My Personal Struggles in trying to understand the King James Only Movement

This thread is simple.*** I simply struggle in understanding the King James Only Movement. I can't call it a denomination because this one English translation is trans-denominational. I do feel comfortable though calling it a movement.  By simple definition, the KJV only movement exists within Protestant Christianity and has even spread within the practices of Non-Christians, and in doctrine and practice only uses the KJV in their church services. Yes of course there are various understandings of the term ranging from preference, friends, familiarity, language, preservation, and even the extreme usage in correcting Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. 

I write this thread because yesterday I drove past the sign for the school listed above, Hyles-Anderson College, while I was on my way to Chicago. Just driving by brings back memories of reading and experiencing church splits and struggles over this issue. Its almost as if the only way to keep peace on this issue is to say nothing, which ultimately ends up saying only they get to say something from classroom and pulpit.  

Just for curiosity I looked on the website to be clear what I am seeing and here's what it says about the Scriptures. All the key terms are present: inerrant, perfect, infallible, plenary and verbally inspired. I believe the error mainly stems from their next statement.  Where does preservation of God's word exist right now? Do these terms listed above apply to the original Greek manuscripts or to an English translation? Does preservation exist within the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts or only in one English translation? "God has divinely preserved His words for English-speaking people in  the King James Version. The King James Version is the translation used in any and all ministries...." So to believe this statement, does that doctrinally make you King James Only? So can we also use the idea that someone may believe an orthodox position but be KJV only in practice as well?

Just for reference, compare this to another Christian college, well-known for their KJV only position. Pensacola Christian College states on scripture, it is "without error in the original autographs" and preservation occurring "in the traditional Hebrew and Greek manuscripts." Both statements fitting within historic Christianity on this issue. Or specifically concerning this English issue, "the Authorized Version (KJV) is an accurate English translation." Again, a good statement but in practice does that mean a student can use another good English translation? Specifically in their handbook students are told to bring a Bible (KJV). Notice the difference between the two options. 

One lacks clarity as to what was actually inspired and inerrant. One also limits preservation to not just one language, but to one English translation, the King James Version. So how should you respond? What should you do? Nothing? Sit in the pew and pretend everyone agrees or only let one side get a voice? If it causes division, is no longer edifying, or potentially sinful, I recommend leaving that church and finding another Gospel-preaching, Christ-exalting church. The following guidelines are not mine but simply guidance from other sources. In fact, some of these same points were given as challenges to a recent Foundations Baptist Fellowship International (FBFI) meeting this year. Click here to listen.

One, do what you can to break ties with the King James Only movement, especially their institutions, camps, and churches. Practically speaking, if your vote is in the minority, and objections not heard, then you are left to vote with you feet. There are plenty of churches that you could attend instead.

Two, do not financially support or do joint ministry with camps and churches within the King James Only movement. Again, similar to point one, if you can't vote, or are always in the minority, then vote with your wallet. There are plenty of churches, camps, and mission boards in need of support.

Three, not doing these above two options give credence to the wrong position. To stay there emboldens their willingness to keep beating that same drum. The older generation has no reason to change because your attendance only encourages them to never change. This is similar to saying, "We're not King James Only but we use only the King James." I agree with others this is supporting the wrong side on this issue and is a very uncomfortable or misleading phrase to use. If your curious who said it listen here. 

Your decisions no matter what they may be will not be easy. Friendships will be injured and potentially even lost. Some churches will potentially never let you preach or teach there again but that is a cost you must weigh. Be informed. Read on the issue and make scriptural-based decisions on this issue.

***I am not defending positions or discussing historical issues here. I have multiple articles dealing with those issues posted elsewhere under theological issues. There are also multiple books addressing the historical position on this issue. 

Read. Enjoy. Comment as needed.

Deacons and Deaconesses: Do Local Churches have Biblical precedent for both or either?

