God's Covenant With You For Your Family Order Printed Copy
- Author: John Eckhardt
- Size: 639KB | 122 pages
- |
Others like god's covenant with you for your family Features >>
The Covenant Connector
God's Blueprint For A Happy Home
Anchor Man: How A Father Can Anchor His Family In Christ
Husbands And Fathers (Rediscover The Creators's Purpose For Men)
The Bride Makes Herself Ready
Winning Your Husband
The Purpose Of Love And Marriage
Why Men Dont Listen And Women Can't Read Maps
Love And Respect
Healing For A Broken Heart
About the Book
"God's Covenant With You for Your Family" by John Eckhardt explores the importance of God's covenant in family relationships and provides biblical guidance on how to strengthen and protect family ties through faith, prayer, and obedience to God's word. The book emphasizes the power of God's promises to bless and prosper families who remain faithful to Him.
George Whitefield
George Whitefield was born at Gloucester in 1714. His mother kept the Bell Inn, and appears not to have prospered in business; at any rate, she never seems to have been able to do anything for her sonâs advancement in life. Whitefieldâs early life, according to his own account, was anything but religious; though, like many boys, he had occasional prickings of conscience and spasmodic fits of devout feeling. He confesses that he was âaddicted to lying, filthy talking, and foolish jestingâ, and that he was a âSabbath-breaker, a theatre-goer, a card-player, and a romance readerâ. All this, he says, went on till he was fifteen years old.
Poor as he was, his residence at Gloucester procured him the advantage of a good education at the Free Grammar School of that city. Here he was a day-scholar until he was fifteen. The only known fact about his schooldays is this curious one, that even then he was remarkable for his good elocution and memory, and was selected to recite speeches before the Corporation of Gloucester at their annual visitation of the Grammar School.
At the age of fifteen Whitefield appears to have left school, and to have given up Latin and Greek for a season. In all probability, his motherâs straitened circumstances made it absolutely necessary for him to do something to assist her in business and to get his own living. He began, therefore, to help her in the daily work of the Bell Inn. âAt lengthâ, he says, âI put on my blue apron, washed cups, cleaned rooms, and, in one word, became a professed common drawer for nigh a year and a half.â This, however, did not last long. His motherâs business at the Bell did not flourish, and she finally retired from it altogether.
An old school-fellow revived in his mind the idea of going to Oxford, and he went back to the Grammar School and renewed his studies. At length, after several providential circumstances had smoothed the way, he entered Oxford as a servitor at Pembroke at the age of eighteen. Whitefieldâs residence at Oxford was the great turning-point in his life. For two or three years before he went to the University his journal tells us that he had not been without religious convictions, But from the time of his entering Pembroke College these convictions fast ripened into decided Christianity. He diligently attended all means of grace within his reach. He spent his leisure time in visiting the city prison, reading to the prisoners, and trying to do good. He became acquainted with the famous John Wesley and his brother Charles, and a little band of like-minded young men. These were the devoted party to whom the name âMethodistsâ was first applied, on account of their strict âmethodâ of living.
At one time he seems to have been in danger of becoming a semi-papist, an ascetic, or a mystic, and of placing the whole of religion in self-denial. He says in his Journal, âI always chose the worst sort of food. I fasted twice a week. My apparel was mean. I thought it unbecoming a penitent to have his hair powdered. I wore woollen gloves, a patched gown, and dirty shoes; and though I was convinced that the kingdom of God did not consist in meat and drink, yet I resolutely persisted in these voluntary acts of self-denial, because I found in them great promotion of the spiritual life.â
Out of all this darkness he was gradually delivered, partly by the advice of one or two experienced Christians, and partly by reading such books as Scougalâs Life of God in the Soul of Man, Lawâs Serious Call, Baxterâs Call to the Unconverted, Alleineâs Alarm to Unconverted Sinners, and Matthew Henryâs Commentary. âAbove allâ, he says, âmy mind being now more opened and enlarged, I began to read the Holy Scriptures upon my knees, laying aside all other books, and praying over, if possible, every line and word. This proved meat indeed and drink indeed to my soul. I daily received fresh life, light, and power from above. I got more true knowledge from reading the Book of God in one month than I could ever have acquired from all the writings of men.â
Once taught to understand the glorious liberty of Christâs gospel, Whitefield never turned again to asceticism, legalism, mysticism, or strange views of Christian perfection. The experience received by bitter conflict was most valuable to him. The doctrines of free grace, once thoroughly grasped, took deep root in his heart, and became, as it were, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Of all the little band of Oxford Methodists, none seem to have got hold so soon of clear views of Christâs gospel as he did, and none kept it so unwaveringly to the end.
