Visitors
What we suffer from today is humility in the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert - himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt - the Divine Reason... The new skeptic is so humble that he doubts if he can even learn... There is a real humility typical of our time; but it so happens that it's practically a more poisonous humility than the wildest prostrations of the ascetic... The old humilty made a man doubtful about his efforts, which might make him work harder. But the new humilty makes a man doubtful about his aims, which makes him stop working altogether... We are on the road to producing a race of man too mentally modest to believe in the multiplication table.
-1908, G. K. Chesterton, "Orthodoxy" (pp. 31-32)
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Sunday, October 19, 2008
God is Love
God's love for us is not mainly His making much of us, but His giving us the ability to enjoy making much of Him forever. In other words, God's love for us keeps God at the center. God's love for us exalts His value and our satisfaction in it. If God's love made us central and focused on our value, it would distract us from what is most precious; namely, Himself. Love labors and suffers to enthrall us with what is infinitely and eternally satisfying: God. Therefore God's love labors and suffers to break our bondage to the idol of self and focus our affections on the treasure of God.
-John Piper, "Pierced by the Word" (p. 13)
-John Piper, "Pierced by the Word" (p. 13)
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
The Object of our faith... not the Example.
Here is found the most fundamental difference between liberalism and Christianity—liberalism is altogether in the imperative mood, while Christianity begins with a triumphant indicative; liberalism appeals to man's will, while Christianity announces, first, a gracious act of God. [...] Liberalism regards [Christ] as an Example and Guide; Christianity, as a Saviour: liberalism makes Him an example for faith; Christianity, the object of faith.
-J. Gresham Machen, "Christianity and Liberalism" (pp. 47, 96)
-J. Gresham Machen, "Christianity and Liberalism" (pp. 47, 96)
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Cozy Theory Into Troubling Experience
Paul had heard horror stories about sin all his life. He had seen countless bony fingers waving in his face to warn him of sin's power. But in Romans 7:21 he moved from cozy theory into troubling experience: he found this law. It is one thing to sit in a group and critique dissertations on original sin; it is something else to find yourself subdued by its strength and madness. It is one thing to listen to a lecture about AIDS - how it spreads, what it does to a body, how invincible it is; it is another thing to hear your doctor say to you, "HIV- positive - I'm sorry."
-Kris Lundgaard, "The Enemy Within: Straight Talk About the Power and Defeat of Sin"
-Kris Lundgaard, "The Enemy Within: Straight Talk About the Power and Defeat of Sin"
Thursday, July 24, 2008
The Gospel According to Ezekiel, Part 2
37:1-14
The hand of the LORD was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones.
And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry.
And he said to me, "Son of man, can these bones live?" And I answered, "O Lord GOD, you know."
Then he said to me, "Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live.
And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the LORD."
So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone.
And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them.
Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live."
So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
Then he said to me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are indeed cut off.'
Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel.
And you shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people.
And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the LORD; I have spoken, and I will do it," declares the LORD.
The hand of the LORD was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones.
And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry.
And he said to me, "Son of man, can these bones live?" And I answered, "O Lord GOD, you know."
Then he said to me, "Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live.
And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the LORD."
So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone.
And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them.
Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live."
So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
Then he said to me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are indeed cut off.'
Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel.
And you shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people.
And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the LORD; I have spoken, and I will do it," declares the LORD.
The Gospel According to Ezekiel, Part 1
16:4-8
"And as for your birth, on the day you were born your cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you, nor rubbed with salt, nor wrapped in swaddling cloths.
No eye pitied you, to do any of these things to you out of compassion for you, but you were cast out on the open field, for you were abhorred, on the day that you were born.
And when I passed by you and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said to you in your blood, 'Live!' I said to you in your blood, 'Live!'
I made you flourish like a plant of the field. And you grew up and became tall and arrived at full adornment. Your breasts were formed, and your hair had grown; yet you were naked and bare.
When I passed by you again and saw you, behold, you were at the age for love, and I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness; I made my vow to you and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Lord GOD, and you became mine."
16:15
"But you trusted in your beauty and played the whore because of your renown and lavished your whorings on any passerby; your beauty became his."
16:22
"And in all your abominations and your whorings you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, wallowing in your blood."
16:60-63
"Yet I will remember my covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish for you an everlasting covenant.
Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed when you take your sisters, both your elder and your younger, and I give them to you as daughters, but not on account of the covenant with you.
I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the LORD,
that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done," declares the Lord GOD.
36:25-27
"I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules."
36:32
"It is not for your sake that I will act," declares the Lord GOD, "let that be known to you. Be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel."
"And as for your birth, on the day you were born your cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you, nor rubbed with salt, nor wrapped in swaddling cloths.
No eye pitied you, to do any of these things to you out of compassion for you, but you were cast out on the open field, for you were abhorred, on the day that you were born.
And when I passed by you and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said to you in your blood, 'Live!' I said to you in your blood, 'Live!'
I made you flourish like a plant of the field. And you grew up and became tall and arrived at full adornment. Your breasts were formed, and your hair had grown; yet you were naked and bare.
When I passed by you again and saw you, behold, you were at the age for love, and I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness; I made my vow to you and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Lord GOD, and you became mine."
16:15
"But you trusted in your beauty and played the whore because of your renown and lavished your whorings on any passerby; your beauty became his."
16:22
"And in all your abominations and your whorings you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, wallowing in your blood."
16:60-63
"Yet I will remember my covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish for you an everlasting covenant.
Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed when you take your sisters, both your elder and your younger, and I give them to you as daughters, but not on account of the covenant with you.
I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the LORD,
that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done," declares the Lord GOD.
36:25-27
"I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules."
36:32
"It is not for your sake that I will act," declares the Lord GOD, "let that be known to you. Be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel."
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Glory which ravishes the heart
In His cross were divine holiness and vindictive justice exercised and manifested; and through His triumph, grace and mercy are exerted to the utmost. This is that glory which ravishes the hearts and satiates the souls of those that believe. For what can they desire more, what is farther needful to the rest and composure of their souls, than at one view to behold God eternally well pleased in the declaration of His righteousness and the exercise of His mercy, in order to their salvation? In due apprehensions of it let my soul live; in the faith of it let me die, and let present admiration of this glory make way for the eternal enjoyment of it in its beauty and fullness.
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace" (emphases mine)
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace" (emphases mine)
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Blessed Jesus!
Blessed Jesus!
We can add nothing to you, nothing to your glory; but it is a joy of heart to us that you are what you are, that you are so gloriously exalted at the right hand of God; and we do long more fully and clearly to behold that glory, according to your prayer and promise.
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace"
We can add nothing to you, nothing to your glory; but it is a joy of heart to us that you are what you are, that you are so gloriously exalted at the right hand of God; and we do long more fully and clearly to behold that glory, according to your prayer and promise.
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace"
I will pay that which I never took
When Adam had sinned, and thereby eternally, according unto the sanction of the law, ruined himself and all his posterity, he stood ashamed, afraid, trembling, as one ready to perish for ever, under the displeasure of God. Death was that which he had deserved, and immediate death was that which he looked for. In this state the Lord Christ in the promise comes unto him, and says:
To the same purpose he speaks unto convinced sinners, in the invitation he gives them to come unto him.
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace"
Poor creature! How woeful is thy condition! how deformed is thy appearance! What is become of the beauty, of the glory of that image of God wherein thou wast created? How hast thou taken on thee the monstrous shape and image of Satan? And yet thy present misery, thy entrance into dust and darkness, is no way to be compared with what is to ensue. Eternal distress lies at the door. But yet look up once more, and behold me, that thou mayest have some glimpse of what is in the designs of infinite wisdom, love, and grace. Come forth from thy vain shelter, thy hiding-place I will put myself into thy condition. I will undergo and bear that burden of guilt and punishment which would sink thee eternally into the bottom of hell. I will pay that which I never took; and be made temporally a curse for thee, that thou mayest attain unto eternal blessedness.
To the same purpose he speaks unto convinced sinners, in the invitation he gives them to come unto him.
- John Owen, "The Glory of Christ: His office and grace"
An addition to Jesus?
Please read this thoughtful and convicting post that my pastor linked in his blog.
Brothers and sisters, it's hard for me to know what is in my own heart. I know that, at this very moment, there is stuff lurking in there that, if I could get even a dim glimpse of it, I would cringe with horror. The closer I draw to Christ, the more I want to cry out with Isaiah, "Woe to me! I am ruined!" The more I understand and grow to love Jesus, the more I understand that what He truly did for me once and for all was something that I could never do for myself.
I believe in the Doctrines of Grace, and I follow the doctrinal convictions that Martin Luther confessed during the reformation of the Church. It is in this sense that I am what may be unfortunately labeled as a "Reformed Christian". But I want to confess to you that what pastor Ortlund is talking about in his post has lurked in my heart from time to time in the past... and may lurk there still. I am sorry, and I would ask for your forgiveness if I have treated you in a way that is not glorifying to Christ, or have made you feel that I have placed a barrier between you and myself because of doctrine.
This is why I no longer discuss doctrine with many. But the times when I cease to put into words how I feel may be the most dangerous, for even if my heart no longer makes itself be heard, it may still grow in silent ways away from a faith that places Christ completely in the center, where only He should be. If my heart is still harboring these thoughts without my knowledge, I am sorry, and I ask that God would graciously continue to refine my heart.
But Christ truly is deeper still, and it is the work and glory of Christ that is at the center of my faith, just as He was at the center of Brother Martin's faith and his reformed view of the Church.
Christ... and nothing else. Amen.
Brothers and sisters, it's hard for me to know what is in my own heart. I know that, at this very moment, there is stuff lurking in there that, if I could get even a dim glimpse of it, I would cringe with horror. The closer I draw to Christ, the more I want to cry out with Isaiah, "Woe to me! I am ruined!" The more I understand and grow to love Jesus, the more I understand that what He truly did for me once and for all was something that I could never do for myself.
I believe in the Doctrines of Grace, and I follow the doctrinal convictions that Martin Luther confessed during the reformation of the Church. It is in this sense that I am what may be unfortunately labeled as a "Reformed Christian". But I want to confess to you that what pastor Ortlund is talking about in his post has lurked in my heart from time to time in the past... and may lurk there still. I am sorry, and I would ask for your forgiveness if I have treated you in a way that is not glorifying to Christ, or have made you feel that I have placed a barrier between you and myself because of doctrine.
This is why I no longer discuss doctrine with many. But the times when I cease to put into words how I feel may be the most dangerous, for even if my heart no longer makes itself be heard, it may still grow in silent ways away from a faith that places Christ completely in the center, where only He should be. If my heart is still harboring these thoughts without my knowledge, I am sorry, and I ask that God would graciously continue to refine my heart.
But Christ truly is deeper still, and it is the work and glory of Christ that is at the center of my faith, just as He was at the center of Brother Martin's faith and his reformed view of the Church.
Christ... and nothing else. Amen.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
I'm dying.
Good, that got your attention. Now that I have it, I would like you to take the time to read this post and take it seriously. Not seriously, as in an overly cliché "look-at-him-he-thinks-he's-so-emo-who-does-he-think-he's-trying-to-fool" kind of way, but in an honestly serious way. I'll try not to make any jokes, to help you take it seriously. Just take the time to read, and think, whoever you are, even if I don't know you. It may be long, but please read it all, and think.
--------------
For one reason or another, I've been thinking about death lately. I'm not entirely sure why. It's not that it's been crowding my thoughts, in an unhealthy, morbid sort of way. It's just that I've been having an abnormally sober judgment of my own life and the fact that it's ending.
