Riffs: 02:13:08: The White Horse Inn, Law/Gospel and Why I Want My Sermon On The Mount Back

Comments

1. Howard says:
   February 16, 2008 at 3:25 pm

   Our dear Lord invited us to come to Him for ‘His Yoke is Easy and His Burden is Light’ – He is the one who will not break the bruised reed nor extinguish the smoldering flax. He is the God who looks mercifully upon the one who cannot even raise his eyes heavenward. When you have encountered so many environs which tell you THEY decide who you can marry and when, who will be of use and who will not,who is saved and who is not, who is right and who is not, then the very last thing you need is more teaching that wants to tell you that you are under LAW! Because of HIS work, I can now come with boldness to a throne of GRACE and find MERCY IN TIME OF NEED. I wish more teachers and leaders would wake to the fact that so often today, Christians find themselves ‘outside the camp’ because they finally realize enough is enough – they are totally burnt out due church going merely becoming a weekly cycle of over burdening the faithful with all manner of obligations and requirements (generally not scriptural imperatives) whilst DENYING the ministry of the Gospel. Isn’t about time this stopped?
2. Steve says:
   February 16, 2008 at 3:38 pm

   Howard,

   It is time that living under the law is stopped. But, it was also time when St.Paul was teaching it (he still is teaching it).

   We don’t want to stop living under the law. It is written on our hearts and it is our default position.

   That is why the law needs to be preached and taught as a means to death. The death of the law/obligation keeper.

   We just don’t want to die. That’s it in a nutshell.

   In the face of those who preach and teach the law as a guide, or princilples for Christian living, we say to the hearer “your sins are forgiven for Jesus’ sake”.

   That’s the Gospel..and that’s enough.
3. Howard says:
   February 16, 2008 at 3:53 pm

   We’re certainly pretty good at adding and subtracting from God’s requirements to deem ourselves ‘good’ or at least OK (doing a little better than last week), but as Dr Rosenbladt notes:

   “If the Ten Commandments were not impossible enough, the preaching of Christian behavior, of Christian ethics, of Christian living, can drive a Christian into despairing unbelief. Not happy unbelief. Tragic, despairing, sad unbelief. (It is not unlike the [unhappy] Christian equivalent of “Jack Mormons” – those who finally admit to themselves and others that they can’t live up to the demands of this non-Christian cult’s laws, and excuse themselves from the whole sheebang.) A diet of this stuff from pulpit, from curriculum, from a Christian reading list, can do a work on a Christian that is (at least over the long haul) “faith destroying.”

   That is the reality we commonly face today – certainly it is a similar to that Paul faced when he ‘stood alone’ against the heresy that stained the Galatians, or the one Luther faced when he stood against so many before the diet – Law disenfranchising the Gospel in common, everyday Christian teaching and practice. It has to end.
4. Brent Gordon says:
   February 16, 2008 at 4:57 pm

   Here here Howard!
   I spent 20 years of my ‘christian life’, climbing some ‘ladder’ upwards on to new ‘glories’ ( american evangelicalism). Just when I thought I was ‘there’, some well intentioned christian told me, “now I have to speak in tongues” or some other such demonstrable evidence that I was ‘growing’…. Enough is enough!
   Jesus Christ just never seemed to be enough for these kinds of movements..
   It just never is enough just TO BE in Christ.
   Thanks be to God, I walked into a Lutheran worship service ( a Lutheran Church that is still confessional ). I heard for the first time law SEPARATED from the Gospel. While I was ‘climbing the ladder’ I heard the Christ came down the ladder, even into the grave FOR ME! What more could anyone add to that great news?
   I just don’t understand talk of trying to live out the SoM. I don’t get it. Having been freed from the law, why would anyone want to cling to it again? Law MUST be preached or there is no Gospel..that is true, but it is only preached to condemn and accuse, NOT to tune up our performance to please God! The faith of Christ is the only thing that pleases God. He gives us that faith out of His ‘free will decision’. When someone ‘get it’ and repents, the whole counsel of Heaven leaps for joy.
   3rd use of the law? No way! Forget it! Those who pay it lip service are doing just that. The law suppresses civil evil and exposes us as sinners so that Christ might be revealed to us as Saviour.
   I am with Steve on this also,.. How is everyone doing with their performance in keeping the SoM (3rd use of the law) How are you doing?
   Are you doing better today than you did yesterday? How do you even gauge such a thing? Forget it! TRust Christ ALONE and just BE. Good works will tumble out of you, often without you being aware of them.
   “I am the vine…” Christ is the one who gets good works out of us . It’s HIS work in us. Why this ‘nervous nelly’ compulsion to ‘help God out’ in getting Christ to wring performance out of us?
   “abandon good and evil and depend on Christ” (Luther)
   Thanks,
   Brent
5. Michael Spencer says:
   February 16, 2008 at 5:01 pm

   So what is the “gospel” Jesus is proclaiming in Mark 1:14-15? What is the Gospel of the Kingdom in Matthew 9:35?
6. Steve says:
   February 16, 2008 at 5:28 pm

   To Michael(the one and only I.M.)Spencer,

   When I read those two passages I hear this:

   Here I am! Look no further. The One that is your salvation, the One who is the source and goal of not only your life, but the life of the world, IS HERE! Repent and Believe!

   Repent of what? Your failure to keep the law, to be what God demands you to be.

   Like Luther said, “if you are sorry, that is enough”. We can’t even do that on our own, so the Holy Spirit leads us to repentance. And then we hear those wondeul , beautiful,life giving words,…”Your sins are forgiven for Jesus’ sake.”
   And we are raised to new life.

   That’s Jesus’ favorite thing to do; raising the dead. “He loves fresh dirt!” (a quote from James Nestingen)

   Anyway, that’s what I get when I read those passages through the lense of ‘the gospel’, and not the lense of the ‘the law’.
7. Michael Spencer says:
   February 16, 2008 at 5:33 pm

   As Spock says…”Fascinating.”
8. Steve says:
   February 16, 2008 at 5:38 pm

   As Spock says…”Fascinating.”

   If Spock were one of us, he’d say… “Fantabulous!!!”
9. Steve says:
   February 16, 2008 at 6:03 pm

   I should of said (of Spock),… if he had ‘ears’ to hear!

   Thanks Michael! What a fantastic post on an issue that is not talked about enough.

   Your Brother in Christ,

   Steve
10. Howard says:
    February 16, 2008 at 6:37 pm

    We so, so often make something other than Christ’s saving work the be all and end all of church –
    a particular view of ecclesiology or spiritual gifts or holiness and on and on – they all prove to be a ‘bewitching’ which effectively seeks to move our gaze away from the message of ‘Christ Crucified’ to the misery and chains of ‘another gospel, which is not another’. The tragedy is how often we deny our birth right, trading it up for such a sour alternative.
    The time is most certainly here to abandon such nonsense and to ‘earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints’, and not some legalistic, dualistic, counterfeit.
11. H. Lee says:
    February 17, 2008 at 2:15 am

    I echo Mr. Spencer’s echo of Spock: “Fascinating.”