At the early age of twenty-two Whitefield was admitted to holy orders by Bishop Benson of Gloucester, on Trinity Sunday, 1736. His ordination was not of his own seeking. The bishop heard of his character from Lady Selwyn and others, sent for him, gave him five guineas to buy books, and offered to ordain him, though only twenty-two years old, whenever he wished. This unexpected offer came to him when he was full of scruples about his own fitness for the ministry. It cut the knot and brought him to the point of decision. âI began to thinkâ, he says, âthat if I held out longer I should fight against God.â
Whitefieldâs first sermon was preached in the very town where he was born, at the church of St Mary-le-Crypt, Gloucester â âAs I proceeded I perceived the fire kindled, till at last, though so young and amidst a crowd of those who knew me in my childish days, I was enabled to speak with some degree of gospel authority.â
Almost immediately after his ordination, Whitefield went to Oxford and took his degree as Bachelor of Arts. He then commenced his regular ministerial life by undertaking temporary duty at the Tower Chapel, London, for two months. While engaged there he preached continually in many London churches; and among others, in the parish churches of Islington, Bishopsgate, St Dunstanâs, St Margaretâs, Westminster, and Bow, Cheapside. From the very first he obtained a degree of popularity such as no preacher, before or since, has probably ever reached. Whether on week-days or Sundays, wherever he preached, the churches were crowded, and an immense sensation was produced. The plain truth is, that a really eloquent, extempore preacher, preaching the pure gospel with most uncommon gifts of voice and manner, was at that time an entire novelty in London. The congregations were taken by surprise and carried by storm.
From London he removed for two months to Dummer, a little rural parish in Hampshire, near Basingstoke. From there he accepted an invitation, which had been much pressed on him by the Wesleys, to visit the colony of Georgia in North America, and assist in the care of an Orphan House which had been set up near Savannah for the children of colonists. After preaching for a few months in Gloucestershire, and especially at Bristol and Stonehouse, he sailed for America in the latter part of 1737, and continued there about a year. The affairs of this Orphan House, it may be remarked, occupied much of his attention from this period of his life till he died. Though well-meant, it seems to have been a design of very questionable wisdom, and certainly entailed on Whitefield a world of anxiety and responsibility to the end of his days.
Whitefield returned from Georgia at the latter part of the year 1738, partly to obtain priestâs orders, which were conferred on him by his old friend Bishop Benson, and partly on business connected with the Orphan House. He soon, however, discovered that his position was no longer what it was before he sailed for Georgia. The bulk of the clergy were no longer favourable to him, and regarded him with suspicion as an enthusiast and a fanatic. They were especially scandalized by his preaching the doctrine of regeneration or the new birth, as a thing which many baptized persons greatly needed! The number of pulpits to which he had access rapidly diminished. Churchwardens, who had no eyes for drunkenness and impurity, were filled with intense indignation about what they called âbreaches of orderâ. Bishops who could tolerate Arianism, Socinianism, and Deism, were filled with indignation at a man who declared fully the atonement of Christ and the work of the Holy Ghost, and began to denounce him openly. In short, from this period of his life, Whitefieldâs field of usefulness within the Church of England narrowed rapidly on every side.
The step which at this juncture gave a turn to the whole current of Whitefieldâs ministry was his adoption of the system of open-air preaching. Seeing that thousands everywhere would attend no place of worship, spent their Sundays in idleness or sin, and were not to be reached by sermons within walls, he resolved, in the spirit of holy aggression, to go out after them âinto the highways and hedgesâ, on his Masterâs principle, and âcompel them to come inâ. His first attempt to do this was among the colliers at Kingswood near Bristol, in February, 1739. After much prayer he one day went to Hannam Mount, and standing upon a hill began to preach to about a hundred colliers upon Matthew 5:1-3. The thing soon became known. The number of hearers rapidly increased, till the congregation amounted to many thousands.