I want to tell you that there will come a day when I'll close my eyes for the last time, my heart will pump its last bit of blood through my body, and my lungs will release their sustaining hold, never to expand again. It will be at that moment that I will no longer be alive, and I will never spend another waking moment in this world as I now know it. A couple days later, perhaps even a week or so, there will be a small section in the newspaper that will try to explain why it happened. It will say that my life ended because of a heart attack, or some sort of cancer, or an incurable disease, or even a car wreck. Who knows, maybe if I'm lucky it will say that I died of natural causes in my old age.
But whatever it says, it won't be true. I want to tell you that right now. Whatever the doctors say is the reason for my death will not be the truth. The true reason why my body will no longer function on that day is because I'm related to you... and because you're related to me... because we're both related to a man named Adam who lived, and died, a long time ago. I'm going to die because of the fallen state that I was born into. I was born to die, actually. I guess it won't really make sense for me to ever have to tell anyone, "I'm dying", or even for anyone to ever react to that statement. The fact is that I am dying now. I've been dying for 26 years. Nothing a doctor will ever say to me can change that.
Because I'm a Christian, I think that people believe that I'm not supposed to be afraid of that day, that I'm supposed to be happy because that's the day when I will get to see my Savior Jesus Christ in all of His glory. But I want to admit to you that that's not true. I'm kind of scared for that day, and it makes me sad to think about it. No matter how much I may think I know about resurrection and heaven, the fact is that I don't really know what it will be like. Will death hurt? Will I be scared on my death bed? What will I think about? Who will be with me? What will they be thinking about?
I get sad sometimes when I leave somebody, not knowing when I will ever see them again. But there will come a day when I will leave everyone around me forever, in a sense. My wife, my children, my friends, my family: I will never again get to see them in the same way that I see them in this life. Sure, I hope to see them in heaven, but I don't even know what that will be like. My wife won't be my wife anymore. What will she be to me? Will I remember the time I spent with her during this life? What will happen to those memories? Will my children know that I'm their father? If not, how will I feel about that?
What about the people I knew and loved who didn't look to Jesus' work on the cross for their eternal salvation, who were misled by the people around them, by their culture, and by their own hearts into thinking that God would have mercy on them because they were "pretty good people"? They will not be with me. Will I cry for them? What will I feel? I don't even want to think about what they will feel.
There's a part of me, deep down inside my emotions, that doesn't want to go, that doesn't want all of this to end. I know that I should want it to end, that I should want all of the the hurt, disease, war, hate, hunger, and worry of this world to be nothing more than a faint memory of something that once happened long ago. I know that I should want to leave and be with God now. But I don't yet. There's so much to do still. There's so much time to spend with my friends and family before I'm gone, or before they're gone. And there are so many people to talk to about Jesus. And I'm scared.
If you're reading this, and you don't know of the good news of ultimate salvation from the sting of death and from the curse of sin, and I talk to you someday (hopefully soon) about it, please don't take offense. Please don't be angry with me for it. The truth is that if I talk to you about it, I will be very scared. My heart will be beating fast in my chest, my palms will be sweaty, and my body will be warm with adrenaline. This will be happening to me because, if I talk to you about Jesus, I will be afraid of what you might think of me, of what you might say back to me. I'm afraid that you will think I'm a freak, or some sort of a brainwashed nutjob. But the very real truth, as honestly as I can tell it to you now, is that for me to find the courage to talk to you about Jesus anyway, in spite of my fear, is because I care for you. If I try to talk to you about your eternal salvation, it's because I wonder about it, and I care about it, because I care about you. If I ask to talk to you about the gospel, it's because I love you. Please don't be mad, because I'm going to be scared enough as it is. But please listen to me, because I love you. If you know that I love you, please listen to what I have to say.
--------------
If you're reading this and you don't know what's going to happen to you on the day that you die; or you think you do, but you're not really sure; or you try not to ever think about it, and put it in the far back of your mind; or even if you once did, but you don't have a confidence or an assurance about it anymore... please talk to me. Send me an email. It doesn't matter if you don't know me. I would like to talk to you about it, even if I'm scared. If you're scared, I won't think you're silly, because I'll be scared, too, but please talk to me anyway. If you do know me, don't be alarmed if I send you an email sometime, or give you a call to talk. Please don't think I'm silly, but talk to me.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek." -Romans 1:16
carignanc@gmail.com
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Before the Throne of God Above, the Remix
I've posted lyrics from hymns on here before, and I'm sure that I've posted the lyrics from the hymn "Before the Throne of God Above", specifically, but sometimes reading lyrics just can't convey the same information as well as good synopsis in prose!
We sang this hymn again this last Sunday, and I was, yet again, struck by how great the almost unbelievable truth of the Gospel is. So, I'd like to put forth my best attempt at rewriting this hymn in prose, and expanding parts that might benefit from clarification. I hope this might make it a bit easier to read, and strike the point home more clearly!
----------------
In the holy court of God above, before His throne, I have a case that is not only good, not only strong... but perfect. My argument is a Person: He is a great High Priest, whose name is "Love". This Priest lives forever, and He always intercedes for me. I am not only comforted by this case against my sin, but I am assured, because my name - my own name, Chris Carignan - is carved into His hands, and it is written on His heart. And I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that while He stands in heaven - which will be forever - nobody can bring any charge against me to try to cast me from His presence.
When I am tempted by Satan to give up because of my sin, and when he tells me how I should feel guilty for the things I have done, currently do, and will do in the future, I look up to heaven, and I see this Priest standing there, this Priest who made an end to all of my sin! Because this Savior, who was completely without sin, died in my place, my own soul, sinful as it may be, is considered to be as free as His. I am completely confident in this because God is not only merciful, He is also just, and His wrath against my sin is appeased when He looks at His Son, and pardons me because of His righteousness. Since I am united with Christ, it would be unjust for God to sentence me to a death that His Son already died.
Look at Him there! He is the risen Lamb! He is my own perfect, spotless righteousness! He is the great, unchangeable I AM, Jehovah God Himself, the King of glory and of grace! Since I am united to Him, it is utterly inconceivable, even impossible, that my soul should die, for that soul has been purchased once and for all by His blood. My own life is kept with Christ, on high, in heaven; it is kept with Christ, my Savior and my God!
We sang this hymn again this last Sunday, and I was, yet again, struck by how great the almost unbelievable truth of the Gospel is. So, I'd like to put forth my best attempt at rewriting this hymn in prose, and expanding parts that might benefit from clarification. I hope this might make it a bit easier to read, and strike the point home more clearly!
----------------
In the holy court of God above, before His throne, I have a case that is not only good, not only strong... but perfect. My argument is a Person: He is a great High Priest, whose name is "Love". This Priest lives forever, and He always intercedes for me. I am not only comforted by this case against my sin, but I am assured, because my name - my own name, Chris Carignan - is carved into His hands, and it is written on His heart. And I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that while He stands in heaven - which will be forever - nobody can bring any charge against me to try to cast me from His presence.
When I am tempted by Satan to give up because of my sin, and when he tells me how I should feel guilty for the things I have done, currently do, and will do in the future, I look up to heaven, and I see this Priest standing there, this Priest who made an end to all of my sin! Because this Savior, who was completely without sin, died in my place, my own soul, sinful as it may be, is considered to be as free as His. I am completely confident in this because God is not only merciful, He is also just, and His wrath against my sin is appeased when He looks at His Son, and pardons me because of His righteousness. Since I am united with Christ, it would be unjust for God to sentence me to a death that His Son already died.
Look at Him there! He is the risen Lamb! He is my own perfect, spotless righteousness! He is the great, unchangeable I AM, Jehovah God Himself, the King of glory and of grace! Since I am united to Him, it is utterly inconceivable, even impossible, that my soul should die, for that soul has been purchased once and for all by His blood. My own life is kept with Christ, on high, in heaven; it is kept with Christ, my Savior and my God!
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Is Jesus really God? (part 4)
Whew... it's been a very long day of studying concordances and references, searching Scripture, praying, working out ideas, and writing them here... but it's been an extremely powerful blessing for my faith! Praise be to God for His plan of salvation through Jesus Christ, my Lord!
I only have a couple more important things to say about this topic.
If you took the time to read the first three posts, you have seen that much of the biblical evidence that has been persuasive for me in trying to understand how God's Word depicts the deity of Jesus involves the holy titles that are reserved for Jehovah God, but are also used for Jesus. There are two more important titles, and may be even stronger than the ones I've already looked at.
First, the name "Immanuel". The book of Isaiah is wonderful, and if you haven't had the chance to read it yet, I encourage you to try to do so as soon as you can, because it just screams "Gospel!!" at the top of its lungs. In chapter 7, verse 14, a prophecy of the coming Messiah is made:
For some of you reading this, you may know immediately the significance of this name; however, for others, it may pass you by. The name Immanuel literally means "God with us", and this point is made explicit in the beginning of the gospel of Matthew, as Matthew is setting up the genealogy of Jesus, and the prophecies concerning Him:
Now, why would Matthew go through the trouble of transliterating this Hebrew word for Greek readers if it did not hold special importance? And, God be praised, it does! This may be one of the strongest pieces of biblical support for the deity of Jesus yet, since the gospel account of one of His own disciples, a man who spent over three years by his side, begins with an establishment of who Jesus was in his eyes: "God with us"
And yet there remains one more title that is used for Jesus that is the most persuasive for me concerning His deity, and it consists of two famous words: I AM
In Exodus, chapter 3, God (Jehovah God) comes to Moses in the form of a burning bush, calling him to be used as a vessel for God's power and glory, in order to free the Israelites from their slavery in Egypt. Here is just a short portion of this holy interaction, verses 13 and 14:
This name is about as holy as they come, my friends. I know of no other being in creation who has ever dared claim this title other than Jehovah God... except for One: Jesus
In the gospel of John, chapter 8, verses 48-59, it is recorded that Jesus is speaking with "the Jews", and, in responding to their accusation that He is "a Samaritan and [has] a demon", He speaks of His Father, and honoring Him. In the debate that ensues they ask if He believes that He is greater than their "father Abraham." In responding, He mentions that Abraham saw His day and was glad, to which the Jews respond:
The response?
Wow. This is clear as it gets. Jesus didn't claim to be a mere mortal man, nothing more than a good moral teacher. He claimed to be Jehovah God incarnate. And that's what I believe He is.
The New Word Translation translates "I AM" in this verse as "I have been." This is obviously a gross mistranslation of the Greek text, since the original phrase is "ego eimi", which is the present indicative tense and mood, and most definitely not the past progressive, which is the grammatical form of "I have been."
Furthermore, beyond grammatical arguments (which, for a linguist like me, are very strong!!), there is the immediate reaction of the Jews to these two words (beginning of verse 59):
Jesus had said many things up to this point, but nothing to instill this type of spontaneous act of anger from his opponents. As careful as the Jewish leaders were to keep the crowds from turning on them, eventually planning an undercover plot to arrest and kill Jesus, these words from Jesus caused them to lash out in immediate reaction. Simply stating that He was a being who existed before the world began would not have caused these religious leaders to try to kill Jesus, for they believed in the existence of angels in the temporary form of men on earth.
However, the claim to be God Himself... now that's something completely different...
Be blessed, brothers and sisters.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.
I only have a couple more important things to say about this topic.
If you took the time to read the first three posts, you have seen that much of the biblical evidence that has been persuasive for me in trying to understand how God's Word depicts the deity of Jesus involves the holy titles that are reserved for Jehovah God, but are also used for Jesus. There are two more important titles, and may be even stronger than the ones I've already looked at.
First, the name "Immanuel". The book of Isaiah is wonderful, and if you haven't had the chance to read it yet, I encourage you to try to do so as soon as you can, because it just screams "Gospel!!" at the top of its lungs. In chapter 7, verse 14, a prophecy of the coming Messiah is made:
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
For some of you reading this, you may know immediately the significance of this name; however, for others, it may pass you by. The name Immanuel literally means "God with us", and this point is made explicit in the beginning of the gospel of Matthew, as Matthew is setting up the genealogy of Jesus, and the prophecies concerning Him:
So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated, "God with us."