    The doctrine that Steve and the WHI folks proclaim is one that I, and apparently several other commenters here, find bizarre and grim:

    Timothy: “I would not think that Jesus would talk to simple people as His disciples with some hidden spiritual meaning, or using the Sermon to kill them as Pharisees would kill with their “letters”. His words are spirit that gives life.”

    Charley: “Of course, nobody can fulfill all of the Sermon on the Mount, but I am sure only this kind of living can move the unbelievers to see the light of Jesus and glorify God.”

    The God that Steve (and the WHI) describe is not our loving Father, but rather this utterly Other being, unapproachable, unknowable, utterly pure. We humans are not His beloved though faulty children; we are filthy worms or slime, intolerable to His purity. Jesus came to die to reconcile us (the slime) to God (the Other). And that’s the Good News!!

    Since we all seem to be speaking frankly here, I’ll say that this story sounds to me like bad science fiction. Yet apparently in some circles it is Reformation theology. Far more “fascinating,” to some people this view of our relation to God is joy and comfort!

    To adopt this view, of course Jesus’ own life, behavior, and teachings have to be minimized or reinterpreted by the correct Reformation code. So Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, is not giving hope and comfort to ordinary people, to the meek, the merciful, or “they that mourn.” Instead, he is taunting them with their weakness, as a father would taunt his young child: “Come on, you can lift that table! You saw Daddy lift it, didn’t you? What’s the matter with you? Try harder!!”

    The goal of this taunting is to make the child (us) collapse in despairing tears. Good News, indeed.

    In contrast to this weird interpretation, I can read that Jesus named God as our Father. The early church prayed, shockingly, to God as “Daddy.” Over and over again, Jesus tell us that God loves us with a father’s kindness, and He speaks of various people (the Samaritan, the shepherd seeking the lost sheep, and others) as exemplars of God’s love toward us, and of the way we must behave toward each other.

    In His message about the Last Judgment, people are divided, not by whether they were justified, sanctified, or in some other theological slot. Indeed, theology isn’t even mentioned in those last chapters of Matthew. Rather, you’re invited into the Kingdom if you’ve acted lovingly toward your fellow human beings. Your theological standing apparently doesn’t matter at all; the “sheep” don’t reply, “Why, yes, Lord, we did all these things because we were first sanctified and then we were justified.” (or is it the other way around?) Instead, like the “goats,” they say, “Huh?”

    The Reformationist approach to the Gospels is apparently to ignore them as much as possible, in favor of Paul’s more abstruse musings. When Jesus’ simple yet profound sayings *must* be addressed, make their message cryptic and gruesome. God forbid (indeed) that anyone reading the NT should perceive God as the loving Father of All.

    This Reformationist approach may be excellent theology — I’m in no position to know. But it is very bad Christianity, IMNSHO.

    Yet if it gives some people strength and hope, I suppose it shouldn’t be completely condemned. Perhaps if ones early spiritual life has been a set of rigid rules which were impossible to follow completely, that might indeed be ones view of God. And the only relief from such spiritual abuse might indeed appear to be utter despair.
12. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 2:23 am

    Howard,

    You are a true bulldog for Christ!

    – Steve
13. Larry says:
    February 17, 2008 at 8:55 am

    Steve,

    “…The Sermon on the Mount by David Scaer…”

    That was wonderful posting that Steve! I always found it amazing when my rightwing friends would tout the 10 Commandments and my leftwing friends would counter with the SoM. I use to tell both of them, “Do you not realize they are the same and both accuse you and me and damn us. The reason we NEED Christ is because we don’t LOVE altruisitically.”

    You lifted my spirits with that quote, that was Gospel served well! I guess that’s the thing. When the SoM or other are used in such a way that they engender “I must do” one always feels the “tightening up” inwardly, even if you DO things that outwardly work what the SoM speaks, one’s heart is suddenly burdened and thus one is really not doing it. But when I hear that Jesus did it for me, just like your wonderful quote said one feels that “release” or relaxing and one finds oneself just free to do and love from the inside out.

    The Gospel, pure Gospel, gives us a “taste” of what it will be like, FREE, and free to love. We just cannot “feel” that here and now it seems. But the tightening comes from the imperative side, and the freedom comes from the indicative side. It reminds me of that opening scene in Les Misreables (I never can remember how to spell that).

    Yours truly,

    Larry KY

    PS: Howard, I second Steve. Great posts brother, been there too!
14. Howard says:
    February 17, 2008 at 9:30 am

    Extra! Extra!, read all about it…
    Jesus says in the sermon on the mount:

    “Do not think I have come to abolish the law and the prophets – no, I have not come to abolish them but to FULFILL them (because not one aspect of this law can pass away until fulfilled)”.

    We are told to take note that anyone who seeks to relax on any one of these commands, event the very least, will be least in the Kingdom, for “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom”.

    So how is that possible?
    How can we keep the law?

    This is EXACTLY where Paul’s teaching concerning the nature and purpose of the Law (Romans 1-3) and Christ’s fulfillment and work of Redemption (Romans 3-8) comes into play – there is no discrepancy here, only completion. If this is merely ‘theology’ and ‘bad Christianity’ then we are in really deep trouble – what exactly is the alternative?

    Christ’s words in this sermon are comforting because He teaches us to seek first God’s kingdom – GOD’s RIGHTEOUSNESS – and everything else is then provided.
15. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 11:01 am

    H. Lee,

    Humans are not born children of God. We are born creatures of God and are called and chosen to be His children by His good and gracious will.

    In order for you to be born again, you have to become nothing first. God does not re-create someone from something, especially the something that does not want Him. In Romans 6, baptism is described as an actual death of the old sinner. ‘ Do you not know, those of you who have been baptised, were baptised into a death like His”. God uses baptism to kill us off, and his law also.
    But then He raises us to new life. Where we offer up our sin to God (it’s all we have to offer Him), and He brings down His forgiveness, there is a meeting. And at that meeting a death must occur. In your baptism, that death (of the old Adam)actually happens, He’s not taunting us, God is not a spoiled brat, He is actually killing off the sinner, so that a believer, clothed in Jesus’ white robe of righteousness, can enter the Holy place where He is. So, as it says in the Gospel of John 1:12,13 (speaking to believers now), “you were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” He calls and chooses us as He wills. Jesus said, also in John, “I choose you, you don’t choose me.”

    You know, H. Lee, the Reformation was all about sticking to what the Bible actually says. We don’t make this stuff up, it all comes from scripture. But what we don’t do as Reformed Christians, Confessional Lutherans, etc, is read the scriptures in a monochromatic fashion, applying the same level of value to each verse. This is where theology comes in. Our theology reads the scriptures through the lens of God’s gracious promises to us. We say that grace trumps the law.

    When Jesus separates the sheep from the goats , he’s not looking for lawkeepers, but rather those that acted un self-consciencely. They had no idea they were doing something that would gain them something.” When did we do this?” “When you did it to the least of these you did it to Me.”
    Do you see the difference between being inspired to good works and doing them out of hope for reward or fear of punishment?

