Justification

Returning to our building blocks series on vocabulary, today we are going to tackle one of the most important terms in all of Christian theology.  Raise your hand if you have ever heard this term in a sermon at church.  Really?

Justification.  From Webster, justification is the act of proving or showing one to be just, right, or reasonable.  Let’s not spend any time considering the obvious breakdown in terms of man, but instead, let’s think of these ideas from the perspective of God.  On the Last Day, we will quite literally face a trial.  There will be a judge.  The charge is sin and the penalty is eternal damnation.  What is just?  God’s view of justice, we have seen is perfect obedience to His will.  What is right or righteous?  What can we say about the righteousness of God?  This perfect righteousness has been attained by one Man only.  Is this reasonable?  When the writer of the rulebook says that these are the rules, I’d say it is perfectly reasonable as well.  Justification is the means by which people may obtain perfect righteousness before God on Judgment Day.  Let’s break it down again by groups.

Pelagian.  Remember that this groups starts from the denial of original sin.  Therefore, Adam is a bad example and Jesus is a good example.  That is why the question “What would Jesus do?” is appropriate in this context.  There is no imputation of Christ’s righteousness.  All of our efforts in our life time become the grounds for our justification.  We will be judged based upon our own actions, thoughts and omissions.  Our lives will be on display and we will be judged.  This is clearly fair.  No one will deny that this is the most fair system.  I have two questions: is it the most Biblical system, and do you really want fair?

Semipelagian.  This group starts with original sin that is subsequently cleansed for all of mankind by the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross.  Our righteousness is still based upon our own efforts in thought, word and deed, by what we have done and what we have left undone.  At Judgment, we will be able to say that we got a good start with a clean slate.  But the righteousness of Jesus is not imputed to us beyond the moment of our birth.  From then on, we are back to “What would Jesus Do?” as our road map to Salvation.  Once again, this is fair to us, though not so much to Jesus who had to die to give us that fresh start.  Therefore, God designed a system that was fair to the creature, but not to Himself.  Really?  That’s what we want to believe?

Arminianism.  We are entering the realm of prevenient grace, yet again.  At the moment we receive prevenient grace, and cooperate with God by believing and having faith, we are justified.  The trouble is in the issue of maintaining that justification.  The rest of our lives involves our vocabulary word for the next post, sanctification.  Even though there is a prevenient grace that precedes our response, this is still a synergistic system of justification.  Justification is by grace through faith, but not by grace alone through faith alone.

Roman Catholicism.  In order to understand the Roman Catholic view of justification, we need to start with something very similar to the Arminian view of justification, and then add the Arminian view of sanctification, to get a combined justification and sanctification that is the full Roman Catholic definition of justification.  In other words, Rome has no use for sanctification; to Rome, it is all part of the same thing.  This is not an altogether unhelpful concept as it is at least honest.  But because the first part is as a result as the input of prevenient grace, the second part which we view as sanctification is pure works, albeit within the context of the infusion of regular dosed inputs of grace.  There is no way to be clear on this topic in one paragraph, so if this seems confusing, it is because the terms are not the same in this system.

Reformed and Calvinism.  We are justified by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone to the glory of God alone as testified in scripture alone.  Every part of that sentence has historical references and is worthy of conversation.  We will be going through each of the five solas in the near future.  The bottom line is that this is a system of monergism; God does it all.  Our justification before God on the Last Day is based solely upon the imputed righteousness of Christ to us, with absolutely no contribution of our own merits.  Our faith that brings this righteousness to us is solely a gift from God through the power of the Holy Spirit, having no input of cooperation from us whatever.  We don’t think about any aspect of the Law as capable of contributing to justification, only as defining the terms required for justification.  We do not presume to elevate ourselves to a position capable of contributing anything worthwhile to the efforts of Jesus on the cross; it is all to the Glory of God alone, not to us.

This was intended as a brief overview of the basic positions, a reference point.  In one sermon this past week, I heard a basically Arminian definition of justification articulated, without ever using the Biblical term justification, followed by thirty minutes of rambling explanation that sounded semipelagian or Pelagian in the amount of effort required for justification.  This illustrates two important points.  The reason that we don’t have the vocabulary any longer is that even when discuss the topics, we don’t hear the Biblical words used.  This leads to imprecision and a muddying of waters that I believe is intentional.  Second, the exegesis that passes for scholarly and Biblical most often fails to view these definitions in light of the redemptive historical narrative.  There is a metanarrative that has been lost as well as the vocabulary of the faith.  The two are intertwined and essential to mutual understanding.

In our next vocabulary post, we will attempt to unravel the key distinctives of sanctification.

– Troll –

Hebrews 11: Saving Faith

And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect. (Hebrews 11:39-40 ESV)

Once again, I want to hit the punch line first before diving into the meat of the text.  We have seen a litany of examples that we might construe as saving faith. And then, we arrive at verse 39. All of these wonderful works accomplished by these Old Testament patriarchs, and then the writer of Hebrews tells us to wait a second, that wasn't the point.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1-2 ESV)

How is it that we can simultaneously be exhorted to do great works, and yet be told that the promise was not received based upon those works? What is this faith that enables such great deeds, and yet falls short in perfecting us? What is it that God provided that was better for us? Rest assured, eager reader, that the author of Hebrews knows the answer. Remember back at the beginning of our journey through Hebrews, that we made some assumptions. A key assumption is that this letter or sermon was delivered to people who already had saving faith. Here, we see the faith of the Old Testament patriarchs set in contradistinction to this saving faith. This obviously begs the question, what is saving faith?

For my long-time readers, this will sound repetitive, because I wrote a similar post back in March. But is an important topic, one that bears repeating. Let us start from the notion that we must have faith. What is faith? Is faith tangible? Is faith itself an object? I ask this in a grammatical sense as well as a metaphysical sense. Grammatically speaking, faith is used as a noun. But more properly, we should think of faith perhaps as a gerund. Take this sentence: faith is believing. Using this construction, is quite easy to see my meaning. So I ask again, is it enough to have faith?

Is faith necessarily a Christian construct? Do you have faith in the Texans' ability to win with the third string quarterback? Is this the same faith of which we speak in a biblical context? Clearly not, therefore, it is obvious that faith must have an object. So, what is the object of our faith?

Let's start small, and build up as we need. I believe in God. For many, that is a sufficient statement of faith. Very quickly, we can argue that this is not a particularly Christian claim. In fact, statistically, most people in the United States believe in God, or a god, or some supreme being. Certainly, our Old Testament patriarchs believed in God, and yet the author of Hebrews has already declared that this was not saving faith.