Whitefieldâs own account of the behaviour of these neglected colliers, who had never been in a church in their lives, is deeply affecting: âHavingâ, he writes to a friend, âno righteousness of their own to renounce, they were glad to hear of a Jesus who was a friend to publicans, and came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. The first discovery of their being affected was the sight of the white gutters made by their tears, which plentifully fell down their black cheeks as they came out of their coal-pits. Hundreds of them were soon brought under deep conviction, which, as the event proved, happily ended in a sound and thorough conversion.â
Two months after this Whitefield began the practice of open-air preaching in London, on 27 April, 1739. The circumstances under which this happened were curious. He had gone to Islington to preach for the vicar, his friend Mr Stonehouse. In the midst of the prayer the churchwardens came to him and demanded his licence for preaching in the diocese of London. Whitefield, of course, had not got this licence. The upshot of the matter was, that being forbidden by the churchwardens to preach in the pulpit, he went outside after the communion-service, and preached in the churchyard. From that day forward he became a constant field-preacher, whenever weather and the season of the year made it possible.
Two days afterwards, on Sunday, April 29th, he records: âI preached in Moorfields to an exceeding great multitude. Being weakened by my morningâs preaching, I refreshed myself in the afternoon by a little sleep, and at five went and preached at Kennington Common, about two miles from London, when no less than thirty thousand people were supposed to be present.â Henceforth, wherever there were large open spaces round London, wherever there were large bands of idle, godless, Sabbath-breaking people gathered together, in Hackney Fields, Mary-le-bonne Fields, May Fair, Smithfield, Blackheath, Moorfields, and Kennington Common, there went Whitefield and lifted up his voice for Christ. The gospel so proclaimed was listened to and greedily received by hundreds who never dreamed of going to a place of worship.
The ministrations of Whitefield in the pulpits of the Church of England from this time almost entirely ceased. He loved the Church in which he had been ordained; he gloried in her Articles; he used her Prayer-book with pleasure. But the Church did not love him, and so lost the use of his services. The Church was too much asleep to understand him, and was vexed at a man who would not keep still and let the devil alone.
The facts of Whitefieldâs history from this period to the day of his death are almost entirely of one complexion. One year was just like another; and to attempt to follow him would be only going repeatedly over the same ground. From 1739 to the year of his death, 1770, a period of thirty-one years, his life was one uniform employment, and he was always about his Masterâs business. From Sunday mornings to Saturday nights, from the 1st of January to the 31st of December, excepting when laid aside by illness, he was almost incessantly preaching Christ and going about the world entreating men to repent and come to Christ and be saved. There was hardly a considerable town in England, Scotland, or Wales, that he did not visit as an evangelist. When churches were opened to him he gladly preached in churches; when only chapels could be obtained, he cheerfully preached in chapels. When churches and chapels alike were closed, or were too small to contain his hearers, he was ready and willing to preach in the open air.
For thirty-one years he laboured in this way, always proclaiming the same glorious gospel, and always, as far as manâs eye can judge, with immense effect. In one single Whitsuntide week, after preaching in Moorfields, he received one thousand letters from people under spiritual concern, and admitted to the Lordâs table three hundred and fifty persons. In the thirty-four years of his ministry it is reckoned that he preached publicly eighteen thousand times.
His journeyings were prodigious, when the roads and conveyances of his time are considered. He visited Scotland fourteen times; he crossed the Atlantic seven times, backward and forward, in miserable slow sailing ships, and arrested the attention of thousands in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. He went over to Ireland twice, and on one occasion was almost murdered by an ignorant Popish mob in Dublin. As to England and Wales, he traversed every county in them, from the Isle of Wight to Berwick-on-Tweed, and from the Landâs End to the North Foreland.
