NT Studies: Course 1 - Introduction

NT Studies

Course 1 - Introduction

Context, Context, Context

      While reading through Carson and Moo's Introduction to the New Testament, I became freshly aware of the significance of placing ourselves into context. We are frequently reminded to always read a text in its context in order to prevent reading it as a proof text. After all, the NT was written some 2000 years ago and consequently is "contextualized" in a period most of us are not even faintly familiar with. In addition to the cultural and historical dimension, we must consider its literary context (how does this particular passage fit into the larger flow of the book?) and theological context (at what point in redemptive-history does this take place?), to name a few. Without reference to this, we have little hope of arriving at a faithful interpretation of the original meaning.

      Yet, how often do we begin with placing ourselves into such contexts? Surely we do not imagine that we are the first Christians to study the Scriptures. We are the "product" of centuries of faithful Christians who have sought to understand the Word of God. Our approach to the text is a byproduct, whether directly or indirectly, of the development of Biblical Hermeneutics. While we have come a long way since the schools at Antioch and Alexandria, our context is inexorably tied to theirs. We have a historical ancestry that encompasses the theological terminology we use, the limiting framework of possibilities of a text and our view of Scripture itself. I am not stating that our theology is merely historical or evolutionary. The Reformation is testimony enough that at various points in the history of the Church, God's people have sought to go back to the source for its life and doctrine. Yet, even in doing this, the theological and political tensions of the day, along with any philosophical trends, will, in part, affect the result. We should not be ignorant of this history, for it is part of our historical context.

      Therefore, just as it would be the height of folly to read any text of Scripture without placing it into its various contextual spheres, so also we must "check our baggage" so as not to proceed into study with a misconception of our own historical context.

      

New Testament Studies: Course 1 Resources

NT Course 1 Resources

     Today marks the beginning of my New Testament studies. In the similitude of my OT approach, I have chosen books that give a balanced overview of historical, theological and literary approaches.

An Introduction to the New Testament by D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo

New Testament Introduction: Revised Edition by Donald Guthrie

Jesus and the Gospels by Craig L. Blomberg

The Greco-Roman World by Jeffers

Backgrounds of Early Christianity by Everett Ferguson

OT Studies: Course 1 - Introduction

OT Studies

Course 1

Introduction

     The definition of exactly what constitutes history, especially as it pertains to Israel's own as found in the Scriptures, has gone through a paradigm shift over the past few centuries. No longer regarded as essentially objective or trustworthy, many modern scholars have concluded that history is so fret with subjectivity on account of those testifying to it, so hopelessly restricted by ideologies, that a reconstruction of the actual events is nigh impossible. Since the only access we have to historical events is from the testimony of either primary or secondary sources, the actual testimony given will be elitist and insufficient. Men can only perceive events from a single vantage point and even that perspective is conditioned by certain presuppositions. In other words, history (as we have access to it) is dead. The only thing which lives is the biased, conditioned testimony of men who are unable to see the actual events objectively. 

     ...Or so goes the argumentation from many modern historians. As Christians, however, who presuppose a personal, triune God who has actually spoken in history to mankind, we must summarily reject this position. Not only is history knowable, but it is precisely in the framework of a Christian worldview that history is given purpose and validity. The irony of this fallacious view of history is that the ones promoting it are themselves subject to various ideologies and presuppositions which necessarily bias and "compromise" their perspective. It is not the fact of an all-encompassing worldview that is the problem, but the foolishness of any and all non-Christian ones.

       For instance, Whitelam, a main proponent of this view, creates such an objective, non-human set of standards by which history must be subjected to that neither he nor any man has, by his own definition, known history. For the most part, history is merely a collection of recollections and accounts of men to either their own or other's experiences. Their testimony is the basis for our understanding of history. How would we know anything about Caesar Augustus apart from those who wrote about him? Some may object and declare, "Aha! We have archaeological evidence of him on coins, monuments and statues." Fair enough, but let me ask you this: what do these tell you in and of themselves? Do coins speak? Do statutes tell you when and why they were created? If not, the only way to make sense of these finds is to fit them into a pre-existing framework of historical events - and that as only known from testimony. Indeed, archaeology would be utterly useless if it were not for the testimony of those living at the time. We would merely have a collection of neat things to look at yet be unable to make any coherent story from them. It is this failure to recognize the necessity of testimony for the discipline of history that undermines the entire modern thesis.

