And now we're dealing with the opposite side. What is forbidden in the second commandment? Because we know that if a command is positive, the opposite is forbidden. If a commandment is prohibitive, the opposite duty is required. That's what we read in the larger catechism. So now we ask, what is forbidden by the second commandment? And it says, the second commandment forbiddeth the worshiping of God by images. or any other way not appointed in His Word. So the second commandment forbids us to attempt to make graven images or pictures of God. And I got to say, first of all, in most Primarily in the core, the commandment speaks to worship. I mean, there's some truth to those who say, well, its primary application is the corporate worship, also the private worship. I mean, you still cannot... in your home have an ephod and kneel down before it. And that is always forbidden because these are also acts of worship. Whenever a graven image, whenever a picture is involved and you pray to it, as for example, the Orthodox churches, I don't mean the Orthodox Presbyterians, I hope they don't do it, but Greek Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox and so forth. They have a lot of icons, they have a lot of... statues, but mostly pictures to which they pray. But that is clearly forbidden, not only the second commandment itself, but by all these commandments and all these precepts that flow from it. Let me just remind you that every precept in the scriptures can be traced back to one or more of the Ten Commandments. And this was an interesting discussion I once had with Dr. R. Scott Clark, when he was one of these often times when he bashes the law of God in its application, in its full application, I asked him because I knew in the confessions, it clearly says the Ten Commandments need to be kept. And I asked him, so what about the Ten Commandments? He says, yeah, yeah, the Ten Commandments are still valid. And I asked him, so if the Ten Commandments are still valid, so how do you argue that all those commandments who trace back to the Ten Commandments which explain the application of these Ten Commandments is invalid? And of course, he resorted as he usually does to ad hominem attacks against my former seminary professors. I didn't know how that helped the discussion, but you have to understand this. You cannot affirm the Ten Commandments and then say, well, but all other precepts, all other applications of the law or the chapters after Exodus 20, that's all not applicable anymore. when this is only the explanation how these Ten Commandments are to be applied in real life. So you can't have it both ways. Of course, they chose a third way. They chose the humanists, the rationalists way and talk about natural law. which they cannot prove, which they cannot write down. I once asked these guys, these R2K fans and fanboys. I asked them, I said, please, what is natural law? Can you write it down for me? I haven't found a book where it is written. Hitler's natural law was a different one than Ronald Reagan's natural law or Cicero's natural law or Thomas Aquinas natural law, which is the natural law. Of course, you never get an answer for that. And that's why they don't... They refuse every debate because they know they would lose. They just dislike the law of God. So the second commandment has many applications throughout the Scriptures. For example, Isaiah chapter 40, verse 18, to whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will He compare to Him? The workman molds an image, the goldsmith overspreads it with gold, and the silversmith casts silver chains. Whoever is too impoverished for such a contribution chooses a tree that will not rot. He seeks for himself a skillful workman to prepare a carved image that will not totter." So this is Isaiah 40, clearly an application of the Second Commandment. Or Paul in Acts chapter 17, verse 29, We ought not to think that the divine nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. Or Jeremiah 10, verses 14 and 15, everyone is dull-hearted without knowledge. Every metalsmith is put to shame by an image. For His molded image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them. They are futile, a work of errors. In the time of their punishment they shall perish." So on and on, there's countless passages in Holy Scripture that forbid the use of any picture or statue for the reason of worship. And I have to agree with G.R. Williamson when he writes that Protestants have increasingly abandoned their faithfulness to this commandment. By the way, an image is a statue and the likeness is a picture, just so you know how it is being used in the scriptures. I have to say, I got to say, I always loved R.C. Sproul, but when I walked to that church the first time, I almost passed out. There are big, I mean, huge pictures, images of Christ in the narthex. They're not in the sanctuary and I appreciate that. But R.C. Sproul had a different opinion on this, truth be told, because I think if I remember rightly, he would say, well, they're not to be worshipped, but it doesn't mean they cannot hang out there in the narthex. And that is a position that sadly more reformed are increasingly adopting. I personally do not hold to this position because I think it's a false argument. It is true that the commandment forbids us to worship statues or images or pictures. And it is often argued, for