Deacons and Deaconesses: Do Independent Baptist Churches have Biblical precedent for both? (Part One)

Most denominations I'm aware of have at least (at a minimum) one pastor/elder and if large enough one deacon. Some have one pastor and multiple deacons and some also multiple elders and with multiple deacons. We've discussed elders and congregations already but who are these deacons?  Men or women? Servants? What are the requirements or expectations?  Do they teach or have authority? Are they a rotating board? I would guess by what I can read and have experienced for over twenty five years in independent baptist churches that how you define the "purpose" or "function" of a deacon defines more who qualifies for this position than what the Bible actually says.  So on that note what does the Bible actually say? On another note, where have we made up as roles the Bible never gave or potentially never intended by God? 

To evaluate the scriptural data available there are two potential options?  (To be fair, we could even ignore what the Bible says and make it up--don't laugh we do this more than you think). First, we'll examine the references to deacons as a noun.  Then secondly, to examine the references to serving or acting as a deacon in verb form. We are left to appeal to the only forms where this church activity even exists. From there it just gets more complicated dealing with two divisive or contested verses: Romans 16:1-2 and 1 Timothy 3:11. So let's begin.

The noun διάκονος appears 29 times in the NT and six times in the LXX. In the KJV it appears as three terms: minister, servant, and deacon (3x). At face value the terms minister and servant help us understand what role we're talking of in the local church.  The three references to the term deacon are simply transliterations and don't help us much. By way of reminder, a transliteration is copies the underlying letters of another language into the letter of the receptor language.  For example, consider the term ἄγγελος. A transliteration would be the term angel. You can almost without knowledge of Greek see with your own eyes the letters A-N-G-E-L.  If I wanted to translate the term I would use another English word such as messenger.  So simply seeing the English word deacon doesn't help much. However, the uses of this term contain several contextual issues of great importance which will be discussed in detail later. For example, these individuals minister or function as servants to include Christ himself modeling a servant (Rom 15:8-9). The three references to deacon (as a church "office") will be given special attention (Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3 (2x)). And of course once we get a good NT basis for what a deacon is or is not maybe this will help with Phoebe's role/function in Roman 16 as well.

As for the verb form: to minster or to serve how does this help us understand this role? Simply by the numbers it occurs 37 times in the NT. The NT has the following senses for this verb: to serve, to minister, or to wait on. No references to a leadership role.  This is a role or function or service.  Consider some examples. Jesus came to serve (Mt 20:28). The angels served Jesus (Mt 4:11). This was not the focused mission of the apostles (Acts 6:6). Remember Mary and Martha. One of them was zealous in serving (Lk 10:40). So this act of serving/ministering is seen by men, women, angels, and even Christ himself.  So the subjects who perform this verb doesn't help much. This is a simple term for serving/ministering to other people of multiple genders and classes.

So what can we take away?  Christ served. Angels serve. Men and women serve. There appears to be nothing inherent in this term of any idea of leadership. These are servants in particular situations. So to really get at the church function of deacons we'll have to dig into the references where they have been transliterated for this church function.  We'll have to look at each one of our "deacon" passages.  What do they tell us? How do they help us understand this role/function within the local church?

I'm afraid the NT available data for word studies is not helpful to answer this question.  However, it does provide some interesting starting points.  First, the underlying Greek in noun form is translated as servant, minister, and three times as deacon. Second, similar results are for the verb form: to serve or to minister. So to answer this dilemma we'll need to focus on the contexts where the term deacon is actually used as a local church role/function.

Read. Enjoy. Comment.

Book Recommendation: The Bivocational Pastor: Two Jobs, One Ministry by Dennis Bickers

The Bivocational Pastor. Two Jobs, One Ministry. (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press), 2004. by Dennis Bickers.

Whether in the local church, para-church ministry, or serving in the military reserves (Army, Navy, etc...), wearing two hats is an ongoing struggle. Balancing both ministry and family are even more difficult.  Bickers gives us an excellent resource to address the challenges of both.