I believe in Jesus, that he is the Christ, the Messiah. Certainly, that is a step farther than the Old Testament patriarchs were able to take. Does this constitute saving faith? Let's look at Matthew 4 for a moment. What is the supposition that the devil keeps making to Jesus?  And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God….” Without getting into too much of a philosophical argument about it, this is clearly a rhetorical statement by the devil. The devil knows Jesus is the son of God; he doesn't just believe it, he knows it. The point is this: if the devil knows Jesus is the son of God, and the devil isn't saved by that knowledge, can we consider this to be saving faith?

Now let's turn to 1 Corinthians 15. It's a long chapter, but I want you to read it now.  Here is just a sampling of the early part of the chapter.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:3-10a ESV)

In verse 1, Paul calls this his gospel, and he exhorts us to the same perseverance as does the author of Hebrews.      Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.  (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 ESV)  

We are being saved, not by our works, but by virtue of this gospel, this news about Jesus. The whole basis of this faith, according to Paul, is the truth of the resurrection. Paul reminds us that this was an actual historical event. He tells us about witnesses, he tells us about the names of some of those witnesses, he tells us about the number of witnesses, more than 500 brothers at one time. This, my friends, is what it means to be a witness. It is a legal word, it is a word used in courtrooms. These 500+ eyewitnesses testify and witness to the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Yes, His resurrection is the basis of saving faith.

Now, let's go back to Hebrews 11:2. …looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.  Once again, saving faith is linked to the events of the cross. Once again, the New Testament links salvation to the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. Once again, the New Testament declares the object of our saving faith.

Elsewhere, I have tried to help you understand how it is that these events on the cross connect directly with you. Biblical words like justification, imputation, and propitiation are used to describe how this saving faith is connected directly to you. The first 11 chapters of Romans deal with this subject, particularly Romans 3:21-31, which we have discussed many times before.

            But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

            Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:21-31 ESV)

It is easy to stumble over some of the language, particularly if you are still lacking the Reformation categories of law and gospel. But whether you have a clear understanding of these two paragraphs or not, one cannot deny that Paul explicitly excludes righteousness by works, and he links righteousness, justification, and salvation to faith in Jesus Christ, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood. It's all there, and it is repeated throughout the New Testament.

In conclusion, then, saving faith is faith that gives us our eternal reward, bodily resurrection, and everlasting life with Christ our King. The link between Jesus Christ and you is His life, His death, His resurrection, His ascension, and His future coming in glory. That is the object of saving faith, nothing more and nothing less.

--Ogre--

Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

It was asked of me this past week, whether I believe in baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is a complicated topic. First, I will describe what is usually meant by the concept of baptism of the Holy Spirit. Second, I will describe what I would refer to as a more orthodox theology concerning this issue.  Finally, I will demonstrate through textual references, which of these two positions is more biblically authentic.

The concept of baptism of the Holy Spirit is usually put forward by Pentecostal groups concerning the idea of a higher level of Christian. In this theology, what we find is that the individual is baptized into Christ through water, and then requires a second baptism by the Holy Spirit, or by fire, into the higher, more complete realm of being a Christian. The basic theology this mode of thinking requires is a separation of justification from sanctification. What this entails is that justification occurs at the time of water baptism, while sanctification occurs sometime later based upon an experience of the individual involving the Holy Spirit. This also leaves several areas of concern regarding the relationship between true believers and the idea of the so-called “carnal Christians."  Carnal Christians are justified by baptism, but continue to lead lives of a lower level of piety, never making Jesus “Lord of their life” and continuing to live as if there was no baptism.  In fact, they could become atheists and still claim their baptism for salvation.  But the higher level Christian, the "mature Christian," has a baptism of the Holy Spirit, an experience in which that person feels the touch of the Holy Spirit transform their lives.  The usual manifestation that is considered proof of this baptism by the Holy Spirit is the skill of glossolalia or speaking in tongues. Other gifts of the Holy Spirit are also considered within the realm of proof of this baptism by the Holy Spirit. Typical of this group are prophecy, dreams, visions, healing, and other such activities.  The rewards of this higher level are usually discussed in terms of “jewels in my crown,” referring loosely to Zechariah 9:16, 2 Timothy 4:8, Revelation 2:10, and 1 Peter 5:4.  There is no true exegesis that occurs in this theology, but rather an eisegesis based upon a whole house of cards created by bad hermeneutics.  What this means is that when we give away logic to the devil, we have no framework in which to interpret the Word.  Said another way, if two passages seem to say the opposite, then your understanding of one or both is wrong.

The orthodox Reformed look at this theology is decidedly different. First of all, sanctification is not considered a separate event from justification. Rather, sanctification and justification occur simultaneously at water baptism. Because justification and sanctification occur simultaneously, there is the possibility, nay, the necessity, of a person being justified, sanctified and in the process of becoming sanctified, all three simultaneously, based upon the single event of water baptism.  Therefore, there is no category for separate events of justification and sanctification. The categories of carnal Christian and higher level Christian are nonexistent.  There is only one category of believer.  There are two types of people in church, but the categories are decidedly different.  In a future post, if reminded by the recipient of this missive, I will breakdown these reformed categories based upon Covenant Theology.

Coming back to our discussion of the Holy Spirit, once again, a full systematic theology is helpful in discerning the differences between these two views of the works of the Holy Spirit. Starting with the impact of original sin, and using the classic debate between Augustine and Pelagius as a template for the discussion, we can lay out three basic positions on the impact of Adam's sin on humanity. In the full Pelagian position, the sin of Adam is not imputed to all of mankind. Adam merely introduces the possibility of sin into the world.  Free will remains untouched.  Adam is a bad example. In the semi-Pelagian position, Adam tarnishes humanity with sin; and the ability to choose well, free will, was tarnished, but is redeemable by Christ. The Augustinian position is decidedly different. Augustine viewed original sin as introducing a condition of sin to mankind whereby all aspects of mankind were affected by sin. This includes free will. Therefore, mankind became incapable of following the law. Mankind became incapable of seeking God.  A full Pelagian has no need of Jesus.  A semi-Pelagian is grateful to Jesus for making salvation possible, but still has to work out his own salvation.  The Augustinian is in a real jam.  He is in a desperate plight and has no way out on his own.  The Augustinian is in desperate need of divine intervention. 

