Well, folks, you need a copy of the map now and try and follow closely. You may need a magnifying glass, not this map. Yeah. The one that's on the screen. And you may need a flashlight. Because the lighting in here is not great, so if I'm screwing up my eyes, I'm having as much difficulty. And that's not going to help us at all, I don't think. So forgive me if I have my back turned to you on occasion. I'm going to try and use this little gizmo here. And the first thing about this is that this is an ocular catechism, ocular eyes, so it's a visual catechism, and ocular catechisms were actually quite popular in the 17th century. There's a very famous ocular catechism by William Perkins. William Perkins taught theology at Cambridge University. His dates are roughly 1570 to 1610, somewhere around there. So around the 1600 period, if you had gone to Cambridge to study, and you'd either gone to Cambridge or Oxford to study theology, you would have been taught by William Perkins, William Perkins was a supraluxarian and then some. It was regarded as the orthodox understanding of the nature of how the doctrine of election relates to the doctrine of the fall. I don't want to go into it this morning in any great detail. It's one of those issues if you start, you can't kind of stop and it's not easy to do without some aids. Let me just attempt to demonstrate to you something here. If you look at this part, and you can follow it on your thing, but if you look at this part of the diagram. Now let's begin up here with this triangle and you've got God, Father, Son, Spirit. Now any attempt, let me just say up front, that any attempt to draw the Trinity is going to be heretical. You know, if you talk about it being being three clovered, three clovers, the Irish, what am I talking about? The Irish clover, the cloverleaf, you know, three. I mean, if you think that the essence of the Father exists outside of the essence of the Son and outside of the essence of the Spirit, then you're already in the realm of heresy. So, any visual demonstration of the Trinity is bound to be incorrect, and this one is certainly incorrect. You know, God being up in one corner and the Spirit and Father in another corner and the Son in the center. I do think Bunyan is trying to do a couple of things. He's probably trying to make Jesus, to emphasize a kind of Christological, Jesus-centered gospel here. It's an understanding of God with the Son at the very center. That is problematic, but let's pass that by. William Perkins isn't that much better either. What is rather curious here is that you see these two lines here. On the left-hand side of the diagram, you've got the way of salvation, and on the right-hand side of the diagram, you have the way of damnation. So you've got heaven here and hell here, right? Just stand back from it, just look at it, and what you notice, it's symmetrical. It's symmetrical. You could fold these in half and it's probably going to work. It's perfectly symmetrical. In other words, that for Bunyan, and Bunyan is depicting here reformed theology, at least a variety of reformed theology, that the way of salvation is the opposite of the way of damnation. that what works on one side works on the opposite side too, but leads to a different conclusion. Let's go back up here, and these two bubbles here, this one here says election. This bubble here says election. and on the other side you've got reprobation. So you've got election, reprobation. Now, try and follow the lines. There is no line, there's a number there, but it's not a line. Election comes through a consideration of Adam and the fall, right? Reprobation comes through a consideration of Adam and the fall. And then you've got lines going up from the fall all the way to the sun on either side. And they are called the line of grace and the line of justice. The line of grace on the line of justice. Now, that puts John Bunyan very firmly in the infralapsarian camp, because the reason for reprobation is justice. Now you're nodding, and I'm amazed that you're nodding, that you know what infralapsarianism means, but let me give you a little quiz. When you're talking about election to say another person and that person doesn't accept election and they say that's not fair. What's your response to that? What's your immediate response to say to somebody saying election isn't fair? Now one response is to say God is sovereign he may do as he pleases. He is the potter, we are the clay. He can make one lump into one thing and of the same lump make it into something else. He is absolutely sovereign. Who are you to question the sovereignty of God? That would put you in a super-luxurian camp, for sure. That would put you in William Perkins' camp. Actually, it might put you in Romans 9 camp. Here's another response. Election isn't fair. Well, if it's fairness you want, we're all going to be damned. Is that where you are? Is that your response? This isn't a right or wrong thing. I'm just asking. Is that your response? Yes. Then pastor here is in for the absurd. Which is fine. The Westminster Divines did not divide over this issue. I think the chapter 3 of the Westminster Confession was a classic compromise allowing for both supra and infra-lapsarians. But, if you say, if you answer the question, election isn't fair by saying, if it's fairness you want, we're all going to be damned, you have pre-considered the fall in your response. And the reason you're going to be damned is because you're a sinner. It is the line of And do you see it there? Justice. So the reason there is reprobation is justice. Right? It's not total sort of blind sovereignty. That would be the supraleptarian. That would be William Perkins' ocular chart. This one is an infraleptarian chart. I'm closing the door on it. Right? That's it. That's a huge topic, fascinating