    Theology isn’t mentioned anywhere, it is done…by us, in order to distinguish God’s Law from His Gospel.

    Reformation theology is all about the Gospel. That our sins are forgiven for Jesus’ sake, out of his love for the ungodly, by faith (alone) is the bedrock on which the Christian Church stands or falls.

    God the Father, in his purity and righteousness, would be unapproachable (no one has seen God and lived) were it not for our Mediator and our Savior, Jesus.
    God doesn’t view us as worms, or slime, because God made us in his image. The fall into sin would not be such a great tragedy if God thought of us like that. And I never said He does view us like that.

    This whole discussion is about whether we can keep the commandments of God, if we have to keep them, or if we need to try to keep them, and the implications of those scenarios in the actual living out of the Christian faith in our daily lives.

    The Church Fathers that put together the cannon thought quite a bit of St. Paul and deemed his letters of crucial importance in trying to keep the Church Christ centered and not believer centered. Most of the books in the N.T. are by St. Paul. God must have thought enough of Him to use him to do as much.

    That was a bit(ok, more than a bit) herky -jerky, but then…so am I!

    Blessings to you H. Lee!

    – Steve
16. Nate says:
    February 17, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    >The Church Fathers that put together the cannon
    >thought quite a bit of St. Paul and deemed his
    >letters of crucial importance in trying to keep
    >the Church Christ centered and not believer
    >centered. Most of the books in the N.T. are by
    >St. Paul. God must have thought enough of Him
    >to use him to do as much.

    Of course, if one reads the works of the Church Fathers, including those you would credit with putting together the canon, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, one can gain much insight into the interpretation of the Scriptures and meaning and manner of our salvation. The danger of this, is that you will find conflicts with Reformed theology and its interpretation of Scripture. What you do with these conflicts is up to you.
17. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 6:03 pm

    Larry,

    Much thanks to you for your staunch defense of Christ’a work on our behalf, and your reminder that the law brings death, anyway you look at it.

    Q: Just why did Christ die for us anyway?

    A: Galatians 5:1

    Luther’s commentary on Galatians may be his best (of all his 54 volumes,or whatever the total of his amassed writing is).

    Howard,

    You have rung the bell once again, my friend!

    I forgot all about those awesome Christ centered scriptures. There are so many great passages centering on Christ’s work for us that it’s hard to keep track of them all!

    – Steve
18. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    “Of course, if one reads the works of the Church Fathers, including those you would credit with putting together the canon, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, one can gain much insight into the interpretation of the Scriptures and meaning and manner of our salvation. The danger of this, is that you will find conflicts with Reformed theology and its interpretation of Scripture. What you do with these conflicts is up to you.”

    Nate,

    I’ll buy most of that. The part I don’t agree with is your assertion that Reformed theology is in conflict with scripture.

    Scripture seems to me to be screaming the work of Christ, for us. And not the other way around.
    Why else would they call it “the good news”?

    If you see it another way, I guess that’s “bad news” for you and anyone else that had better get busy and clean up their acts.

    I’ll stick with Reformers, thank you very much.

    Thanks Nate!

    – Steve
19. Howard says:
    February 17, 2008 at 6:57 pm

    The danger of this, is that you will find conflicts with Reformed theology and its interpretation of Scripture. What you do with these conflicts is up to you.

    I think the real danger is when we seek to side-step or ‘mumble’ our way around the clear teaching of the New Testament regarding God’s work through Jesus Christ. I’m not about defending “Reformed” theology, I’m about the fact that it’s by grace that a person is saved, through faith, and this is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. All else will stand or fall because of this key reality.
20. Michael Spencer says:
    February 17, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    Isn’t it a bit disingenuous to speak as if the “reformers” are of the same mind? Calvin would not have recognized today’s reformed Baptists as Christians. We know what Luther thought of Zwingli. Calvinists persecuted Lutherans. The whole “reformed” label is rejected by Lutherans, and most people who call themselves “reformed” today consider large swaths of the “reformed” community worldwide to be apostate.

    Where exactly is this reformed community that’s being celebrated here?
21. Larry says:
    February 17, 2008 at 8:26 pm

    I think Luther made a distinction between condemning a man’s theology/doctrine versus the man himself. Luther always held out sure hope even heretics. It’s one thing to speak strongly against Christ hiding doctrine another to condemn the man fully. And I think even Luther said we all ‘serve Satan’, pastors, theologians, laymen, the “best of us” from time to time. I know my own “legal bone” doesn’t die so easy in practice as it does in work.

    The funny thing is that legalist, even some who have posted here, my NATURAL gravity is to side with them. I have to fight myself with grace to escape it!

    For what it’s worth.

    Larry
22. Shane Rosenthal says:
    February 17, 2008 at 8:45 pm

    This is for Steve who asked,

    “If one is obligated, then one should do it. If this obligation is there and we are so grateful to the Lord for saving us, then why do we not do what He tells us to do? Are you aware of anyone who is keeping their part of the obligation, or are we back to “trying your best” counts for something?”

    Great question. Basically this is the tension between Romans 6 and 7. Six emphasizes our obligation (the imperative that flows from our new indicative status) “Shall we sin that grace may abound? By no means” But chapter seven reminds us that we will still struggle with sin until the day we die. Also, I find the Heidelberg Catechism very helpful here:

    Q 62. …Why cannot our good works be the whole, or part of our righteousness before God?
    A: Because, that the righteousness, which can be approved of before the tribunal of God, must be absolutely perfect, and in all respects conformable to the divine law; and also, that our best works in this life are all imperfect and defiled with sin.
    Q 63. What! do not our good works merit, which yet God will reward in this and in a future life?
    A: This reward is not of merit, but of grace (Luke 17:10)
    Q 64. But does not this doctrine make men careless and profane?
    A: By no means: for it is impossible that those, who are implanted into Christ by a true faith, should not bring forth fruits of thankfulness.

    SR
23. H. Lee says:
    February 17, 2008 at 9:47 pm

    Steve (and Howard),

    Thanks for taking time to reply.

    I really don’t know what to say to you, except what I say to the pleasant Mormon missionaries who come to my door once in awhile: “I appreciate your sincerity, but I think your basic premise is wrong.”

    You are theologians, and I do respect that. But I also see that theologians disagree all the time (as Mr. Spencer mentioned above).

    Steve, you say, “You know, H. Lee, the Reformation was all about sticking to what the Bible actually says. We don’t make this stuff up, it all comes from scripture. But what we don’t do as Reformed Christians, Confessional Lutherans, etc, is read the scriptures in a monochromatic fashion, applying the same level of value to each verse. This is where theology comes in.”

    I would suggest that “what the Bible actually says” is not that easily clarified, and that in the process of “clarifying” it, theologians tend to choose the verses that their own theology values most highly. In the particular case that we were discussing (the SoM), for instance, Paul’s words for you have a higher “value,” theologically, than Jesus’s words. OK. I don’t “get” this, but I accept that you sincerely believe it.

