M’Cheyne Bible Reading Plan: November

November 1

 

November 2

 

November 3

 

November 4

 

November 5

 

November 6

 

November 7

 

November 8

 

November 9

 

November 10

 

November 11

 

November 12

 

November 13

 

November 14

 

November 15

 

November 16

 

November 17

 

November 18

 

November 19

 

November 20

 

November 21

 

November 22

 

November 23

 

November 24

 

November 25

 

November 26

 

November 27

 

November 28

 

November 29

 

November 30

Giving in the Order of Worship (Part One)

Earlier this year our church underwent several changes. First, we ordained two new deacons (we now have three). Second, we ordained a new elder (we now have two). Third, we instituted a time of giving in our order of worship. There were several considerations that contributed to our decision to start “passing the plate.” The following are just a few:

Giving as a Command

One of the big questions commonly asked of Calvinists is how they reconcile their soteriology with the Bible’s exhortations to evangelize. There are many different angles from which Calvinists approach this issue, but ultimately, they will unanimously end up hitting on the big one: we are commanded to evangelize. The same is true for giving. We give because we are commanded to give in the Bible.

In 1Corinthians 16:1-2, Paul orders the church in Corinth to regularly take up offerings on the Lord’s Day. He had not only given this command to the church at Corinth, but had also given it to the churches in Galatia. The specific occasion for this command was a famine that had come upon the church in Jerusalem, but notice that Paul does not have them take up a one-time “love offering” to help meet the need in Jerusalem. Rather, he had them take up regular offerings. This was so that the flock would not be pressed for funds when he came to them to collect the money. Rather, out of their regular givings, they would have compiled a large sum that they would have been unlikely to raise with a single offering. The work of the church requires regular giving. Churches cannot function without it.

Passing the Plate 01Throughout the Old Testament, God’s people are commanded to bring their gifts to the Lord. Even the sacrifices are referred to as gifts in some passages (Numbers 18:11; cf. Hebrews 5:1). The Magi brought gifts to Christ as an act of worship when He was a young child (Matthew 2:11). These commands to give are reiterated by the author of Hebrews when he says:

“And do not neglect doing good and sharing, for with such sacrifices God is pleased.” (Hebrews 13:16; NASB).

Such doing good and sharing is reminiscent of the early church in Acts 2 who shared all things in common and gave to anyone as he had need (vv. 44-45). So, if anyone asks why we should give, there may be many answers we can give. However, if all those were to fall by the wayside, we would still have the command given us in Scripture. Let us not withhold our gifts from the Lord who has so graciously given all things to us.

Giving as an Act of Worship

Another issue that was raised in our discussions about giving was the fact that pretty much any sermon you will find on subject of giving will inevitably make reference to the fact that giving in the Bible is an act of worship. In Matthew 6:1-4, Jesus gives instructions on worship through giving. He instructs those listening to His sermon to give in such a way that only they and God know how much was given. The point is that the gift is meant to be a theocentric act, not an act to draw attention upon oneself. We give out of worship toward God, not out of a desire to bring glory to ourselves.

This was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira. Ananias and Sapphira, having seen that others like Joseph of Cyprus (Acts 4:36-37) were selling land and giving to God, sold their land and gave only a portion of the proceeds. When they brought the portion to the apostles, they were asked why they lied. The land belonged to them, Peter said. As long as they owned it, it was theirs with which they could do what they wanted. They chose to sell the property and give some of the proceeds from it in order to bring glory to themselves (Acts 5:1-16). The act of giving is an act of worship to God, not to self.

Before we decided to include giving in the order of worship, we had always had an offering box in the back of the room. This box made giving the only act of worship at our church that was not included in the order of worship. It took the corporate sense out of this one act of worship and made it individualistic. Thus, I and others argued that, if we were going to call giving an act of worship, it should be included in the corporate worship service.

_________

In the next article, I will discuss three more arguments for giving in the order of worship: giving as a teaching tool (for our children), giving as a blessing to the giver, and giving as an act of stewardship.