       But how does Christianity make sense of history? How are we to understand it? If history is simply a recollection of men and women, who are we to trust? Don't men and women lie? Don't people commit perjury all of the time? If only there was a source of knowledge and wisdom that was without error and truthful in all its statements! Thanks be to God that there is! Unlike the secular humanist historians, the Christian not only accepts the validity of testimony but has complete faith in it on account of the one testifying: the Lord Jesus Christ. God has spoken to man throughout history and swears by His own name that it is true. For the Christian, the testimony of God is the beginning and end of all proper understanding of past, and even future events. Yes, historical accounts are a result of subjective, limited and biased human beings who, in many cases, are writing in order to make a particular point. Yet, because this testimony is that of God Himself, working through men, the biased, limited and subjective account is invariably accurate and true. While it is never absolute, it is absolutely true. Therefore, history is justified as a discipline and should by no means be discarded as a hopeless endeavor, for by it God has revealed Himself to men and continues to make known His glorious name.

Old Testament Studies Resources

OT Studies

Course 1

Resources

     This week I began my Old Testament Studies course (self-study), beginning with an introduction. (Most fitting, I think.) I have selected the following books to assist me in my study of the Old Testament, both in its content, historical context and theology.

   Historical

   A Biblical History of Israel       

Author: Iain W. Provan, V. Philips Long, Tremper Longman, Philips V. Long

   Theological

From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch
Author: T. D. Alexander

Theological Interpretation of the Old Testament: A Book-by-Book Survey
Author: Kevin Vanhoozer

Biblical Theology
Author: Geerhardus Vos

  Introduction/Content

   An Introduction to the Old Testament: Second Edition

Author: Tremper Longman III, Raymond B. Dillard

Dear Theologian

Dear Theologian,

        This path of study has been both a joyous and difficult one, has it not? I have watched you from the beginning and followed you until this day. Do you remember your first longings? That moment when you realized the valley of knowledge you had known was but a mere spec upon the landscape of the foundation of the Word? Having come to a knowledge of your ignorance and beholding the mountains from afar, you pursued the Lord with passion and sought only to know Him, both in mind and heart. You devoured books and yet never seemed to be full. The knowledge you gained did not puff up but humbled and refined. Every hill and meadow was glorious; every tree bearing fruit.

         Then you awoke to a new awareness: you couldn't do this alone. So you sought the counsel of others and joined the halls of University. Now you stood among giants and were expected to stand as they. Reading became more difficult. Studying more tiring. The books stacked higher and the writing grew longer, but you loved it still. This thirst for knowledge still drove you and the challenges only baited you. The brethren at your local church began to grow strangely dimmer. Surely you still loved them, but they didn't seem to love the Lord as much as you did. For if they had, they would know about Him the way you know Him. They would mine the Scriptures with every exegetical tool and systematize it into a coherent set of doctrines. Even your pastors, who you once looked up to and admired for their knowledge of the Lord, began to seem........rather ordinary. Sure, they could preach better than you, but if they would only get the terminology right. If they would only exposit within a redemptive-historical framework and rightly understand the importance of the original languages. The teaching wasn't as deep nor the preaching as profound. It just all seemed.......dimmer. If they could only see what you could see. If they could only know what you knew.

          Then you discovered your greatest passion: debate. Oh, how powerful was the Word to tear down every opposing worldview and expose the folly of unbelief! Everyone around you seemed completely blinded by the incoherent, inconsistent and unjustifiable argumentation they were employing. Especially your fellow church members. Didn't they realize the books and sermons they were learning from were nothing but drivel? I mean, what kind of book on studying the Bible doesn't address the problem of language in conveying truth or the intricate network of presuppostions and preunderstandings that the reader brings to the text? It was your job to point out these intellectual sins and lead others onto a more straight and narrow way. Surely God would not give you this knowledge for any other purpose.

           Your library expanded with volumes on every conceivable topic. You had a book on how to read a book and how to be able to even justify reading a book. You had 6 systematic theologies, 4 works on the Doctrine of God and who knows how many introductions to the Old and New Testaments. Ahh, the smell. The look and feel of that new theological book. Your knowledge was growing and your thirst still strong.