The role of the atonement is likewise viewed through different lenses. The full Pelagian view of the atonement is that Christ was the perfect example, where as Adam was the sinful example. There was no real need for Christ to die, because it was his good example that matters to us.  He teaches us ultimate virtue and morality.  The semi-Pelagian view of the atonement is that Christ wipes our slates clean including our free wills making us now capable of filling the law. Again, Christ makes salvation possible.  The Augustinian view of the atonement is that Christ imputes righteousness to believers, justifying them on judgment day, but it does not affect our free will or our condition of sin. We remain in Adam while we are in this world.  But the righteousness of Christ has been accounted to us and our sin has been accounted to Christ in the great exchange.

Extending each of these logically to the area of sanctification, we can now make the following conclusions. A full Pelagian worldview actually has very little need for Christ. In this system, Adam is merely a bad example, while Christ is a good example. Since a believer in this system really didn't get much from Christ's death, resurrection and ascension, there is plenty of room for "something else." It is into this feeling of emptiness, that the Pentecostal places this idea of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Because nothing much was attained by the sacrifice of God’s son, more is required to attain our full eternal reward. The semi-Pelagian view of sanctification is one in which we are constantly working towards perfection. Because our slate was cleaned by Christ, we are now on a cosmic balance scale of sorts hoping to tip our scale towards the side of righteousness. The Holy Spirit's job in the system is to lend assistance in our endeavors toward righteousness. The Augustinian view of sanctification is different. We are at once justified and simultaneously sanctified at the time of baptism. We are in a lifelong process of being sanctified simultaneous with our declaration of justification and sanctification. Our efforts are genuinely in the direction of righteousness because we are covenant members with Christ and through Christ. But these works have no bearing on our righteousness, because our righteousness was declared to us as being imputed from Christ to us at time of baptism. Similarly, our sin is imputed to Christ; so that time of judgment, we may approach the throne of God with confidence clothed in the righteousness of Christ. Christ has already bore the sin of the believers, having once and for all time been the perfect sacrifice for our sins.

So, which argument has the best support from Scripture? Let's start by looking at the Prophets.  In Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel and others, mankind is clearly declared incapable of following the law. Several of the Psalms echo this problem. Paul's summary of this Old Testament view of the sin of mankind can be found in Romans 3: 1-20.  No one does good; no, not even one. No one seeks God. Their mouths are an open grave. Several places discuss this as well within the parables and teachings of Jesus. Matthew 5: 48 gives us the words be you therefore perfect.  So, logically, if Jesus is telling us to be perfect, and Paul points out that we can't be perfect, we have a problem. Therefore, the bigger view of Jesus, that is, the Augustinian view, becomes necessary to solve this problem.

So, if the Holy Spirit isn't here to give us a second baptism of sorts, why did Jesus send the Holy Spirit? Lucky for us, Jesus answers this question for us.  John 14 to 16 gives us a detailed description of the work of the Holy Spirit. The job of the Holy Spirit is to testify about Jesus, his work, his purpose, his identity, and his saving grace. It is the Holy Spirit that gives us the gift of grace, the gift of faith, the gift of knowledge in the redeeming work of Christ through his death, resurrection and ascension. The Holy Spirit is actually quite busy without doing parlor tricks on our command.  The reason the Pentecostal believes that there has to be more, is that the Pentecostal does not understand original sin, the Holiness of God, and just how absolutely desperate his plight actually is.  Without a full understanding of sin and the condition of sin, we cannot appreciate how truly amazing Grace really is.  The bigger the problem, the bigger the solution has to be.  Augustinians have no need for something more.  The work of Christ and his Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, has to be absolutely huge beyond imagination to accomplish redemption for the believers.

The usual places to which the Pentecostal references the Holy Spirit are Acts 2 and 4, 1 Corinthians 12 and 14. A basic tenet of hermeneutics is that the Bible should interpret the Bible. Interpretation of these passages without account for the John passages is bad hermeneutics. But more than that, interpretation of Acts 2 without regard to the actual sermon by Peter in that same chapter is bad hermeneutics. A reasoned approach to all of these passages is to keep things in Biblical and redemptive historical context. Look and see what the context of speaking in tongues is in Acts 2.  The apostles are not babbling senseless noise. They are speaking in the native languages of all of the different peoples who are there to hear them. 3000 people were converted that day, not because of some emotional experience, but because of the convincing words of the apostles in their testimony about the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, I can say that is because of the work of the Holy Spirit that I believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore, I can say that because of the work of the Holy Spirit at my baptism, I am a new covenant member in Christ. Therefore, I can say that because of the work of the Holy Spirit, I have knowledge of the gospel, of Christ's redeeming work on the cross, and of the justification and sanctification that his death, resurrection and ascension earned on my behalf and was imputed to me at baptism, but that I will not actually receive until death or the last day, whichever comes first. Truly, the Holy Spirit has been very busy in my life.

Hebrews 7—Melchizedek, Part 2

In Judah God is known; his name is great in Israel.  His abode has been established in Salem, his dwelling place in Zion.  There he broke the flashing arrows, the shield, the sword, and the weapons of war. Selah  (Psalm 76:1-3 ESV)

The LORD says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” The LORD sends forth from Zion your mighty scepter.  Rule in the midst of your enemies!  Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours.  The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”  (Psalm 110:1-4 ESV)

For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever.  (Hebrews 7:1-3 ESV)

Types and shadows are the tool of covenant theology that the writer of Hebrews keeps hammering.  Rather than dwell for long in the Psalter, I just want to point out that the order of Melchizedek runs through the whole Old Testament.  It is the High Priesthood of that better Covenant that is made first with Abraham, and then finally by Christ, through Christ, for his elect, who are both natural and grafted in members of the Covenant family of Abraham. 

I want to start by enumerating a few interesting tidbits.  First, Melchizedek blesses Abraham; and by giving him a tithe, Abraham recognizes Melchizedek as the Great High Priest who intercedes for him with God.  Second, one chapter later, Abraham has no need of an intercessor, because God talks directly to him.  In a moment, we will examine why that is the case.  Third, Melchizedek is called the king of peace.  Fourth, Melchizedek is dropped into the story without antecedent or genealogy, and then seemingly disappears again.  The writer of Hebrews implies that he continues a priest forever.