topic. It's one that I'm absolutely fascinated by, the whole thing. But it's like, if I go down this road any further, I can't get back. I've just got to close the door. So you just have to accept, if you didn't get that, just accept from me, this, the line of grace and the line of justice is suggesting to you that Bunyan is an infralapsarian. Now if you ask me, does Bunyan know about super-Ellipsarian and infra-Ellipsarian? Oh yes he does. Yet another reason to sort of question the card that Bunyan often plays, you know, that he had no education. He had no formal education, but he had read a good deal. And he had certainly thought a great deal. Now, this is rather curious that the lines here go to Jesus, but not to the Father and the Spirit. There is no way of interpreting that except that it's going to get you into all kinds of problems. That's just a mess. So just ignore that. I mean, theologically that's kind of messy. Because one of the fundamental tenets of patristic theology is that the external operat extra trinitatis indivisa sum, that the external operations of the trinity cannot be divided. that in the doctrine of, in the decree, all three persons are involved and not just the son. I think that's just trying to make this look Jesus-centered. But actually, it's not good. But let's ignore that. Now, follow this line to here and it says, election upon which standeth What? The next bubble above it, follow the line here. The covenant of grace. And on the other side, reprobation upon which standeth the covenant of works. So you have covenant of grace on this side, covenant of works on this side. Bi-covenantal. The whole of history is bi-covenantal. There's a covenant of grace and there's a covenant of works. Now that's very significant. Covenant theology I mean, you can certainly make a case that some of the patristic fathers were covenant theologians. You can certainly make a case that Calvin was a covenant theologian. But covenant theology did not come into its own, and certainly the language of covenant of works is 1630. This is in the 1660s. perhaps 1670s by the time he's doing this chart, but this is barely half a century after the phrase the Covenant of Works has been established. Now the Covenant of Works of course is a term that finds its way into the Westminster Confession in 1645. So the Puritans were covenant theologians. What does that mean? Well obviously it doesn't mean there were Presbyterians, right? Although it's a big issue for Presbyterians for sure. But Bunyan is a Baptist, but he's a covenant theologian. Meaning that the thing that holds the whole of history together, the whole Bible together, is the covenant. From Adam onwards. What that means is that Bunyan was not a dispensationalist in any shape, way or form. That it wasn't that people were saved in a different way in the time of Moses than in the time of the Apostle Paul. Because the whole of history, right, from Adam down to Heaven, through all of time, is governed by this principle of covenant theology. Either a covenant of grace or a covenant of works. That's big too. I'm going to close that door. So there's this infrasuperlapsarian thing closing the door. There's covenant theology. I'm going to half-close that door for now. But this is huge. This is John Bunyan firmly planting his feet here in the theology of covenant theology. Now let's follow this side. So you've got the covenant of grace and follow it down to number three here. There's number three. Follow it down. To the elect comes by the covenant effectual calling. Now, effectual calling, justification, adoption, sanctification, perseverance, all of these are aspects of what we call, what do we call it, the order of salutis, the order of salvation. Now think of Romans 8, those whom God did predestinate, them he also called, those whom he called he also justified, those whom he justified he also glorified. So you have a sort of inherent order of salutis, an order of salvation in Romans 8. William Perkins had written a book on that passage in Romans 8 and he called it the Golden Chain. It was a massive book, six, seven hundred pages. in which he talked about the order of salvation. Is there an order in which God applies salvation to us? Well, obviously there is. Faith must come before, but which comes first? Faith or regeneration? Think about it carefully. Which comes first, faith or regeneration? Ah, you're a form Baptist. Because general Baptists would say regeneration for sure. I mean, we would say faith for sure, because of free will. But the reason you're saying regeneration is that the Bible teaches we don't have the ability to believe unless God first regenerates our hearts. We can't believe. Which comes first, justification or sanctification? Justification. In other words, there's an order, whichever way you look at it, there's an order. Now, the first thing is something called effectual calling. If you go over to the side, do you remember what was said about Banyan, that if you pricked him, his blood would be Biblang? Right, so there are texts here, and in the square box on the side, there is a reference to Romans 8, whom he did predestinate, them he also called. Now notice the little poem above here, and it says, He that doth miss the saving call into God's wrath, he soon will fall. Now there is an effectual call, but there's also something called a general call. We'll see that on the other side. There is something called a general call when your pastor preaches the gospel, everybody within hearing, not just in the room, but through the medium of internet and so on and recordings. There are lots of people who will hear that call, but who will not respond. They hear it externally, but they don't hear it internally. There's no effectual call. So there's an effectual call, follow it down to number four here, by