I chose the Landauer Altarpiece for the banner on my blog. Here is some info on the painting.
"This work was commissioned by the Nuremberg metal trader Matthäus Landauer.
Also known as the Landauer Altarpiece, it was ordered for the chapel of the
Twelve-Brothers House, which he endowed for a dozen impoverished artisans.
In the centre of the painted panel at the top is the Trinity. God the Father
is shown as emperor, holding Christ on the Cross and surmounted by the dove of
the Holy Ghost. Around the figure of God are two rings of angels. Below them, to
the right, are Old Testament figures and, to the left, followers of Christ
bearing palm branches. Nearer the base of the picture are the slightly larger
figures of the living, led by the Pope (with a blue tiara) and the Emperor (with
a golden crown). The grey-haired figure of Matthäus Landauer, the donor, is
depicted on the left, being welcomed into the throng by the outstretched hand of
a cardinal.
The landscape at the bottom of the panel stretches into the far distance. A
lone figure stands on the land - the artist, who has depicted the earthly
community being reunited with the realm of heaven. His hand rests on a panel
which is inscribed: `Albrecht Dürer of Nuremberg made this 1511 years after the
Virgin.'
Dürer also designed an ornate frame for the altarpiece. An early drawing for
the frame and panel is dated 1508 and shows that they were a carefully designed
ensemble. The frame still survives in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum,
Nuremberg, although unfortunately it has long been separated from the painting.
(The frame shown in the reproduction is an exact replica of the original.) Made
of carved and painted wood, the top of the frame has a sculpted depiction of the
Last Jjudgment, with God enthroned and surrounded by the kneeling figures of the
Virgin and John the Baptist. An inscription on the base of the frame records:
`Matthäus Landauer has finally completed the house of worship of the Twelve
Bretheren including the donation of this panel. After Christ's birth, the year
1511.' Dürer's workshop also designed stained-glass windows for the
Twelve-Brothers Chapel, but these were removed in 1810 and were destroyed in
Berlin during the Second World War."
From: http://www.wga.hu/html_m/d/durer/1/07/landaue.html
So, why did I choose this? First of all, I love the Trinitarian aspect of the painting. The Father, Son, and Spirit are all present here, along with many saints of old. I also think the image of the crucifix is something that is important since it shows us what God did to take care of our sin. God had to die on a cross. The painting is also a very beautiful piece of Christian artwork from the Reformation era. Albrecht Durer, a Roman Catholic, was very sympathetic to Luther and the Lutherans as well.
Draped around the picture and in the accents of the blog, I chose to use the liturgical color of the church season. On the outside borders, I inserted an oil painting of the sky and clouds that closely matches the center of the altarpiece.
The banner itself was created by a friend who knows how to do those sorts of things. Raise your hand, Jennifer!
Grace and Peace
8/27/13
Reprobation. All On You.
The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord gives one of the most in-depth, if not the most in-depth, treatment of the doctrine of predestination and election that you will find anywhere. Within the Solid Declaration, the doctrine of reprobation is also addressed.
"The reason why not all who hear the Word believe, and some are therefore deeply condemned, is not because God had begrudged them them their salvation. It is their own fault. They have heard the Word in such a way as not to learn, but only to despise, blaspheme, and disgrace it. They have resisted the Holy Spirit, who through the Word wanted to work in them, as was the case at the time of Christ with the Pharisees and their followers. Therefore, the apostle distinguishes with special care the work of God (who alone makes vessels of honor) and the work of the devil and people. By the instigation of the devil, not God, a person has made himself a vessel of dishonor. For it is written, "[God] endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory" (Romans 9:22-23).
Here, then, the apostle clearly says that God endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath. But He does not say that He made them vessels or wrath. If that had been His will, He would not have required any great long-suffering for it. The reason that they are fitted for destruction belongs to the devil and to the people themselves, and not to God.
All preparation for condemnation is by the devil and a person, through sin. In no way does it come from God, who does not want any person to be damned. How, then, should He Himself prepare any person for condemnation? God is not a cause of sins. He is also not the cause of punishment or damnation. The only cause of damnation is sin. "For the wages of sin is death" [Romans 6:23]. Just as God does not will sin and has no pleasure in sin, so He does not desire "the death of the wicked" [Ezekiel 33:11], nor has He pleasure in his condemnation. He is not willing "that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). So, too, it is written in Ezekiel 33:11, "As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live." St. Paul testifies in clear words that from vessels of dishonor, vessels of honor may be made by God's power and working. He writes, "Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work" (2 Timothy 2:20-21). A person who should cleanse himself must first have been unclean and a vessel of dishonor. He says clearly about the vessels of mercy that the Lord Himself has prepared them for glory. He does not say this about the damned. They themselves, and not God, have prepared themselves as vessels of damnation."