Now, why would Matthew go through the trouble of transliterating this Hebrew word for Greek readers if it did not hold special importance? And, God be praised, it does! This may be one of the strongest pieces of biblical support for the deity of Jesus yet, since the gospel account of one of His own disciples, a man who spent over three years by his side, begins with an establishment of who Jesus was in his eyes: "God with us"
And yet there remains one more title that is used for Jesus that is the most persuasive for me concerning His deity, and it consists of two famous words: I AM
In Exodus, chapter 3, God (Jehovah God) comes to Moses in the form of a burning bush, calling him to be used as a vessel for God's power and glory, in order to free the Israelites from their slavery in Egypt. Here is just a short portion of this holy interaction, verses 13 and 14:
Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?"
And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"
This name is about as holy as they come, my friends. I know of no other being in creation who has ever dared claim this title other than Jehovah God... except for One: Jesus
In the gospel of John, chapter 8, verses 48-59, it is recorded that Jesus is speaking with "the Jews", and, in responding to their accusation that He is "a Samaritan and [has] a demon", He speaks of His Father, and honoring Him. In the debate that ensues they ask if He believes that He is greater than their "father Abraham." In responding, He mentions that Abraham saw His day and was glad, to which the Jews respond:
"You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?"
The response?
Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM."
Wow. This is clear as it gets. Jesus didn't claim to be a mere mortal man, nothing more than a good moral teacher. He claimed to be Jehovah God incarnate. And that's what I believe He is.
The New Word Translation translates "I AM" in this verse as "I have been." This is obviously a gross mistranslation of the Greek text, since the original phrase is "ego eimi", which is the present indicative tense and mood, and most definitely not the past progressive, which is the grammatical form of "I have been."
Furthermore, beyond grammatical arguments (which, for a linguist like me, are very strong!!), there is the immediate reaction of the Jews to these two words (beginning of verse 59):
Then they took up stones to throw at Him.
Jesus had said many things up to this point, but nothing to instill this type of spontaneous act of anger from his opponents. As careful as the Jewish leaders were to keep the crowds from turning on them, eventually planning an undercover plot to arrest and kill Jesus, these words from Jesus caused them to lash out in immediate reaction. Simply stating that He was a being who existed before the world began would not have caused these religious leaders to try to kill Jesus, for they believed in the existence of angels in the temporary form of men on earth.
However, the claim to be God Himself... now that's something completely different...
Be blessed, brothers and sisters.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.
Is Jesus really God? (part 3)
To continue with the biblical evidence that Jesus, while being fully man, is also fully God, and is, in His essence, one with Jehovah God, I'd like to look again at Isaiah 44:6-
Aside from the points I already mentioned, that both God the Father, and "his Redeemer" refer to Themselves as "the First and the Last" (a title which, as we already have seen, Jesus also uses for Himself in the book of Revelation), and that this two-facet portion of the Godhead says, "besides Me there is no God" (which not only confirms that the "Redeemer" is God, but also that there are not individual, separate gods in heaven), there is also this other interesting title used for the Godhead here: "the Lord of hosts"
According the Strong's concordance of the Bible, the Hebrew words Jehovah ("Lord") and Elohim ("God") occur in some combination with Sabaoth ("hosts") over 285 times in the Bible to refer to God, all of them in the Old Testament, but I would like to look at just a couple of these instances.
Jeremiah 46:25 begins with the following words:
There is absolutely no doubt that "the Lord of hosts" here is Jehovah God, for the title given at its side is that of "God of Israel". Furthermore, the very word used for "Lord" here is Jehovah, which is used in traditional scripture translations, as well as in the New World Translation, to designate God the Father.
Again, in Psalm 46, the title "the Lord of hosts" is used to refer to Jehovah God, since there is a repetition of the following lines:
So, what I see in comparing these verses is another instance of a term reserved for God the Father being used to refer to Jesus, since "the Lord of hosts" of Isaiah 44:6 refers to the King of Israel's "Redeemer", but hundreds of other times elsewhere to refer to God the Father.
But, again, if this type of connection is not persuasive enough for you, or if you don't believe that the title "the Lord of hosts" in Isaiah 44:6 actually refers to Jesus (the New World Translation is slightly ambiguous here) let's look at one of the other occurrences of this title used in the Bible, in the book of Isaiah, chapter 8, verse 13:
The use of "Lord" here is, without a doubt, a reference to God the Father, since the Hebrew word is Jehovah. That being said, let's look at the larger context of verses 13-15:
What's important to understand here is that this "stone of stumbling", this "rock of offense" is Jesus Himself! The evidence for this can be taken from the historical context of God's covenants, specifically, in the reason why this stone would be a "snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem"; but it is also explicitly noted in the New Testament. Beginning in Romans 9:32, we see Paul referring to Jesus in this way. After explaining that the Gospel of Jesus as the Messiah does pose a problem for the Jews, since the Gentiles, and not the Jews, have attained righteousness through Him and not through the law, he continues and says:
It's true that the verse that Paul references here is not Isaiah 8:14, but, rather, Isaiah 28:16. But this is of no consequence, for, in context of the entire book of Isaiah, the terms "stumbling stone" and "rock of offense" in 28:16 refer, themselves, to the same terms in 8:14!
There's even more convincing references than those that Paul makes. First, Peter groups all of these "stumbling stone" verses together in 1 Peter 2:6-8, using them all in reference to Jesus. And you know what? He groups Isaiah 8:14 with them! Yes, Peter recognized that Jesus, being the "stone of stumbling", is the same God who is referred to in Isaiah 8:14 as "the Lord (Jehovah) of hosts."
Furthermore, if you question the validity of the epistles, Jesus refers to Himself as "this stone" onto which men would fall and be broken in Matthew, chapter 21, verses 42-44:
I hope that these posts are an encouragement to any who read them, and will serve to strengthen your faith in the ability of Jesus to be a propitiation for the sins of man, since it is God, Himself, who fulfills His own righteous requirements of His own law! But, there will be one more post to follow, in which I will try to provide even more encouragement for your faith in this way.
*The "chief priests and Pharisees" (Matthew 21:45)
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: "I am the First and I am the Last; besides Me there is no God."
Aside from the points I already mentioned, that both God the Father, and "his Redeemer" refer to Themselves as "the First and the Last" (a title which, as we already have seen, Jesus also uses for Himself in the book of Revelation), and that this two-facet portion of the Godhead says, "besides Me there is no God" (which not only confirms that the "Redeemer" is God, but also that there are not individual, separate gods in heaven), there is also this other interesting title used for the Godhead here: "the Lord of hosts"
According the Strong's concordance of the Bible, the Hebrew words Jehovah ("Lord") and Elohim ("God") occur in some combination with Sabaoth ("hosts") over 285 times in the Bible to refer to God, all of them in the Old Testament, but I would like to look at just a couple of these instances.
Jeremiah 46:25 begins with the following words:
The Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, says...
There is absolutely no doubt that "the Lord of hosts" here is Jehovah God, for the title given at its side is that of "God of Israel". Furthermore, the very word used for "Lord" here is Jehovah, which is used in traditional scripture translations, as well as in the New World Translation, to designate God the Father.
Again, in Psalm 46, the title "the Lord of hosts" is used to refer to Jehovah God, since there is a repetition of the following lines:
The Lord of hosts is with us;
The God of Jacob is our refuge.
So, what I see in comparing these verses is another instance of a term reserved for God the Father being used to refer to Jesus, since "the Lord of hosts" of Isaiah 44:6 refers to the King of Israel's "Redeemer", but hundreds of other times elsewhere to refer to God the Father.
But, again, if this type of connection is not persuasive enough for you, or if you don't believe that the title "the Lord of hosts" in Isaiah 44:6 actually refers to Jesus (the New World Translation is slightly ambiguous here) let's look at one of the other occurrences of this title used in the Bible, in the book of Isaiah, chapter 8, verse 13:
The Lord of hosts, Him you shall hallow; let Him be your fear, and let Him be your dread.
The use of "Lord" here is, without a doubt, a reference to God the Father, since the Hebrew word is Jehovah. That being said, let's look at the larger context of verses 13-15:
The Lord of hosts, Him you shall hallow; let Him be your fear, and let Him be your dread. He will be as a sanctuary, but a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, as a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And many among them shall stumble; they shall fall and be broken, be snared and taken.
What's important to understand here is that this "stone of stumbling", this "rock of offense" is Jesus Himself! The evidence for this can be taken from the historical context of God's covenants, specifically, in the reason why this stone would be a "snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem"; but it is also explicitly noted in the New Testament. Beginning in Romans 9:32, we see Paul referring to Jesus in this way. After explaining that the Gospel of Jesus as the Messiah does pose a problem for the Jews, since the Gentiles, and not the Jews, have attained righteousness through Him and not through the law, he continues and says:
Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. As it is written:
"Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
and whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame."
It's true that the verse that Paul references here is not Isaiah 8:14, but, rather, Isaiah 28:16. But this is of no consequence, for, in context of the entire book of Isaiah, the terms "stumbling stone" and "rock of offense" in 28:16 refer, themselves, to the same terms in 8:14!
There's even more convincing references than those that Paul makes. First, Peter groups all of these "stumbling stone" verses together in 1 Peter 2:6-8, using them all in reference to Jesus. And you know what? He groups Isaiah 8:14 with them! Yes, Peter recognized that Jesus, being the "stone of stumbling", is the same God who is referred to in Isaiah 8:14 as "the Lord (Jehovah) of hosts."
Furthermore, if you question the validity of the epistles, Jesus refers to Himself as "this stone" onto which men would fall and be broken in Matthew, chapter 21, verses 42-44:
Jesus said to them*, "Have you never read in the Scriptures:
'The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder."
I hope that these posts are an encouragement to any who read them, and will serve to strengthen your faith in the ability of Jesus to be a propitiation for the sins of man, since it is God, Himself, who fulfills His own righteous requirements of His own law! But, there will be one more post to follow, in which I will try to provide even more encouragement for your faith in this way.
*The "chief priests and Pharisees" (Matthew 21:45)
Is Jesus really God? (part 2)
In the last post, I looked at an evidence of the deity of Jesus in the fact that He refers to Himself as "the First and the Last", a title which is only ever given to God the Father. I focused on some verses in Revelation, and stopped at chapter 1, verse 17:
As clear as this connection maybe be in my mind, it may still be insufficient for others, because Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that all of these verses in Revelation are spoken by Jesus, but that it is rather God the Father who is using these terms for Himself, so there is no problem raised with Him using this title. Okay, fine. Let's look at verse 17 again, but in conjunction with the following verse:
Wait... what?! If the title "the First and the Last" is referring to Jehovah God... when did He die? I know that Jesus died and was raised to life, but when did this happen to Jehovah God? This verse makes no sense unless Jesus is, in His very essence, one with God the Father, who is "the First and the Last."
And this is not the only place where this claim appears. Again, Jesus says in chapter 2, verse 8:
What is interesting to me is the fact that - with all of the differences between the New World Translation and the standard, traditional, labored over, and heavily studied translations of the Bible - the New World Translation still contains these words. For one to deny the deity of Jesus, they would have to tackle the issue of God dying... especially if it exists in their own doctrine-specific translation.
Hopefully, this information is even more convincing than the fact that Jesus uses the title "the First and the Last" to refer to Himself, but if not, stay tuned, because there will be more, which, to me, is actually more persuasive still.
"Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last."
As clear as this connection maybe be in my mind, it may still be insufficient for others, because Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that all of these verses in Revelation are spoken by Jesus, but that it is rather God the Father who is using these terms for Himself, so there is no problem raised with Him using this title. Okay, fine. Let's look at verse 17 again, but in conjunction with the following verse:
Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.