His regular ministerial work in London for the winter season, when field-preaching was necessarily suspended, was something prodigious. His weekly engagements at the Tabernacle in Tottenham Court Road, which was built for him when the pulpits of the Established Church were closed, comprised the following work: Every Sunday morning he administered the Lordâs Supper to several hundred communicants at half-past six. After this he read prayers, and preached both morning and afternoon. Then he preached again in the evening at half-past five, and concluded by addressing a large society of widows, married people, young men and spinsters, all sitting separately in the area of the Tabernacle, with exhortations suitable to their respective stations. On Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday mornings, he preached regularly at six. On Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Saturday evenings, he delivered lectures. This, it will be observed, made thirteen sermons a week! And all this time he was carrying on a large correspondence with people in almost every part of the world. That any human frame could so long endure the labours that Whitefield went through does indeed seem wonderful. That his life was not cut short by violence, to which he was frequently exposed, is no less wonderful. But he was immortal till his work was done.
He died at last very suddenly at Newbury Port, in North America, on Sunday, 29 September, 1770, at the comparatively early age of fifty-six. He was once married to a widow named James, of Abergavenny, who died before him. If we may judge from the little mention made of his wife in his letters, his marriage does not seem to have contributed much to his happiness. He left no children, but he left a name far better than that of sons and daughters. Never perhaps was there a man of whom it could be so truly said that he spent and was spent for Christ than George Whitefield.
[Adapted from J. C. Ryleâs âGeorge Whitefield and His Ministryâ in Select Sermons of George Whitefield; see also George Whitefieldâs Journals, Robert Philipâs Life and Times of George Whitefield, and Arnold Dallimoreâs 2-volume biography George Whitefield.]
How Did Evil Begin
Why is there a Satan? Why does a being exist whose name means accuser â a âdevil,â which means slanderer, a âdeceiver of the whole worldâ (Revelation 12:9), a âruler of this worldâ (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), a âgod of this ageâ (2 Corinthians 4:4 NKJV), a âprince of the power of the airâ (Ephesians 2:2), a âBeelzebul, the prince of demonsâ (Matthew 12:24)? Where does he come from? How did it come about that he ever sinned? The letters of Jude and 2 Peter give us clues. Jude 6 says, âThe angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day.â And 2 Peter 2:4 says, âGod did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment.â It appears, then, that some of Godâs holy angels (we may assume, in principle, that Satan is included, whether these verses refer to his original rebellion or a later one) âsinned,â or as Jude says, âdid not stay within their own position of authority.â In other words, the sin was a kind of insurrection, a desire for more power and more authority than they were appointed by God to have. So Satan and the other fallen angels originate as created holy angels who rebel against God, reject him as their all-satisfying King, and set out on a course of self-exaltation and presumed self-determination. They do not want to be subordinate. They do not want to be sent by God to serve others (Hebrews 1:14). They want to have final authority over themselves. And they want to exalt themselves above God. Most Popular Answer But these thoughts about the origin of Satan do not answer the question we began with: Why is there a Satan? They simply push the question back to the very beginning. Why did any holy angel sin? Here is the most popular answer of our modern era: All of Godâs creatures were created âfree moral agents.â If God had made them otherwise they would have been mere machines with no will of their own. . . . To be a âfree moral agentâ implies that one has the power of âchoice.â . . . As long as Satan chose the âWill of Godâ there was no âEvilâ in the Universe, but the moment he chose to follow his own Will, then he fell, and by persuading others to follow him he introduced âEvilâ into the Universe. (Clarence Larkin, The Spirit World, 12â14) There are at least two problems with this presumed answer: (1) it does not answer the question and (2) it assumes that God cannot exert sufficient influence on a morally responsible being so as to keep that being safe in the worship of God â to keep him from sinning. âFree Willâ Philosophy First, it does not answer the question, Why did any holy angel sin? To say that a perfect angel sinned because he had the power to do so is no answer. Why would a perfectly holy angel in Godâs infinitely beautiful presence suddenly be inclined to hate God? âFree willâ â that is, ultimate self-determination â is not an answer. It explains nothing. âFree willâ is a name put on a mystery. But it is not the