example, in children's books that when Jesus is depicted, it is for instructional purposes. I get the argument. I still think it's wrong. First of all, I would argue by the formulation of the commandment and its application throughout scripture. There is no exception that you can exegetically extract, I believe. You would have to argue from the absence of an actual term that says, you can also not use this for instructional purposes. But also you have to understand, we do not know how Jesus looks like. We do not know how he looked like when he walked on earth. So every depiction of Jesus as a statue or as a picture would by necessity be a lie. And I can tell you, this is from my own experience. When I was a young believer, that Jesus movie in the 80s was very... Very popular, I don't know if you remember that was by the Gospel of Luke. I appreciate the intention. It was only the text of the Gospel of Luke. There was nothing added and I appreciate that. But there was also Jesus and it took me decades to get that Jesus out of my head. Because Jesus was not blue-eyed and blondish, that alone. He cannot have looked like that. And as likable as you may depict Jesus in a picture or in a TV show, it will always be wrong. He certainly hasn't looked like any of the Jesuses. How can I say that? Because we don't know. You tell me what the likelihood is that another person who plays Jesus ever in a TV show or who is painted in a children's book looks exactly like the real Lord Jesus Christ. So again, Jeremiah 51, ''Everyone is dull-hearted without knowledge. Every metalsmith is put to shame by the carved image, for his molded image is falsehood. Now the father you cannot depict at all because he has no body. God is a spirit and doesn't have a body like we do. And it goes on, they are futile, a work of errors. So the scripture talks about all of them. All of them who seek to depict any person of the Trinity is producing a work of errors. And it says, in the time of their punishment, they shall perish. So this is how serious of a sin this is. And secondly, an argument against this kind of reasoning is that we separate in our imagination Jesus' divine nature from his human nature. So even if we would depict him right outwardly, we would never be able to depict his divine nature. And Jesus' divine nature is never to be separated from his human nature in our depiction. Even now, Jesus is still Fully man and fully God. Do you know that many evangelicals don't know that? I once led a Bible study a few years ago in Austria when I was visiting and one seminarian argued vehemently how I can say that Jesus is still a man. They think that he stripped off his humanity like a snake strips its skin. And now he's only divine again. It was just a rental. He rented a human nature and then he gave it back again and hoped that he gets his security deposit back or whatever, I don't know. But if you depict Christ, you cannot, you must not depict only his humanity, even if you could. John 5, 23, all should honor the son just as they honor the father. He who does not honor the son does not honor the father who sent him. So you cannot separate Christ's humanity from his deity. You cannot, you must not. It is not allowed, it's foreboding. There's no way that you can do this. And I give you a third one. Using visual representations for the Lord Jesus Christ, we dishonor both the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit, which are alone able to make us wise for salvation through faith, which is in Christ Jesus, as it says in 2 Timothy 3, verse 15. So the Scriptures alone make us wise. And here we are and say, no, the Scriptures are not enough. We need also visual depictions. And I have to say that our Reformed fathers were right. They abhorred, I cannot imagine, I cannot remember any stream of the Reformation of the Reformed side that was seriously bibliophile in the way that they loved the scriptures that would ever allow any form. You know that many Reformed churches would even not like to have the cross on their pulpits. because in their mind, it's already too much, a cross. And I sympathize. I'm also not a big fan of having crosses everywhere, but I don't think we're, this is not, I mean, it gets clearly idolatrous when you put crosses everywhere. a depiction of Christ on it, as the Roman Catholics do. You know, they call it a crucifix, right? That would surely be apart from the fact that he's not on that cross anymore. This is a false depiction. But so, historically, the Reformed were always strongly against any depiction, any signs. And by the way, historically, the young church did not use the cross as their sign by the throne. because for them, Christ, they understood better than the reform today that Christ sits on the throne and he rules. So it would be even a more accurate statement than the cross. The cross is over, thank God. But of course it reminds us. And that's why we have it. And when this pulpit was made, I let the artists do it. I didn't expect the cross to be there, but it was there. I have no problem with it, but I personally wouldn't have put it on it. And I'm not a big fan of having big crosses anything that distracts. But in this case, it's more a practical reason for me than whatever can distract you from the pure worship of God who is a spirit should be avoided. But I don't think in our circles there are people who would