Interracial Marriage and the Ordinary Means of Grace

This past week, I had the privilege of teaching the 9-12 year old class at my church. We are going through the Bible, piece by piece, and discussing each section. This week our discussion was on Genesis 6-11. Now, I understand that there are multiple orthodox views on who the sons of God were in Genesis 6. I exposed the kids to three, but only argued for the one I think to be best supported by the text: the godly line of Seth view.

When holding to this view, the question naturally arises, “What was the big deal with the sons of God marrying daughters of men?” A little context goes a long way in understanding how this is a problem. When Moses wrote the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible), the people of Israel were on the plains of interracial-marriageMoab awaiting their conquest of the land of Canaan (Numbers 22:1). There, God commanded them through Moses not to intermarry with the Canaanites (Deuteronomy 7:3-4).

I recall one time at a training exercise in the Army being asked by a guy where the Bible forbids interracial marriage. He wanted to know so that he could discourage his daughter from marrying outside her race. In fact, the Bible nowhere forbids interracial marriage for the sake of keeping people of different skin colors from joining together in matrimony. What it did forbid in Deuteronomy 7:3-4 was interfaith marriage. The Israelites were forbidden from taking foreign wives because they would entice them to follow after false gods.

In my estimation, the best understanding of the sons of God intermarrying with the daughters of men in Genesis 6 is that they were being led away from God by these women. What is interesting is that, when I asked the kids if the Bible anywhere explicitly forbids interracial marriage, they unanimously agreed that it does not. When I asked them why God forbid people in the Bible from marrying foreigners, they agreed that it was because they would entice them to follow false gods.

I bring all this up not to brag on how smart our children are at my church. Rather, I wanted to highlight the fact that the ordinary means of grace are sufficient for helping our churches, and even our the children in our churches, deal with the major issues that the church will face in our culture. The church does not have to resort to conducting a complete reset of its worship service or starting up a multi-culturalist project in order to be the church.

These children came to a right understanding of this deeply important cultural issue by partaking of the ordinary means of Bible reading. They have sat under the preached word week-in and week-out, they have sung psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs that promote biblical truth, and we as a church have regularly prayed over their souls for the better part of their lives. What the church needs is to commit itself to the ordinary means of grace and expect that this will be the medium through which God will perform His extraordinary, transformative work in the lives of believers both personally and corporately. What she does not need is a multi-culturalist agenda pushing for extra-biblical traditions to be added to the means God has ordained for the dispensing of His grace.

Why Mark Jones Is Right… and Wrong

Jones-Mark-HigherRes

Mark Jones

Let me be the first (perhaps not) Baptist to admit that Mark Jones was spot on in many regards in his post “A Plea for Realism”:Are Presbyterians Christians? It seems to me that Mark Jones is simply calling for a little intellectual honesty from us Baptists. Well, allow me to humor him.

I certainly agree that, if we do not allow unbaptized believers to take communion, that should include those who have been “baptized” in a way that we believe to be unbiblical and, thus, no baptism at all. If a paedobaptist came to my church who refused to be baptized post-confession due to having been sprinkled as an infant, we would not allow him to be a member, so why would we allow him to take communion? Baptism, in every Christian tradition, has historically preceded communion. Baptism preceding communion is both a historical and a biblical view. On this point, most Baptists and Presbyterians agree.

Therefore, for me to dissuade my Presbyterian friends from taking communion in my local church, I am not saying they are not Christians so much as that they have not followed biblical mandate in regard to the order of the sacraments. That is, baptism precedes communion. On this point, they would obviously disagree with me, because they hold to a different understanding of baptism. However, for Baptists to cave on this issue and allow for unbaptized Presbyterians (and that’s what we think they are) to take communion, we would be going against our confession’s definition of true baptism.