Table of Contents

1. Defining Success
2. A Good Match
3. Leadership in the Church
4. Leadership in the Church
5. Integrity in Your Life
6. Commitment to Your Church
7. Passion for the Ministry
8. Faith in God
9. Growth of the Minister
10. Equipping the Laity
11. Management of Time

Each chapter includes questions for reflections to think through the information just read.

Here's Amazon.com's summary of the book:

"Bivocational ministers face unique challenges. Often, you are called to lead smaller churches with few resources, many of which have plateaued or are in decline. Many bivocational pastors have little or no formal theological training. Bivocational ministry is looked at by some as a ’second-class’ ministry performed by people who do not have the opportunity to serve a larger church. Along with your family and church responsibilities, your second job also requires a large amount of time each week. But you have a special calling, as both of your jobs can provide opportunities for ministry. In his new book, Dennis Bickers provides solid advice to help you succeed in bivocational ministry. You’ll learn how to:Manage time wiselyDefine success on your own termsDevelop a vision for your churchMaintain a passion for the ministryAnd much more!Read Dennis Bicker’s Blog."

Read. Enjoy. Comment.

What does Acts 6 offer for local church elders, deacons, and pulpit committees?

What does Acts 6 offer for local church elders, deacons, and pulpit committees?

So what's Acts 6 got to do with elders, deacons or even pulpit committees? Well we need to consider the text itself, its context, and ramifications for the church today in 2018.  After we understand what the text says we will then begin to struggle with the applications for today (we can't skip this step).  By what standard do we determine what was then and what continues on till now?  Where are the commands for today or perhaps principles we can use to guide our steps today? Do we say pulpit committees aren't forbidden therefore we can have them? I assume this would include the fact that any age, gender, or level of maturity can't be held against someone.

These may sound like simple questions but they have massive implications for the church today.  By what standard do we determine what proof-texting is allowed in churches today? By way of reminder, when we talk in terms like "descriptive" what we mean is the biblical text is simply describing what events were happening in the first century (or earlier).  Question: is this NT first century pattern binding on the church today?  That's a big issue. When we use the term "prescriptive" what we are saying is that the NT writer, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is telling us exactly what we are to be doing today.  Do this because doing this is being obedient .  This is what right looks like.  This verse over here is what wrong looks like, don't do this thing or have this motive or desire.  Get the point.

Back to our discussion. Typically, those who are against a plurality of elders view the passages in Acts as merely descriptive (that is the ones mentioning more than one elder).  They are not for the church today.  Or as some writers have stated, these references are only "permission" they are not really "prescriptive" for directing local churches today. Consider the consistent ramifications for these principles: believer's baptism by immersion, speaking in tongues, plurality of lay elders, Lord's day practices, and missions.  The list could go on and on, the point is when do we determine it was only a "transitional" period in Acts or whether its only describing what happened then but not for today?  Is it possible for us today to selectively pick proof texts of our own convenience?  I can be just as guilty about this as anyone else.  But I want to be consistent and not hypocritical in my understanding of this concept. What value do Paul's epistles and other general epistles help in this area? Do the epistles confirm or clarify any ambiguities in the book of Acts for either elders, deacons, or congregational decision making?  This is a tremendously important issue.

So what's going on in Acts 6? Let's apply this discussion from the previous paragraphs to our issue of pulpit committees. The first six verses are key for this conversation. Summary of the content is as follows: (1) some individuals (widows) are overlooked in receiving some form of beneficence ministry (2) the twelve apostles tell the disciples to pick (imperative verb) some people to address this issue; (3) the disciples pick seven men; and (4) the twelve apostles lay hands on these seven men selected by the disciples. I'm going to hold off on technicalities for a later series on servant/deacons but the following comments should provide a significant degree of spiritual food for thought:

First, those who made the initial decision to address the issue were the twelve apostles.  A complaint (grumble, murmur) was brought to their attention. These twelve apostles are no longer with us today. In fact Acts 1 explicitly limited those who qualify for this specific office to a very small select group of individuals. So to be honest we need to acknowledge we are changing the terms from "the twelve" to local church pastor/elders. If your comfortable making this change to make it applicable for today I'm sort of curious what else your willing to change to make it applicable? Gender? Moral qualifications? Or for our topic at hand, pulpit committees are not made up of apostles today.