           Where is your heart, O great one? What happened to your original quest for knowing God and making Him known? No, it was not the books that lead you astray. No, it was not the seminary nor the professors. No, you were right in your critique of many problems in the church and the laziness of so many around you. But you forgot one very important thing: you were as they before I opened your eyes. You were contentedly grazing in that small valley without the faintest idea of the world beyond. You did not know the names of Barth, Schleiermacher, Bultmann or Owen. The complexities of language and the history of the doctrine of the Trinity did not yet take up space on the shelves of your mind. No, these things did not drive you from me. Your heart did. What was once an earnest and innocent desire became an idol and a thing of reproach. Love lost its root in you and grew dim as knowledge grew strong. People became objects of study and critique rather than fellow redeemed sinners. The arguments in the halls of history became more important than the bitterness and pride festering in your own heart. You lost your first longing. The Word which was to master you became a thing to be mastered.

          Remember from where you have fallen. Remember the end for which you toiled. For without love, your theology has become barren. What should have merely been the means to stimulate religious affections and your love for the Lord became the end in itself. Remember from where you have fallen.

Sincerely,
   Wisdom

    

Systematic Theology Course 1: Prolegomena continued

         Having read the introductions to several Systematic theologies, I began perusing through Monergism's website for articles on the task of theology. To my utter surprise, I came away challenged and encouraged by one particular article.........by a Mennonite scholar. Yes, a Mennonite scholar. While I certainly do not agree or endorse all of his positions, John Yoder had some very compelling things to say when it comes to the task of doing theology. The following are my reflections upon this article. It will be quite scattered in thought but hopefully be comprehensible.

      Yoder on The Use of the Bible in Theology 
     See article here

      Unlike every other introduction to theology I have read, this begins with the issue of the end of theology as it functions in the covenant community. Boy, was this a stab in the heart. Here I have been bemoaning the cultural sins of occidental society with its emphasis upon the individual rather than the community, the "I and me" vs. the "We and us." (this will be the topic of a future posting, Lord willing), and yet I completely failed to see it in my own approach to theology. What hypocrisy! Thanks be to God for opening my eyes to this blindness. Yoder goes on to state that theology is the job of the Church, not the academy. This is not to say that theology should be banned from the University nor that people are forbidden from studying the Scriptures on their own. Instead, I believe the notion of doing theology in the covenant community is an emphasis of seeing oneself in a larger group. We are not isolated individuals each charged with our own separate work to conduct, including that of theology. No, we have been called into the community of faith, the church. We are tasked with ministering to one another and fulfilling our duty contingent upon our various spiritual giftings. One particular application of this principle I find most lacking is seeing the 21st century church as the fruit of the diligent labor of our brethren of old. We are not a "new" church. We stand upon the shoulders of those who have come before us. As such, when we attempt to do theology, really digging into the Scriptures to see what the Lord would have us to, we must be cognizant of the fact that our work is merely a continuation of that which has come before. We are not starting from scratch, nay, we dare not do so if we take seriously the Lord's promise to build His church.

      This community emphasis is also seen in the function of theology. At its heart, it has a catechetical end. Theology is not for the scholar, the professor or the intellectual. The truth of the Scriptures is for the believer, in order to sanctify him, mature him and bring him up into the likeness of Christ. The Scriptures were written for the people of God, both in bringing them to salvation and working that newfound salvation out. It also serves to expose and correct our cultural sins. We are so easily blinded by the sins of our society that sound theology becomes a necessity for biblical thinking. One example is our tendency to read all things as essentially speaking to the individual, not the community. When Paul speaks of our bodies as the temple of the Holy Spirit, our first thought is that he is talking about my body. Rather than seeing the communal and covenantal work of the Spirit, we reduce it to I and me. Furthermore, it is not only the "what" (the facts) but the "how" (application) that is crucial. Theology should be used as a means of correcting our false assumptions, poor hermeneutics and myopic applications. Within the church body, it serves as a rod to both guide and discipline us. Even the function of the teacher is not to invent something new nor proclaim some hidden wisdom that has been discovered in the Scriptures. No, he is to be the expositor, corrector and guardian of the one-for all faith delivered to the saints. Newness should be the last goal of the pastor/teacher. Faithfulness and protection should be paramount.

      Yoder brings up a very interesting issue of whether the church is to be viewed simply as "maintenance" or rather as "mission." Obviously these two cannot be put into contradistinction but must be seen as juxtaposed. The church should never be reduced to the idea that it is merely trying to "stay alive" in a dark world. However, we must also avoid the idea that the sole purpose is missionary work so that the daily feeding and discipling of the flock is relegated to the basement. I would like to further explore this subject at a later time once I have given it more thought.