which is given the Holy Ghost and the operations of it. In a reference to Galatians chapter 4, because he has sons, here in the box, he hath sent forth the spirit of his son into your hearts. So, there's effectual calling, there's the giving of the Holy Spirit, go across now to number 5, which causeth sound convictions of sin. Look at the text. I kill and I make alive. Now that's an interesting use of that text. Not sure if that's what that text is meant to teach what Bunyan is saying here. But sound convictions of sin. There's an effectual call. There's a giving of the Holy Spirit. There's sound conviction of sin. Not just conviction of sin. The rich young ruler had a conviction of sin enough to say what must I do to be saved. But there's something called sound conviction of sin. A conviction of sin that doesn't just lead to guilt. A conviction of sin that doesn't just lead to saying, well, let's do more, let's try better, let's pick ourselves up by our bootstraps. But a conviction of sin that drives you to an end of yourself until they hold of Christ. Now, this is what I mean here by experimental or experiential Calvinism. It's not enough simply to say conviction of sin. There has to be sound conviction of sin. And that opens up a whole host of questions. What is sound conviction? How can you test sound conviction? What does it look like when it's something short of sound conviction of sin? Follow it down to number six here. whereat the soul is cast down, notice the text, Acts 16, the Philippian jailer, move across, which occasioneth Satan to tempt to despair, Right? And the text from 1 Peter is in this little banner he prowls about like a roaring lion. And then the next one, Which driveth the soul to the promise. Job 13 10, Though he slay me, yet will I trust him. Now, are you already seeing something of at least a question if not a problem right this may fit John Bunyan's experience of salvation that there was a conviction of sin and then there was the soul being cast down driving to despair but what about the person like my dear wife who doesn't remember a day when she didn't believe So this experiential chart here can be used and abused. And that's part of the problem of doing theology in the form of experiential theology, that you're trying to mold everybody's experience into a cookie cutter. Now follow it down to this one here, which is number nine, which strengthens faith, followed by which encourages us to pray, which causes God to hear and in mercy to Christ's righteousness there, which increases confidence And then down, working true love to holiness, humility at the site of sin, watchfulness against it, patience under the cross, which brings more experience of God's goodness. You wish you brought the magnifier now, right? Let's follow it down. We're down here. Which worketh strong hope in an unseen world, which begets much sweet soul contemplation which bears them up in faith above their sufferings, down here, whereby they overcome the world, and have an entrance into the kingdom of Christ, and then down here, wherein it dwelleth to eternity. Now, this is a very different chart. from William Perkins' chart. William Perkins' chart is a chart that talks about talks about effectual calling, talks about repentance, talks about faith, talks about justification, talks about adoption, talks about union with Christ. It's a very theological chart. This one is much more, it's less I mean, it's theological, but it's very unlike William Perkins. This is an experiential chart. How does one experience salvation? From its beginnings to the warfare of the Christian life with temptation, with the devil, with trials and difficulties, with hope, And eventually leading down here to dwelling to eternity. And then an angel saying here, come weary saint, come into light. Down here. It's not faint. Walk thou in white. Do you notice that the stress here very much is on perseverance. That's not saying at all that Bunyan didn't believe in the sovereignty of God. He believes in the doctrine of election and reprobation. He believes in God's decree, but he also sees the Christian life in terms of perseverance, of fighting, of struggling, of keeping going. Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God who works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. But work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. This is not Bunyan, the Calvinist, saying just trust in God's sovereignty. Let go and let God. Rest in God's sovereignty. Be still and know that God is sovereign. That's not Bunyan. Bunyan believes in the sovereignty of God, but he also believes in perseverance. The need on the part of the individual Christian to persevere. Energy. To cite Luther, and I think there is a link here between Bunyan and Luther, that faith is a busy little thing. Any questions about this left-hand side here? Let me read this banner here. When thou dost read this side, then look into thy heart as in a book, and see if thou canst read the same in thee from God by Christ his name. If not, then fear the other side, which not to life but death doth guide. This was meant to be an ocular catechism. It was meant for Christians to read. And as you read down the left-hand side, you ask yourself, well, is this me? Is this my experience of the faith? The passing into and out of the world. now let's go to the other side and you start here with the decree of reprobation and then to the covenant of works the covenant of works says do this and live The covenant of grace says live and do this. Because you are alive, because you've been effectually called, now do this. As a response to grace that you have received. On this side it's the opposite. Do this and live. Obey and you will live. So you come to this little bubble here, it's number three. To them by this covenant, the covenant