    Now, I am a layman, and while I can’t argue theology, I can proof-text, of course: Romans 2:”6 He will render to each one *according to his works:* 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; … 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who *does evil,* … 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who *does good,* …” That sounds to me like God is looking pretty hard at what we *do* — but you could probably come back with some other interpretation, and we could play “dueling Scriptures” all night. No point in that.

    But I have been thinking about this whole “Reformationist” approach throughout the day, thanks to you. As you might have gathered from my tone, it has personal meaning for me. I left the Presbyterian Church in which I was raised, after many years, because I simply could not bear Reformation theology. It was pounded at us from the pulpit every Sunday, and every Sunday I left church feeling even blacker despair than when I had entered it. Being told weekly from the pulpit that I was a worthless piece of garbage, totally depraved, and always had been and always will be and there was absolutely nothing I could do about it, but that’s OK because God forgives me — well, let’s just say that after awhile it lost its comic value.

    It didn’t seem to bother most people in the church, but that, I figured, was because no one took it seriously (except me). In my observation, no one I’ve met can or does live their life as if they really believe they are a worthless, hopeless piece of garbage. (Well, some very sad people like drug addicts might, but I declined to be one of them.) Most people talk and act as if they are reasonably decent human beings, trying to get along and do their best for God and neighbor in this life — which I think is the truth.

    But how, I asked myself, can people who *really believe* this “we are forgiven garbage” approach, such as Steve and the WHI folks, not only keep going but actually find strength and inspiration in contemplating their own depravity, forgiven though it may be?

    The tentative answer I found was in my knowledge of the 12-Step programs. The First Step, as you may know, is to “admit we are powerless…, that our lives have become unmanageable.” The Second Step is “Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.” And so forth.

    In the 12 Steps, though without the moralizing, was the outline of what you seem to be talking about: an admission of personal helplessness, and a surrender to God. I can easily understand *that,* because I have done it and I have seen it work. It works wonders!

    Now, of course it is different from Ref. theology, because what 12-Steppers are fighting is alcohol addiction, drug addiction, codependency, or some other plainly evil thing. The evil is a *part* of our nature, but one that we can overcome with God’s help. That’s not at all the same thing as saying our whole natures are plainly evil, and we must get rid of them entirely because God hates them.

    But still, I think this is a start for me at understanding, for the first time, what makes so many Reformationists (like my former Presby pastor) so dead set on and enthusiastic about their message.

    So although I *still* feel your basic premise is wrong, I have for the first time gotten some glimmer of understanding about it. At least I hope so. Thank you for “engaging” in this exchange (and feel free to point it out if I’ve got it wrong *again*)
24. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 10:41 pm

    Shane Rosenthal,

    That was a great reply to my questions.

    Thanks very much. If I understand your answer correctly, you pretty much are in agreement with me and countless others, that our good efforts are not enough, and also that being obligated to do something would be an imperative, and that would mean that we would be right back where we started..under the yoke of the law. We are , however, as is pointed out in the Heidelberg Catechism, inspired by God’s Spirit to do good works. BIG difference between inspiration and obligation.

    So, if we are not under any obligation and we are really free as is said in several places in the N.T., that means that nothing be done on our part. One does not have to do anything to be a Christian. Nothing. Again, this blows the minds of Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, basically because they have pretty much the same Jesus + theology. A lot of Jesus and just a little bit of me, only it usually turns out to be the other way around.

    Luther found this out the hard way after doing 14 1/2 years in an Augustinian cloister. Talk about climbing the ladder!

    Once he heard that sweet, liberating sound of the gospel, he never again went back. Melanchthon went in for the 3rd use of the law , but Luther never paid it much heed.

    Luther said (as Howard pointed out to us)that “the whole gospel is outside of us.” It is an objective and not subjective reality. Christ has declared from the cross that the war is over between a just and demanding God, and his willfull disobedient creation.
    Like some Japanese soldiers on far flung islands in the Pacific, we will not believe that the war could possibly be over so we continue to fight, struggle, and sqwirm, refusing to let God be God and exercise His will. We just have to be involved. We won’t let go.

    Jesus tells us to let go!

    The trouble with the ladder of our efforts to please God, or to attain some greater spirituality, is that there is always another rung. It is a never ending project. People and pastors (not that pastors aren’t people…some are) will (with the best of intentions) keep you on this endless quest for something that you will never attain outside of the person of Jesus Christ.
    You just never arrive!
    In the waters of your baptism, in the body and blood of communion, in the preached word of the gospel…heard and believed…you have arrived! It is finished! (there it is again…funny how that keeps showing up)
    Pastor Mark Anderson says that “there is only one rung on the Christian ladder, and that is the horizontal board that is on the cross. That’s where the Christian life begins,and where it ends.”

    I’m telling all that will hear it, that there is absolutely nothing that can compare to the freedom that Christ has won for you. And once you are totally free of the constricting force of the law, you will never go back again.

    This kind of teaching and preaching is hard to find in our contemporary church culture, but it is out there. The White Horse Inn is a great example. And there are others.

    Thanks Shane Rosenthal! Peace and Grace to you!

    – Steve
25. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    To Whom it may Concern,

    I understand that many are not in agreement with the “totally free” grace doctrine, the likes of which Brent Gordon, Howard, Brian, Larry and myself espouse.

    I do think that many may have heard something new in these discussions and I would encourage the two of you(maybe only one) to click on Brent Gordon’s name and also Howard’s name to avail yourself of more stimulating thoughts along these lines.

    Thanks to the aforementioned for your undaunted devotion to the cause that is the Gospel of our Lord.

    – Steve
26. Steve says:
    February 17, 2008 at 11:51 pm

    Michael Spencer,

    I have a feeling that we may be getting towards the end of this wonderful discussion that you’ve initiated.

    Your blog is one of the best I’ve seen because you aren’t afraid to tackle anything. Your honesty and integrity in approaching matters of ultimate importance is a great encouragement to me insofar as those qualities seem to be on the wane in this post, post modern world.

    I pray for you continued blessings from our Lord, and that He may be a lamp to your feet and a light unto your path as you journey in the post-evangelical wilderness.

    Thanks so much!

    Your Brother in Christ-

    Steve
27. Howard says:
    February 18, 2008 at 5:35 am

    H.Lee Wrote:
    “In the particular case that we were discussing (the SoM), for instance, Paul’s words for you have a higher “value,” theologically, than Jesus’s words. OK. I don’t “get” this, but I accept that you sincerely believe it”.

    If you actually look at Jesus’ words in the Sermon concerning the nature and demands of true righteousness (as I touched upon in a previous comment) then you can see why Paul’s exposition of the nature of Sin, the Law and Salvation by Grace through Faith are so essential to the very essence of Christianity.

    “Now, I am a layman, and while I can’t argue theology, I can proof-text, of course: Romans 2:”6, etc”

    Proof-texting is easy, but follow the argument of Paul’s epistle through from chapter one concerning the issues, and the conclusion is inescapable – we are made anew entirely by grace.