     Finally, the issue of hermeneutics is discussed towards the end of the article. One insightful premise is that our methodology of theology should be derived from its source and rule: the Scriptures. Rather than imposing our own alien grid onto the Scriptures so as to draw out its treasures, we must seek to humbly submit to its own framework and system. How do the apostles "do theology"? How did Christ approach the Scriptures? How does the NT interpret and utilize the OT? etc. These must be our concerns in order to be faithful to the Scriptures themselves. We must also take the presentation of Scripture seriously. Has God revealed Himself through lists of topics or treatises? No, He chose to do so through history and speech. Most of the OT is comprised of narrative and even where it is not, the psalms and wisdom literature find their meaning within the context of history. This redemptive-historical context must be taken seriously and thought through. How does this affect our view of Systematic theology? Is it proper to teach propositional truth without reference to its historical context? One strong example of the misuse of the latter position is the presentation of the gospel. Without situating both the person and work of Christ and the people to whom we are speaking in a historical framework, the gospel loses its power. While there are many true propositions bound up in the gospel (the death of Christ accomplishing forgiveness of sin, his resurrection justifying His own work and the means of ours), they become vapid and almost silly without reference to their historical, objective foundation. While the gospel is timeless in its power and efficacy, it is time-bound in its origins and accomplishment.

Systematic Theology Course 1: Prolegomena

 

      As I press on in this new studying schedule, I will be taking the time to write up short summaries of my studies. Some of these may be very quickly written whereas others may be of a more academic nature; it all depends on the time I have and the insight gleamed. This is the first of this series.

      The Task of Theology

      What is the nature of Systematic theology? First, it must be constructive. The teaching of the Scriptures, both explicitly and implicitly in view of its parts and as a whole, must serve as the unchanging basis for all doctrine and teaching. (sola scriptura). It is not only the rule of all faith and practice, but the rule of all theology and biblical scholarship! The academy does not enjoy a neutral position of hyper-critical authority whereby it can stand over the Scriptures in scrutiny. All theology must be approached as a means of worship and duty. Any system of belief that does not have its foundation in the revealed Word of God alone is not true theology; it is merely the mental ruminations of men placing their own so-called wisdom above that of the Omniscient God. Second, the task of Systematic theology must be demonstrative (confessional). Once constructed, the aim is to demonstrate through sound exegesis and instruction, that these cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith are indeed firmly rooted in the soil of God's word. However, if one finds that some previously held doctrine does not derive from sound exegesis and hermeneutics but rather fallible tradition, it must be abandoned and replaced with the truth. This is simply an outworking of the reformed cry, sempre reformanda. Finally, theology must be critical. No, I have not contradicted myself in my previous dismissal of the hyper-critical schools of Academia. Rather, the good and necessary criticism that flows from good theology has the duty of exposing and tearing down every worldview and false belief that does not find its root in the Scriptures. These must be analyzed and exposed for the folly that they are. We must always begin with ourselves and then move towards the world around us. (Consider the ramifications of this in Christ's teaching about the plank in your eye vs. the speck in your brothers. Unless we first deal with our own sins, especially our intellectual ones, we will not be able to see clearly to critique others'.) It is this work of construction, confession and critique that Systematic theology has as its aim. 

     Note: This is certainly not the only task of Systematic theology, but it is the one which is chiefly neglected and so essential in our era of radical postmodernism. 

New Course of Study

     As of this week, I am embarking upon a more robust and detailed study of the Scriptures and Theology. Over the past several weeks I have found myself whittling away the time in profitless activities that have neither fruit for me or for others. (Yes, this includes Facebook - how many times can you really check people's status' a day? It is very pathetic.... - technology news, chatting and other stupid things.) Therefore, in order to redeem both my resources and time, I am setting a strict schedule for my studies. The fact that this happens to coincide with the first of the year is entirely coincidental, I assure you. I do not make New Year's resolutions. ;)

      One of my weaknesses is beginning a project only to never finish it. I envision a grande plan for learning all of the Scriptures only to find myself biting off more than I can chew......or swallow.....or even look at. I fear this may be the case again, but I plan on revising it as I go along. One of the most important things in biblical studies is to remain balanced. In order to accomplish this, I am choosing to study the Old Testament, New Testament, Systematic Theology, Church History and Puritans writings. (This is in addition to my present school study in Hermeneutics and linguistics, along with Hebrew and Greek.) Within each of these major subjects, I will be studying, in some detail, the content, theology and history of each. For example, as I begin my OT studies, I will be covering an introduction to the OT, the history of Israel and the overall theological flow of it as it points to Christ. Once I begin Genesis, the history of the ancient-near eastern culture, biblical theology and the content/structure of the book will be examined. This method will also be applied to the NT, Systematic Theology and Church history, albeit with slight modifications.