However, we are not alone in this stance. Presbyterians must take issue with at least some Baptists taking communion in their churches. Just this week, I listened to a somewhat refreshing episode of Reformed Forum in which Jim Cassidy admitted that Baptist parents are in sin who do not baptize their infants in keeping with a Presbyterian view of baptism. I think this is the only consistent Presbyterian view and, as such, I don’t see how Baptist parents can take communion in Presbyterian churches, unless Presbyterians encourage people in open, unrepentant sin to take communion.

ctc-album300Either way, both traditions have an issue when it comes to what Jones calls “catholicity” and baptism. Neither one of us can deny that we see the other as being disobedient to our Lord’s ordinance of baptism. Are Baptists inconsistent to call their Presbyterian friends Christians? Not quite as inconsistent, I would argue, as those Presbyterian churches that allow consistently Baptist parents to take communion.

So, perhaps the proper way to respond to our Presbyterian friends when they try to corner us on these issues is not to bend over backward to try to be ecumenical. Perhaps, the best response is to affirm them where they are correct, but demonstrate how they have to answer the same questions regarding their sacramentology. None of us are immune. At a certain level, each believe the other (credos and paedos) is disobedient at a certain level, and that must stand as a guard to the communion table at some point.

See also Tom Hicks’ response to Jones’ article. Michael Haykin has also chimed in, and Jones has offered his critique of Haykins’ response here.

M’Cheyne Bible Reading Plan: October

October 1

 

October 2

 

October 3

 

 

October 4

 

 

October 5

 

October 6

 

October 7

 

October 8

 

October 9

 

October 10

 

October 11

 

October 12

 

October 13

 

October 14

 

October 15

 

October 16

 

October 17

 

October 18

 

October 19

 

October 20

 

October 21

 

October 22

 

October 23

 

October 24

 

October 25

 

October 26

 

October 27

 

October 28

 

October 29

 

October 30

 

October 31

 

Circumcision and Baptism in Colossians 2

In two recent episodes (here and here) of the CredoCovenant Fellowship, some debate arose regarding the definition of circumcision and baptism in the context of Colossians 2. I found myself in disagreement with Nehemiah Coxe on the meaning of the passage, and decided I’d like to use my bully pulpit to argue my case. I’ve consulted with JD ahead of time so that he might have time to prepare a response.

Nehemiah Coxe seeks to demonstrate in Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ how Colossians 2 teaches that water baptism replaces fleshly circumcision. He posits that the circumcision referenced in the passage is Christ’s own fleshly circumcision performed in His incarnate infancy. He further insinuates that, water baptism being a symbol pointing to Spirit baptism, we can assume that Paul means for us to recognize that he is in fact calling to mind water baptism. The conclusion to his argument is that water baptism, the symbol representing Spirit baptism, effectively nullifies the Covenant of Circumcision as symbolized in Christ’s circumcision. If you are confused by this argument, you may or may not be helped by reading Coxe’s argument in greater detail on pages 127-130 of Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ.

The Book We Discussed…

In this post, I would like to argue that what we find in Colossians 2 is not a conclusive statement regarding the nature of fleshly circumcision and the nature of water baptism. Rather, it is the beginning of a much different argument that persists on into the beginning of Colossians 3. In this argument, Paul’s statements evoking circumcision and baptism are best understood to be premises rather than the conclusion.

Paul establishes three premises in his argument (2:8-12), circles back around to further explain his premises (2:13-3:4), and then gives his concluding statements in the form of application (3:5ff).

  • Premise 1 (2:8-11)
  • Premise 2 (2:12a)
  • Premise 3 (2:12b)
  • Further Explanation of Premise 1 (2:13-19)
  • Further Explanation of Premise 2 (2:20-23)
  • Further Explanation of Premise 3 (3:1-4)
  • Concluding Application (3:5ff)

His first premise is the fact that Christ has established Himself as the ultimate authority over all, and particularly in the life of the believer through heart-circumcision (vv. 8-11; cf. 13-19). His second premise is that we have been buried with Christ in spirit-baptism (vs. 12a; cf. 20-23). His third premise is that we have been raised from spiritual death with Him through His resurrection (vs. 12b; cf. 3:1-4). Let’s take these point by point.