See how great this man was to whom Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth of the spoils! And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man who does not have his descent from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.  (Hebrews 7:4-10 ESV)

This is a key point the writer of Hebrews is making.  Melchizedek is not of the same lineage as Levi.  It is very tempting to assume that Melchizedek is some sort of preincarnate, dropping into the story to set Abraham on the correct path.  But Salem was a real place, and it had a real king.  No true incarnate diety would take authority of a kingdom of man.  But as a type and shadow, this works very well.  Melchizedek blesses Abraham.  In the next chapter, Genesis 15:6, we are told that the basis of Abraham’s righteousness is his belief in the promise of God.  What purpose then is this passage of Genesis 14 in the overall narrative?  The writer of Hebrews tells us that by translation, Melchizedek is the king of righteousness.  We’ll have to take his word for that, of course.  So, in one man, we have king of righteousness, by name, and king of peace, by location in Salem.  First, Abraham receives blessing from this Great High Priest, Melchizedek, the king of righteousness and the king of peace, and then Abraham offers Melchizedek a tithe, recognizing him as greater than himself, and then God declares Abraham righteous based upon his faith in the promise and blesses Abraham.  Later in Genesis 22, Abraham will obediently offer his son as a sacrifice to God, but God refuses the sacrifice.  Remember, it will be Abraham’s Seed, Who in His incarnation is also a natural branch of Abraham, Who is indeed sacrificed to God. 

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.  (Hebrews 7:11-14 ESV)

While this whole line of argument seems obscure to us today, let’s break this down and try to view this from a redemptive historical picture.  We must start with the audience again.  The audience of Hebrews are predominantly Jewish Christians.  As such, they have spent their whole lives in the religious context of Moses and Aaron and Levi as priests.  Melchizedek not being of the family of Levi or Aaron is exactly the point.  Aaron and Levi are associated with the Law as given through Moses.  Melchizedek is not.  Jesus is not from that branch of the family. 

But there is a larger point and that is in the first phrase: Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek?  Indeed.  This is such an important question and we are so bogged down on who this Melchizedek guy is, we totally blow over this basic and fundamental question.  The writer of Hebrews just told us that we are ready to move onto advanced Christianity, so we should not need to dwell on the basics.  I agree with Paul on this point.  We never outgrow the basics, because fallen man, left to himself will always turn back to himself for answers.  So, the writer of Hebrews makes an assumption that we are meant to make as well.  Perfection is NOT attainable through the Law; otherwise, this argument doesn’t make any sense.  This is a huge point and cannot be overstated.  The answer to the writer’s question is obviously that there would be no need for Jesus as incarnate deity if perfection were possible under the Law.  This is the whole point of the Gospel.  This is what Jesus keeps pounding into the Pharisees.  This is what Paul finally understands.  This is the central point of the distinction between Law and Gospel.  The whole message of Hebrews hinges on this very point.  If we were capable of perfection through the Levitical priesthood, what further need would we have for Jesus?

This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. For it is witnessed of him,

            “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.”

For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.  (Hebrews 7:15-19 ESV)

This section, again, gives some to think of Melchizedek as some preincarnate.  Clearly, this passage refers to Jesus.  As such, it is obvious that He arises by the power of an indestructible life.  But does that phrase also refer to Melchizedek?  No.  The line of argument is about genealogy.  Just as Melchizedek was not of the same lineage as Abraham, neither is Jesus of the same lineage as Aaron or Levi.  The indestructible life of Jesus does allow Him to continue as priest forever.  But this is not the big point of this section either.

Focus on verses 18-19.  A former commandment is set aside.  What is set aside here?  The Levitical priesthood interceded based upon the Law and the Covenant of Moses; therefore, the Mosaic covenant is no longer in force.  It was not capable of making anything perfect.  The Law is only capable of teaching us about our sin.  That was the whole purpose of the Law.  Now, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.  Remember again the audience.  Only the Great High Priest dared to draw near to God under the Levitical system.  Now, with this new hope, this new covenant, this new Great High Priest of the order of Melchizedek, we can all draw near to God.  This is truly amazing stuff, and it puts a dagger into the notion of Temple worship and the Mosaic Covenant. 

And it was not without an oath. For those who formerly became priests were made such without an oath, but this one was made a priest with an oath by the one who said to him:

            “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever.’”

This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.  (Hebrews 7:20-22 ESV)

We have already seen that this quote is from Psalm 110.  What is this oath to which the Psalmist refers?  For just a moment, let us remember all of those Old Testament covenants that we discussed recently.  Three were Law Covenants: creation, Noah and Moses.  We know that Abraham is different.  The missing covenant is that with David.  Remember that David wrote many (roughly half) of the Psalter.  This one in particular is a Davidic Psalm, and it refers to the Davidic Covenant.  Let’s go, once again, to 2 Samuel 7:8-17 and read about the Davidic Covenant.  Two key points are at once obvious.  First, there are no blessings and curses.  This is a straight royal grant.  This covenant is of the same type as that with Abraham.  Second, we come to 2 Samuel 7:12.  When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom.  The assumption is that God is talking about Solomon.  It makes sense within a Jewish Old Testament manner of thinking.  Notice the number of the noun offspring.  We know from later in the sentence that this is one person.  The writer of Hebrews is directly applying this verse to mean Jesus.  It is the Kingdom of Heaven that will be established.  It is Jesus who will be the Son of God.  It is the throne of Jesus that will be established forever.  This promise was about Jesus.

So, logically, if the writer of Hebrews is pointing to both the Covenant with Abraham as well as the Covenant with David in distinction to the three law covenants, Jesus is certainly the guarantor of a better covenant.  Everything that Jesus mediates is a gift from God, not tied to a blessings and curses situation.  Those three covenants have to be reconciled, but that is why we needed Jesus to come.  He had to fulfill those covenants for us. 

The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.  (Hebrews 7:23-25 ESV)

This section is plainly straightforward to us today, in our Trinitarian view of Christ.  If we have some odd Arian type of theology, then this is more problematic.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are the archetype of this theology in our century.  But we need to be careful with so many of the liberal views that chip away at the Gospel and deity of Christ.  To these wolves, we must shout the charge of blasphemy. 