        My hope in all of this is that my worldview (that network of presuppositions which make sense of reality) will be gradually conformed to that of Christ's so as to be the best possible instrument for His work through me. May the Lord be glorified in this.

Assuming the Gospel: A Plea for a Balanced and Complete Presentation of the Good News

What is the gospel?

What elements must be present in order for the gospel to have been faithfully preached?

     These questions came to my mind after hearing several pastors preach, with one in particular having the great duty of explaining what the gospel was. In hearing them, something struck me: we so easily assume the particulars of the gospel, especially if the audience is composed of church-goers. It is not as though any of these pastors (or those to whom this applies) intentionally leave out certain truths. Neither are they ignorant of the fundamental propositions inherent to the gospel. Rather, it is a subtle yet dangerous overemphasis on one aspect of God's work of salvation in and through Jesus Christ to either the exclusion or emaciation of the others. The reasons for this are great and many and I will not presume to know why a particular pastor is guilty of this homiletical fallacy. Instead, I want to point out, hopefully with humility and respect, the problem and as a response, offer a specific yet practical solution.

   The Problem of Assumption


        Assumption, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. In fact, it is good and proper to assume certain things as a Christian. We should assume that those who profess faith in Christ are Christians, unless their actions or beliefs prove otherwise. We should assume that our pastors are working for our good and are seeking to build up the church in maturity, unless their actions or beliefs prove otherwise, etc. However, it is rarely good to assume that Christians, let alone church-goers, are intimately or even vaguely familiar with the message and heart of the gospel. Not only is this, in all probability, a false assumption, but the very nature of man precludes it. We, as fallen sinners, are "naturally" opposed to the concept of grace. We forget it, deny it and try to live our lives ignoring it. It is contrary to our thinking, not to mention the concepts of sin, judgement and righteousness. Sin always leads us away from the gospel and towards a works-based righteousness. We will never drift into truth. We will never drift into righteousness. Christians need the gospel as much as unbelievers. To deny them of the clear articulation and application of it is to rob their souls of life.

       So how is it assumed? More often than not, a pastor will take for granted the fundamental elements of the gospel. Sometimes the term is just used without any explanation. "Believe the gospel. It is the gospel that saves us, for it is the power of God for salvation to all who believe." At other times, Jesus' death and the forgiveness of sins offered in it are the sole propositions set forth. "Jesus died on the cross so that all who believe in Him might be forgiven of their sins. He paid the penalty of sin so that we wouldn't have to. He took what we deserved so that we might receive what he alone merited." All of these things are good and true, but they are not the gospel.

       To the first I would ask, what is this gospel? Is it my experience at church? Is it what I try to live every day? What does it mean to believe? What do I need saving from, A bad marriage? An illness? A bad hair day?
       To the second, Who is Jesus? What does a cross and death have to do with sin? If he is dead, how can he help me now? etc.

       These are the assumptions that we are making with our gospel proclamation. We are assuming that people remember each of the elements of Christ's life, death and resurrection and what they accomplished. We are assuming that they understand the concepts of both God's love and justice, faith and repentance, sin and eternal life.

       Depending on the topic of the sermon, one or more of the following tenets will usually be missing:
- sin, guilt, condemnation and judgment
- Christ's incarnation, life, death, burial, resurrection and ascension
- substitutionary atonement, sufficiency of Christ's work and forgiveness
- God's grace, love, righteousness and justice displayed at the cross
- command of repentance and faith.
      While this may sound like a lot to cover, it can easily be delivered in under 5 minutes. If the heart of Christianity is to be found in the message of the gospel, shouldn't we be striving to teach it faithfully rather than assuming it is already understood?