 

For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ (all Scripture citations taken from the New American Standard Bible);

As has been well documented, when Paul wrote to the church at Colossae, he was combating Judaizers and other false teachers (e.g. an early heretical group referred to by scholars as proto-Gnostics) who had added to the law of God and were perverting the teachings of Christ. He wanted to remind his brethren that they were under no yoke or burden but that under which Christ had placed them (Mt. 11:30). In fact, they had been placed under Christ’s yoke, not by rite of Jewish circumcision, but by regeneration—the greater reality:  spiritual circumcision of the heart.

In claiming His full and ultimate authority over all things, Christ is said to exercise His authority in two particular spheres: over creation generally (Col. 1:15-17) and over the church particularly (Col. 1:18-20). It is the second sphere to which Paul here addresses himself. Christ exercises His reign peculiarly in the lives of believers through the indwelling of His Spirit, but this indwelling has a starting point. That starting point is regeneration—the circumcision of the heart (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Rom. 2:29). After laying out his other two premises, Paul goes on to expound on this argument in verses 16-19:

16Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. 18Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, 19and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

Christ Himself is the rightful King and Ruler of His church. Therefore, no one else is to attempt to usurp His authority. If anyone attempts to compel his fellow saints to return to the types and shadows or to adopt some form of legalism or asceticism, he is effectively heaving an added burden upon the shoulders of Christ’s subjects. He is removing the delight of Christ’s rulership and replacing it with an extra-biblical, despotic oppression. Christ is King and Ruler over His church and will not share His throne.

But it is not a fleshly circumcision under which we have come, not even (I would argue) Christ’s incarnate fleshly circumcision. Such a notion is not even hinted at in the text. Rather it is that same circumcision under which God’s true people have always come: the circumcision of the heart. Under this circumcision, there are no civil or ceremonial laws that must be obeyed. Likewise, there are no ascetic practices which must be observed. Rather, the true believer passively receives the stamp of God’s approval in Christ upon his heart, and upon his heart the law is written (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10; 10:16) that, in it, he might find his delight (Ps. 1:2; 40:8).

 

having been buried with Him in baptism,

Paul furthers his argument by calling to mind the doctrine of spirit baptism, a common theme in Paul’s letters (Rom. 6:6; 1Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27; Eph. 2:5). In order for Nehemiah Coxe’s argument to remain in tact, he must prove that this text is referring to either water baptism or Spirit baptism of which water baptism is a picture. Obviously,  he would have to make the second argument as (I will demonstrate), Paul is clearly referring to Spirit baptism. The problem is that Coxe does not make an argument that the symbol of Spirit baptism (water baptism) is being referenced here. He merely assumes it. Paul, on the other hand, will go on to make it clear that he is not talking about the physical symbol, but the spiritual reality.

20If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, 21“Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22(which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? 23These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.

When Paul refers to burial in this passage, he is referring to that spiritual reality of our dying in Christ. In a very real sense, we have died and been buried with Him. We have died to sin (Rom. 6:2, 10; 1Pt. 2:24), to the law (Rom. 7:2-6; Gal. 2:19), and to the elementary principles of the world (Col. 2:20). Like a wife whose husband had died in battle, we have been freed and lawfully betrothed to Another. Being dead to sin and the law, they no longer have mastery over us.

Having died to these things, we are no longer to come under their bondage. We have died to the Old Covenant system. Therefore, we are neither to come under the yoke of fleshly circumcision nor the yoke of the civil or ceremonial laws. Likewise, we are no longer in the world, so we ought not to submit to the edicts of man imposed upon our consciences. Our consciences are to be bound ultimately and finally by Scripture alone! This is the first aspect of what the apostle means when he speaks of baptism: our union with Christ in His death and burial.

 

in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

The second aspect of Paul’s meaning is like the first: our having been raised with Christ! It is clear in the immediate text that Paul is not referring to water baptism when he says that we are raised “through faith.” This is not true of our water baptism. We are not raised up out of the water through faith, but by the joint efforts of the preachers arms and our abdominal muscles. Further, there is no talk of symbol in the text, so the faithful exegete is not at liberty to assume its presence in the argumentation. The baptism referenced here obviously takes on a spiritual meaning. Paul goes on to explain that meaning in Chapter Three, verses 1-4:

3:1Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. 3For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.