of works, cometh legal conviction for sin. By the law is the knowledge of sin. So there's conviction of sin on this side as there is on this side. On this side, it's sound conviction of sin. On this side, it's legal conviction of sin. What is legal conviction of sin? A sense that you're guilty. A sense that you're culpable. but with no way of knowing how that guilt can be removed. Work yourself down to number 4, which worketh some desires after life. Numbers 23, 10, let me die the death of the righteous. And then over here, number 5, to whom God in mercy gives some tastes of life. Now, notice the text there. And that text is Hebrews 6. They have tasted the good word of God. You remember the Hebrew 6 passage, it is impossible for them who have been once enlightened, who have tasted the good word of God, and so on, to be renewed again unto repentance. They've tasted, but not swallowed, as John Owen says. They've tasted it. What's the difference between Peter and Judas at the time of Peter's denial. So you know the answer, you've read the book, you've read the last page, so you know the answer here. But actually there's absolutely no difference, none whatsoever. At the point of Peter's denial, as far as the danger of his position is concerned, there is no difference. The only difference is that Peter actually repents. His was a repentance that actually led to, his was a sorrow that led to repentance. But there is a sorrow that doesn't lead to repentance. Down here, number six here, at which the soul groweth secure. If a man think himself something when he is nothing, he deceives. himself. Then in the middle, which causes looseness of life, right? He's got away with it. At which God injustice blasts the soul. And he cites from Romans 11, God has given them the spirit of slumber. This is Bunyan saying that legal conviction can lead to a state, you know, you convince yourself that you're okay and you fall into this slumber And then down here, at which Satan renews his possession, the story that Jesus tells of Satan being cast out and the house being cleaned but the doors left open so he comes back and brings seven others with him. And then going across, who worketh blindness of heart, 2 Corinthians 4, the God of this world hath blinded. And then here, number 11, which begetteth impenitency, and then over here, which increaseth all manner of iniquity. And he cites, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath. and then here, which strengtheneth unbelief into atheism, which worketh contempt of God, which quencheth desires of heaven, at which God gives over to a reprobate mind, then the soul shineth with greediness, that verse in Ephesians 4, greediness, and abhorreth reproof, they would they would none of my reproof is quoting from Proverbs chapter 1 and then working its way down which beget us a spirit of persecution as Cain who was of that wicked one and slew his brother And then, which here, which is a shrewd sign of final apostasy. Again, Hebrews 6, and betokeneth the sin against the Holy Spirit. And then down here, for which there is no forgiveness but a certain fearful looking for of judgment under which the reprobate lies to eternity. Now Bunyan isn't I think suggesting here either on this side or on that side that every believer or unbeliever experiences this in exactly the same way. And certainly Bunyan would have believed for example that there were some very graphic examples of sinning against the Holy Spirit and the unforgivable sin and so on. Rather than what this might seem to suggest that every unbeliever, all the reprobate, in the end sin against the Holy Spirit. Now, there was a discussion in 17th century that discussion still exists today as to what exactly Jesus meant by the unforgivable sin. There is only one sin that is unforgivable and that is the lack of faith, unbelief. If you die without belief, without believing in Jesus, there is no forgiveness. So the unforgivable sin ultimately is the sin of unbelief if you don't believe. And suddenly all of the reprobate will end up in a condition in which they don't believe and in that sense they have sinned against the Holy Spirit. They have sinned against the light. They have sinned against knowledge. They have sinned against general revelation and special revelation. Perkins had another section over here, because all of this assumes, actually here, that they had actually heard the Word of God and had rejected the Word of God. But Perkins has another section over here, suggesting that there are actually some who have never heard the Word of God. and who still are reprobate but they don't go through all of this. So Perkins has another little section over here for those who have just never heard the word of God. Now notice down here in these two little banners on this side. Whether to heaven God will have glory or hell, sorry, whether to heaven or hell you bend, God will have glory in the end. The glory of God is done either way. So even reprobation is part of God's glory. It's not something that lies outside of the decree of God, that God will have glory either way. Again, that shows Bunyan to be the Calvinist, the reformed theologian that he was. that in the end nothing lies outside of the decree of God. God doesn't have his hands tied and isn't in control of the big picture here. Now that's the catechism. Let me open this up now for some questions. Yes? Did he hold to the view of equal ultimacy and reparation in elections? The question of equal ultimacy is the question, does God regard election and reprobation in precisely the same way? The ocular, the visual part suggests something that is equal here, in that both election and reprobation are considered with the fall in mind, so that makes him an interlubsarian. He doesn't seem to do what the Westminster Confession does, When it talks