For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever.  (Hebrews 7:26-28 ESV)

We finish up chapter 7 with a brief discussion of the sacrifice of Jesus.  I say brief because the writer of Hebrews was brief.  I will not be nearly so succinct.  From the first line, why is it fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens?  The writer tells us.  There are two reasons and we are elaborating on the first.  He has no need to offer sacrifices for his own sins.  He doesn’t have any sin.  His sacrifice pays for our sin.  Because he was made perfect, he only had to do it once.  Goats and lambs and bulls and pigeons cannot cleanse us of our sins.  They can only cover up our sins.  This is the mercy seat language of the Old Testament.  His sacrifice is so much better.  It does more than just cover up.  It reconciles us through Christ, to God the Father, by the power of the Holy Spirit.  How is he made perfect?  This works on two levels.  He is God, so when He became incarnate, He was made perfect from the start.  But also, He is made perfect in a progressive sense by living a perfect, sinless life while incarnate under the curse of Adam.  This life creates the conditions of a perfect sacrifice.  He is wholly human and wholly God and completely sinless as such.  Perfection incarnate.  He does what no man under the Law is capable of doing.  He becomes that perfect sacrifice for us.

My friends, I am going to say this differently that what we heard last week.  It’s in the text so watch closely.  He did this once for all.  That statement cannot be more plain and yet it cannot be more overlooked and abused.  Those other priests must atone for their own sins daily (plus every year on the Day of Atonement,) because they are not perfect and the sacrifice that they offer is insufficient to the job.  Therefore, in response to this paragraph from the notes, my answers would be different.

What has the blood of Christ done for you? Where do you need His blood in your life? Often we most need the blood of Christ at those times we're victorious. Victorious times can actually be dangerous times, although **** spoke for all of us in saying he could use the challenge of victorious times right now.

The blood of Christ, for me, purchased redemption, cleansing my sin, reconciling me to God, allowing me to approach His throne boldly and with confidence on the Last Day, knowing that I am not to be judged by my own merits, but rather by the perfect righteousness of Christ that was imputed to me as a gift of Grace through the power of the Holy Spirit.  In my life, His blood has already freed me from the yoke of sin, so that my works are sanctified by that same Grace from the Holy Spirit.  Because I have the knowledge of the Gospel and what the Blood of Christ has already done for me, once and for all, I can live accordingly in gratitude and obedience to His will.  I am not ever going to be victorious in this life, in the way in which that question was asked.  My victorious time will come on the Last Day, at Judgment, when I will hear the words, “Well done, my good and faithful servant,” as if I had done something to earn them.  My victory in this life is the certain knowledge of that victory that was paid for me by Christ’s blood for that victory on my behalf on the Last Day.  And that, my friends, is plenty enough for me.

--Troll--

Hebrews introduction

Two topics leapt to mind on our opening day of Hebrews.  First, there was the example of God’s redemptive story that was played before us.  I discussed this with our fearless leader afterwards and would embellish upon it now.  Second, there is the issue of redemptive history and its conclusion in the Apocalypse.  Some system of eschatological organization should be agreed upon.  Otherwise, the discussion of eschatology in the New Testament can be easily diverted to various distractions.  Therefore, in this post we will tackle the former issue, and in the next post we will address the latter issue.

In Hebrews 1:1-4, several assumptions are made by the author.  He can make these assumptions because he is writing to a mature church, but one that probably consisted primarily of converted Jews.  The writer’s main theme as we move through the book will be one of endurance and perseverance in Christ.  Therefore, he will assume much of the Gospel is known.  These assumptions are manifest in these first four verses as we saw our leader flesh this out on Tuesday. 

These verses are the beginning of a lengthy argument concerning the person of Jesus.  Starting with verses 1-2, we have the declaration that there has been a change in the manner of God’s revelation of redemptive history.  There has been a sentinel event from which historical accounts will be measured.  History is divided between Long Ago and these Last Days (note to Mormons: Last Days, not latter days).  The implication is clear: these Last Days will lead up to a Second sentinel event about which we will converse in the next post.  Also, there is a declaration of who Jesus is, consistent with the first chapter of the Gospel of John.

The next two verses tell us more about Jesus; particularly that He is of the same nature as God, an exact imprint in fact.  Jesus upholds the universe by the word of His power.  This language is consistent with Isaiah as well as John, and it sets the stage for the whole book in which the writer will be making many references to the Old Testament with which he will assume that his readers are familiar.  But in this post, I want to spend time focusing on verse 3b.  In this short phrase, the writer summarizes all of Christ’s redeeming work on the Cross.  This is the assumed to be known reference to the Propitiation, Romans 3:25, given to us through the meritorious work of Jesus on the Cross.

In the example that we staged in the room, I would modify the drama in these ways in order to introduce the missing player.  In this passage of Hebrews, the focus is squarely upon Jesus.  In our Bible study drama, we added God the Father.  I would like to include the third person of the Trinity as well.  Let’s proceed with our drama, then.

Humanity was arrayed in a circle around God.  This is a good image with God in the center of our world and lives.  However, after the fall, we all turn our backs on God.  Picture everyone in the room spinning their chairs around and facing away from the center, away from God.  Now, we are all enemies of God.  If we make a move, it will be away from God.  From God’s perspective, all He sees now are dead people, doomed people.  The gap that sin has created between us and God is huge and we cannot bridge it, because we are facing away from God; we are His enemies.  Therefore, God does something remarkable.  While we were still enemies of God, He sends His Son to intervene.  His son takes the sin of the believers upon Himself, and places His coat of perfect righteousness upon His flock.  Next, He sends the Holy Spirit into the world.  The Holy Spirit goes and turns some of the chairs back around to face God.  Then, the Holy Spirit points the way to Jesus, who bridges the gap to God.  All whom the Holy Spirit turned will receive a white robe of righteousness from Jesus that will cover them so that God sees us through the perfect righteousness of Jesus.  God is now pleased with us, and He grants us the inheritance in Jesus. 

All three Imputations are represented in this drama.  The imputation of sin upon all of us by Adam turned all of us away from God.  The imputation of the sin of the believer is taken back by Jesus.  Finally, the imputation of righteousness from Jesus to the believer is also portrayed.  All three persons of the Trinity are portrayed.  Jesus is now next to God, and the Holy Spirit moves the elect to face the creator.  All persons of the Trinity are of the same substance, “the exact imprint of His nature.” Jesus is also fully human, so that He can be that bridge for the believer back to God.

And finally, as I said during Bible study, all of the verb tenses in the first paragraph are perfect tense.  All of the action is complete.  The only exception is verse 3a, which is the declaration of the Divinity of Christ that I just quoted.  That declaration is an eternal truth rather than an action.  The events that justify the believer, to which the writer refers in verse 3b, are all completed actions.  Again, this dovetails with John 19:30, in which Jesus says, “It is finished.”