biblical name. Because the Bible never teaches that there is such a thing as ultimate human, or ultimate demonic, self-determination. That is a philosophical notion forced onto the Bible, not taught by the Bible. In fact, that philosophical notion was one of Satanâs first designs for humanity â to persuade Adam and Eve that they could be ultimately self-determining, and that this would be good for them (Genesis 3:4â5). Both of those ideas were false. They could not become ultimately self-determining, and it was deadly for them to try. The human race has been ruined by these notions ever since. Slandering Godâs Saving Power Second, Larkinâs appeal to angelic self-determination assumes that God cannot exert sufficient influence on a morally responsible being so as to keep that being safe in the worship of God forever. Larkinâs deadly mistake is to assume that if God exerted such influence, the angels âwould have been mere machines with no will of their own.â This too is a philosophical assumption forced on the Bible, not taught by the Bible. In fact, the Bible pervasively teaches the opposite â that God can and does exert sufficient influence on morally responsible beings (his children!) to keep them safe in the worship of God forever. When the Bible says, for example, that God will âcause [us] to walk in [his] statutesâ (Ezekiel 36:27), and that he is âworking in us that which is pleasing in his sightâ (Hebrews 13:21), and that he âworks in [us], both to will and to work for his good pleasureâ (Philippians 2:13), and that the work he began in us he âwill bring . . . to completion at the day of Jesus Christâ (Philippians 1:6), and that he âwill sustain [us] to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christâ (1 Corinthians 1:8), and that âthose whom he justified he also glorifiedâ (Romans 8:30) â when God says all this, he means for us to stop talking nonsense about such glorious influence turning us into machines. It doesnât. It is life-giving grace. It is effective. It keeps us safe forever. And to call it machine-making is slanderous. If God did not exert sovereign influence over our wayward hearts, we would all fall away. Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it, Prone to leave the God I love. Hereâs my heart, oh, take and seal it, Seal it for Thy courts above. âIf God did not exert sovereign influence over our wayward hearts, we would all fall away.â Godâs âsealingâ (Ephesians 1:13) â his decisive, keeping influence â does not turn us into machines. It keeps us safe in the worship of God forever. No one who is justified will fail to be glorified (Romans 8:30). Heaven will never see an insurrection among the saints. Not because we are better than the angels, but because the blood of Jesus secured the new covenant for Godâs elect, where God says, âI will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from meâ (Jeremiah 32:40). He bought this pledge for his children by his blood. They will not commit treason. Let us praise such sovereign, merciful, keeping influence. God save us from slandering his saving power. It is false when Larkin assumes that God could not have kept his holy angels from sinning â safe in the worship of God. It is false to assume that such sovereign influence would make angels, or humans, into robots. It doesnât. Redemptionâs Stage What then is the answer to the question, Why did any holy angel sin? The answer is that God had a wise and gracious purpose. That is why it happened. Some of Godâs holy angels sinned because their fall would set in motion a history of redemption that would fulfill the infinitely wise purposes of God in creation. All the âunsearchable . . . judgmentsâ and all the âinscrutable . . . waysâ of God flow from the depths of his wisdom (Romans 11:33). âO Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them allâ (Psalm 104:24). He is âthe only wise Godâ (Romans 16:27). All that happens from eternity to eternity happens according to the wisdom of the one âwho works all things according to the counsel of his willâ (Ephesians 1:11). And we know it was a gracious purpose because Godâs plan before the creation of the world was to show grace to unworthy sinners. Sin came into being as part of a plan to show grace to sinners. â[God] saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages beganâ (2 Timothy 1:9). The plan before creation was that Christ would be the Lamb slain for sinners â sinners whose names were âwritten before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slainâ (Revelation 13:8). Christ slain for sinners was the plan before any human sinned. Two Unassailable Truths But notice what question I am not answering here. I am not answering the question, How did the first sin happen in the heart of a holy angel? The why question I have answered by saying the first sin happened as part of Godâs wisdom and purposes and planning. But that assumes God was able to see to it that the first sin happened without himself being a sinner, and without making the first sinning angel into a machine. I do not know the answer to the question of how God did this. This, to me, is one of