Our baptism in Christ: our death, burial, and resurrection in Him, has the intended outcome of a victorious lifestyle lived with the knowledge that Christ was not defeated. Christ was raised, He ascended, and He currently reigns with the Father in heaven. If we have likewise been raised, we likewise have the joy of knowing that we are currently seated in the heavenly places with Him (Eph. 2:6), ruling and reigning with Christ our Brother.

We are no longer to live as slaves, defeated and conquered by the world in which we live. Rather, we are to recognize our true, royal positions as sons of the King of heaven and earth. The contrast here in Paul’s language is not between two covenants: one of fleshly circumcision and the other of water baptism. Instead, the contrast is between slavery to the world and freedom in Christ.

 

Conclusion

Whatever we may say about fleshly circumcision and water baptism, and the covenants to which they belong, we are not at liberty to argue toward those conclusions from this text. The reason why not is very simple: this text is not arguing for a contrasted understanding between fleshly circumcision and water baptism. This text is talking about Christ’s authority over believers as demonstrated by our heart circumcision (regeneration) and Spirit baptism (union with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection).

[Repost] Know the Word of God

(Note: These are my modified notes from a Kids’ Catechesis lesson I taught in January 2013 at SJCC)

Q.112: How do we know the Word of God?

A. We are commanded to hear, read, and search the Scriptures.

2Timothy 3:14-17; Acts 17:11; 1Timothy 4:13

Memorize Scripture

2Timothy 3:14-17

14You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (NASB).

Paul’s disciple Timothy had a godly mother and grandmother who cared for him enough to teach him what the Bible said (2Timothy 1:5; 3:15). At that time, the only Scripture they had available to them was the Old Testament, but Timothy was taught from the Old Testament nonetheless. His mother and grandmother read to him and probably had him memorize large portions of Scripture, much like how we have our children memorize things like the Lord’s Prayer and Psalm 23.

Why do we have our children memorize Scripture? We have them memorize Scripture so that they can have it in their minds and in their hearts for when they need it most. “Your word I have treasured in my heart, that I may not sin against you” (Psalm 119:11; NASB). When we are confronted with temptation, it is good for us to have memorized the word of God so that we can remember it and not sin.

When Jesus was in the wilderness being tempted by Satan, Satan tried to convince Jesus to do what he wanted Him to do by quoting improperly interpreted Scripture to Him. Jesus, having memorized Scripture Himself, was able to respond with correctly interpreted Scripture (Matthew 4:1-11). If we want to be like Jesus and not sin, we need to treasure God’s word in our hearts. We need to memorize Scripture.

Search Scripture

Timothy’s mother and grandmother likely used other methods to train him in the word. It is likely that he was shown how to search the Scriptures to see if the things he was being taught were true. After all, Paul wrote to him: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2Timothy 3:16-17; NASB). Timothy needed to know how to search “all Scripture.” We also have other examples of godly men and women searching the Scriptures to see if they were being taught truth.

Acts 17:11

Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” (NASB).

The church at Berea were considered “noble-minded” by Luke, the author of Acts, because “they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether [the things the apostles were teaching them] were so.” No one is expected to just take the teachings of a man at face-value. We must believe only those religious teachings that line up with the word of God. If it does not line up with God’s word, it is not true.

Why do we need to test truth claims with the Bible? God’s word is the final authority on all matters to do with faith and obedience (LBCF 1677/1689, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1). If we want to know what we should believe about God, the Christian life, and the church, we must read the Bible. If we want to know how to obey God and glorify Him, we must read the Bible. This does not mean we cannot trust what men say about God to be true, but God expects us to take what we learn about Him from men and compare it to the Bible to make sure it is the truth.

Read Scripture

Of course, Timothy could not have learned to search the Scriptures if he had not first read Scripture. Many of our children are learning to read. But do we know why we have historically placed such an emphasis on literacy in Western societies? In the 16th century, a man named Martin Luther translated the New Testament into the language of his people. It was the first time since the Latin Vulgate, at the beginning of the Middle Ages, that the entire New Testament had been translated into the common language.