This concludes the discussion of the dramatic demonstration.  In verse 4, the writer will launch into his first example of Jesus being much more than something else, in the first case, angels.  In my next post, we will discuss various views of the whole study of redemptive history, eschatology.

--Troll--

Does God Love the Sinner, but hate the Sin?

Usually, Troll doesn’t just plow into a topic that falls into the area of Ogre, but today will be different.  Two of my dear friends, in the same week, used the old saw “God loves the sinner, but hates the sin.” In both instances, I stated that I did not agree, but in neither case was the circumstance appropriate to elaborate.  Since this perspective is so pervasive in the US, I thought it needed a good discussion.

The statement above implies a couple of things.  First, it implies that deep down inside, man is basically good.  Secondly, it implies that even if the sin of Adam was federally imputed to all of mankind, the role of the Atonement becomes a clearing of the slate.  This further implies that the standard of God can be less than perfection, because Jesus gives the gift that keeps on giving, unless you are Roman Catholic, in which case you’ve got some work to do in Purgatory.  Both of these examples are works theologies, and typical of the liberal perspective.  Let us look at this statement from a theology of Grace instead of a theology of Works.

Is man basically good?  I’ve addressed this issue many times in the past, but here are just a few passages that speak to the issue.  Jeremiah 17:9, Psalms 5:9, 14:1-3, Isaiah 6:5, 59:7-8, Ecclesiastes7:20, and of course Romans 3:9-12.  We have a problem of sin.  Notice how Paul describes the condition of sin in Romans 5:12-21.  He is contrasting the imputation of sin by Adam on the whole human race to the imputation of perfect righteousness by Christ to the elect through the gift of faith from the Holy Spirit.  The problem here is that we are born sinners and we will die sinners.  We require an alien righteousness, a righteousness that is outside of ourselves, a righteousness that we can obtain from someone else, to satisfy the Justice and Glory of God.  And here is the rub: without this alien righteousness, our own deeds, our own works, condemn us to hell. 

Therefore, can we truly say that God loves the sinner?  Perhaps, if we argue that while we were still enemies of God, He provides us with this perfect righteousness, then we can say that God loves us anyway.  But here is the problem with that line of reasoning.  God doesn’t save everyone.  There is an elect remnant, Romans 9, that God has held back for Himself from before time.  For these, He loves us and gives us the free gift through Grace of faith in the meritorious work of Christ on the Cross.  So, does God love us due to any particular virtue of our own?  Of course not.  He loves us because of the imputed righteousness of Christ that is added to our account.  Without this imputed righteousness, He truly does not love us, but instead, we suffer His Just Wrath.

What if we come to the problem from an Arminian, Semi-Pelagian or Roman Catholic perspective of the Atonement?  What does this mean?  The work of Christ on the Cross was sufficient for all people to wipe our slates clean, in these systems.  Our free will, being thus cleansed of sin, is now capable of following the commandments.  Our salvation is based upon our efforts and works during this life.  If we make an effort, God will forgive the rest in the first two cases, or give us a time in Purgatory in the third case.  Now, I’d like for a moment to discuss how this violates the Holiness of God.  We are saying here that God will accept sinful people into heaven.  Check out Matthew 5:48.  The standard is perfection.  No joke.  Perfection.  Dwell on that bad news for a minute.  Do we really expect that God’s love implies that He will simply overlook our sin?

God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that all who believe in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.  John 3:16.  We all know this verse, but we seem to turn off our brains when reading it and add some stuff that just isn’t there to the equation.  God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that all who believed in Him and followed the commandments and took one step towards Him and prayed the prayer at the altar call and voted Republican would not perish, but have everlasting life.  Hmmm.  All that stuff is not actually in there, (except the bit about voting Republican.  It’s in the Grand Old Pachyderm Revised Standard Version (GOPRSV).)  As C.S.Lewis put it in the Screwtape Letters, just get them to add something to the Gospel, add anything to the Gospel, and then it’s no longer the gospel.  What this verse does say is that the work of Jesus on the Cross is 100% efficacious for all believers.  This means that salvation is based upon faith alone.  Certainly, I could have selected many other passages, particularly in the Pauline epistles, that are more explicit on this subject, but this is from John, and it is very well known.

Finally, God hates sin.  God abhors sin.  Any who sin, or are born in the condition of sin in Adam, in other words everyone, is condemned to hell.  God went about a rescue mission for an elect remnant of native vines and wild vines (Jews and Gentiles) in which He not only provides a perfect sacrifice that turns away God’s wrath, but also reconciles us to God through Christ Jesus’ blood.  Our sin, the sin of all believers, before we were born, was imputed to Christ.  His righteousness was imputed to all believers, and this righteousness is credited to our account on the Last Day.  Therefore, He lived the Life we could not live.  He died the death we could not die as a perfect sacrifice.  He arose from death and ascended into Heaven, becoming the firstborn from the dead.  On the Last Day, He will raise all of us and clothe His elect in His own righteousness, so that we may walk boldly in Judgment, confident in a perfect righteousness that isn’t our own.  God gets to see us through this perfect righteousness and His Holiness and Justice remains intact.  God, in this way, is not diminished by our sin.  We are accepted immediately and completely, full inheritors of His Kingdom.

Why did God go through all of this for us?  I’m sure He’ll tell us all someday.  Until that Day, the Last Day, we must trust in the scripture and believe.  Our reaction to this gift of faith and mercy is obedience and humility.  We will sin again and again as long as our bodies are IN Adam (until we die), and though it drives us nuts and upsets us that we cannot be the perfect man that Christ was, we persevere in the certain hope that our Salvation is secured in Christ.

That, my friends is why I do not agree with the opening proposition.  The theology of works is not my claim to salvation.  I’ll take grace, thank you.  Don’t give me what I deserve.  I’ll simply accept that free gift that the Holy Spirit has given me.  As bad is the bad news really is, the Good News is much better than you can possibly imagine.

--Troll--

Gospel Quiz Comments

1. All people are basically good, but there might be a few exceptions.
2. All good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell.
3. The most important teaching of the Bible is to live your life as an example to others.
4. Jesus summarizes the gospel as Love God and Love your neighbor.
5. God understands that we are not perfect, but he just wants us to do our best.  He will do the rest.
6. God helps those who help themselves.
7. The blood of Jesus gives me healing and blessings.
8. The Holy Spirit gives me healing and blessings.
9. You must make a decision to follow Christ to be saved.
10. Jesus saves us from ourselves and our sins.
11. If you make Jesus your savior, you become a carnal Christian.  You can then obtain one of the spiritual gifts and receive your full inheritance, jewels in your crown.
12. Free will is a gift of God.  We must factor in our free will when discussing salvation.

