If we do not know our Reformation heritage, ignorance will lead to indifference, and indifference to relinquishment. I urge you to study Reformed thinking. Immerse yourself in the writings of solid, renowned Calvinists. Read sixteenth-century classics such as Calvin’s Institutes. Try Henry Bullinger’s The Decades, which teaches the doctrines of the Bible in fifty messages on a somewhat simpler level than the Institutes. Read seventeenth-century classics, too, such as John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress and John Flavel’s The Fountain of Life. Pick up eighteenth-century works such as Wilhelmus a Brakel’s The Christian’s Reasonable Service and Jonathan Edwards’ Religious Affections. From the nineteenth century, read Octavius Winslow’s Work of the Holy Spirit and Charles Spurgeon’s The Treasury of David. From the twentieth century, read D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ The Sermon on the Mount and John Murray’s systematic theology (Collected Writings, vol. 2).5 If we do not appreciate our Reformation heritage, our faith will lack authenticity. No one will be jealous of us, for we will be sorely lacking in true peace, joy, and humility. And if we don’t live our Reformation heritage, we will not be salt in the earth. When salt has lost its saltiness, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under the feet of men (Matt. 5:13).

Joel R. Beeke, Living for God’s Glory: An Introduction to Calvinism, Loc. 143.

“In the 1980s, my doctoral dissertation adviser, D. Clair Davis, often said that Calvinism is so comprehensive that it is hard to get one’s mind and arms around it. He would then say, a bit tongue-in-cheek, that this comprehensiveness is one major difference between Lutheranism and Calvinism. Lutheranism could neatly bring all of its confessional statements under one cover in 1580 and call it The Book of Concord. But the Calvinistic faith is so rich that at least three families of confessional statements developed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: the English-Scottish family, the Dutch-German family, and the Swiss family–none of which contradicted the others but built on and complemented them” (Joel R. Beeke, Living for God’s Glory: An Introduction to Calvinism, Loc. 78).

[Comment on 1 Corinthians 15:24] V. 24. delivered up the kingdom to God] Christ hath a double kingdom; 1. Essential, as God; and this Christ possesseth with his Father and the Spirit for ever. 2. Economical, as Mediator betwixt God and man: and this kingdom which he received from his Father, he shall surrender up again to his Father after he hath subdued sin and death, and put all enemies under his feet.

Annotations upon all the books of the Old and New Testament wherein the text is explained, doubts resolved, Scriptures paralleled and various readings observed by the joynt-labour of certain learned divines, thereunto appointed, and therein employed, as is expressed in the preface (London: John Legatt and John Raworth, 1645).
 

The magistrate is invested with punitive power. “He beareth the sword.” This language is partially figurative. The “sword” is the emblem of the power of civil government to inflict pains and penalties. In this respect, civil authority stands in direct and striking contrast to ecclesiastical; for the latter has no other power than that which appeals to the understanding, the heart and the conscience: it can set by means of admonition, reproof, exhortation, and, in the last resort, can place the erroneous and the immoral outside the pale of the visible church. Civil authority sustains itself and enforces its enactments by penalties of a different sort, when necessary. It uses force, not as the only means of securing conformity to its decrees, for it also may use admonition and persuasion — but, as a last resort, when milder measures fail.

James M. Wilson, Civil Government: An Exposition on Romans XIII. 1-7 (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1853), 67.

The governors to whom the injunction of Paul applies “are not a terror to good works.” To what does Paul here refer? to what class of “works?” Does this phrase mean no more, as Tholuck explains it, than such works as are the opposite of resistance and rebellion? Most certainly not. Such an interpretation puts an entirely new meaning upon the phrase “good works,” and would, moreover, fix upon the apostle the charge of expressing himself with an unaccountable obscurity and meagerness. Does it mean such “works” as industry, honesty, and the orderly discharge of common, social, and relative duties? No doubt these are included in it. But even this is a very defective interpretation. There must be added, at least, such things a s come under the head of common morality. But we go farther. Paul here speaks, not as a mere heathen philosopher, but as a Christian minister, and an apostle of Christ. What then are “good works?” The answer is clear. They are such as the law of Christ demands: they are all the external results and fruits of the operation of the Spirit of Christ. Among these, as already intimated, will be found all that is comprehended under the name of morals; but they include much more — Sabbath sanctification, the public profession of the name and truth of Christ — His worship, and efforts to advance his kingdom and interest. Thus Eph. ii. 10. “Created in Christ Jesus unto “good works.” Tit. ii. 14. “Zealous of good works.” 1 Tim. iii. 1. “He that desireth the office of a bishop desireth a “good work.” 2 Thess. ii. 17. “Stablish you in every good word and work;” this good work being, in part, what is referred to elsewhere in addressing the Thessalonian church, that from them “the word of the Lord had sounded out.” Rev. xiv. 13. “Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord — that they may rest from their labours, and their works do follow them.” It is not denied that, in most of these passages and similar ones, works of morality are meant; but in some, the immediate and only reference is to “works” peculiarly denominated religious, and in no instance can these be excluded. How can we imagine that Paul departed, in the passage before us, from the current meaning which every Christian attaches to this phrase. . . .