    “I left church feeling even blacker despair than when I had entered it. Being told weekly from the pulpit that I was a worthless piece of garbage, totally depraved, and always had been and always will be and there was absolutely nothing I could do about it, but that’s OK because God forgives me”.

    If that’s all the church you attended provided as theology, then I don’t wonder at your despair and your departure. Yes, we need to show people what they are (and that is ugly), but we so need to bring people to the grace and mercy of God, and then share the life He brings so that our lives become a means to share the riches of His grace and goodness. Fellowship should entail of this.

    “The evil is a *part* of our nature, but one that we can overcome with God’s help. That’s not at all the same thing as saying our whole natures are plainly evil, and we must get rid of them entirely because God hates them”.

    To follow through Paul’s argument, the only thing you can do with the old nature is end it – who needs to be tethered to something that vile? – but the work of Grace is to give us a new nature, to make us new creatures, that can know and mature into God’s people.

    “Thank you for “engaging” in this exchange”.

    It’s pretty imperative that Christians do talk about these things, and there are clear reasons why.

    To end, a few choice words from Martin Luther:

    “It is evident that no external thing has any influence in producing Christian righteousness or freedom, or in producing unrighteousness or servitude…anyone can clearly see how a Christian is free from all things and over all things so he needs no works to make him righteous and save him, since faith alone abundantly confers these things”

    (Treatise on the Freedom of a Christian)

    Regards,

    Howard.
28. Christopher Taylor says:
    February 18, 2008 at 3:57 pm

    M. Horton,

    You said:

    By the way, I think it’s important to say that we live the law, not the gospel. The gospel is not something to be followed, but something to be heard and believed. It’s pure announcement. The place for the third use of the law is directing us in our life of gratitude as forgiven people. So we live IN THE LIGHT OF the gospel, ON THE BASIS OF the gospel. But it’s the law that gives us things to do, not the gospel.

    Simon Peter says:

    “For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” 1 Peter 4:17 ESV

    I think you need to justify yourself.

    Warmly,

    CT
29. Shane Rosenthal says:
    February 18, 2008 at 5:29 pm

    Christopher,

    I can’t speak for Dr. Horton, but here’s what I’d do with 1Pet 4:17. Paul has a similar comment in Romans 10 in which he says,

    “As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ (Rom 10:12-17 ESV).

    But as you can see, Paul qualifies what he means by “obeying the gospel” in the next verse, when he repeats Isaiah’s question, “who has believed?” So obeying the gospel simply means to be obedient in faith.

    Also, take a look at the definition for the word gospel (euangelion). My Greek dictionary (Louw & Nida) has these helpful and interesting comments, “In a number of languages the expression ‘the gospel’ or ‘the good news’ must be rendered by a phrase, for example, ‘news that makes one happy’ or ‘information that causes one joy’ or ‘words that bring smiles’ or ‘a message that causes the heart to be sweet.’” This information that causes joy, is simply to be believed or not believed. It is not an action to be accomplished. Christ performed the action, and this is the good news. We simply believe it: “To the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness” (Rom 4:5).

    Shane Rosenthal
    Producer, The White Horse Inn
30. Steve says:
    February 18, 2008 at 10:41 pm

    Shane Rosenthal,

    Nice going! That Romans verse (4:5) says it all.

    If it doesn’t, we are really in big trouble.

    – Steve
31. Nate says:
    February 19, 2008 at 3:59 am

    Of course, once we head merrily off into Romans, we have to take care to distinguish between the various forms of “law” Paul is discussing. I’m seeing a tendency to lump everything into the Mosaic law to hammer the inability to be justified by works through the law of the old covenant. Okay, very well and good. But there is nuance. We have the Mosaic law and the natural law (2:12-15). Although a guide, we cannot attain salvation or righteousness through these laws by a law of works (3:27). It is only through the law of faith (3:27) that we can move beyond the law of sin (7:25, 8:2) and defeat it with the aid of the law of the Spirit (8:2).

    Now for the law of the faith, to be able to operate in the law of the Spirit, we need Christ. It is not merely our faith, and thankfully not, but also that of Christ (Gal 3:22, sadly not translated correctly in the English translations “being given through faith in Jesus Christ” should read “through *the* faith *of* Jesus Christ, to those who believe”). The Gospel makes Christ known to us, yes. We must believe and have faith to be justified, yes. But what do we do with that belief? This is where the law of the Spirit comes into play. If we try to live the Sermon on the Mount without faith, we cannot receive the grace that draws us into closer union with Him and thus our salvation. But to cast aside the law of the Spirit in cavalier fashion for those who would proclaim faith is a grave error. Scripture clearly states that we can not be justified by works. But stating that justification is by faith alone will put you in conflict with Scripture (yes Luther wanted to get rid of James, yet it too is canon).
32. Bror Erickson says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:03 am

    Christopher,
    The word translated “do not obey” in 1 Peter 4:17 is actually one word in the Greek, “apeitheo”. I looked it up and while it can mean do not obey, even my Roman Catholic Greek cheater book “A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament,” says this about “apeitheo” :”dis-obey in scripture usu. of disobedience to God, in NT taking the form of disbelieving the gospel.” This is made somewhat evident the way John uses it in John 3:36 as an antonym for the word believe.
    I hope that helps. I found your question intriguing it sent me on a quest to find the answer, and not just the answer I wanted but what does the text really say. I also did a word search to see if we are ever commanded to “Obey the gospel.” But the only time the word obey is used in conjunction with the gospel is in the negative form translated do not obey. The other NT word for obey, often used in the conjunction with Christ, is “hupakouo” which gives the connotation of listen to, rathern than just here.
    So I think I have to remain with Horton on this, we don’t live out the gospel, we live in light of the gospel. The gospel isn’t something we do.
33. Bror Erickson says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:14 am

    Nate,
    Canon issues aside. (You can’t just declare a book to be canon. There are rules to that game. You have to prove among other things that it was written by an apostle. Otherwise we may as well just declare the Book of Mormon to be canon. The book of James was suspect for 1500 years, and then the Council of Trent decided it was canon. Sorry as a Lutheran I’m not about to let the Council of Trent decide what is or isn’t canon for me.) But again all that aside. You seem to know a little bit about greek, so it should be easy enough for you to read James and see that he and Paul are using the word “faith” in completely different ways. Why is it the word is translated knowledge in the same chapter when it is talking about demons. No I agree with James knowledge alone does not save, but I also agree with Paul and Luther, faith alone does save. Thing is both Paul and Luther teach that faith is never actually alone, but then you aren’t necessarily going to see your good works either.
34. Howard says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:23 am

    I think Nate (and earlier, Mike Horton and Shane Rosenthal) touch on something here that is actually very key to Reformation theology. To see how important it is, you merely have to unpack the “Sola’s” of the Reformation itself, (pretty nicely done, for example, in the Cambridge Declaration of a few years ago). These essentially show that Christ, His Word, Unmerited Grace and the gift of faith from God (as the original puts it, ‘the just shall live by His faith”) are imperative to the redemption of humanity. We not only “move on from the law of sin”, we are ‘dead’ to the law (Romans 7:4) in order that we may belong to Christ and live life well.
    Luther’s excellent work – his treatise on the freedom of the Christian – gives a very helpful understanding of this.
35. Steve says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:30 am

    Nate,

    Romans is awesome, isn’t it!?