the great mysteries of biblical teaching that I cannot explain â how God governs the will of sinful beings, yet, in doing so, does not sin, and does not take away their responsibility. I see that it is true, because the Bible teaches it, but how God does this remains a mystery. Recall that above I said that âfree willâ â ultimate self-determination â is the name some people put on this mystery. Then I added that this is not the biblical name. Because the Bible never teaches that there is such a thing as ultimate self-determination, except in God. The Bible doesnât give the mystery a name. Rather it teaches two truths again and again: God governs the hearts and minds of all sinful beings without himself sinning, and they are truly and justly accountable for all their sins. Sovereign over Satan Since we are not told explicitly how things transpired in the fall of Satan, it is illuminating to study how God relates to Satanâs will now. Is God helpless when a satanic will chooses to do evil? Can God restrain that will? Or would that only turn the will into a machine? The biblical answer is that God has the right and power to restrain Satan anytime he pleases. Consider these examples. 1. Though Satan is called âthe ruler of this worldâ (John 12:31), Daniel 4:17 says, âThe Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.â Satanâs world rule is subordinate to Godâs. 2. Though unclean spirits are everywhere doing deceptive and murderous things, Jesus Christ has all authority over them. âHe commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey himâ (Mark 1:27). 3. Satan is a roaring lion, prowling and seeking someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8). Peter explains that the jaws of this lion are, in fact, the sufferings of persecution: âResist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the worldâ (1 Peter 5:9). But this suffering, Peter says, does not happen apart from Godâs sovereign will: âIt is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be Godâs willâ (1 Peter 3:17). 4. Satan is a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). But God decides, finally, who lives and who dies and when: âIf the Lord wills, we will live and do this or thatâ (James 4:15). 5. When Satan aims to destroy Job and prove that God is not his treasure, he must get permission from God before he attacks his possessions (Job 1:12) or his body (Job 2:6). 6. Satan is the great tempter. He wants us to sin. Luke tells us that Satan was behind Peterâs three denials. âSatan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheatâ (Luke 22:31). But Jesus is sovereign over this tempterâs work, and its outcome. He says to Peter, âI have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothersâ (Luke 22:32). Not âif you turn,â but âwhen you turn.â Christ rules over all of Satanâs designs. Satan aims to fail Peter. Jesus aims to fit him for leadership. 7. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 4:4 that Satan âhas blinded the minds of the unbelievers.â But two verses later, God removes that blindness. âGod, who said, âLet light shine out of darkness,â has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christâ (2 Corinthians 4:6). So now back to the question about the origin of Satanâs sinfulness. Is God helpless before the will of his own angels? Is there a power outside himself that limits his rule over their choices and plans? My conclusion is that, from cover to cover, the Bible presents God as governing Satan and his demons. He has the right and power to restrain them any time he pleases. Guarding the Mystery The sum of the matter, then, about where a sinful Satan came from is this: He was a holy angel who mysteriously came to prefer self-exaltation over God-exaltation. He fell into the delusion that ultimate self-determination was possible for a finite creature, and that it was preferable to submitting to God. This fall was part of Godâs all-wise plan. It did not take him off guard. How God saw to it that this part of his plan came to pass, without himself sinning and without turning Satan into a machine, I do not know. âFrom cover to cover, the Bible presents God as governing Satan and his demons.â Trying to explain this mystery with so-called âfree willâ â that is, ultimate self-determination â is unbiblical and vacuous. It is unbiblical because the idea that any of Godâs creatures has ultimate self-determination is not taught anywhere in the Bible. And it is vacuous because it does not explain anything. Simply asserting that a holy angel had the âpower of choiceâ offers no explanation of why a perfectly holy being in Godâs infinitely beautiful presence would suddenly be inclined to hate God. We should probably take our cue from the reticence of the Bible to speak about Satanâs origin. He is there in the first pages of the Bible with no explanation. The mystery of his first sin remains just that. We surround it and guard it with biblical truth, lest unbiblical and vacuous explanations spread like a smog over the Scriptures and obscure the glory of Godâs saving purposes. Article by John Piper Founder & Teacher, desiringGod.org