   The Problem of Emphasis 


        Not only is assumption a danger but so is its partner in crime: emphasis. Let us say, for the sake of discussion, that the pastor doesn't assume anything about his hearers. Instead, during the course of his sermon, he gets to the work and person of Jesus Christ and lays it out in detail. Well, if he isn't assuming anything, won't he be fine? Not necessarily. It has been my experience that the main message of the days sermon inadvertently leads to an unbalanced presentation of the gospel. If 1 Corinthians 12 has been expounded, the love of God towards sinners will receive the majority, if not all, of the emphasis. If Romans 2 has been exposited, the wrath and judgment of God towards sin will be the focal point - with grace and forgiveness taking a backseat. This is only a natural thing for us to do. We are excited and passionate about the subject we are expounding and as a result, we overemphasize that same part of the gospel. However, this is a very dangerous habit.

        The gospel cannot be reduced to a single emphasis. It is not merely a message of love or grace, etc. It is not merely the death of Christ or the subsequent resurrection. Rather, it is all of this and more, in their proper balance.

    A Proposed Solution


        So how can these things be prevented? I propose the following solution.

        A. Get the content of the message nailed. 

            First and foremost, memorize the gospel message. I do not mean that you have a canned response that you present at every occasion. Instead, resolve in your mind to be able to recite the primary elements of the gospel so that if any of them are missing, you can quickly remedy the problem. So what are these primary tenets?

        1) Prolegomena: teach the law. While this is not the gospel message itself, it is necessary to be taught first in order for the gospel to be proclaimed in its proper context. Teach who God is (especially His righteousness and holiness) and what He demands (perfect keeping of His law). Explain sin and how every single person without exception is under the judgement and condemnation of God on account of it. (death, hell, etc.)

        2) The Message: it is all about Christ. Explicate clearly his sonship, sinlessness and perfect obedience to the law and how He is the fullfillment of the Old Testament scriptures. Preach his death, why it was necessary and what it accomplished. (wrath and justice of God, sufficient atonement for and forgiveness of sin, reconciliation, peace, etc.) Last, but certainly not least, explain the resurrection and ascension of Christ. (justification, victory over sin and death, acceptance of God, rule and reign in the heavens and the earth, etc.) The amount of detail you relay is entirely up to your discretion, but the central elements of his life, death, burial and resurrection must be given their due.

       3) The heart: justification by grace through faith in Christ alone. Be sure to emphasize (see, I told you it was ok in and of itself) that this salvation is a free, unmerited gift of grace on account of the Father's love for sinners. It is not a reward for our works but a reward for Christ's. Justification is wholly and fully of grace through faith. We are not justified by faith, but by means of our faith as a result of Christ's work. It is the great and glorious truth that God declares guilty sinners to be innocent in His sight on account of both the imputed righteousness of Christ and His full payment for our sins.

    B. Present a balanced command as the proper response

       4) The response: Repentance and Faith. This message of what God has done in Christ is received by repentance and faith. It is not earned by them, but these are the first fruits of a redeemed heart. It is not enough to simply believe that Jesus died for sin and was resurrected for justification, for even the demons believe this. Faith must be explained as an assent to truth, personal acceptance of fact, and complete assurance in its object. Secondly, repentance is the companion of faith. If one believes without having a conviction of sin and subsequent turning away from it and to Christ for forgiveness, his faith is in vain. True faith is accompanied by true repentance.

        5) A Command: Yes, faith and repentance are a command from God, not a suggestion. Peter declared that God now commands all men everywhere to repent and believe the gospel. It is the duty of every man to do so, not merely a proposition they should consider. Keeping this in mind prevents us from "selling" the gospel. Rather than appealing to the emotions and sentimentalities of sinners, repentance and faith can be declared with full assurance that the Lord will save His people.

    C. Take Heed to the Balance


         We must make every effort to examine our speech so as to ensure that we are not neglecting any of these great truths of the gospel. Do not let the sermon's message of God's love trump his demonstration of justice and righteousness at the cross. All things in their proper place and in the proper time. Do not be careless and assume you have it down. Constantly and persistently examine your messages to ensure you are preaching the whole counsel of God, especially in the gospel.

  



  

Faith and Works

Protestants have valiantly and unabashedly heralded the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ alone for centuries. Indeed, this was the very bedrock of the Reformation and has continued to be the bulwark between Christianity and every false religion. Nothing can be added to faith in Christ as the means of receiving redemption from sin and salvation to God. For if anything is added to the imputation of Christ's righteousness received through faith as the sole grounds of our justification, whether sacrament, good deeds, continued confession and repentance, etc, God is no longer glorified in salvation. It is only when He alone is the grounds of man's salvation that the phrase saved by grace has any valid meaning.

