Do Christians need continual exhortation to be spurred on to better works and love of God and neighbor?
That's a big question, and one that I think has a clear answer. I answer this with an emphatic: NO! Of course, there are plenty of examples of exhortation in the Scriptures, so there is a time and place for it.
This is, properly put, a Law and Gospel issue. The Law exhorts and commands, whilst the Gospel promises and forgives.
I think, when we consider the options, some clear answers emerge. I posit that there are two types of people who need to be bashed over the head with the Holy Law of God on a continual basis.
First and foremost, the Law shows us our sin. Thus, those who are unrepentant need to be preached the Law for the main reason that it indeed does reveal that we have not kept it and therefore must repent. Hence, St. Paul can write such passages like this:
Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. ~Galatians 5:19-21
St. Paul here is clearly referring to unrepentant folks who engage in these things with no sorrow for their sin.
Those who are unrepentant need the harshness of the Law. No doubt about that.
The second type of person is the person that thinks they have made it and think they are doing such a wonderful job of living the Christian life that their works are better than other folks' works; even to the point of not sinning. They need the Law too, because in essence, they're unrepentant as well by way of denying their sin.
Those who claim they are in Christ and claim they do not sin need the Law preached to them continually. Why? They're liars. They do sin, and they're unrepentant of it.
If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. ~1 John 1:8-10
Those who are repentant and have a Godly sorrow for their sin, however, need the Gospel preached to them in all of its glory and sweetness. They need that one-sided divine promise that says that they belong to Christ.
So, I answer thus: Does a repentant Christian with a Godly sorrow for their sin need to be hammered continually with the Law and with exhortation to do more works? No way. This will accomplish nothing but leading them to despair. They are already repentant of their sins, and all that continual exhortation will do is serve to show them more and more sinfulness within themselves.
Give them, that group or repentant people, that good old sweet savor of the Gospel.
Grace and Peace
When I think back to so many Reformed that gave me an "attitude" as if they were better than me, it makes me cringe that I stuck with them so long. I bought into the "do better, try harder" ferris wheel until I realized I couldn't do it anymore, and ran to Jesus' righteousness, and stopped relying on my own inner spirituality and works, which gets you nowhere fast. Now when I sin, I know I am forgiven (Word and Sacrament) in the simplicity of the Gospel.
ReplyDeleteAmen! I just ran into perhaps the biggest pompous dolt I've ever seen on facebook in a Calvinist group. I challenged him on something (hint, it was Scripture) and he basically responded that he knows more than me and I am an irrationalist liberal. LOL
ReplyDeleteGotta love those Clarkians...
Calvinists have NO assurance other than looking to themselves. So it is no wonder that so many are pompous, self-righteous asses.
ReplyDeleteSteve Martin: I can't agree that Calvinists have no ability to look outside themselves, on the objective, and finished work of Christ, and therefore have no assurance. That was not the reformed tradition I was raised in ... admittedly influenced heavily by Westminster Seminary California. We were constantly directed outside of ourselves - to Christ - and that the keys to Christian living were found extra nos (outside us) and directed at Christ and His finished work experienced in Word and Sacrament. My transition over to Lutheranism has come as a result of what Holy Scripture says about baptism and that very special command and work of God that saves, forgives, and upon reflection, justifies and sanctifies. We literarly are buried with Christ and raised with him through baptism. Whenever one used words like ALL to describe communions, races, fellowships, etc., one is being contra reasonabl
ReplyDeleteWestminster West is an exception within Reformed circles.
DeleteAndrew: Is Westminster West an exception—or are they simply more faithful to the reformed confessions than the more evangelical relevant expressions of reformed faith and piety? We call these folks the obedience boys ... (see Dr. Darryl G. Hart of Old Life Theological Society for details.)
ReplyDeleteIn short, I would argue the latter. THOSE committed to the theology espoused by the Trinity Foundation, also, (hyper-Calvinistic in certain respects) would argue that assurance comes from outside ourselves—extra nos—not looking into ourselves because of our inherent sinfulness.
In fact, they do an exercise which states what is our hope and confidence of salvation: faith or [Christ's]obedience to the law?
It's a trick question. What they are trying to get folks to realize is that everyone has a different measure of faith ... but Christ's perfect obedience to the law imputed to all who believe is an objective satisfaction of law which the believer is clothed in. In a word, it gets around the whole "reflective faith bog" most main stream Protestantism suffers from. I do not agree with the Trinity Foundation on a host of issues, but to say all, or even most, reformed theology is rooted at looking inside oneself for assurance is patently false.
My decision to become Lutheran is rooted in that... it's rooted in baptism and the sacrament of the altar—where frankly, I believe Reformed do not go far enough ... and get around the plain reading of Holy Scripture on the passages in question.
Westminster West drove me to Lutheranism in a way...because of the same reasons you went to Lutheranism.
DeleteThe Trinity Foundation is basically Clarkian, right? If that is the case, I don't agree with them on much of anything, considering Gordon Clark was a Nestorian heretic and a rationalist. I want nothing to do with them.
Andrew: My point wasn't that the Trinity Foundation or Gordan Clark did have serious theoloical issues, namely rationalism and nestorian heresy. My point was there are several "sects" within reformed orthodoxy which teach assurance based upon Christ's finished work on the cross for sinners, including His active and passive obedience. Obviously, Westminster California is the best example of this ... warring against some of the more dangerous movements in reformed circles, including theonomy and other troublesome movements.
ReplyDeleteI am curious. What about Westminster West drove you to Lutheranism? They certainly helped make me aware of Lutheranism and some of the debates
Distinction of Law and Gospel. Of course the Scriptures and the Sacrament passages were huge too.
DeleteAndrew: I can definitely see where the sacraments was huge in your decision to become Lutheran. But many different Reformed expressions really concentrate on Law and Gospel distinction. That was true of my experience in two different reformed churches. One was more influenced by Tim Keller and Co., one - as I said - was heavily influenced by Westminster Seminary California.
ReplyDeleteDr. Lee Irons has written extensively about this. And Calvin and the second generation of reformers talked as much about the importance of law - gospel distinction as Lutherans. So there's that. Especially Dr. Ursinus.
That does not take care of baptism and the sacarment of the altar, however. And that is where Lutheran distinctions and confessions have impacted men greatly.