be tempted to pray to this cross or even a great cross that hangs in the back. I'm just saying this because our host church has a big cross and many Reformed churches have a big cross in the back. My conscience is not violated by a cross. It would be violated when there were painted windows, when Christ is depicted, that is a different story. But the cross is a reality that we know basically how a cross looked like and it reminds us what Christ has done for us. Here's what John Calvin said, Calvin said, daily experience teaches that the flesh is never satisfied till it has obtained some image resembling itself as an image of God." So the flesh always wants some crutches and I got to tell you, it would be so much easier to pray if there were a statue in front of us, right? And we think we can address this statue. And I think that must by necessity hold true for all of us. But here's the thing, The statue is nothing, it doesn't listen. It will be thrown into the fire once we're cold, as Isaiah says. We speak to a God who is invisible. And whenever we want to bypass that fact, we're basically trying to alter God himself as it were. And that's why it is such a serious sin to engage in this kind of ideology. The only images, the only visual representations that are allowed in the Christian faith are the two signs, the two sacraments, the Lord's Supper and Baptism. Those are signs. Here God speaks in signs, but also the bread is not to be worshiped. I remember a seminary professor of mine who said, if I ever see you lifting any of the elements in a church worship service, I'm going to come and drag you down from the pulpit or from behind that table. And the reason is you do not lift the elements because the elements are not Christ. the elements only represent Christ. And then I have seen disturbing worship services where the elements are lifted. I preached in a church that I otherwise liked, and I very much liked the pastor, but they kneel during the Lord's Supper, which I didn't administer. So I was in that worship service, I preached there, but I was not the one who administered, so I was, I was confronted, do I kneel or not? I just remained seated and I didn't kneel. You do not kneel before the elements, before the elements are just bread and wine. And that's why I feed the bread to the children afterwards, just for them to grow up knowing this is not the body of Christ. This just symbolizes the body of Christ. I cannot let them drink the wine, but every once in a while I grab one of the brothers and said, let's have one together. And then we drink a little cup of wine. So you understand that this is just wine, this is just bread. It represents Jesus Christ, but it is not Jesus Christ. And therefore, that's also one of the reasons why you don't line up here. I'm not a priest and this is not Christ and you don't kneel before it. I don't lift it. We sit before the invisible Christ who is here present among us in His Spirit. Not in material, but this goes too far as far as details are concerned. But I needed to tell you once so you know why I do things the way I do. This is how I was taught, this is how the fathers taught, and I think this is in line with scripture. But I'm also not that kind of person who in a worship service where they kneel, stands up and cries heresy. Heresy, you know, when I was a young man, I was a little bit like that. But you learn quickly that if we start doing that, there is always reason for somebody to jump up at any time and cry heresy because we're so bad in the things we do. So always keep in mind when I say something like that or explain something like that, I also didn't run out of R.C. Sproul's church. I worshipped, I mean, God knows my heart, right? I didn't worship any of those pictures. And it was Sinclair Ferguson who preached, why would I leave? I'm not an idiot to leave out such a feast. I just ignored those pictures in the back in the Northex. Again, there were none in the sanctuary. Now we have to talk about worship itself for a moment. First, let me say question 52. What are the reasons annexed to the second commandment? The reasons annexed to the second commandment are God's sovereignty over us, His propriety in us and the zeal He has to His own worship. So this is what you have to understand. God is very zealous about His worship. And that's why worship is so important. And I'm always really, really struck by the fact that in Reformed pulpits in this country, Calvin is so often, so often mentioned and so often quoted, which he should be. I'm taking no issue with that. But we do not get that while Luther brought us back the gospel, Calvin brought us back worship. Halloween was so focused on worship. He said, now we have the gospel, now we have our salvation, now we have to learn to thank God in worship. And I got to tell you, honestly, I never learned a proper theory of worship or theology of worship in seminary. I just did what everybody did. And most of the time he was right because it was passed on the Reformed generations properly. But you'll be getting a kick by this, how I learned about worship. A seminary asked me if I would teach Reformed worship. And you know, cocky young man that I was, oh yeah, I can teach anything. Then I started to dig into worship and I realized I knew nothing. All I knew was these basics, the second commandment. I knew it's a dialogue between God and