These questions have been asked in many ways over the years and the answers have been changing, usually in a cycle from orthodoxy to liberal drift to reformation to liberal drift.  I have heard 12 yes’s or agrees on these questions recently.  Most people seem to be splitting the difference and averaging about a 6.  Now, I will tell you my own score.  Zero.  Nada.  Zilch.  And now, I will go through each of these and explain why I do not agree.

(1)  According to the Bible, all people are evil, corrupted by sin.  In this present evil age, only two people have entered this world uncorrupted by sin, Adam and Jesus, and only one successfully exited this world without sin.  The condition of sin was not understood by the Pharisees, nor the whole Jewish nation with the exception of the remnant elect, all through the Old Testament.  This is what the prophets kept complaining about.  Remember how Ezekiel laments that he is the last person who believes in the promise of a messiah and God tells him, no, there are 7000 others that He has held back for Himself.  Read Romans 3:1-20 from a good word-for-word translation; ESV, NKJV, NASV all do justice to the passage.  All men are under the law.  All men have evil hearts.  All men will be convicted of sin on the last day if left to the works of Law.

(2)  Christ came into the world, lived, died and was resurrected to save sinners.  He did not come here to save the righteous (or self righteous, as none is truly righteous,) for the righteous do not need saving.  Based upon the answer to comment 1, no one is righteous, no one is good, and no one is going to heaven by the works of Law.  So, actually, since my heart is evil, and I believe that I AM going to heaven, evil people WILL go to heaven.  Of course, there is far more to this than God overlooking my sin.  Of course, He will never overlook my sin.  That would violate His Holiness and Infinite Righteousness.  There has to be another way.  Luckily for us, there is.

(3)  Most nominal Christians, you would think, would recognize the folly in this statement.  Alas, this is not the case.  So many people believe that their best testimony is to live pious lives as an example to the world.  Hello, people!  I’m not putting my life up against the average Mormon, and they are not Christian.  Change that to Hindu if you like, and the answer is the same.  Piety and righteousness before men is not an exclusive province of Christianity.  If you put all of your marbles on your righteousness before men, you will be judged based upon your own righteousness.  Before God, as we are developing in these questions, your own righteousness is, well….  Paul says that his own righteousness that he thought he had was dung.  Surely, there is more to the message of the Bible than living piously before man.  Maybe the real story in the Bible is His rescue of His people for eternity.

(4)  Jesus summarizes the Law as Love God and Love your neighbor.  Love is a verb in this sentence and it is in the imperative tense.  Imperative means command.  Command means Law.  This is not the Gospel.  Jesus was trying to explain to the Jews that their righteousness that they claimed under the law was woefully insufficient.  He takes the Law and raises it to the fourth power.  Sure, I can avoid murdering my neighbor and stealing his wife and his boat.  But can I avoid thinking bad thoughts about him?  Paul says that his heart and mind sin before his body ever gets around to it.  No, this summary is not the Gospel; this summary is the Law.  Jesus came to fulfill the Law because we can’t.

(5)  God does understand that we are not perfect, and frankly, He’s not very happy about it.  In fact, He banished us from Eden and convicted us all to death.  He doesn’t just want us to do our best; He expects us to be perfect!  Since we can’t be perfect, in fact, there is absolutely nothing that we can contribute at all to our own salvation, God, in His infinite Mercy, sent His Son into the world to save us all, all of those to whom He would give the free gift of Grace and Belief.

(6)  Amazingly, most people these days think this is a Bible verse.  It is, of course, from Benjamin Franklin.  God judges those who help themselves; He judges them under the Law.  The verdict is guilty, and the penalty is eternal separation from our God.

(7) (8)  These two are the same.  The blood of Jesus is not some magic talisman, nor is the Holy Spirit a cosmic butler.  The blood of Jesus is not an object to be wielded.  Jesus’ Blood was spilled in sacrifice of atonement to propitiate believers to God.  When we speak of the Blood of Jesus, we need to keep in mind why it HAD to be spilled, for whom it was spilled, and what it purchased for us.  The Blood of Jesus is a shorthand for the reconciliatory and atoning work of Jesus on the Cross; nothing more and nothing less.  The Holy Spirit came into the world to give the gift of faith to His people.  He testifies about Jesus; nothing more and nothing less.  Without the work of the Holy Spirit, we are all lost.

(9)  This one will get a resounding yes from most Americans, unfortunately.  If you follow the logical arguments above, there is no possibility of agreeing with this proposition.  The only decision of which I am capable on my own is to deny the Truth of Scripture and to choose that which I perceive is the best available option.  The problem is that my perception is tainted by sin, thus I cannot ever choose God.  The Holy Spirit is the solution of God to this problem.  The Holy Spirit is sent to testify about the Truth of the work of Jesus, in His life, death and resurrection, and to give the gift of faith to those whom He would choose.  The Pelagian heresy is anathamized even by Rome.

(10)  It is amazing to me that people don’t get this one right.  Sin is the problem, the consequence of sin is the Wrath of an Angry God.  The Wrath of God for sin is the main issue.  We have gravely offended the Holy, Almighty and Just God.  Justice will be served.  We are saved FROM the Wrath of God.

(11)  This is the standard Pentecostal formula.  They assert that there are two levels of believer: the carnal Christian verbalizes belief while the fully vested Christian manifests some “spiritual gift” and conforms to some man imposed ethical standard.  The brute damage that this theology does to the Gospel, to the Crucifixion of Christ, is beyond all limits.  This is truly that “other gospel” to which Paul associated the super apostles in Corinth.  As C.S. Lewis says in the Screwtape Letters, just get them to believe the Gospel and….  And anything, it doesn’t matter.  Just add anything on to the Gospel and it is no longer the Gospel.

(12)  Free will is of man.  Free will is nothing more than our mind choosing between the best options available as we perceive things.   The gospel is alien to us, outside of us.  We cannot perceive the Gospel without the gift of Grace from the Holy Spirit.  We are free to choose whatever we like from the options available to us.  But as Paul says in Romans 3:1-20, we are completely incapable of choosing God; we don’t want to choose God; we would not have made a different choice than Adam.  Free will does not help us in the least with our salvation.