Wait... what?! If the title "the First and the Last" is referring to Jehovah God... when did He die? I know that Jesus died and was raised to life, but when did this happen to Jehovah God? This verse makes no sense unless Jesus is, in His very essence, one with God the Father, who is "the First and the Last."
And this is not the only place where this claim appears. Again, Jesus says in chapter 2, verse 8:
And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write, "These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life."
What is interesting to me is the fact that - with all of the differences between the New World Translation and the standard, traditional, labored over, and heavily studied translations of the Bible - the New World Translation still contains these words. For one to deny the deity of Jesus, they would have to tackle the issue of God dying... especially if it exists in their own doctrine-specific translation.
Hopefully, this information is even more convincing than the fact that Jesus uses the title "the First and the Last" to refer to Himself, but if not, stay tuned, because there will be more, which, to me, is actually more persuasive still.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Is Jesus really God? (part 1)
Yes. Yes, He is. I'm more convinced now than ever.
I spent another weekend in Tennessee with some of Alli's family. They are Jehovah's Witnesses, and although I disagree to the highest extent with the majority of their doctrines, I do think that they are wonderful people, and I had another great weekend down there!
Sunday morning, before I went to the service at their Kingdom Hall, I got into a discussion with Alli's aunt about the deity of Christ. As I see it, among the many doctrinal heresies, the denial of Jesus as God is the greatest one, and the key that unlocks the rest of what seems to be an extremely legalistic and man-centered religion. I had happened to go through the first few chapters of Revelation during my quite time earlier that morning and read some interesting verses. They spurred me on to do more research when I returned back home... and it turns out that there is more biblical evidence that I had ever imagined! I'd like to present my findings here as a personal reference, but also as a reference that might possibly encourage and help anyone else who might read this.
Another multi-post series. Consider it a short "Why I am not Jehovah's Witness" series to precede my soon-to-be-completed "Why I am not Catholic" series!
---------------------
The first point from the first two chapters of Revelation deals with the names that Jesus uses for Himself, and then a certain claim that He makes. Chapter 1, verse 8 reads (NKJV):
The New World Translation, which is used exclusively by the Jehovah's Witness organization, leaves out "the Beginning and the End", and translates "Lord" as "Jehovah God". Now, I'm not quite sure why this is the case, since archē ("beginning") and tělŏs ("end") exist in the primary manuscripts, and the word used for "Lord" is kurios, which is used to designate Christ, not God the Father. Regardless, we'll move on with the word study...
Again, in verse 11, Jesus says:
The New World Translation has taken this entire sentence out of the text, and claim that this is still Jehovah God speaking, but we'll leave that alone for the sake of argument, because I believe that my point will still hold true. The word here for "First" is prōtŏs, and the word for "Last" is ěschatŏs.
Now, in verse 17, Jesus says:
The New World Translation does also keep in these words "First" and "Last", which are the same Greek words used in verse 11, and recognizes that these are the words of Jesus, which is important. Jesus is naming Himself as "the First and the Last."
We're almost at the interesting part here, but let's first consider why the fact that Jesus refers to Himself as "the First and the Last" is important. Let's read a passage from the Old Testament, Isaiah, chapter 44, verse 6:
Now, it is true that the words for "First" and "Last" here are not the same as those found in Revelation, but this is no solid argument against this connection because... well... the words are from different languages! What is also true, however, is that the Hebrew words used here are only found two other places in the Bible: both also in the book of Isaiah, and both also used to refer to God the Father, Jehovah. Furthermore, the verse states that it is not only Jehovah God, but also his Redeemer who say this about Themselves. And what do They say next, after They claim this holy title?...
So much for Jesus just being a separate god-man beside Jehovah. And yes... the New World Translation retains all of this valuable insight in Isaiah... :o)
In naming Himself "the First and the Last", Jesus is claiming a relationship that is much closer than being only the Son of God. He is using specific language that is reserved for Jehovah God, the King of Israel. In doing so, He reveals that He is, in fact, God Himself at the same time that He is also His Son.
I spent another weekend in Tennessee with some of Alli's family. They are Jehovah's Witnesses, and although I disagree to the highest extent with the majority of their doctrines, I do think that they are wonderful people, and I had another great weekend down there!
Sunday morning, before I went to the service at their Kingdom Hall, I got into a discussion with Alli's aunt about the deity of Christ. As I see it, among the many doctrinal heresies, the denial of Jesus as God is the greatest one, and the key that unlocks the rest of what seems to be an extremely legalistic and man-centered religion. I had happened to go through the first few chapters of Revelation during my quite time earlier that morning and read some interesting verses. They spurred me on to do more research when I returned back home... and it turns out that there is more biblical evidence that I had ever imagined! I'd like to present my findings here as a personal reference, but also as a reference that might possibly encourage and help anyone else who might read this.
Another multi-post series. Consider it a short "Why I am not Jehovah's Witness" series to precede my soon-to-be-completed "Why I am not Catholic" series!
---------------------
The first point from the first two chapters of Revelation deals with the names that Jesus uses for Himself, and then a certain claim that He makes. Chapter 1, verse 8 reads (NKJV):
"I am the Alpha the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
The New World Translation, which is used exclusively by the Jehovah's Witness organization, leaves out "the Beginning and the End", and translates "Lord" as "Jehovah God". Now, I'm not quite sure why this is the case, since archē ("beginning") and tělŏs ("end") exist in the primary manuscripts, and the word used for "Lord" is kurios, which is used to designate Christ, not God the Father. Regardless, we'll move on with the word study...
Again, in verse 11, Jesus says:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last."
The New World Translation has taken this entire sentence out of the text, and claim that this is still Jehovah God speaking, but we'll leave that alone for the sake of argument, because I believe that my point will still hold true. The word here for "First" is prōtŏs, and the word for "Last" is ěschatŏs.
Now, in verse 17, Jesus says:
"Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last."
The New World Translation does also keep in these words "First" and "Last", which are the same Greek words used in verse 11, and recognizes that these are the words of Jesus, which is important. Jesus is naming Himself as "the First and the Last."
We're almost at the interesting part here, but let's first consider why the fact that Jesus refers to Himself as "the First and the Last" is important. Let's read a passage from the Old Testament, Isaiah, chapter 44, verse 6:
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: "I am the First and I am the Last; besides Me there is no God."
Now, it is true that the words for "First" and "Last" here are not the same as those found in Revelation, but this is no solid argument against this connection because... well... the words are from different languages! What is also true, however, is that the Hebrew words used here are only found two other places in the Bible: both also in the book of Isaiah, and both also used to refer to God the Father, Jehovah. Furthermore, the verse states that it is not only Jehovah God, but also his Redeemer who say this about Themselves. And what do They say next, after They claim this holy title?...
"Besides Me there is no God."
So much for Jesus just being a separate god-man beside Jehovah. And yes... the New World Translation retains all of this valuable insight in Isaiah... :o)
In naming Himself "the First and the Last", Jesus is claiming a relationship that is much closer than being only the Son of God. He is using specific language that is reserved for Jehovah God, the King of Israel. In doing so, He reveals that He is, in fact, God Himself at the same time that He is also His Son.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Stop the presses!!!
I know that this may come as a shock to anyone who has read my posts before, so you may want to sit down before you read this next part.
Are you sitting down? Okay... here goes...
I may disagree with John Piper on something.
Now... get the smelling salts, clear your head, and continue on reading, if you can muster the energy.
Now that classes are over, I'm trying to get back to reading Piper's "The Pleasures of God", and I just finished chapter 5, titled "The Pleasure of God in Election". Toward the end of the chapter (pp. 150-151), Piper discusses that our assurance of salvation is ultimately rooted in our election. I agree with this. However, I don't think I agree with why Piper says that this is the case. According to Piper, our assurance is rooted in our election because:
I most certainly agree that God will surely sanctify those which He has justified, and that this will be done unto perfection for each one of God's children, continued until the day when he or she enters the presence of God, and perfected there. This is the biblically sound teaching of a perseverance of faith, which I have posted about before, and will write about more extensively in the last of my series of posts on "Why I am not Catholic".
So, it is true that I believe that God will slowly, but surely, mold me into the image of His Son. With all the sin that is still in me, I love God, and strive to follow His will, more today than a year ago, and pray in faith that I will do this more a year from now than I do today.
However, I do not believe that my continued sanctification is what "is necessary for salvation." I believe that I am no more justified, or even assured, today than I was a year ago, nor do I believe that I will be any more justified or assured a year from now than I am today. If I were to drop everything I am doing right now to become a lifelong missionary in some foreign land, I do not believe that this work for God's kingdom would make me any more justified in His sight than if I continue to work in research as a phonetician. If God were ever to call me to become a missionary my response would be, "Here am I. Send me!" (Isaiah 6:8). But if that were to be the case, my salvation would be no more secure than that of the thief on the cross.
Rather, as I have written about many times, I believe that the assurance of my salvation is rooted in my election because it is in my election that God has chosen to open my eyes and ears to receive the truth of the Gospel, has given me the ability to repent of my sin, and has given me the desire to turn to Him by my own free will. And it is through all of this that my justification comes, because, by the power of God, I have turned to Christ to receive His righteousness, which clothes me in a spotless garment, and I know that my salvation is assured, not because I see the daily evidence of sanctification in my life (although it's true that this is a very real evidence of my justification), but because the wrath of God toward my sin has already been poured out on Christ, and it is His righteousness, and His holy obedience to the law, not my own imperfect sanctification, that assures that I will one day see Him in glory.
Edit 5/20/08: Well, now I'm just confused. Piper definitely believes in the doctrine of imputation (i.e. Christ's righteousness imputed, through faith, to God's elect), so I'm not quite sure what he was talking about here...
Are you sitting down? Okay... here goes...
I may disagree with John Piper on something.
Now... get the smelling salts, clear your head, and continue on reading, if you can muster the energy.
Now that classes are over, I'm trying to get back to reading Piper's "The Pleasures of God", and I just finished chapter 5, titled "The Pleasure of God in Election". Toward the end of the chapter (pp. 150-151), Piper discusses that our assurance of salvation is ultimately rooted in our election. I agree with this. However, I don't think I agree with why Piper says that this is the case. According to Piper, our assurance is rooted in our election because:
"Divine election is the guarantee that God will undertake to complete by sanctifying grace what his electing grace has begun... Election is the final ground of assurance because, since it is God's commitment to save, it is also God's commitment to enable all that is necessary for salvation." (P. 150, emphases mine)
I most certainly agree that God will surely sanctify those which He has justified, and that this will be done unto perfection for each one of God's children, continued until the day when he or she enters the presence of God, and perfected there. This is the biblically sound teaching of a perseverance of faith, which I have posted about before, and will write about more extensively in the last of my series of posts on "Why I am not Catholic".
So, it is true that I believe that God will slowly, but surely, mold me into the image of His Son. With all the sin that is still in me, I love God, and strive to follow His will, more today than a year ago, and pray in faith that I will do this more a year from now than I do today.
However, I do not believe that my continued sanctification is what "is necessary for salvation." I believe that I am no more justified, or even assured, today than I was a year ago, nor do I believe that I will be any more justified or assured a year from now than I am today. If I were to drop everything I am doing right now to become a lifelong missionary in some foreign land, I do not believe that this work for God's kingdom would make me any more justified in His sight than if I continue to work in research as a phonetician. If God were ever to call me to become a missionary my response would be, "Here am I. Send me!" (Isaiah 6:8). But if that were to be the case, my salvation would be no more secure than that of the thief on the cross.
Rather, as I have written about many times, I believe that the assurance of my salvation is rooted in my election because it is in my election that God has chosen to open my eyes and ears to receive the truth of the Gospel, has given me the ability to repent of my sin, and has given me the desire to turn to Him by my own free will. And it is through all of this that my justification comes, because, by the power of God, I have turned to Christ to receive His righteousness, which clothes me in a spotless garment, and I know that my salvation is assured, not because I see the daily evidence of sanctification in my life (although it's true that this is a very real evidence of my justification), but because the wrath of God toward my sin has already been poured out on Christ, and it is His righteousness, and His holy obedience to the law, not my own imperfect sanctification, that assures that I will one day see Him in glory.