His people. I knew nothing about covenant renewal in worship. I did not understand how you trace worship from the Old Testament because we don't have enough in the New Testament to build our worship service, right? Why? Because... the young Christians knew that the Old Testament was not per se. And then dispensationalism came to this country or to the West as a whole. And then we suddenly cut off the Old Testament. We only had the New Testament. Suddenly we were all Baptists. And suddenly we didn't know how to worship anymore. So I didn't want to offend, but it is true in the New Testament. You don't learn much about baptism at all. You don't learn much about worship at all. Why? And you know, I have friends One will preach here soon. He was here a few times, Pastor Andrakowicz, he's a Baptist who understands covenant theology. He uses the Old Testament. But if you only use the New Testament, there's many things that you will never find out. And dispensationalism has done that with this cut between the Old and the New Testament. But in the young church, the Old Testament was still the Bible. It is still part of the Bible. I would never encourage you to only have a New Testament. You would never buy a third of a book somewhere, right? You want to read the whole story. I understand sometimes we start at the back because we want to know how it ends. But if you don't know the beginning, you don't know what's going on and what this story is. So we're talking about worship here, and I want to remind you of this horrifically truthful story in Leviticus chapter 10 about Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron. who were to administer the first organized worship service after they were ordained as priests. And I think I've mentioned that before because I mentioned it every time because that's one of the historic events that I have a hard time dealing with. I'm not saying that it's not right. I think it's perfectly right and it's all good, but as a father, Here is Aaron, he must have been so happy about his sons. I almost said proud, but as a Reformed, you got to be so careful how you use these terms. But in a good way, he must have been so grateful to God that his sons were now priests and they were taking it very, very seriously. And they are now administering the first worship service. And they are so excited about it that they get carried away. And they said, let's light another fire before the Lord. Let's just add some praise to him. And I'm pretty certain nobody objected at the time. Next thing you know, they're barbecued in front of the eyes of their father. They're burned to a crisp. That very fire ate them up and burned them. And then comes the part that I cannot wrap my mind around, especially I can't wrap my heart around it. Aaron must have stood there seeing his two beloved sons. I mean, within a moment you go from absolute bliss and happiness to completely devastating tragedy, from the best to the absolutely worst that can happen to a father. And then God speaks through Moses and He says, I will be glorified. And then come the words that I understand the least in all of scripture. It says, and Aaron held his peace. Now there's a reformed man. You're your father and you see this. Here's a man who loves God more than everything. I know as I am today, I would have nowhere close reacted like Aaron reacted in that moment. and Aaron held his peace. Why? Because he understood the holiness of God. That the holiness of God was so much more important than even the life of his own sons. And in that respect, this text becomes a massive challenge to my own heart towards God compared to the things of this world. And my sons and my daughters are things of this world at this point, you know, compared to God, you know. And so what we learn here is God wants to be worshipped the way He says. It doesn't mean every time we worship wrong, our children will be killed. This is a one-time event to signify how important worship is. We better heed this warning and be very interested to learn to worship God the proper way and not in the way that we want to. And God is enormously patient, you have to say. If you look around, how many churches worship him as false and as wrong as can be, and God still at times blesses them, but at some point his patience ceases. Because if you walk, and I cannot wrap my mind around the patience of God, if you walk into any given one of these big churches or mega churches and you know you have all this smoke and and and the show and I've seen a video recently where a pastor flies in strings or whatever I don't know he hit something on the way but that's okay and so I understand they want to please people, they want to make the gospel more acceptable. But at the same time, they not only deny God and God's power through His Word, they're also violating His standards for worship. And this has been a problem ever since I was a young pastor. I always had people, always had people who would come into the church. It was the worst in Ohio, I have to say. Often people would come to the, I don't know why, but often people would come to the church. It was not a reformed area, maybe that was it. And they would say, we really love it here. We love the people, we love the preaching, the commitment to the truth, but boy, your singing is boring. And gone they are. I mean, at least they're honest, you got to say. But