But, is this all? Has the “minister of God” [magistrate] fulfilled his whole functions, when he merely secures the religious liberties of the faithful? He has not. He is a “minister for good.” As God’s servant to do his work, he must seek, by some positive acts, the “good” of the friends of God. He must be, in this sense, “a praise” to them that do well. He must give them encouragement and sustain them in their Christian efforts.

James M. Wilson, Civil Government: An Exposition on Romans XIII. 1-7 (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1853), 52-54, 65.

The magistrate is set up that he may guard the rights of every member of the community — protect the weak against the strong — restrain all violence — promote every good work, and so secure the welfare of the whole community; but surely, as God’s “servant,” he must have a special concern for the name, and cause, and kingdom of God, as these are, in a still higher sense, intrusted [sic] to the faithful, and exemplified in them.

James M. Wilson, Civil Government: An Exposition on Romans XIII. 1-7 (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1853), 65.

The magistrate is “God’s servant,” and, hence, it must be the end and design of his office to do God’s work. God is his Master, whose law, gospel, glory and kingdom the magistrate must seek to promote: as God is a praise to them that do well, so must the ruler be also, for he is called to act as his servant.

James M. Wilson, Civil Government: An Exposition on Romans XIII. 1-7 (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1853), 63-64.

The subject of civil government is, in all its aspects, of no little importance. It occupies a large share of men’s thoughts in all enlightened countries, and awakens, just now, the liveliest concern. This is not strange; for its influence is felt in every department of human action. It has to do with the peace, the order, the material prosperity of the commonwealth; with the rights and liberties of the citizens, and exercises no inconsiderable influence upon the interests of morals and religion. In all these respects, in the last particularly, the institution of civil government is deserving the attention of the Christian and of the Christian minister.

James M. Wilson, Civil Government: An Exposition on Romans XIII. 1-7 (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1853), 5.

Revelation 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

Even though it was predicted to John that it would be bitter, he is nevertheless obedient. He eats it, and it went as it was predicted to him: it was sweet, and bitterness followed. Thus the Lord would make the teachers obedient and willing in the time of the seventh trumpet. They would have sweetness in preaching, and bitterness because of that persecution. One is only able to proclaim the gospel and suffer on its account, if he has tasted its sweetness, and if he has eaten it, understands it, and feels the power of it in his heart.

A glance at the world we live in and the day to day reality we know will show us very quickly that human existence is broken. Death and misery are twin curses that certainly did not make it onto the list of observations that caused Louis Armstrong to sing “What a Wonderful World” in his 1967 hit song by the same name. And yet despite the clear evidence to the contrary the prevailing philosophies in our culture would explain death, and the resulting misery, as a natural part of life. Death is normal. Or worse yet, the pain we experience when a loved one dies or as we approach our own death is an illusion or weakness; it is a feeling that must be mastered, subdued before our internal human strength and fortified will to press on. But if we are being honest with ourselves each one of us knows death is not natural and the misery we endure is far from an illusion.

The next obvious question then is “why?” Why is death an ever present intruder in our lives? Why do pain and misery slowly eat away at our happiness like a cancer from the inside out? (For many of us, sadly, it is literally cancer that does this). If death is not normal than why are things abnormal, broken? The Bible tells us that sin entered the world through one man and so death through sin (Rom.5:12). Adam, the first man, who was created by God and declared to be good sinned against God and brought death into the world, not just physical death but spiritual death for every person. In a word, the brokenness is our own fault. This answers the question but thankfully it is not the end of the story. The good news is that God did not leave us here. He promised to save His people through a Redeemer and that Redeemer is Jesus Christ, God’s only Son.

When the fullness had come God sent His Beloved Son into the world to die an accursed death on the cross, the death we should have died. He himself bore our sins on His body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). And because He was the Son of God death could not hold Him. He was powerfully raised from the grave so that all who would believe in Him might have life and have it abundantly, eternally. This is who we worship and adore, Christ our Risen Savior. This is what it means for Jesus to be the resurrection and the life. A quick glance at the world today will show us death is all around. But if we look to the Son and believe in Him then we know that though we die yet shall we live. To God be the glory through Jesus Christ our Lord!

https://ppcaustin.org/death-and-life/