Second, the focus of discussion, as far as I can tell is a reference to famine relief or a beneficence type of service, meaning food provision or service. The text suggests this ministry is to be understood in this manner. It occurs "daily" (v. 1) and involves "tables" (v. 2). I gather this combined idea produces this form of food provision hence the translation "to serve tables" (NASB, ESV, and KJV). Three primary conservative translation all agree here. So again, the context is not the selection of pastor/elders but men to distribute food. Does one imply the other is possible?

Third, not to be picky, but the apostles told the disciples to pick seven men (masculine). This is a simple positive command (do something) as opposed to a prohibition. The disciples complied and selected seven men. So I am left to assume that they understood and obeyed the command to pick only seven men for this service (not six or eight). They also only chose men, significant, cultural, descriptive only? Some are very clear, these seven men are not local church deacons (See MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1644).

Fourth, the command/imperative "select" (NASB) and "pick out" (ESV) both are in plural form given to the "congregation of disciples" (v. 2) which appears to be agreed up by the same group "the whole congregation" (v. 5). Either this is the same group twice mentioned or perhaps a smaller group finding approval by a larger group. Both groups have the same underlying Greek term meaning "multitude."  I'm not sure there's much help here. So if we are to be consistent today with at least some of the details, the apostles are giving instructions to the believers to carry out a task. So even this selection of servants initiates with the elders/apostles. So we have congregational involvement. So how do the contextual details carry over for today? Does the congregation act when a plurality of leaders makes exhortations? Do congregations tell the plurality of elders what to do? Just food for thought. Is blind obedience required even when unbiblical decisions are made?

Fifth, the subject and verbs still point to the idea of an ordination by plural elders/apostles. Consider the simple clauses of verse six, "these they brought before the apostles." I think its safe to assume the "these" are the seven men selected by the congregation. The verb "they brought" refers to the congregation who are bringing the seven selected men. Lastly, who are they bringing these seven men to? The apostles. On to the next clause of this verse, "and after praying, they laid their hands on them." Who prayed? Who laid hands on them? First, I would suggest this is the apostles praying for the seven chosen men. Second, it is these same apostles who will lay hands on them. I think this pattern best matches what we have seen in Acts 13, 14, James 5, and 1 Timothy 4. The apostles/elders (the leadership) are laying hands on the selected candidates. There is nothing to prohibit the congregation or any member from praying but what does the context point to here.

So when it comes to decision making in a local church, what model is typically followed and on what actual reasoning were those proof texts chosen. I would suggest the following points are verifiable in a typical local baptist congregation (at least one without lay elders) based on our opening paragraph discussion or descriptive/prescriptive passages. I'm not saying I agree with the following I am simply stating why I think the typical baptist church believes this text trumps all the others in area of means or decision making methods.

First, this passage is most likely prescriptive and not descriptive. That means it is the local church congregation making the decisions and the selection of candidates not the elders in a local church. So what hermeneutical principle produces this product?  Congregational polity. Put simply: passages that teach a congregational polity with one pastor are prescriptive and all passages to the contrary must be descriptive. All passages focused on church discipline and doctrinal matters (Matt 18, 1 Cor 5, 2 Thess 3, Gal 1) also are implied to mean congregations make the decisions in a local church--for which in those texts I agree that the congregation has a responsibility to church discipline a sinning brother, or to keep a pastor or church doctrinally accountable.