about reprobation, it seems to have two steps. The Westminster Confession talks about God passing by the reprobate and then ordaining them to eternal punishment. It's a kind of two-step thing. Partly, I think, to appease the infilipsarians, for sure. Bunyan doesn't have any of that nuance in this diagram, and maybe because that was something beyond what he intended to do with the diagram. But the mirror image thing here is stunning, that one is just an image of the other. So it certainly looks equally ultimate. Yeah? Well, I mean, there certainly was a debate that had gone back to the time of Calvin with Catholicism. Calvin spends a great deal of time in Book 2 of the Institutes talking about the nature of salvation under the Old Testament, and basically answering the question, how were the saints in the Old Testament saved? Partly because medieval Catholicism had come up with a whole doctrine of limbus patrum, that Old Testament saints went to a kind of limbo state. suggesting at least that the way of salvation in the Old Testament was certainly different from the way of salvation in the New Testament. So there was a strong semi-dispensational aspect I think to medieval Catholicism to begin with. Certainly not all Protestants were reformed. the Armenians, which is, I mean, the targets in Protestantism that folk like Bunyan would have were largely, on the one side, folk with zany views about the Holy Spirit, whether they were renters or Quakers or Shakers or whatever they were. that on the one side, and then Arminians pretty much, and Sassinians on the whole issue of the doctrine of Trinity. But they would have been the sort of folk here that they were arguing against. What covenant theology ensured was, one, an understanding that the way of salvation from the time of Adam onwards is the same. It's by faith alone in Jesus Christ alone, either in a Jesus who is promised and prefigured and seen in types and shadows and ceremonial law, or a Jesus who has actually become incarnate. But either way, it's faith in Jesus. But it also provided covenant theologians like Bunyan a way of understanding what it is that Jesus has actually done. How do they view the cross, and for that matter the entire life of Jesus, as an act of obedience? To satisfy divine justice, to quote the Westminster Confession. The cross was viewed as Jesus fulfilling the covenant of works. Because there are two covenants here, there is the covenant of grace and there is the covenant of works. And for us to know the covenant of grace, Jesus fulfilled the covenant of works. Hence the fundamental category to understand the atonement then is the category of obedience. Jesus obeyed. I have finished the work which you gave me to do. What does Jesus mean when he says it is finished? But he had performed, he had been the second Adam. He had done what Adam couldn't do. He had obeyed the covenant of works. Now, in theory, covenant theologians then believed that the covenant of grace and the covenant of works were both operative. Covenant of works still stands in theory. So that when Jesus says to the rich young ruler, who asks the question, what must I do to inherit eternal life? And he sends him to the law. It's as though Jesus is saying, well, look, if you can obey the law, you can be saved. I mean, the fact is you can't obey the law, but if you can obey the law, then you can be saved. Underlining the fact that the covenant that works hypothetically is still operative. It's just that no one can obey it. But it provided a way of understanding, you know, how do you understand the movement in history from the period of the patriarchs to the time of Moses and the giving of the law? You know, how could people before Moses be guilty if there wasn't a law? I mean, that question. And from the time of Moses to the time of the prophets to the time of the apostles, How do you put all of that history together? And covenant theology provided a framework to do that. That there is one covenant. A covenant of grace. One way of salvation. Well, I hope that's given you a thirst for Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. Maybe not for this chart, although it would be fun to frame that chart and put it on the wall. This chart is disturbing. This isn't the chart that you look at and you feel good every morning. Look at this chart, yeah, I feel good. This is great. This chart gives you the heebie-jeebies. I mean, this chart says to you, I need to make my calling and election sure. I need to persevere. I need to keep on believing and trusting. This is not a quiet moment with Jesus time, this chart. This chart speaks about the need to persevere on our part. It's also a chart that's always separating the world into two kinds of people, the saved and the lost. Those in union with Christ and those who are not. Those who are trusting and those who are not. And it's a very graphic way of seeing the world. Everybody that you see in a football crowd of 100,000 people, there are those who are saved and there are those who are lost. And none of Vabonian's Calvinism drove him into a kind of quiet mode. I mean, he was an evangelist. He wrote Pilgrim's Progress as an evangelistic text. Father, we do thank you. Thank you for this man, this extraordinary man that you raised up and his life and his writings. Although he's dead, he still speaks to us through his pilgrim's progress in particular and we pray that we too might make our calling and election sure. that we might persevere even to the end, that we might remember that even from the hill beside the entry into the celestial city there was a door that led even into hell. We pray, Lord, that you would, by your Spirit, so assure us of our relationship to the Lord Jesus, and that we might constantly look to him. So hear us and bless us, we pray, we ask it all in Jesus' name.