Edit 5/20/08: Well, now I'm just confused. Piper definitely believes in the doctrine of imputation (i.e. Christ's righteousness imputed, through faith, to God's elect), so I'm not quite sure what he was talking about here...
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Where are all the yellow stripes?!
Well. Everything's finally wrapping up to a close this semester... and this has definitely been the veritable semester from "you-know-where"! Sooooo glad it's just about over!
But that means that I'll have more time on my hands now. And you know what that leads to? Right! More blogging! I'll finally finish the series of posts on Protestantism (I promise), but I'll first give just a little sump'n sump'n today.
------------
Charles Spurgeon (Go, C.H.! Go!), a firm believer in Paul's view of election, was known to say the following in response to the common question "If God elects people unto faith, then why bother evangelizing?":
I just read 1 Thessalonians yesterday, and this last point that Spurgeon makes - that he would know the elect by their belief in the Gospel - is a clear allusion to 1 Thessalonians 1:4-5a-
It is interesting that Paul (along with Silvanus and Timothy) does not say "We know that God has chosen you because you live a good Christian life, and He owes it to you", nor does he say "We know that God has chosen you because you first chose Him". No, Paul says that he recognized that the members of the church at Thessalonica were first chosen by God because they believed in the Gospel.
But look closely at the way that Paul says this. What is the root of the act of believing in the Gospel, according to Paul? Power, and that, through the Holy Spirit. The Gospel was preached to many people in Paul's age, as it is today. However, Paul recognized that to some, it only came "in word". It fell on deaf ears. Empty words falling on dry soil. However, to others, as was the case for the church at Thessalonica, the Gospel came in power. And how was this power able to be recognized? Because the fruit of this power working in the elect was full conviction. And where did this power come from? The Holy Spirit gave men the ability to do that which they were incapable of doing on their own: namely, repenting of their sin, and accepting the Gospel.
If sin has corrupted the heart of man to the point that he is unable to choose God over sin (which I believe the Bible clearly shows) then repentance and faith are not something that man can give to God by his own ability. Man cannot reach into the treasure chest of his heart and pull out faith... because it simply isn't there to pull out! If we, on our own, do not possess the ability to choose to love God, then it is rather God who chooses to first love us:
A propitiation for whose sins? The sins of the elect, for this epistle is written to the believing Jews (2:7), but includes believers from all nations (2:2). And what is the initial sign of this electing love? Belief in the Gospel, plain and simple. For belief in the Gospel requires full repentance and love toward God... two things which are impossible for man to do without the power of the Holy Spirit.
But that means that I'll have more time on my hands now. And you know what that leads to? Right! More blogging! I'll finally finish the series of posts on Protestantism (I promise), but I'll first give just a little sump'n sump'n today.
------------
Charles Spurgeon (Go, C.H.! Go!), a firm believer in Paul's view of election, was known to say the following in response to the common question "If God elects people unto faith, then why bother evangelizing?":
"If God would have painted a yellow stripe on the backs of the elect I would go around lifting shirts. But since He didn’t I must preach 'whosoever will' and when 'whosoever' believes I know he is one of the elect."
I just read 1 Thessalonians yesterday, and this last point that Spurgeon makes - that he would know the elect by their belief in the Gospel - is a clear allusion to 1 Thessalonians 1:4-5a-
For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction.
It is interesting that Paul (along with Silvanus and Timothy) does not say "We know that God has chosen you because you live a good Christian life, and He owes it to you", nor does he say "We know that God has chosen you because you first chose Him". No, Paul says that he recognized that the members of the church at Thessalonica were first chosen by God because they believed in the Gospel.
But look closely at the way that Paul says this. What is the root of the act of believing in the Gospel, according to Paul? Power, and that, through the Holy Spirit. The Gospel was preached to many people in Paul's age, as it is today. However, Paul recognized that to some, it only came "in word". It fell on deaf ears. Empty words falling on dry soil. However, to others, as was the case for the church at Thessalonica, the Gospel came in power. And how was this power able to be recognized? Because the fruit of this power working in the elect was full conviction. And where did this power come from? The Holy Spirit gave men the ability to do that which they were incapable of doing on their own: namely, repenting of their sin, and accepting the Gospel.
If sin has corrupted the heart of man to the point that he is unable to choose God over sin (which I believe the Bible clearly shows) then repentance and faith are not something that man can give to God by his own ability. Man cannot reach into the treasure chest of his heart and pull out faith... because it simply isn't there to pull out! If we, on our own, do not possess the ability to choose to love God, then it is rather God who chooses to first love us:
In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
-1 John 4:10
A propitiation for whose sins? The sins of the elect, for this epistle is written to the believing Jews (2:7), but includes believers from all nations (2:2). And what is the initial sign of this electing love? Belief in the Gospel, plain and simple. For belief in the Gospel requires full repentance and love toward God... two things which are impossible for man to do without the power of the Holy Spirit.
The elect show themselves to be the elect by believing in the Gospel.
-Mike Shea
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Standing before God clothed in the righteousness that is our own faith?
Mike Shea on Romans 5:1 and 5:9-
Faith does not merit you justification on some kindler and gentler New Testament sliding scale. No, faith receives the gift of perfect righteousness, purchased for you by the blood of Christ. Faith doesn't purchase the righteousness, faith doesn't merit the righteousness, faith simply receives the gift of righteousness purchased by the blood of Christ, and so Paul can say we are justified by His blood. We do not stand before God clothed in the righteousness that is our own faith; we stand before God clothed in the perfect righteousness of Christ, received through faith. And it makes a difference! If you don't get this, you'll have a very shaky assurance, because you'll be in danger of trusting in your own faith, rather than trusting in Christ. If you think that your faith merits the justification, that God's lowered His standards and says, "Okay, just believe," and you worry, "Well... do I believe enough? Is my faith strong enough?!" Your assurance will only be as stable as your own faith, rather than your assurance being as stable as the faithfulness of Christ.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Friday, May 2, 2008
Justifequation
Here are some simple equations from one of pastor Mike's earlier sermons on Romans. They are given as an illustration to rectify the seemingly incompatible views of faith and works given by Paul and James. I've already talked a little bit about this in this post.
F= faith
W= works
J= justification
F + W --> J ?
false (Paul)
F - W --> J ?
false (James)
J --> F + W ?
TRUE (Paul and James)
I won't comment on these illustrations other than to say this: somehow, somewhere in the Church's history, the understanding of the order of these three elements got switched around in general American Christian doctrine. I'm not sure how, why, or when this happened, but don't you think it's about time we return to the roots of the Gospel?
(edit: 100th post! Woo hoo!)
F= faith
W= works
J= justification
F + W --> J ?
false (Paul)
F - W --> J ?
false (James)
J --> F + W ?
TRUE (Paul and James)
I won't comment on these illustrations other than to say this: somehow, somewhere in the Church's history, the understanding of the order of these three elements got switched around in general American Christian doctrine. I'm not sure how, why, or when this happened, but don't you think it's about time we return to the roots of the Gospel?
(edit: 100th post! Woo hoo!)
Friday, April 25, 2008
Evangelize for the glory of Christ!
So last weekend I drove down to Tennessee with Alli and her sister (yes, in my Prelude... which now has 240,000 miles... and is still going strong!!); their cousin was getting married on Sunday. Great weekend, and a beautiful part of the country, by the way!
Before going down there, however, I guess I didn't pay too much attention to the fact that the majority of that side of their family are Jehovah's Witnesses. I had never before spent any time sitting down with a Jehovah's Witness to discuss their personal beliefs, so I decided to go to one of their services, and spent a good while over the weekend talking with a couple of the cousins, an aunt, an uncle, and various other people in their congregation. When asked what my thoughts were, I was honest with all of them in saying that, although I appreciated the Sunday service and their genuine hospitality, I disagreed greatly with their doctrines... especially their view of Jesus: not as God, but as the first-created of the angelic beings, Michael the Archangel.
During these discussions, I found myself getting frustrated at my lack of ability in pulling specific Scripture references to support my beliefs on various points. Now, this frustration was not due to me not being able to win over another person in a theological debate. No... I don't believe that it was not that kind of prideful frustration. Rather, I was frustrated that the glory of Jesus was not being shown to its full extent during these conversations, and lifted up in adoration and praise for what it truly is. At least it wasn't to my eyes, at any rate; but I'm not a faithful judge of that. Who knows how God used/is using/will use those conversations to glorify His Christ.
Long story short, though, God used these discussions over the weekend to put a renewed fire in my soul to continue learning Scripture as much as I possibly can, and to preach the Gospel with less timidity. I feel frustrated that Jesus' glory is being trampled on everywhere we turn! In short, God gave me a renewed vision for evangelism this weekend. And I wanted to share this here because I believe this vision is important not just for me, but as an encouragement to any brothers and sisters who might read this.
In our spreading the good news of Christ's atoning sacrifice on the cross, His glory is at stake. God does not "need" our help in order to declare the glory of His Son; He can certainly make rocks cry out, or raise up Abraham's children from among them. However, as Christians, we have the extreme privilege of being able to bless, and be blessed, by declaring God's plan for salvation, and in this, to not only see souls brought into eternal glory... but to also see the glory of Jesus Christ be declared as the perfected, divine, awe-inspiring, mouth-stopping thing that it is! This, alone, should give us reason to preach the Gospel to every person that we meet!
When the truth of Christ's work on the cross as a divine propitiation for the sins of mankind is not preached, His glory does not shine forth as splendidly as it should. So, let's ask God that He would give us monthly, weekly, even daily opportunities to preach of the cross to others, and when we do so, let us remember that we preach not only of personal salvation, but of the glory of Christ!
Before going down there, however, I guess I didn't pay too much attention to the fact that the majority of that side of their family are Jehovah's Witnesses. I had never before spent any time sitting down with a Jehovah's Witness to discuss their personal beliefs, so I decided to go to one of their services, and spent a good while over the weekend talking with a couple of the cousins, an aunt, an uncle, and various other people in their congregation. When asked what my thoughts were, I was honest with all of them in saying that, although I appreciated the Sunday service and their genuine hospitality, I disagreed greatly with their doctrines... especially their view of Jesus: not as God, but as the first-created of the angelic beings, Michael the Archangel.
During these discussions, I found myself getting frustrated at my lack of ability in pulling specific Scripture references to support my beliefs on various points. Now, this frustration was not due to me not being able to win over another person in a theological debate. No... I don't believe that it was not that kind of prideful frustration. Rather, I was frustrated that the glory of Jesus was not being shown to its full extent during these conversations, and lifted up in adoration and praise for what it truly is. At least it wasn't to my eyes, at any rate; but I'm not a faithful judge of that. Who knows how God used/is using/will use those conversations to glorify His Christ.
Long story short, though, God used these discussions over the weekend to put a renewed fire in my soul to continue learning Scripture as much as I possibly can, and to preach the Gospel with less timidity. I feel frustrated that Jesus' glory is being trampled on everywhere we turn! In short, God gave me a renewed vision for evangelism this weekend. And I wanted to share this here because I believe this vision is important not just for me, but as an encouragement to any brothers and sisters who might read this.
In our spreading the good news of Christ's atoning sacrifice on the cross, His glory is at stake. God does not "need" our help in order to declare the glory of His Son; He can certainly make rocks cry out, or raise up Abraham's children from among them. However, as Christians, we have the extreme privilege of being able to bless, and be blessed, by declaring God's plan for salvation, and in this, to not only see souls brought into eternal glory... but to also see the glory of Jesus Christ be declared as the perfected, divine, awe-inspiring, mouth-stopping thing that it is! This, alone, should give us reason to preach the Gospel to every person that we meet!