Second, all the other passages referencing to a plurality of lay elders in local church congregations are merely descriptive  (including Luke, Paul, Peter, and James). Again, all those passages were merely saying what was going on in the first century or only those particular churches had elders or were given "permission" to have more than one elder. Again back to the hermeneutics, what principles are being used to determine what patterns are kept and which ones are discarded?

So in conclusion I've tried to avoid the specific deacon/servant focus of this passage. Or even its place as a perennial first deacon/servant selection by believers. All I can ask is does this understanding of the passage by typical baptist churches match the text? I want our practices to be biblical and meeting God's approval.  So how are we doing? Again, the congregation has tremendous decision making abilities and responsibilities, however I just don't see it in these texts in the selection of pastor/elders.

But if the Bible says nothing of pulpit committees where did it come from historically in local churches? That's a question you're gonna have to wrestle with (I recommend you start looking in the 1940s--but you have to do your own homework).

Read. Comment. Enjoy.

Book Recommendation: Two Books on Peer Pressure and Worrying About What Others Think of You

Truly the fear of man paralyzes too many people. We fear telling the truth because we wonder what others will think of us. Wisdom perhaps in some situations but more often than not people do things to be noticed by them. I would include putting down other believers or co-workers to make yourself look better or even more important (dare I say, even more spiritual).  I offer these two books to you to be helpful and encouraging in this area (especially to those who live in a sub-culture where you constantly think that somebody somewhere might not like you--based on how you act, think, or what you wear).

Pleasing People. How not to be an "approval junkie." by Lou Priolo. Thomas Nelson, 2007. By Lou Priolo

Reviewed by Tim Challies here.
Reviewed on the OPC website here.

Table of Contents

Part One: Our Problem
1. Characteristics of a People-Pleaser
2. Is it Ever Right to Please People?
3. The Dangers of Being a People-Pleaser
4. More Dangers of Being a People-Pleaser
5. You Can't Please All of the People Even Some of the Time
6. But You Can Pleas God
7. Some Points about Pride

Part Two: God's Solution
8. Characteristics of a God-Pleaser
9. So What Exactly Does It Take to Please God?
10. What Are You Wearing?
11. Whose Serve Is It?
12. Additional Remedies
13. Where's Your Treasure?

Appendix A: Prerequisite to Pleasing God
Appendix B: Getting to the Heart of Pride (Directions for using the Heart Journal)

When People are Big and God is Small. Overcoming Peer Pressure, Codependecy, and the Fear of Man. P&R Publishing, 2007. By Edward T. Welch.

1. Love tanks with a leak

Part One: How and Why We Fear Others

2. People will see me

3. People will reject me

4. People will physically hurt me

5. The World wants me to fear people

Part Two: Overcoming the Fear of others

6. Know the fear of the Lord

7. Grow in the fear of the Lord

8. Biblically examine your felt needs

9. Know your real needs

10. Delight in the God who fill us

11. Love your enemies and your neighbors

12. Love your brothers and sisters

13. The Conclusion of the Matter: Fear God and keep His commandment

Read. Comment. Enjoy.

Challenging Sermon on Worldliness by Mark Dever

Challenging Sermon on Worldliness by Mark Dever

My family just listened to this sermon tonight.  Good challenge on affections and what Christians are to love (and what we should not love).

Listen. Enjoy. Be challenged to grow in Christlikeness.

Who are the Presbytery? First Timothy 4 and pulpit committees, elders, and congregations (Orthopraxy Matters)(Part Five)

pres·by·ter·y

ˈprezbəˌterē,ˈpresbəˌterē/

I've personal served on presbytery questioning sessions/boards and seen elders lay hands on candidates many times.  Interesting though I've never seen the members of a congregation lay hands on the ordination candidate.  It's always been previously ordained elder/pastors who did the laying on of hands. This series has delved into the the realm of pulpit committees and the biblical evidence for its existence. We have touched on congregational polity and plurality of lay elder texts used to teach a multiplicity of topics within the local church.  Today I'd like to dip into a another text for the selection of pastors/elders in local churches and their role in laying hands on ordination candidates.  Today we will look at 1 Timothy 4:14.

"Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery." (NASB) (emphasis mine)

Several details help tremendously in understanding this verse. First, the surrounding context.  Second, the action happening. Third, who is doing the activity. Finally, what is actually being exhorted.

First, the surrounding context.  This verse appears in the first of three pastoral epistles. A previous thread already addressed this designation.  As to its recipient, Paul is writing to a young pastor/elder named Timothy. From a technical aspect the recipient Timothy is addressed twice with a second person personal pronoun "you." So there is no congregational or local church address. But to an individual and the activities to function in the local church.

Second, the action happening. Something was "bestowed" upon Timothy. Nothing fancy here. This is the standard term to give or to grant.  It occurs over 400 times in the NT.  No secret etymologies or special uses.  Actually the KJV and ESV translate it this way as "give." So in context something was given to Timothy.  The what and the how are where things start getting helpful.

Third, who is doing the activity. The presbytery. The NASB and KJV translate it as "presbytery." Other noticeable translations are the ESV "council of elders" and NIV "body of elders." So who is doing the laying on of hands?  It is the presbytery not the members of the congregations in part (a pulpit committee) or the whole (all the members in majority vote). Note the text states "by the presbytery." This term appears three times in the NT (Acts, Luke, and 1 Timothy).  Across the board it's a body of leaders (2/3 of which are specifically Jewish leaders) who have authority to make decisions.  Here this body is laying hands on Timothy.

Finally, what is actually being exhorted. Timothy is told "Do not neglect...." Do not neglect what?  The spiritual gift within you. How should we understand this idea of "spiritual gift"? Is it Timothy's office as a pastor? One study bible comments, "Gift probably refers to something related to Timothy's calling to and gifting for ministry." (ESV Study Bible, p. 2332). Consider also MacArthur, "Timothy's gift was leadership with special emphasis o preaching and teaching." (The MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1867). Knight as well points to "Timothy's calling and appointment to his special ministry" (George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 208. The gift of prophecy is not the gift. If we look closely at the Greek text, "through prophetic utterance" we will see this is simply a prepositional phrase telling us the means by which the gift was received. This understanding matches the usage elsewhere in Eph 4:11 as one of the four "gifts" to the church being pastors-teachers.

Does this laying on of hands sound familiar? We've seen it before so its not a new concept.
Acts 6 and the selection of servants includes the final approval of the apostles with the laying on over their (the elders) hands" (Acts 6:6). Acts 13 and the selection of Paul and Barnabas includes the laying on of hands by the prophet/teachers (again nothing in context involving the congregation). 1 Timothy 5:22 exhorts this idea with an imperative verb, "Do no lay hands upon anyone too hastily."  This is explicitly addressed to Timothy. This laying on of hands, Knight comments "ordination by the group of presbyters" (Knight, NIGTC, p. 209). For what its worth R. C. Sproul comments, "a group of elders, along with Paul, laid hands on Timothy" (The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version. Orlando: Ligonier Ministries, 2005, p. 1752).

I really enjoyed the MacArthur Study Bible notes here on verse 14, "His call to the ministry was thus confirmed subjectively (by means of his spiritual gift), objectively (through the prophecy made about him), and collectively (by the affirmation of apostles and the church, represented by the elders." (John MacArthur Jr., ed., The MacArthur Study Bible, electronic ed. (Nashville, TN: Word Pub., 1997), p. 1867).

In conclusion, the answer is fairly clear. Timothy was ordained a pastor/elder, which itself is a gift to the church, ordained and set apart for ministry in the local church. The elders are the ones who performed this action. There is no mention of the congregation's approval or a pulpit committees selection. We want churches who model a godly plurality of lay elders, chosen by God and keeping other accountable.

Read. Enjoy. Comment.