    Faith is a gift from God. It is something (as you rightly pointed out), belongs to Jesus,and He gives us a piece of it. And however much of it He gives us… is enough.

    Living the Sermon on the Mount is not “doing”, or performing at a certain level,as you pointed out in your 1st paragraph, but rather, living out the SoM is “trusting”. That is what the law (gift) of faith does. It calls us to trust…not to act.
    The law (gift) of the Spirit, inspires us to act. This acting (James) comes in many forms and at many levels, but none of it…none of it gains us anything that we didn’t already have by the virtue of the gift of Jesus’ faith to us.(in the waters of baptism (Acts 2), and in His Word of promise.

    So while Luther did refer to James as the “epistle of straw”, taken in proper context(totally outside the objective, external work of Jesus on our behalf), James has value as sort of a corrective of stewardship, or 2 x 4 to the head of Christians that were totally wasting their gifts.
    Luther said as much because the work of Christ on our behalf to save and sanctify us is very, very dim at best, in the Book of James. The epistles that were strongly centered in Christ’s work for us were the books that Luther thought were of much greater value. Not reading the scriptures in a monochrome, flat line, everything weighs the same manner, but reading the bible through the ‘lens of grace’ and not through the lens of ‘law’, is why Luther spoke that way. And I, obviously, believe Luther was correct. Paul goes to great lengths in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc. to make the same sort of distinctions. Luther was just parroting Paul in that respect.

    So, when Paul says in Romans 6, that “we are to consider ourselves dead to sin”, he is not saying that we won’t sin anymore, he is saying that now the Lord our God has acted on our behalf, killing the old Adam, drowning him in baptism, so that our sins no longer have dominion over us. They no longer condemn us. (we will still sin, and often, as Paul states in Romans 7)

    So Paul says “why would we still want to live in sin” (living in it, is giving yourself over to it, totally, willfully, as opposed to stumbling over it as the Christian does, for the most part)
    So he says that we keep the law, out of our greatfulness.(again, not because we have to, but rather because we desire to)

    It all boils to down to this…

    Was the cross of Christ enough?

    If not, then what do I have to do?

    If so, then I am free. (as Jesus said)

    For those that are mired in law, that are imprinted with ‘the law lens’ in their reading of scripture…the cross was good…but just not quite everything. I must now “do”.

    Well, the Gospel of Christ that I know, and that the New Testament screams, at the top of it’s literary lungs, says to us “done”. “It is finished”. Now, go and live!

    Thanks Nate! Always a pleasure, my Brother in Christ -

    Steve
36. Steve says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:55 am

    You know, I’ve been pretty much making the same points over, and over, and over again to my worthy detractors.

    Yet, I know this stuff is hard to swallow. Jesus and His work for us is hard to hear. That old Adam just does not want to die to the religious, self justification, self improvement project.

    I see it in myself everyday. In the way I pray, in the way I think, in the way I live, the “doer” in me, just will not leave the God Project alone.

    That is why Law/Gospel preaching is so important.

    Killing off the God project needs to happen and it needs to happen often. Otherwise that new man, or new woman, can’t be raised to new life in Christ.
    This is crucial in our (Confessional Lutheranism)understanding of God’s Word, and the way that God Does His Word…TO US!

    So, if I am starting to sound like a broken record, as my pastor says once in awhile, then so be it…because we all need to hear this, over and over, and over again.

    Then on that day when the old Adam is finally laid down for the last time, we will be raised for the last time to that unspeakable Glory, and all that our Lord Jesus has in store for us.

    Until then, we slug it out down here (with all the defensive and offensive weapons that our Lord gives us) for a few years, knowing all the while that we are as good as there, with our Lord, even as we battle.

    I pray that all my friends, Brothers and Sisters in Christ on this blog, will someday be able to experience that great joy, that total freedom, that Jesus has won for us, and that He wants you to have. Trust in Him alone, and forget about being so cotton-pickin’ religious.

    Remember; when Jesus walked the earth, the people that gave Him the most trouble, that He had the hardest time with, were the religious people.

    Food for thought.

    Sincerely,

    Steve
37. Michael Spencer says:
    February 19, 2008 at 12:57 pm

    We’re getting very close to some people evangelizing the IM audience. Please don’t do that.
38. Steve says:
    February 19, 2008 at 3:53 pm

    Michael,

    Thanks for the heads-up on that Michael. I’ll will watch that. My apologies to you.

    Sometimes in my zeal…well… I appreciate the gentle reminder.

    – Steve
39. Steve says:
    February 19, 2008 at 11:53 pm

    Bror Erikson,

    Excellent points you have made in your discussion with Nate.

    I don’t think it’s fair, though…with a name like Erikson, Nate doesn’t have a chance!
    (just kidding Nate, you do have a chance)

    You Lutherans sure are fools. Fools for Christ that is!

    Thanks Bror -

    Steve
40. Christopher Taylor says:
    February 20, 2008 at 12:22 am

    I think the aspect of the WHI crowd that bothers me is the apparent lack of exhortations. Those of us who are Reformed understand that we are justified by faith alone. But we must balance our words the way the Apostles balanced their’s, with plenty of imperatives (well up near 1000).

    “Go and teach them to obey everything that I’ve commanded you” has to have a robust and clear exposition or we begin looking like those who pick and choose what verses we like.

    Part of the proclamation of the good news is that, once we’ve believed, we’re empowered to obey. The Holy Spirit causes us to keep God’s commands. We grow in grace.

    Yet it seems like this kind of talk is not only not present in the WHI type people, it’s viewed as very close to Arminianism.

    I want my Great Commission back.

    Warmly,

    CT
41. Rick Ritchie says:
    February 20, 2008 at 1:37 am

    H. Lee, you say the following:
    Now, I am a layman, and while I can’t argue theology, I can proof-text, of course: Romans 2:”6 He will render to each one *according to his works:* 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; … 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who *does evil,* … 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who *does good,* …”

    Well, the problem here is that Romans is a sustained argument. I don’t have to go outside the argument for an answer. Paul’s conclusion just a very few verses later is that “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” This states what you seem to want to say quite clearly.

    Only he doesn’t leave it there. St. Paul has leveled the playing field so that Jews and Gentiles are both accountable to God, and it is not who has the law who is saved, but who does it. Who will that be? No one. “There is none righteous, no not one” (Romans 3:10). How many do good as he mentioned in Romans 2:10? None. “there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Romans 3:12). And the verse that tells all us Reformation folk how to read all law, “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20). So how are we to be saved? “But now a righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by the redemptions that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:21-24).

    If Romans 3 can come after Romans 2, then reversals of expectation are always possible. This is the nature of Law and Gospel. The Law is spoken as if it is the final word from which there is no appeal. Then the Gospel is spoken as if the Law were no problem.