When the truth of Christ's work on the cross as a divine propitiation for the sins of mankind is not preached, His glory does not shine forth as splendidly as it should. So, let's ask God that He would give us monthly, weekly, even daily opportunities to preach of the cross to others, and when we do so, let us remember that we preach not only of personal salvation, but of the glory of Christ!
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Are not the rich the ones who "passively woo" you into court?
ὲλκύω or ὲλκω
The Greek dictionary of the 1990 edition of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible defines this word as "to draw", stating that it is "probably akin to αίρέοαι", which means "to take for oneself, i.e. to prefer: - choose."
I recently read through the epistle of James this last weekend, and found that it is the word that is used for "drag" in James 2:6-
But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court?
What's my point in taking the time to mention this? The point is that it is the exact same word used for "draw" in John 6:44, spoken by Jesus himself:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
If this is the same word used for the rich oppressors who "drag" their defendants into court... then the action that God uses to "draw" His own unto Christ is no mere passive wooing, my friends! It is surely a powerful action, one that God uses effectively to bring men to salvation... and no one can come to Christ... unless God the Father first draws them.
The Greek dictionary of the 1990 edition of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible defines this word as "to draw", stating that it is "probably akin to αίρέοαι", which means "to take for oneself, i.e. to prefer: - choose."
I recently read through the epistle of James this last weekend, and found that it is the word that is used for "drag" in James 2:6-
But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court?
What's my point in taking the time to mention this? The point is that it is the exact same word used for "draw" in John 6:44, spoken by Jesus himself:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
If this is the same word used for the rich oppressors who "drag" their defendants into court... then the action that God uses to "draw" His own unto Christ is no mere passive wooing, my friends! It is surely a powerful action, one that God uses effectively to bring men to salvation... and no one can come to Christ... unless God the Father first draws them.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Recognition of a need for a Savior
I was converted by seeing a man executed; for, thought I, if a man be thus punished with death for breaking one of the laws of men; what do I then deserve, who have broken all the laws of God?-Anonymous, telling the story of his conversion, in A Lifting up for the Downcast, by William Bridge
Luther on repentance
Still going to finish my posts on "Why I'm not a not a Catholic"... I promise!
But here's a little something to tide over while my busy semester wraps up. It's a quote from Martin Luther on what true repentance is, why we are not forgiven on the basis of our wanting to "do better", and how we find assurance in this:
But here's a little something to tide over while my busy semester wraps up. It's a quote from Martin Luther on what true repentance is, why we are not forgiven on the basis of our wanting to "do better", and how we find assurance in this:
A Christian remains firmly attached to Christ and says, "If I'm not good, Peter wasn't either, but Christ is good." Such are the elect. Others say, "God is gracious to me because I hope to amend my ways," but this is only a gallows repentance; the heart isn't in it. Although the wicked sometimes have compunctions (so they call them) - that is, promise themselves that they will be good - they soon depart from the straight path and seek to merit a reward. But a Christian says, "I wish to do as much as I can, but Christ is the bishop of souls. To him will I cling, even if I sin." It is thus that one has assurance.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Luther's Free Beer: on hold
Looks like Brother Martin is going to have to wait a bit for that cold one... the semester hit a busy spell, so I'll be out of blogging commission until things slow back down a bit!
Stay tuned.
Stay tuned.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Luther's Free Beer, Part 3: "Righteousness is obtained through faith" (part 2)
There are many who would disagree with me on these points, though, and would oppose the idea of the righteousness of Christ being imputed to us. Many believe that our own righteousness is to be obtained as a result of our own works, or rather by some combination of Christ's work and our own. We have already looked at some of the verses that one might use to oppose imputed righteousness, so I won't go back over them, but I would like to look here at one more passage:
Surely this is good evidence that God doesn't justify us through our faith alone, but also through works! Jesus Himself is saying that those who say "Lord, Lord," won't necessarily be saved, but that they must also follow God's will in order to be saved, right? I don't think so... again, I see this approach as a reversal of what God has actually revealed in these passages. Just like with the passages that we looked at in James, I think that this is a question not of works as the basis of justification, but as the evidence of true faith. To make this more clear, let's look at the six verses leading up to what Jesus will say in verses 21-23:
It seems more clear in this context that Jesus is not claiming that one must follow God's will in order to be saved, but that those who are saved will inevitably follow God's will! Just because somebody does a good deed does not mean that they have the Spirit of God working in them to glorify Him through these actions. Salvation is not ultimately about works, even works done in the name of God. However, again, as Jesus says here, justification will necessarily lead to sanctification... but sanctification can never lead to justification! There may be some who would ask me, "What's the big deal, Chris? This is just a small difference in meaning. There's no need to cause a fuss over this!"
Ahh... but I would disagree greatly with that disagreement! :o) There is great need, indeed!
Firstly, an interpretation of these passages of Scripture which allows us to believe that we are ultimately saved by the things that we do (i.e. our sanctification leads to our own justification) builds a doorway for legalism to enter in with great ease. This is not in the spirit of Christianity, for in the words of John the Baptist, "He must increase, but I must decrease."
Secondly, and more importantly, the very glory of God is at stake here! When we begin to get our eyes off of ourselves and our own works, we turn them to Christ, and see the wonderful nature of His holy majesty and perfect righteousness! God must get the glory in our salvation, not us. However, this opens up many questions that are debated among Christians, which I will not get into here here and now, but I will say this about my personal experience here: when I started to understand more of how the Bible declares that I was saved from my sin, my eyes were opened to see the beauty of salvation, and what an amazing thing it is to even be called a child of God! Here are just two of the many verses which show why it is that I feel unending gratitude to God for being His son:
Or take also the words of Christ that we have already seen from Matthew. What is Jesus' reaction to those who claim to follow Him, and even do good works in His name, yet will not see salvation? "And then will I declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." Jesus didn't know them? But Jesus is God, right? So shouldn't He know everything?! It's clear that Jesus is using a different definition for the word "know" here when referring to these people. It's the same "know" that is used in Amos 3:2 when God says of Israel, "you only have I known of all the families of the earth." God certainly knew about all of the families on earth... but there were only certain people on whom He chose to set His divine love. Or, when the Bible records that Adam "knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain", we can be sure that Adam did a lot more than have intellectual recognition of his wife in order for her to become pregnant!
The point I'm trying to make here is not only that the people who come to God saying, "Lord, Lord," yet are rejected by Him, are not justified by their works, but that these people do not follow Christ because they are not of His chosen adopted children, not of His flock. It is this adoption which gives the Spirit, it is this Spirit which gives true sanctifying power, and it is this sanctification which is the fruit of true faith, not the basis of justification. The sheep of Christ's flock make themselves known by the transforming power that is in them, and by their love (John 13:35), but it is not these signs which allow them to be in the flock in the first place. Christ's sheep are not His flock because they do what He says... they do what He says because they are in His flock!
Well, if we are not saved through our own works, but through our faith in Christ, how can it be that one can receive this faith? That question will be tackled in the next part, "Faith is a gift", but I would ask you to ponder over these verses until then:
Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?" And then will I declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness."
-Matthew 7:21-23
Surely this is good evidence that God doesn't justify us through our faith alone, but also through works! Jesus Himself is saying that those who say "Lord, Lord," won't necessarily be saved, but that they must also follow God's will in order to be saved, right? I don't think so... again, I see this approach as a reversal of what God has actually revealed in these passages. Just like with the passages that we looked at in James, I think that this is a question not of works as the basis of justification, but as the evidence of true faith. To make this more clear, let's look at the six verses leading up to what Jesus will say in verses 21-23:
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
-Matthew 7:15-20
It seems more clear in this context that Jesus is not claiming that one must follow God's will in order to be saved, but that those who are saved will inevitably follow God's will! Just because somebody does a good deed does not mean that they have the Spirit of God working in them to glorify Him through these actions. Salvation is not ultimately about works, even works done in the name of God. However, again, as Jesus says here, justification will necessarily lead to sanctification... but sanctification can never lead to justification! There may be some who would ask me, "What's the big deal, Chris? This is just a small difference in meaning. There's no need to cause a fuss over this!"
Ahh... but I would disagree greatly with that disagreement! :o) There is great need, indeed!
Firstly, an interpretation of these passages of Scripture which allows us to believe that we are ultimately saved by the things that we do (i.e. our sanctification leads to our own justification) builds a doorway for legalism to enter in with great ease. This is not in the spirit of Christianity, for in the words of John the Baptist, "He must increase, but I must decrease."
Secondly, and more importantly, the very glory of God is at stake here! When we begin to get our eyes off of ourselves and our own works, we turn them to Christ, and see the wonderful nature of His holy majesty and perfect righteousness! God must get the glory in our salvation, not us. However, this opens up many questions that are debated among Christians, which I will not get into here here and now, but I will say this about my personal experience here: when I started to understand more of how the Bible declares that I was saved from my sin, my eyes were opened to see the beauty of salvation, and what an amazing thing it is to even be called a child of God! Here are just two of the many verses which show why it is that I feel unending gratitude to God for being His son:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
-John 6:44But you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
-John 10:26-27
Or take also the words of Christ that we have already seen from Matthew. What is Jesus' reaction to those who claim to follow Him, and even do good works in His name, yet will not see salvation? "And then will I declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." Jesus didn't know them? But Jesus is God, right? So shouldn't He know everything?! It's clear that Jesus is using a different definition for the word "know" here when referring to these people. It's the same "know" that is used in Amos 3:2 when God says of Israel, "you only have I known of all the families of the earth." God certainly knew about all of the families on earth... but there were only certain people on whom He chose to set His divine love. Or, when the Bible records that Adam "knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain", we can be sure that Adam did a lot more than have intellectual recognition of his wife in order for her to become pregnant!
The point I'm trying to make here is not only that the people who come to God saying, "Lord, Lord," yet are rejected by Him, are not justified by their works, but that these people do not follow Christ because they are not of His chosen adopted children, not of His flock. It is this adoption which gives the Spirit, it is this Spirit which gives true sanctifying power, and it is this sanctification which is the fruit of true faith, not the basis of justification. The sheep of Christ's flock make themselves known by the transforming power that is in them, and by their love (John 13:35), but it is not these signs which allow them to be in the flock in the first place. Christ's sheep are not His flock because they do what He says... they do what He says because they are in His flock!
Well, if we are not saved through our own works, but through our faith in Christ, how can it be that one can receive this faith? That question will be tackled in the next part, "Faith is a gift", but I would ask you to ponder over these verses until then:
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
-Ephesians 2:8-10
Luther's Free Beer, Part 3: "Righteousness is obtained through faith" (part 1)
If the Bible teaches that our righteousness is not obtained through works of the law, then how is it possible for one to be justified and declared as righteous in the sight of a perfectly holy God?! Thankfully, it seems that Scripture is a bit more clear on this point. There are many passages in the Bible which attest to justification by faith alone, but let's start with just a couple which, by themselves, could be considered the veritable battle cries of the Reformation:
It may need to be reiterated at this point that justification by faith alone is true not only because it is how justification is presented in the Bible, but also because salvation by faith alone is absolutely necessary for God, who is just, to be able to declare us to be righteous. "Righteous", by definition, means "without guilt or sin". We are humans who are sinful by our very nature, and therefore, we have never had, we do not presently have, and we will never have any righteousness of our own. Because of this, if we are to ever be labeled as "righteous", this title needs to be obtained by another on our behalf, and given to us. This process - a transaction, if you will - is called imputation:
The only righteous being to ever walk this earth was our very God Himself who came in fully human form as Jesus Christ. It was His righteousness, not our own, that not only appeases His own holy wrath against sin through obedience to the law, but also fulfills the demand for worship that is required of a perfectly glorious and awesome creator being (i.e. Jesus not only never committed any sin of commission, He also never committed any sin of omission). This fulfillment of the requirements of righteousness is then given to us through faith, and makes a propitiation for God's wrath against our sin:
This transaction, this imputed righteousness, was at the very heart of the Gospel for the reformers. Martin Luther was once tormented by Paul's letter to the Roman church, particularly by one key passage:
Luther simply couldn't understand how God's own righteousness being revealed to us could ever possibly be "good news" to us who have no righteousness of our own! And his torment was very understandable, because during Luther's era, verses like these were interpreted by the Church in this way, as God's own actively righteous state being displayed to us, and his anger being set against us, compelling us to do good works to appease His wrath. This also made Luther angry against God, because in this verse Luther viewed God as crushing us with the impossible requirements of the law and threatening us with punishment through the Gospel!