The Providence of God and 9/11: Personal and National Remembrance

yThe Providence of God and 9/11

Introduction

"Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6). Shocking and sobering words from scripture on this day. People will squabble over how God accomplishes his will, the means or agents involved, or even use terms such as "secondary causation."  In the end God is Sovereign and is working out his perfect will for the nations. How does this effect me personally? At what level do I still exercise human responsibility? Nearly seventeen years ago my life changed.  I think this can be safely said of nearly every person, family, and country on the globe. I went from being a young seminary student recently married a few months earlier and training for local church ministry to a short time later becoming an Army Chaplain preparing for deployment. I find it helpful on a day like this to remind myself as one of God's children: He has everything under His control. Please consider the following verses as an overview of God's providence.  This basic outline appears in Not By Chance by Layton Talbert on pages 18-21. I've poured through this book and even taught through it in a local church.  It is a valuable tool in encouraging believers to trust in the sovereign God of creation. I ask you as you read through these scriptural passages to be comforted.  God has everything under control.  This is how he has revealed himself on the pages of scripture.

So before you read what follows, consider the following applications (only a sampling of many):

• God was in control and had a purpose for that flat tire
• God was in control and has a purpose for governmental leaders at every level
• God was in control and has a purpose for every war our country has been involved
• God was is control and has a purpose for your job, church, friends, neighbors, etc...
• God was in control and has a purpose for the one who was church disciplined
• God was in control and has a purpose for the false teacher and wayward child

If this is too much then read the Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter 5, On Providence) or if your of a baptist persuasion like me then read the London Baptist Confession (Chapter 5, On Providence).  I think you'll find them nearly identical regardless of your denominational flavor. But I'd prefer you comfort your heart and mind with the direct verses of scripture.

God CAN Do Anything He Says.

• "Is anything too hard for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son." (Gen 18:14)
• "And the LORD said to Moses, Is the LORD's hand shortened? Now you shall see whether my word will come true for you or not." (Num 11:23)
• "I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted" (Job 42:2)
• "The LORD has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all" (Psa 103:19)
• Other verses teaching this doctrinal and practical truth (Dan 4:17; Jer 32:17, 27; Lk 1:37; and Eph 1:11).

God WILL Do Everything He Pleases.

• "Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases" (Psa 115:3)
• "Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps." (Ps 135:6)

God CANNOT Be Thwarted in What He Purposes.

• "Behold, he taketh away, who can hinder him? who will say unto him, What does thou?" (Job 9:12)
• "If he cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder him? (Job 11:10)
• "Behold, be breaketh down, and it cannot be built again: he shutteth up a man, and there can be no opening. (Job 12:14)
• "There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD." (Prov 21:30)
• "Consider the work of God: for who can make that straight, which he hath made crooked?" (Eccl 7:13)
• Other verses teaching this truth: (Job 42:2; Isa 14:27, 43:13; Lam 3:37)

God WILL NOT Be Thwarted in What He Pleases.

• Verses teaching this truth (Isa 46:9-10; Dan 4:35; Rev 3:7)

God Rules Providentially over "Good" AND "Bad."

• See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. (Deut 32:39)
• The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. (1 Sam 2:6)
• The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up. (1 Sam 2:7)
• What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? (Job 2:10)
• Other verses teaching this helpful truth (Eccl 7:14; Isa 35:6-7; Lam 3:38; Amos 3:6)

A Righteous Response to the Sovereign Providence of God.

• But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips. (Job 2:10)
• I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee....I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but not mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes. (Job 42:2, 5-6).
• Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. (1 Tim 1:17)

Consider some other helpful titles on this issue

J.I. Packer. Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Foreward by Mark Dever (IVP Books, 2012).

John Piper and Justin Taylor. Suffering and the Sovereignty of God. (Crossway, 2006).

D. A. Carson. How Long O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil. (2nd Ed) (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006).

Randy Alcorn. If God is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil. (Multnomah, 2009).

Read. Study. Take comfort in God's Word. Comments encouraged.