    Of course if St. Paul is wrong about all this, you may have an argument. But if St. Paul is right, then we have every reason to use his argument as a lens through which to read the rest of Scripture. So why a Pauline lens? Because he is speaking universally. He is telling us the nature of redemption, and explaining how the Law fits into that. And when we read of the nature of the Law, it is clear that the Sermon on the Mount is a sub-species of Law.

    “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). It isn’t an infinite leap to apply the Pauline idea “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.” (Romans 3:19) to what Jesus says here. Does Jesus’ teaching here not increase the number of people that will see themselves guilty of adultery, one of the commandments of the Law?
42. H. Lee says:
    February 20, 2008 at 9:38 am

    Rick, Steve, and others who have tried to get me to see the light,

    Thanks for your efforts. I’m sure you mean every word you say, and you hope with all your hearts that you can “convert” me and others, for our own well-being.

    I’m not a theologian. I kind of wish I were at this point, not so I could argue with you but so that I could have all the fun you seem to be having with Scripture. (NOT sarcastic here. Honestly.) Theology is fascinating for those who are well-versed in it, and you are all well-versed indeed.

    In my working life I was in the computer business, and I now teach business part-time. Relevance? Well, in my current textbook there’s a cartoon of two American tourists talking to a native of some other country. The American wife is saying to her husband, “He doesn’t understand you, George. Try shouting a little louder.”

    I’m not saying that you’ve been shouting; I’m just saying that you’re talking another language. I’m not stupid — got a Ph.D. and all — but you are trying to speak of spiritual matters and I am trying to hear spiritual matters, and we’re just not connecting.

    Steve and probably others think it is because I’m not listening correctly: “So, if I am starting to sound like a broken record, as my pastor says once in awhile, then so be it…because we all need to hear this, over and over, and over again.”

    Since I’m human, that attitude tends to annoy me. “Here, let me explain once again, and *then* you’ll finally understand and agree with me.” I understand, daggone it! I just. don’t. agree. with. you.

    However, once I can smooth my own ego down a bit, I can say sincerely, guys, if I *could* talk you out of your views, I wouldn’t. Your ideas cheer, strenthen, and sustain you, and that is all that I as a Christian can ask for. (Not saying it’s all *you* can ask for, but…)

    I’m going to hang out in my little corner of the vineyard, and wave at you in yours occasionally. Keep the faith, and God bless you.
43. Bror Erickson says:
    February 20, 2008 at 11:28 am

    CT.
    You write:”“Go and teach them to obey everything that I’ve commanded you” has to have a robust and clear exposition or we begin looking like those who pick and choose what verses we like.”
    And finish I want my great commission back.

    I hat to do this I don’t want to come off like I am beating you up with theological arguments. But seriously no one has taken the great commission from you, most especially not Dr. Rosenbladt, who I am happy to know personally. That man’s life has been dedicated to exactly that. Believe me, but his understanding of it might be slightly different than yours, because I believe his understanding of the Gospel is different than yours.
    Now for your great commission it simply doesn’t say what you say it says. It doesn’t say teach them to obey all that I have commanded you. It says teach them to observe/keep (Greek word Teirein) [sorry my transliteration sucks but it will have to do] all that I have commanded you. The apostles are to make disciples by doing two things, batpizing, and teaching. The disciples then learn all that Christ has commanded the apostles to teach them, that is they are to teach these disciples gospel, the forgiveness of sins, not a new list of rules. God, literally, knows that we do not need a new list of rules to live by.
    See I used to read it in much the same way you do. That is teach them to observe (reading observe here as obey) all that I have commanded you. Meaning God has commanded the disciples to do this and that, and the disciples are to teach the new disciples to do this and that also. But that isn’t it at all. What is being said here in short is this. Disciples I have commanded you to teach many things. Teach them all I have commanded you to teach them. Don’t let anything slip by. Don’t ignore any of it. It is all important.
44. Howard says:
    February 20, 2008 at 2:35 pm

    Christopher wrote:
    “Those of us who are Reformed understand that we are justified by faith alone. But we must balance our words the way the Apostles balanced their’s, with plenty of imperatives (well up near 1000)”.

    I so agree, and the one we certainly cannot afford to miss to begin with is the one which Paul had to stand alone for:

    “For freedom Christ has set us free:
    Stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery…
    (for) you who would be justified by law are severed from Christ, you have fallen!
    For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly await the hope of Righteousness” (Galatians 5).

    “Part of the proclamation of the good news is that, once we’ve believed, we’re empowered to obey”.

    Those made anew as His sons and daughters – freed from bondage – will indeed proclaim.
    I cannot speak for America, but I know there are many here in the UK (including me)who have indeed been ‘made free’ though the marvelous Gospel light shared by those dear friends at the White Horse.

    Howard.
45. Charley says:
    February 20, 2008 at 7:35 pm

    I think my Catholic sympathies are showing, but I find the following from Brent Gordon a little hard to swallow:

    “The world needs good works.. go ahead. You are free to do them.. but not one “smile from God” will they win you.”
    …
    “There are a thousand things you can do to be helpful in this world, you are free to roll up your sleeves and dig in. Just remember, it’s not contributing one wit to your becoming Holy.”

    Can’t God, through the Holy Spirit, inspire Christians to do His will. And can’t following His will makes us a better, more holy, people? I’m not talking about these things saving us, or giving us material riches ala Joel Olsteen. I’m talking about Christian spiritual formation.

    One obvious example is God inspiring us to pick up the Bible and start reading. Another would be feeding the poor in His name. Likewise, church planting, evangelizing, keeping Lent, or trying to be more “SOM” in how we interact with others.

    Growing up, my parents were non-religious. When I first became a “believing” Christian, I found it hard to even say the name Jesus without being embarrassed. Now, I’m reading more, and as Micheal says, “on a post-evangelical journey, discovering what it means to be vitally connected to Jesus.” I find it hard to believe that God is apathetic to my Christian journey of faith.

    While we could feed 1,000,000 mouths and still be a sinner worthy of death, I find it hard to believe that God cares nothing about acts of Christian good will or grave sin committed by Christians. I would think that it pained God to see the numerous wars between Christian Groups. In addition, I would think that it pleased God to see Christian groups so involved in the civil rights movement.

    To say that God did not care about these things because it was sinners doing them makes God seem absent from our lives, instead of an active participant via the Holy Spirit and Jesus.