Luther was so eager to see how the people of his country were learning from this New Testament that he went on a tour of his native Saxony. To his surprise, most of them had not even begun to read his translation of the New Testament. The reason: most of the people of Saxony could not read! Appalled, Luther wrote to the princes of Saxony and told them that they had a duty to God to educate the people so that they could read God’s word. This was the beginning of the modern education movement. We need to learn to read so that we can read God’s word.

It’s not just important that we learn how to read God’s word. It’s important that we start to read it regularly. Our church has started a Bible reading campaign this year and many of our members are taking part in it. We are encouraging parents to read the Bible with their families every night. Each of our members is encouraged, regardless of the reading plan they use, to “cherish the word of God,” “teach [their] children the word of God,” and “engage in regular Bible reading.” It is very important that we read the Bible regularly.

Hear Scripture

1Timothy 4:13

Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching” (NASB).

Even if our children can’t read, yet, or if they can’t read well, they can still hear the word of God. They can hear the word of God in their homes, they can recite to themselves the passages we have them memorize, and they can sit under the preached word at church. At SJCC, when our pastor gets up to preach, we read a passage of the Bible, first. Then, he explains what we’ve just read. This is a perfect time for our children to hear the word of God.

Also, as their parents, we all know how to read and yet we come every week to hear the word of God. Why do we come to hear the word of God preached if we can just read it? God speaks to us in a special way when we come to hear His word proclaimed on the Lord’s Day. It is very important that we be attentive in these times. We can listen, take notes, and discuss our families’ questions about the sermon when we get home. These things are very important for our relationships with God. As we grow in our knowledge of God, we will grow in our relationship with Him, too.

Meditate on Scripture

Psalm 1:2

“But his delight is in the law of the Lord,

And in His law he meditates day and night.” (NASB).

According to Psalm 1, the righteous man meditates on God’s law day and night. If we want to be like the righteous man, we ought to meditate on God’s law ourselves. The Scripture we memorize, the Scripture we search, the Scripture we read, and the Scripture we hear… upon these things we are called to meditate day and night.

In meditating on God’s word, we will have effectively stored it up as treasure in our hearts. We will find ourselves thinking about, talking about, and even singing about God’s word throughout the day. As we learn to think, speak, and do the things written in God’s word, we will draw closer to Him and be less and less inclined toward sin. These are the things Paul wanted Timothy to dwell on as he ministered to the church of God at Ephesus.

CCF Episodes 13-14, 25-28: Covenant Theology by Nehemiah Coxe

Grab Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ by Nehemiah Coxe and John Owen and read along with the CredoCovenant Fellowship as we engage its major themes from a Reformed Baptist perspective:

 

coxeowen2

Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ

by Nehemiah Coxe and John Owen

CCF Episode Twenty-Eight: Concluding Our Discussion of Covenant Theology

CredoCovPodcastMaster

In this episode, JD and Billy sit down with Junior “The Big Dippa” Duran and Rene Del Rio to conclude their discussion of Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ by Nehemiah Coxe and John Owen.

MP3 Download | stream:

Subscribe to future podcasts and leave us a review on iTunes: RSS | iTunes  

The book we read…coxeowen2

Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ by Nehemiah Coxe and John Owen

We’d love your participation. Contact us with your comments and questions about the books contents:

M’Cheyne Bible Reading Plan: September

September 1

 

September 2

 

 

September 3

 

 

September 4

 

 

September 5

 

 

September 6

 

 

September 7

 

 

September 8

 

 

September 9

 

 

September 10

 

 

September 11

 

 

September 12

 

 

September 13

 

 

September 14

 

 

September 15

 

 

September 16

 

 

September 17

 

 

September 18

 

 

September 19

 

 

September 20

 

 

September 21

 

 

September 22

 

 

September 23

 

 

September 24

 

 

September 25

 

 

September 26

 

 

September 27

 

 

September 28

 

 

September 29

 

 

September 30