But then Luther continued to contemplate the rest of this verse:
It was upon reflexion of the full meaning of this verse that Luther realized that God's "righteousness" named here did not refer to His active righteousness by which He sets His anger against all sin, but rather His passive righteousness that He reveals to sinners by giving it to them, ascribing His own righteousness to those who were once completely unrighteous:
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
Furthermore, he saw that this imputed righteousness is the way by which the spiritually dead are made alive and given salvation:
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
And what are the means by which God chooses to give His righteousness to us sinners?
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
-Romans 3:28
For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
-Romans 10:10
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.
-John 6:47
It may need to be reiterated at this point that justification by faith alone is true not only because it is how justification is presented in the Bible, but also because salvation by faith alone is absolutely necessary for God, who is just, to be able to declare us to be righteous. "Righteous", by definition, means "without guilt or sin". We are humans who are sinful by our very nature, and therefore, we have never had, we do not presently have, and we will never have any righteousness of our own. Because of this, if we are to ever be labeled as "righteous", this title needs to be obtained by another on our behalf, and given to us. This process - a transaction, if you will - is called imputation:
And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin."
-Romans 4:5-8
For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."
-Romans 4:3
The only righteous being to ever walk this earth was our very God Himself who came in fully human form as Jesus Christ. It was His righteousness, not our own, that not only appeases His own holy wrath against sin through obedience to the law, but also fulfills the demand for worship that is required of a perfectly glorious and awesome creator being (i.e. Jesus not only never committed any sin of commission, He also never committed any sin of omission). This fulfillment of the requirements of righteousness is then given to us through faith, and makes a propitiation for God's wrath against our sin:
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. -Romans 5:1
This transaction, this imputed righteousness, was at the very heart of the Gospel for the reformers. Martin Luther was once tormented by Paul's letter to the Roman church, particularly by one key passage:
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed...
-Romans 1:16- (first half of) 17
Luther simply couldn't understand how God's own righteousness being revealed to us could ever possibly be "good news" to us who have no righteousness of our own! And his torment was very understandable, because during Luther's era, verses like these were interpreted by the Church in this way, as God's own actively righteous state being displayed to us, and his anger being set against us, compelling us to do good works to appease His wrath. This also made Luther angry against God, because in this verse Luther viewed God as crushing us with the impossible requirements of the law and threatening us with punishment through the Gospel!
But then Luther continued to contemplate the rest of this verse:
For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."
-Romans 1:17
It was upon reflexion of the full meaning of this verse that Luther realized that God's "righteousness" named here did not refer to His active righteousness by which He sets His anger against all sin, but rather His passive righteousness that He reveals to sinners by giving it to them, ascribing His own righteousness to those who were once completely unrighteous:
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
Furthermore, he saw that this imputed righteousness is the way by which the spiritually dead are made alive and given salvation:
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
And what are the means by which God chooses to give His righteousness to us sinners?
"The righteous shall live by faith"!
Friday, March 14, 2008
Luther's Free Beer, Part 2: "Righteousness is not obtained through works" (part 2)
In closing, however, I would like to quickly address the fact that there are some texts in the Bible that have been used to support the idea that justification is obtained through both faith and works. I believe, however, that this reading of the passages is a case of misinterpretation, or rather, misapplication of the text. Let's just look at one section of the Bible, which contains some of the most famous passages of this sort, James, chapter 2. The main prooftexts for perfected justification by works are verses 14, 17, 20, 22, and 24:
14: What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
17: So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
20: Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?
22: You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works
24: You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
However, I don't believe that what James is referring to here is the basis of justification, but rather the fruit of justification. He has already noted, along with Paul, that we are all sinners and have transgressed the law of God, and, therefore, should justly be under His wrath: "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it." (verse 10) Therefore, James did not believe that we humans can fulfill the righteous requirements of the law, because we have all transgressed it. Moreover, James was speaking this truth about Christians, because it was to "the twelve tribes" that he wrote this epistle. He recognized that even those who had the Spirit in them could not keep the law perfectly.
In verse 14, it seems that James is referring to a question not of works as the basis of justification, but as the evidence of true faith. "If someone says he has faith", James writes, and continues, "can that faith save him?" What kind of faith is it that this person says he has? Is it merely a knowledge of the facts of the Gospel? "I believe in God," one might say. Can this belief alone save them? No, for even the demons believe this (verse 17), and they are certainly not of God's children. What if someone says, "I believe in Jesus"? Are they saved by this kind of faith? No; for, again, Satan and his own know who Jesus is better than we do (Mark 1:24). What, then, if someone says, "I not only believe in Jesus, but I also believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that He came to earth to be an atoning sacrifice for those who have faith in that sacrifice. I also believe that He was raised to life by God and now sits in heaven at His right hand." Surely, this person, with this kind of faith must be saved! Right? Still, I say no, not necessarily, because these are all facts of our world that Satan himself is fully aware of. However, saving faith is the kind of faith which allows a person to say, "I believe that all of these things are true... and that they apply to me! Not only do I believe that Jesus came to die, but that He came to die in my place!"
And it is this kind of faith, the kind of faith which can only be obtained through the power of the Holy Spirit (1 Corithians 12:3), that will save a person. Furthermore, because this kind of faith comes by the power of the Spirit, it is a transforming faith, a faith that will necessarily produce the fruit of the Spirit. I believe that this is the important framework of knowledge to have while reading these passages. For surely, faith, without the fruit of the Spirit, without the ability and desire to obey the commands of God, is not a saving faith, but a dead faith. This faith is not the kind of faith which saves, it is not the kind of faith which is living, and it is not the kind of faith that produces works... because is not the kind of faith which is given to the children of God by the Holy Spirit upon the hearing of the Gospel!
14: What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
17: So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
20: Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?
22: You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works
24: You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
However, I don't believe that what James is referring to here is the basis of justification, but rather the fruit of justification. He has already noted, along with Paul, that we are all sinners and have transgressed the law of God, and, therefore, should justly be under His wrath: "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it." (verse 10) Therefore, James did not believe that we humans can fulfill the righteous requirements of the law, because we have all transgressed it. Moreover, James was speaking this truth about Christians, because it was to "the twelve tribes" that he wrote this epistle. He recognized that even those who had the Spirit in them could not keep the law perfectly.
In verse 14, it seems that James is referring to a question not of works as the basis of justification, but as the evidence of true faith. "If someone says he has faith", James writes, and continues, "can that faith save him?" What kind of faith is it that this person says he has? Is it merely a knowledge of the facts of the Gospel? "I believe in God," one might say. Can this belief alone save them? No, for even the demons believe this (verse 17), and they are certainly not of God's children. What if someone says, "I believe in Jesus"? Are they saved by this kind of faith? No; for, again, Satan and his own know who Jesus is better than we do (Mark 1:24). What, then, if someone says, "I not only believe in Jesus, but I also believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that He came to earth to be an atoning sacrifice for those who have faith in that sacrifice. I also believe that He was raised to life by God and now sits in heaven at His right hand." Surely, this person, with this kind of faith must be saved! Right? Still, I say no, not necessarily, because these are all facts of our world that Satan himself is fully aware of. However, saving faith is the kind of faith which allows a person to say, "I believe that all of these things are true... and that they apply to me! Not only do I believe that Jesus came to die, but that He came to die in my place!"
And it is this kind of faith, the kind of faith which can only be obtained through the power of the Holy Spirit (1 Corithians 12:3), that will save a person. Furthermore, because this kind of faith comes by the power of the Spirit, it is a transforming faith, a faith that will necessarily produce the fruit of the Spirit. I believe that this is the important framework of knowledge to have while reading these passages. For surely, faith, without the fruit of the Spirit, without the ability and desire to obey the commands of God, is not a saving faith, but a dead faith. This faith is not the kind of faith which saves, it is not the kind of faith which is living, and it is not the kind of faith that produces works... because is not the kind of faith which is given to the children of God by the Holy Spirit upon the hearing of the Gospel!
Luther's Free Beer, Part 2: "Righteousness is not obtained through works" (part 1)
This second part of the reason why Martin Luther's gettin' a frosty pint from me in heaven is very closely related to the first. We've already seen that, due to original sin, there is no person who has a righteousness of their own. We are all contaminated by sin (Romans 8:23) and cannot possibly give ourselves as a pure atonement for ourselves, nor for others. Nevertheless, just as the sin-atoning sacrifices of the covenant of Abraham in the Old Testament required the shed blood of a spotless sacrifice in order for the sin of the people to be forgiven, so the covenant of Christ in the New Testament requires the shed blood of a spotless sacrifice to the same end. This has already been accomplished by Jesus Christ's righteousness and sacrifice... because it could not be accomplished by us.
Well, this often doesn't ring too well with the individualistic nature of us humans, since we like to do things on our own. We like to try to be autonomous creatures. We like to think that we are able to do enough so that we can work our way from sinfulness to a righteous, holy state. We know intrinsically that we are not perfect, so we want to try to do things in order for God to forget our sinful state, and justify us based on our works. "If I'm just good enough," we say, "I'll surely go to heaven when I die." This common desire to atone for our fallenness by human means is clearly opposed in Scripture. Here are just a few passages to look at, but there are many others to be found-
1) Works will not justify us before God:
Again, we must recognize why this is impossible, in order to get ourselves out of a legalistic mindset. As the Apostle Paul indicates clearly in Romans 5:18-19, all human beings are justly under condemnation because of the original sin committed in the Garden of Eden. We did not take the fruit ourselves, but it was taken for us by a just and fair representative of the human race, and the judgment rendered in response to this rebellion was rightly imputed to each and every one of us. Therefore, each and every one of us is contaminated by sin, and cannot fulfill the righteous requirement of the law.
2) Christ died to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law on our behalf:
The beauty of the Gospel is that the very same God who demands that which we cannot possibly do fulfills His own perfect requirement by Himself. We cannot do it, but God did it for us. And for each and every one who looks not to their own efforts to be saved, but places their faith in the righteousness of Christ, this fulfillment of the righteous requirements of the law by Jesus is ascribed to them. This is what is meant by imputed righteousness... a concept which is opposed by the Catholic church, and the "New Perspectives" movement... but is, itself, the very heart of the Gospel! How can the news of a requirement which we cannot fulfill ourselves possibly be "good"?! If our justification were to be obtained through our perfect obedience to the law, then the Gospel would cease to be good news. But furthermore, if our salvation were even to be maintained by our obedience to the law... this still wouldn't be good news! Our sanctification cannot be made perfect until our glorification, which will not happen in this world. Therefore, even for those who are in Christ, who are given the power of the Holy Spirit to sanctify them, to conform them to the image of the Son, they cannot possibly be made sinless this side of heaven, and so cannot fulfill the righteous requirements of the law even after their conversion! This is the very problem that the early church in Galatia struggled with, and Paul properly rebuked them for:
O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?