    I have not committed to any confessions, or counsels, yet. So, maybe I’m just a little green for this discussion.
46. Brent Gordon says:
    February 21, 2008 at 2:38 am

    Hahaha!
    Good on ya H. Lee!
    Boys, we might not be able to convert ‘im, but he’s damm lovable!
    God bless you H. !
    Brent
47. Brent Gordon says:
    February 21, 2008 at 3:02 am

    Charley,
    Just read your post.. I think you have a point that comes through… Often (on these posts) we come through much like Luthers’ writings.. stridently harsh (in writing ) to achieve a point and to make it clearly stand out. We often don’t have the luxury to write “one on one” as a Pastor would. The whole goal of these writings should keep the exhortation of the brethren in mind. Certainly the emphasis the writers have been striving to make clear is the objective declaration of the Gospel in light of the “anti” gospel. Having said that, your point of the subjective is valid and should be considered. It IS proper and right and good to acknowledge and thank God (Emanuel) for His personnel walk with us. I believe we just are sensitive to not make it “normative” and thus reduce it to a formula, which would in effect, make God beholden to us. My point I tried to drive home is, that good works are not meritorious. Christ certainly brings good works forth from the Christian, this is true, however, they earn us no reward. Christ alone has won us the reward that awaits us. That in mind, we are free to perform good works which WILL bring praise to God. Praise then, will not belong to us, but to God who initiates the good works out of us, through His Spirit.
    Good point Charley, I’ll be more thoughtful next l next time I chime in.
    Brent
48. Howard says:
    February 21, 2008 at 9:13 am

    Charley wrote:

    “Can’t God, through the Holy Spirit, inspire Christians to do His will. And can’t following His will makes us a better, more holy, people?…I’m talking about Christian spiritual formation”.

    These are interesting terms;
    “better people”, “holy people” and “spiritual formation” – what exactly is being desired here beyond a union with Christ in death and resurrection?

    It is imperative that we do NOTHING to nullify this work by grace (Galatians 2:21) – that is the priority:
    “Christ daily drives out the old Adam in accordance with the extent to which faith and knowledge of Christ grow. This ‘alien righteousness’ makes progress and is finally perfected at the end (death and resurrection)”. This, notes Luther, is the cornerstone of our living life well – dying to the old, living to the new (Luther on righteousness).

    “One obvious example is God inspiring us to pick up the Bible and start reading. Another would be feeding the poor in His name. Likewise, church planting, evangelizing, keeping Lent, or trying to be more “SOM” in how we interact with others”.

    It is not what we do that is ‘good’ (looking at things from this view is merely going back to ladder climbing), it is the fact that in as we live, in anything we do, the life of Christ (the fruits of the Spirit) may be evidenced – that the marvelous treasure, placed in these earthen vessels, may actually peak through and savor or fragrance a moment, a conversation, an event with the sweetness of Him – that is astonishing indeed. Our daily need is to be those given up to Him, that He can renew us and that His life can be expressed. Christ in us – that is living by faith!
49. Steve says:
    February 21, 2008 at 10:57 am

    Brent Gordon,

    Who is that at Brent’s computer?!

    I bid you untie him and put him back in front of his mac! This miniute!

    – Steve
50. Larry says:
    February 21, 2008 at 3:58 pm

    There is of course the very very very earthy practical, if I can use that term correctly, side to this. We all have this tendency, particularly when it comes to ANY law, love, ethics, morals, etc…to speak in such a fashion that we are “removed” from the accusations or implications of said law we are spewing forth. We tend to speak of “I use to be…” or “yea I was LIKE that ONCE…”; or even in the SoM we will tend read Jesus when He says, “You’ve heard don’t commit murder…I say if you have had anger you have” as “Well I agree with Jesus of course, though I’ve not murdered with my hands (flesh defense exhibit #1 being presented), I do realize (flesh defense exhibit #2, I’ve come to great humility is what this means 99% of the time) that when I’m angry it is as if I’ve actually murdered with my hands (flesh defense exhibit #3 – the final denial and really calling Jesus a liar). Because Jesus doesn’t say “like murder” (which is a softening in and of itself of the Law’s accusation), He says that it IS murder and the fact the hands have not act does not in the LEAST alleviate the guilt and REALITY of the murder. The fact it comes from the heart even if hands have not acted is not a “better” thing, but worse! Now put that in your pipe and smoke it the next time you are cut off in traffic, mad at the insurance company worker, mad at waiting in line somewhere, etc…each case murder committed, murder committed, and murder committed. Because you would as soon that person blocking your way to some temporary thing you perceive life to coming to you be gone, dead, murdered (though we wouldn’t use a harsh term like murder, because we like to hide the reality). Same for adultery and all the others. That doesn’t EVEN touch on the fact that ANY time you/me worry or are anxious about our lives in any sense that we are violating the first commandment, putting a god in front of God to be our god, the second, then the third follow and the Sabbath is of course at this point forgotten. These idolatries lead to and cause the sins against the neighbor.

    To get even more “earthy”, the thing us fallen gods hate so much:

    All the huffers and puffers and purveyors of law from Scripture that come back and undermine, even unintentionally, that I’ve known in multiple denominational backgrounds from various Baptist to Reformed Baptist to S. Baptist to Reformed to Wesleyan to various Charismatics, ALLLL of the most conservative nature – I’ve observed a constant. IF we are going to measure law, NONE of them, and I’ve known them personally, ZERO of them even live anywhere near the level of the Law they claim and lay upon others. Zero, nada, none-whatsoever, not one breathes air that I’ve known or met, not even close, not even in the direction, not even moving toward the level and direction they seem to extract out of Scripture for all to have.

    For example: I’ve had more than a few very conservative neo reformed PASTORS who were NOT Wesleyan try to push the Rich Young Ruler off on me as Gospel. Yet, when I pressed if they “had done that”, I either got ‘crickets and frogs’ or a sheepish yes nodding of the head. INCREDIBLE. Because right here in front of me a pastor is claiming this “giving over” is Gospel and the way to heaven, and I know for a fact they have more earthly wealth than I do/did, look me in the eye and say this, imply he’s done it or at least let silence do it for him leaving me spiritually hanging, yet he still more wealthy on all accounts than I am and yet imply that this is what I need to do too. Incredulous and hypocrisy are the words! To lay the “guilt” trip, the ‘if you will be a saved Christian you must do this’, even while they themselves are bald faced liars is beyond credibility. And I’m not talking about health and wealth pastors, I’m talking about otherwise solid conservative doctrinal pastors. I’m not talking about a Bennie Hinn telling me to do this whose so incredulous so as to be laughable. The RYR passage is just one example, other passages have had the same extraction and application, but when pressed the pastor couldn’t even fess up to it, even though he implied by silence he might have leaving YOU hanging.

    The point being is that I’ve never personally seen in my life, nor read in history any of these SUPER Christians every generation seems to have an idealized fantasy about.

    It reminds me of a mission trip to Utah we had. One of the passages, can’t recall it was in their Book of Mormon, I think some where in Moroni, it stated that “if you’ve repented (up to date) of ALL your sins, then you sin, you must AGAIN repent of ALL your sins”. We always would ask them, “have you got there yet.” Answer, “No” or silence (like some of my above accounts). Then we’d press, “Do you think you will and how so, what makes you think you will.” The answer was always that “god” will give us the grace to do so before we die. Now we use to use that to show how Mormonism is against Christianity, not the same. Yet, that crap is EXACTLY what is coming into and is IN far too many Christian circles, churches, pastors, elders, deacons and lay persons minds, teachings and preachings. In Utah we called it antichristic, but in our local churches around here the very same principle we call the Gospel.

    I like Luther’s earthy approach!

    Blessings,

    Larry KY