I’m sure I’ve been treading on some toes with heavy steel tipped work boots.  I might respond to comments on this thread, or I might respond by email, depending on the tone of the comment and my view of the comment as a teaching point.  I have presented the reformed position.  If you are not Roman Catholic, this is your Christian heritage.  Why are you giving back the farm?  There was a time when Protestants held these positions, believed these Biblical doctrines.  This alien righteousness that Christ provides to His flock by the free gift of faith in Him through the power of the Holy Spirit is the thesis of the Bible.  This is the purpose of that rescue mission.  This is the Gospel.

--Troll--

Gospel Quiz

Answer the following 12 questions yes or no, agree or disagree.  Total up all of your yes or agree answers and we will discuss the answers in the next post.

1. All people are basically good, but there might be a few exceptions.
2. All good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell.
3. The most important teaching of the Bible is to live your life as an example to others.
4. Jesus summarizes the gospel as Love God and Love your neighbor.
5. God understands that we are not perfect, but he just wants us to do our best.  He will do the rest.
6. God helps those who help themselves.
7. The blood of Jesus gives me healing and blessings.
8. The Holy Spirit gives me healing and blessings.
9. You must make a decision to follow Christ to be saved.
10. Jesus saves us from ourselves and our sins.
11. If you make Jesus your savior, you become a carnal Christian.  You can then obtain one of the spiritual gifts and receive your full inheritance, jewels in your crown.
12. Free will is a gift of God.  We must factor in our free will when discussing salvation.

Write down your total and, if you like, post the number here or on the Facebook starting link.  We’ll talk about it on Monday.

--Troll--

Progressive Revelation: Connecting the dots, part 2

In part 2, we will discuss the nuts and bolts of how we are able to receive this righteousness that is apart from works, based on faith alone, so that none can boast (Romans 3:21-31.) I have laid a pile of doctrine upon my friends in the past few days, and this will be similar and connected to much of what has gone before.  The key passage for this discussion is about this righteousness that we will require in order to pass through judgment on the Last Day with the Not Guilty verdict.  This righteousness is alien, external, independent of our merits.  Let’s see how Paul puts this together for us.

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

Before we dive in deeply, I want to address a structural element.  At the end of verse 21, you will notice a dash.  What is going on here is that Paul, in mid-sentence is making an aside.  That thought is being clarified and will be resumed in verse 27.  This is why there is a dangling phrase.  This aside, of course is the key to the Gospel, so we are grateful that Paul makes it.  But because of this, I’m going to skip to verses 22-26, then I’ll come back to verses 21, 27-31.

The Law and the Prophets bear witness to it: the righteousness of God, which has been manifested apart from the Law, through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.  The Old Testament bears witness to this revelation!  The progressive revelation through the Covenants, the Law and Prophets finally bear witness to this righteousness that is apart from the Law.  Look at that again.  The Law bears witness to the righteousness of God apart from the Law.  How does it do that?  Paul answers for us: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.  What he means in there being no distinction refers to between Jews and Gentiles.  Both groups are equally condemned under the Law.

Now, Paul tells us how we can have access to this righteousness that we need.  We are justified by our faith that is a gift from God through the redemption that is in Jesus.  We are going to come back to verse 21 later, but bookmark this thought now.  Our faith is a gift.  Now, Paul is going to tell us about that faith.  We believe in our justification through the redemption that is in Jesus, who God put forth as a propitiation by His Blood, to be received by faith.  The theological density of this passage is approaching a singularity (physics reference.)  God puts forth Jesus to us as a propitiation.  Propitiation is a word I’ve defined in the past, but basically, there are two parts to it.  Jesus’ Blood turns away the Wrath of God by cleansing us of our sin and clothing us in His righteousness.  But also, Jesus’ Blood reconciles us to a right, or just, relationship with God.  This restores us to our inheritance.  Can you think of a parable that talks about this issue?  Again, Paul reminds us that this gift is received by faith.  This is a large point that he is about to expand even more.

Why does God do all of this?  Here is Paul’s answer.  This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.  Paul says that God is both just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.  Basically, God gives us the Law to show us that we are not worthy.  Once we understand that point, He turns around and gives us the justification the we need so that He can remain just.  All people are going to face judgment on the Last Day.  God will be just.  We will be judged based upon our merits.  The point of this whole passage is that God has provided a righteousness apart from our merits for those to whom He gives the gift of faith.

Am I applying these doctrines to the text, or is plain reading of the text providing these doctrines?  If this doesn’t just scream election and predestination to you, just wait until you read Romans 9.  Paul is laying it down, explaining the doctrine to all who will listen and receive the Gospel.

Back to verse 21, 27-31.  Allow me to group them together for you without the aside.  So what does become of our boasting?  Who might boast?  Jews might boast because they are Jewish.  Gentiles might boast because they have been given the gift of faith.  Paul says that boasting is excluded by the law of faith.  What?  For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.  Oh, I see.  If faith is a gift apart from merit, who then may boast?  No one may boast.  God justifies the circumcised (Jews) by faith and He also justifies the uncircumcised (Gentiles) by faith.  Same mechanism.  No boasting allowed.

I left verse 31 in here to link to future posts.  Don’t let it bog you down for now.  Paul is going to talk about the benefits of the Law in later chapters of Romans.  Instead, let’s move on to Romans 4.  Paul spiritualizes the Covenant of Abraham in two very important ways.  First, he links the inheritance of Abraham to Jesus.  Second, he links the beneficiaries to all who believe in Jesus like Abraham believed in the promise.  The people of God are from both Jews and Gentiles, but not all of either group, and the Holy Land becomes the whole world.  Please reread this chapter again and again.  The Romans Road approach to this book is to omit all of chapters 4, 7 and 9.  Therefore, many of us haven’t read this or even realize that it is there.  The Romans Road carefully omits verses 3:21-22.  I would put this forward to you: the canon is the canon.  We have to deal with all of it.  If there are passages that we cannot understand, then we have work to do.  The Canon is not the problem; we are the problem.

And finally, we come to Romans 5.  I have said much about the first five verses elsewhere, so let’s move on.  For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.  Christ died for the ungodly.  Really, now, why would He bother to save the righteous?  The righteous have no need of salvation through Christ’s blood.  The rest of that paragraph is fantastic reading.  While we were still sinners, He died for us.  While we were enemies of God….  I will leave you to the rest of chapter 5.  Paul really does speak more eloquently than I concerning these issues.

In closing of this section of posts, I will leave you Romans 5:11.  More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.  You will know by now to check the context, specifically, to find out what Paul means by “more than that.”

--Troll--