these are people who don't understand that worship is not primarily for us, but it is for God. And here's the thing, as with our lives, as it becomes all about God in contrast to all about us, a side effect will be God in His grace will edify us. But if you come in and say, no, I don't trust God in that respect, I begin right away the way that pleases me, like the world with music that goes deep, you know, in the way of the bass, I have to feel it in my ribcage. Not only is it wrong, but what you're doing is you're like a junkie who always ups his dose, the amount of drug that he takes and you need more and more and more to get a kick. And then by Monday noon, it is gone anyway, because it was all emotional. It was not the Holy Spirit. It was not the truth that edified you. Now, I'm not one who says, well, if you have a guitar in a worship service, you're done. You're a full-blown Boltmanian. You're a liberal. You're basically on your way to hell. I know people like that. If you allow a piano or an organ, you might as well allow a guitar. Now the argument about which instrument you're gonna use, if you use instruments, the argument then becomes wisdom, right? So we allow a violin because the association of a violin and the piano is still worship. But the moment we have a drum set here and an electric guitar, the association is not worship, it is world. It is self-worship, it is being pumped. You know, I'm a hockey referee and I hear when I get dressed, I hear the teams, they have subwoofers in their dressing rooms and before the game, they turn them all the way up. I mean, it doesn't matter where in the arena they are, we hear it. So they get pumped in their egos, the adrenaline gets going. So they're going to be strong warriors on the ice. It's not different to what happens in some of these modern or contemporary churches. It becomes all about me, I feel good about myself. And all these tears that you see, that's often, I don't want to say always, but that's often just self-pity. It's self-pity, it's self-worship, it's woe is me. You understand that self-pity is also pride. Somebody once said self-pity means crying at the devil's shoulder. You know, those tears and... If you compare the Psalms, if you compare the old hymns like Isaac Watts with contemporary worship songs, not only are the modern ones just stupidly simple, but you have to only count the I's versus the D and I's. Today, we sing how we feel. Back then, we sang who God was. So you see, I'm generalizing, I know that, but you know, and then you repeat and repeat and repeat in order to stir the emotions and then you ask people to come forward. It's not the Holy Spirit. It's not the truth. It's emotions that are being manipulated. And it started in this country with a guy called Charles Grandison Finney. He was a heretic basically, he was a blazing Arminian. And he thought anything's possible, anything's allowed, nothing's off limits when it comes to getting people to make that decision for Christ. So worship has become... blatant manipulation of emotions. And as much respect as I have of the man, but even Billy Graham used that in his crusades because all you had to look is how many people walked forward under the influence of a sudden emotion and how many were still in the church a year later. I saw it in my own hometown. I mean, hundreds went forward and those who remained You can count on one hand if it has no fingers, maybe. But anyway, we have to trust the Lord, not only in our life, but also in worship. So the second commandment... is the rule that says God describes worship and nothing is to be added and nothing is to be taken away. And we have three basic rules. I used them in preaching already. I preached about worship a little bit, but just as a reminder, whatever is commanded about worship always has to be done. That's why we have weekly communion, because there is no argument I've ever heard that would tell us that communion is not commanded by God. If it's not commanded, and that is the second rule, it is always forbidden. So the Lord's Supper is either commanded or forbidden. If it's commanded, it's always to be held. If it's forbidden, it's never to be held. And I remember when I was in seminary, I went to Morton Smith, one of my favorite professors. He's with the Lord now. But I asked him, I said, Dr. Smith, I don't understand this once a month because many Presbyterians have communion once a month. I don't understand where it comes from. As far as I read scriptures, it's either weekly or once a year. I mean, the Passover was once a year. Worship is weekly. It can only be one of those two. And he said, you're quite right about that. And that was it, nothing changed, nothing changed. But worship is, whatever is commanded is always to be done. Whatever is not commanded, not mentioned, is not to be done. We cannot add expression and dance. You wouldn't want to see me dancing. Or we have young people, it's not commanded, therefore it's forbidden. And whatever is forbidden is always forbidden. So only what is actively commanded by God. If you don't remember how we trace our order of worship to the Old Testament, go back to that mini-series on worship and you will hear. And keep in mind John 4.24 that God is a spirit and he must be worshiped in spirit and truth and not according to our own imaginations. Okay, I'm sure there are questions or comments.