-Galatians 3:1-3
The answer to Paul's rhetorical question is an emphatic "no!" He realized that, even after the commencement of human sanctification, the "flesh profits nothing" (John 6:63), and our salvation is not perfected by it. What then is Paul's answer to the bondage of law that the Galatians were placing upon themselves? It was Christ who fulfilled the law, that we might be free from it:
Well, this often doesn't ring too well with the individualistic nature of us humans, since we like to do things on our own. We like to try to be autonomous creatures. We like to think that we are able to do enough so that we can work our way from sinfulness to a righteous, holy state. We know intrinsically that we are not perfect, so we want to try to do things in order for God to forget our sinful state, and justify us based on our works. "If I'm just good enough," we say, "I'll surely go to heaven when I die." This common desire to atone for our fallenness by human means is clearly opposed in Scripture. Here are just a few passages to look at, but there are many others to be found-
1) Works will not justify us before God:
For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
-Romans 3:20
For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them." Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for "The righteous shall live by faith."
-Galatians 3:10-11
Again, we must recognize why this is impossible, in order to get ourselves out of a legalistic mindset. As the Apostle Paul indicates clearly in Romans 5:18-19, all human beings are justly under condemnation because of the original sin committed in the Garden of Eden. We did not take the fruit ourselves, but it was taken for us by a just and fair representative of the human race, and the judgment rendered in response to this rebellion was rightly imputed to each and every one of us. Therefore, each and every one of us is contaminated by sin, and cannot fulfill the righteous requirement of the law.
2) Christ died to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law on our behalf:
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
-Romans 10:4
I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.
-Galatians 2:21
The beauty of the Gospel is that the very same God who demands that which we cannot possibly do fulfills His own perfect requirement by Himself. We cannot do it, but God did it for us. And for each and every one who looks not to their own efforts to be saved, but places their faith in the righteousness of Christ, this fulfillment of the righteous requirements of the law by Jesus is ascribed to them. This is what is meant by imputed righteousness... a concept which is opposed by the Catholic church, and the "New Perspectives" movement... but is, itself, the very heart of the Gospel! How can the news of a requirement which we cannot fulfill ourselves possibly be "good"?! If our justification were to be obtained through our perfect obedience to the law, then the Gospel would cease to be good news. But furthermore, if our salvation were even to be maintained by our obedience to the law... this still wouldn't be good news! Our sanctification cannot be made perfect until our glorification, which will not happen in this world. Therefore, even for those who are in Christ, who are given the power of the Holy Spirit to sanctify them, to conform them to the image of the Son, they cannot possibly be made sinless this side of heaven, and so cannot fulfill the righteous requirements of the law even after their conversion! This is the very problem that the early church in Galatia struggled with, and Paul properly rebuked them for:
O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?
-Galatians 3:1-3
The answer to Paul's rhetorical question is an emphatic "no!" He realized that, even after the commencement of human sanctification, the "flesh profits nothing" (John 6:63), and our salvation is not perfected by it. What then is Paul's answer to the bondage of law that the Galatians were placing upon themselves? It was Christ who fulfilled the law, that we might be free from it:
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us - for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree"
-Galatians 3:13
It was Paul's correct understanding of the Gospel that lead him to preach that "the righteous shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17, Habakkuk 2:4). You see, Christianity in fact is a works-based religion... it's just not our works which count! Christ has done the work that we could never do. It is through the faith which is given to us, not through our works, that our salvation is both begun and perfected. This, then, leads me to the next discussion, "Righteousness is obtained through faith".
-Galatians 3:13
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Luther's Free Beer, Part 1: "Man has no righteousness of his own"
Okay, let's start this...
At the heart of the dividing line between the Protestant and Catholic belief systems is the question of how man is made righteous before God. Both sides recognize that we, as human beings, are sinful, and that our sin needs to be atoned for in order for us to be justified in God's sight; however, they differ greatly in their views of precisely how this justification is obtained.
It seems that Bob Dylan might be a Protestant:
You can't get to glory by the raising and the lowering of no flag.
Put your goodness next to God's and it comes out like a filthy rag.
In a city of darkness there's no need of the sun
And there ain't no man righteous, no not one.
-"Ain't No Man Righteous (No Not One)"
Why do I say that I think Dylan is a Protestant based on these lyrics? Well, he's alluding to Isaiah 64:6 when he compares our goodness and God's goodness ("We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment."), and to Psalm 14:1-3 and Romans 3:10-12 when he declares that no man is righteous ("As it is written: 'None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.' ").
But don't both Catholics and Protestants believe this? What's the problem, then? Well, to understand the full effects of the truths of these verses, we need to understand how the Bible presents the concepts of original sin, justification, and sanctification.
The term "original sin" means that, since the fall of mankind to sin, we humans - as descendants of Adam - are no longer born holy, righteous, without sin. More than that, we are not even born morally neutral! Rather, we are born in a state of sin (Psalm 51:5) and, as an entire race, are condemned and justifiably under God's holy wrath. Paul states clearly this condition of our inevitable condemnation in Romans 5:18-19. However, in the same breath, intertwined in those very same sentences, he gives a hope for us condemned sinners, the righteous life of Christ:
Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.
The importance of recognizing the truth of original sin for the full understanding our own justification is found in the fact that, as the Bible teaches the hopelessness of man's condition (if left to himself!), it shows us that man can do nothing to bring himself to righteousness, to justify himself in God's sight. God requires perfect holiness - not just our best effort! - in order to proclaim a human being as righteous. I will say it again: God requires perfect holiness, not a single drop of sin, to proclaim a person to be righteous. If we are born in sin, condemned by the fall of Adam, we cannot, absolutely cannot have this righteousness on our own! Therefore, if we cannot justify ourselves, then it must be God who justifies (Romans 8:33), and He must justify on the basis of something outside of us, since He requires an absolutely perfect holiness for the atonement of sin, and such a holiness cannot be found in any one of us.
A couple more verses to ponder over:
Do not enter into judgment
with your servant,
For in Your sight no one
living is righteous.
-Psalm 143:2
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good – except God alone."
-Luke 18:19
Relevant to the discussion of original sin and justification is sanctification. This term refers to the very real life transformation that every Christian begins experiencing from the very moment that they believe upon the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ for their sins. This is an ongoing process of conforming us to "the image of the Son" (Romans 8:29) that enables us to turn from sin and, through the power of the Holy Spirit, begin living a life that glorifies Christ. However, this process is not perfect: sanctification does not make us perfect like Christ is perfect. Rather, it is a word (which means, literally, "to set apart") given for the very gradual process by which we are given the power to choose holiness over sinfulness... but it will not be perfected in this life. We cannot become perfect beings who never commit sin while we are still living on this earth, in these bodies.
I stress this point of understanding the Biblical definition of sanctification (Paul makes his stance on this matter very clear in his epistle to the Romans, if you would like to know more) because there are many who seem to confuse sanctification with justification, or will even collapse the two categories into one. The latter is the stance that the Roman Catholic church takes, which I do not believe is Biblically sound. Justification and sanctification are two very different things that happen in the Christian life! Rome would have us believe that we are justified not only by the atoning sacrifice of Christ, but also by a life-long process of sanctification. I believe that this is simply not true, and that it is not supported in the Bible*. Our sanctification is the fruit of our justification, it is not the basis for our justification! Justification will inevitably lead to sanctification, but sanctification can absolutely never lead to justification.
If we are to believe that the Bible teaches that no man is righteous, that God demands an entire life of perfect living in order to justify, and that what semblance of righteousness that man might have within himself is as filthy rags in the sight of God, then we must concede that man cannot be justified on the basis of something that God might see inside of him. This point leads me to the Biblical teaching that our righteousness is not based on works, which I will discuss in the next part.
*There are some texts which have been used to support the idea of justification based on human works, but I will discuss this later.
At the heart of the dividing line between the Protestant and Catholic belief systems is the question of how man is made righteous before God. Both sides recognize that we, as human beings, are sinful, and that our sin needs to be atoned for in order for us to be justified in God's sight; however, they differ greatly in their views of precisely how this justification is obtained.
It seems that Bob Dylan might be a Protestant:
You can't get to glory by the raising and the lowering of no flag.
Put your goodness next to God's and it comes out like a filthy rag.
In a city of darkness there's no need of the sun
And there ain't no man righteous, no not one.
-"Ain't No Man Righteous (No Not One)"
Why do I say that I think Dylan is a Protestant based on these lyrics? Well, he's alluding to Isaiah 64:6 when he compares our goodness and God's goodness ("We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment."), and to Psalm 14:1-3 and Romans 3:10-12 when he declares that no man is righteous ("As it is written: 'None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.' ").
But don't both Catholics and Protestants believe this? What's the problem, then? Well, to understand the full effects of the truths of these verses, we need to understand how the Bible presents the concepts of original sin, justification, and sanctification.
The term "original sin" means that, since the fall of mankind to sin, we humans - as descendants of Adam - are no longer born holy, righteous, without sin. More than that, we are not even born morally neutral! Rather, we are born in a state of sin (Psalm 51:5) and, as an entire race, are condemned and justifiably under God's holy wrath. Paul states clearly this condition of our inevitable condemnation in Romans 5:18-19. However, in the same breath, intertwined in those very same sentences, he gives a hope for us condemned sinners, the righteous life of Christ:
Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.
The importance of recognizing the truth of original sin for the full understanding our own justification is found in the fact that, as the Bible teaches the hopelessness of man's condition (if left to himself!), it shows us that man can do nothing to bring himself to righteousness, to justify himself in God's sight. God requires perfect holiness - not just our best effort! - in order to proclaim a human being as righteous. I will say it again: God requires perfect holiness, not a single drop of sin, to proclaim a person to be righteous. If we are born in sin, condemned by the fall of Adam, we cannot, absolutely cannot have this righteousness on our own! Therefore, if we cannot justify ourselves, then it must be God who justifies (Romans 8:33), and He must justify on the basis of something outside of us, since He requires an absolutely perfect holiness for the atonement of sin, and such a holiness cannot be found in any one of us.
A couple more verses to ponder over:
Do not enter into judgment
with your servant,
For in Your sight no one
living is righteous.
-Psalm 143:2
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good – except God alone."
-Luke 18:19
Relevant to the discussion of original sin and justification is sanctification. This term refers to the very real life transformation that every Christian begins experiencing from the very moment that they believe upon the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ for their sins. This is an ongoing process of conforming us to "the image of the Son" (Romans 8:29) that enables us to turn from sin and, through the power of the Holy Spirit, begin living a life that glorifies Christ. However, this process is not perfect: sanctification does not make us perfect like Christ is perfect. Rather, it is a word (which means, literally, "to set apart") given for the very gradual process by which we are given the power to choose holiness over sinfulness... but it will not be perfected in this life. We cannot become perfect beings who never commit sin while we are still living on this earth, in these bodies.
I stress this point of understanding the Biblical definition of sanctification (Paul makes his stance on this matter very clear in his epistle to the Romans, if you would like to know more) because there are many who seem to confuse sanctification with justification, or will even collapse the two categories into one. The latter is the stance that the Roman Catholic church takes, which I do not believe is Biblically sound. Justification and sanctification are two very different things that happen in the Christian life! Rome would have us believe that we are justified not only by the atoning sacrifice of Christ, but also by a life-long process of sanctification. I believe that this is simply not true, and that it is not supported in the Bible*. Our sanctification is the fruit of our justification, it is not the basis for our justification! Justification will inevitably lead to sanctification, but sanctification can absolutely never lead to justification.
If we are to believe that the Bible teaches that no man is righteous, that God demands an entire life of perfect living in order to justify, and that what semblance of righteousness that man might have within himself is as filthy rags in the sight of God, then we must concede that man cannot be justified on the basis of something that God might see inside of him. This point leads me to the Biblical teaching that our righteousness is not based on works, which I will discuss in the next part.
*There are some texts which have been used to support the idea of justification based on human works, but I will discuss this later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)