Yet, it seems that a strong, and indeed noble desire to flee from anything even hinting at a works based righteousness has led to an unbalanced perception of the Christian life. While the Christian life begins, continues and ends with faith, that faith is never alone. While justification is solely based upon Christ's work and received through faith, that faith is never alone. When the Holy Spirit regenerates a man and grants to him faith and repentance, these very gifts are the firstfruits of good works. The first thing a man does that is accepted as good and holy before God is faith and repentance - and that only because He is the one who grants it! Yet, these "works" cannot and should not be ignored for what they are: firstfruits. From the moment a man is saved, he begins upon a path of good works that the Lord has prepared for him to do. He is so radically transformed in will and desire that his former goals are reordered with God now as the chief end - not himself. He begins to love the things of God and hate the things of the world.

Now, if these things be true, what does it say of the faith he had at first? If a man repents of his sins and has faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as his only hope of being guiltless before God, is that faith enough to justify him? Yes! BUT, here is the point to remember clearly: that same saving faith is justified by works. At conversion, the Holy Spirit plants the seed by which grace grows in the soul. This seed is Christ. He is the shoot from which all good works bloom and grow. Indeed it is the purpose of God to save men so that they may do good works! While the grounds of justification never changes and the means of receiving grace continues by faith alone, this faith produces plentious good works.

It is at this juncture that I believe Evangelicals have missed the mark. Faith and works cannot be made to contest with one another. The very soul of the Christian life is a process of this faith producing these works. If a man claims to have faith, let him examine himself to
see whether he is in the faith. Does his life bear the fruit of genuine faith? It is not enough for him to claim a profession of faith at the first as the sole assurance of his salvation. He must determine whether his life since that time has been one of continued growth in holiness, hatred of sin and desire to do good works which bring glory to God. Does the shoot of his faith have branches with good and wholesome fruit, or is it withered and dry with only poison for a crop?

You can see then, that genuine faith is never alone in the Christian. Do not fear good works nor striving to live so as to bring glory to the Lord. Rather, plead for his grace daily that He may continue to nourish you by His means of grace (word, sacraments, prayer and fellowship) so that the branches of your life may be full of ripe and pleasing fruit. Do not suppose that a man who clings to a naked faith without a crop of good works will enter into the Kingdom of God. For that faith is false. That faith is rotten. That man will perish with his faith. For just as the man who stands before God on the basis of his own works will be condemned, so also will the man who stands upon a faith that has not works perish. For true faith bears fruit and never withers. True faith is known by its works, not solely by it's profession. True faith is grounded in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Will a faith so rooted in Him not also produce a life like His? So then, a man is justified by faith alone, but that faith is never alone.

Currently Reading

Reading and Studying this month:
Scripture
1) Samuel (DONE)
2) Kings (DONE)
3) Isaiah (DONE)
Puritans
4) A Christian Soldier - Thomas Watson
Studies
5) Hebrew Grammar - Year 1
6) Greek Text of John - Year 2
Casual
7) When People are BIG and God is small

Rapid Reviews I: The Pilgrim's Progress

This is the first in what I hope will be an on-going series of concise, to-the-point, book reviews. Rather than spending countless words detailing the pros and cons of every book I read, these Rapid Reviews will succinctly state my reflections. It is an attempt at saying much in very few words.
I also hope to use this as a means of
keeping track of my reading. So, let's begin with this week's book.

RR: The Pilgrim's Progress

Required reading for all Christians - especially Calvinists.
Fosters worship and prayerful self-examination.

The marks of genuine salvation are set forth in beautiful allegory.
Worldliness is exposed as treason.
Love is allegiance and unwavering obedience to the King.
Piety is stirred up in the soul.
The often ordinary and common guise of spiritual warfare is vividly portrayed.
The resolve of the Christian from first breath until last is beinoutound a genuine and faithful servant in this world and the world to come.
Christians are pilgrims in the present age - not natives, seeking to balance the dual reality of the already of regeneration and the not-yet of complete salvation.

Read it. You will find yourself both despising your flesh and enraptured by the glorious truths of the Gospel of God.