Mine is that we get our “ethical points” precisely and directly from the 10 commandments and the sermon on the mount, and that we are clear that God demands that we do these things and does not offer an alternative option. We should not make up our own “roll-your-own” spiritual guidelines to “grow closer to Jesus”.

Not coincidentally, these exact same “ethical instructions” (make that “What you need to do or die” not the “10 suggestions”) are required of christian and pagan alike.

I trust you fully agree with me!

What does it say about your breathing if you are “striving” to breathe?

Your diagnosis would be a correct one: There is something terribly wrong with your breathing. This is not to say that your breathing is not necessary or required does it?

“Gospel-driven”? sounds like alot of work to me!

Josh C: Of COUSE you not only should but you MUST try your very best to keep the SOTM and the Laws of God summarized in the 10 commandments and all the other Laws of God, even those about speeding and littering that are issued by the government. And you should try to do it well. AND you should do it willfully and cheerfully (ah here especially don´t forget the law about paying your taxes!)

And I am all for calling the legitimacy of your faith (or mine) into question if I do not do ALL these things the law demands. They are reasonable, good and just and serve my neighbor. And I need to do them all cheerfully , willingly and from the bottom of my heart as though they are second nature to me.

Is there someone on here who is suggesting anything less than this?

We lutherans confuse often, sanctification with the mortification of the flesh where the Holy Spirit uses the Law on us.

We hear words like “discipline ” “denial” “take up cross” as “evangelical calls to sanctification” or a “3rd use of the law exhoration” “sanctified living” . This is really the Holy Spirit´s use of the Law to kill the Old Adam, make him submit. To kill our wills.

Most of all, the Holy Spirit used the law to destroy our Will Power,

Our Will Power is ever alive and active in creatively trying to avoid death by feigning to be of service in making us into better men and women.

Our Will Power too must die.

First let me say thanks. These are important topics, and I appreciate your interaction which has been in a good tone and spirit. I’m in the middle of some work, so I won’t be able to read the Lutheran Confessions this afternoon, but I will do so in the next day or so because I do want to hear from the best articulations from this p.o.v.

In no particular order, a couple of thoughts: I was saying that “only the sacrifice is grace” because of this from I-Monk, in a previous conversation where he was trying to explain the Lutheran perspective to me (in which only some Jesus is “gospel” or grace): “Calling ‘commands’ grace is going to be an issue. You can call them true, helpful, etc. . . You can find another way to say the Law is good without saying the law is grace.” And he was including much of Jesus’ own teachings and invitations to discipleship in that ‘law’ category. So if Jesus says “Get out of the way! Car coming!” That’s not an act of grace, it’s law, in this perspective. That seems like a somewhat true, yet obviously odd and insufficient description of what’s going on. It is a half-truth at best. At least from Jesus’ perspective, I have no doubts that saying such a thing would be, above all, an act of undeserved love and kindness, which I thought was the definition of grace, and much of his teaching would be the same. What’s more, we view his teaching in a better light if we think of it as “grace” rather than “law” which sounds like some kind of power-play. It certainly helps my children listen and follow my teachings to them when they think of them as acts of and grace rather than “law.”

My other reaction is this: I love the Lutheran reminder of how little (nada) we can do apart from Christ and that we all fall short in many ways. That said, #6 of the Confessions you mentioned seems to contradict I John, James, let alone multiple statements from Jesus himself and even Paul in many places. Yes, in the very short term (in some instances) faith is all internal or hidden. But not in the long term; in the long term what we love and trust becomes observable by our actions, generally speaking. Any ‘trusting Jesus’ that doesn’t bear his kind of fruit over the long term is not the kind of trust that Jesus is asking for, not according to the NT. The church can, does and should be able to say that this or that conduct is inconsistent with God’s leadership. And it can, does, and should not keep associating with folks who claim to be Christ’s but keep acting in a clearly contrary way. But it does not follow that the church that accepts this truth will make fruit inspecting their chief vocation (no more than those of a more Lutheran bent will all become wanton and thoroughly immoral). I’ve been in the dark places questioning my own legal status with God, but Lutheran-like theology telling me that it was all internal and my manner of life was irrelevant didn’t help pull me out. Only a more wholistic response of trust to a Person, for everything, not just justification, put me on a path to recovery and joy.

Lastly, I minister largely in an inner-city environment. Trust me, the parts of Jesus that I’m arguing are good news (the mentoring, the guidance, the teaching, the formation into a different way of life) are good news to the young men who have no father, who deeply want one, and who know that their inherited way of life is bankrupt. These are kids who have seen several of their contemporaries murdered or be convicted of murder and everything else. Yes, life after death is good news to these kids. So is the stuff Jesus majored on.

If we think of sanctification as really simply faith, or as the Augustana says “the weak beginning of keeping the first table of the Law” and as the invisible added ingredient to outward righteousness, or the keeping of the second table of the Law, then this avoids several nagging problems:

(1) it says that the line between christian/pagan is an invisible one
(2) It says that the difference cuts down the middle of each of us and not between “us” and “them” in that it implies that the keeping of the second table looks and is identical between pagan and non-pagan and that the method God uses for producing these works is identical in both christian and pagan apart from faith.
(3) It avoids the idea that being righteous is qualitatively different as to fruit between pagan and christian. Fruit produced by faith is the same second table righteousness produced by the threats of the law. .
(4) it suggests that the only difference is in the tree/doer (faith in heart) and not in the fruit/act. we sin automatically because we are sinners.
(5) it avoids “spiritualization” of the christian life. and avoids the evangelical monasticism of avoiding certain books and music and such. The world and all in it , even meat offered to idols, becomes redeemed/reconciled, pagan and christian… in faith.
(6) it provides the right meaning to the phrase “the just shall live by faith”.

Also, James seems more than happy to apply the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount to believers, even calling the legitimacy of their professed faith into question if they don’t!

This establishes three important things:

(1) sanctification proper is invisible.
(2) it cannot be coached using the tools of the law …eg “try harder to trust God more!”
(3) It implies that the visible fruit of sanctification, the keeping of the second table, is essentially identical to righteousness worked by the law in pagans.

Lutherans, especially many “conservative/confessional” ones in exactly these three points wouldn´t you agree dear dumb ox?

where Lutherans get works in through the back door is when they start to imagine that the fruit of sanctification are not “spontaneous”. they talk about “evangelical encouragement” “reminding” “exhorting” as though that is about sanctification and not about the law and mortification of the flesh.

Worse they imply that there is some class of works that are more sanctified than what the pagans do. The difference is in tree not fruit. faith not works.

Chrstian righteousness looks the same as pagan righteousness. period.

The other way Lutherans get wadded up in their underwear is to imagine that christians do not need still the SAME carrot/stick of the Law. We preach against antinomianism but then also teach that there is some special “nice” or “evangelical” form that law needs to take.

Suggestion: The message of Law and Gospel needs to look exactly identical when preached to christian or pagan. This is the Lutheran teaching actually.

Blessings,

- John