Solid Declaration, XI, 78-82
This is all to say, as strongly as the Lutheran Confessions affirm the doctrine of unconditional election in a positive sense; the elect are predestined to heaven by God alone, they just as strongly reject the idea that God predestines persons to perdition, whether actively or passively. This is to say, that Scripture does not equate election or predestination with anyone other than those who are elected and predestined to glory. We do not deal in terms of the 'non-elect' or 'predestined to damnation' as Calvinism does. Lutherans are certainly not supra or infralapsarian Calvinists. There is no "double predestination" in Lutheranism. Although God does indeed predestine His elect alone to glory, He also fully desires that everyone come to repentance and His grace is universal. In this way, God truly desires and offers to everyone salvation, but He does not predestine persons to damnation, only His elect to glory. In this way, nobody will be able to stand at the judgment seat and claim that God did not predestine them to glory or that God predestined them to hell. Much more, they will not be able to claim that Christ did not die for them. And on this paradox we shall stand. Scripture behooves us to stand here.
"The reason why not all who hear the Word believe, and some are therefore deeply condemned, is not because God had begrudged them them their salvation. It is their own fault. They have heard the Word in such a way as not to learn, but only to despise, blaspheme, and disgrace it. They have resisted the Holy Spirit, who through the Word wanted to work in them, as was the case at the time of Christ with the Pharisees and their followers. Therefore, the apostle distinguishes with special care the work of God (who alone makes vessels of honor) and the work of the devil and people. By the instigation of the devil, not God, a person has made himself a vessel of dishonor. For it is written, "[God] endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory" (Romans 9:22-23).
Here, then, the apostle clearly says that God endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath. But He does not say that He made them vessels or wrath. If that had been His will, He would not have required any great long-suffering for it. The reason that they are fitted for destruction belongs to the devil and to the people themselves, and not to God.
All preparation for condemnation is by the devil and a person, through sin. In no way does it come from God, who does not want any person to be damned. How, then, should He Himself prepare any person for condemnation? God is not a cause of sins. He is also not the cause of punishment or damnation. The only cause of damnation is sin. "For the wages of sin is death" [Romans 6:23]. Just as God does not will sin and has no pleasure in sin, so He does not desire "the death of the wicked" [Ezekiel 33:11], nor has He pleasure in his condemnation. He is not willing "that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). So, too, it is written in Ezekiel 33:11, "As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live." St. Paul testifies in clear words that from vessels of dishonor, vessels of honor may be made by God's power and working. He writes, "Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work" (2 Timothy 2:20-21). A person who should cleanse himself must first have been unclean and a vessel of dishonor. He says clearly about the vessels of mercy that the Lord Himself has prepared them for glory. He does not say this about the damned. They themselves, and not God, have prepared themselves as vessels of damnation."
Solid Declaration, XI, 78-82
This is all to say, as strongly as the Lutheran Confessions affirm the doctrine of unconditional election in a positive sense; the elect are predestined to heaven by God alone, they just as strongly reject the idea that God predestines persons to perdition, whether actively or passively. This is to say, that Scripture does not equate election or predestination with anyone other than those who are elected and predestined to glory. We do not deal in terms of the 'non-elect' or 'predestined to damnation' as Calvinism does. Lutherans are certainly not supra or infralapsarian Calvinists. There is no "double predestination" in Lutheranism. Although God does indeed predestine His elect alone to glory, He also fully desires that everyone come to repentance and His grace is universal. In this way, God truly desires and offers to everyone salvation, but He does not predestine persons to damnation, only His elect to glory. In this way, nobody will be able to stand at the judgment seat and claim that God did not predestine them to glory or that God predestined them to hell. Much more, they will not be able to claim that Christ did not die for them. And on this paradox we shall stand. Scripture behooves us to stand here.
It's All About Jesus. Really, It Is.
The Gospel reading from the three year lectionary Sunday came from Luke 13:22-30. Here is a portion of it.
Luke 13:24-25: Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’
In Luke 13:22-30, Jesus speaks about striving to enter through the narrow door. When we look at this text, it becomes clear that Jesus is not telling people they can strive to the point of earning righteousness; much less salvation.
What is Jesus' point? It's really pretty simple. He IS the door (cf. John 10:9). There have been many people in history striving to enter the door, but only One has done so. Jesus. He is the door and He is the only human who has ever entered the door by His own merits.
Therefore, since Christ alone has entered the door, we must be in Christ. How can we enter the door as well? Only by being in the One who is the door. That is the only way. Only Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6). Jesus Christ Himself is the end of all self-justifying activity. Every mouth is stopped and every deed is a filthy rag.
He washes us, sanctifies us, and justifies us. (1 Corinthians 6:11) So take and eat, this is His true body and blood given for you for the forgiveness of sins. (Matthew 26:28)
It really is all about Jesus. Really.
O Almighty God, whom to know is everlasting life, grant us without all doubt to know your Son Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life that, following his steps, we may steadfastly walk in the way that leads to eternal life; through Jesus Christ, our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.
Amen.
Luke 13:24-25: Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’
In Luke 13:22-30, Jesus speaks about striving to enter through the narrow door. When we look at this text, it becomes clear that Jesus is not telling people they can strive to the point of earning righteousness; much less salvation.
What is Jesus' point? It's really pretty simple. He IS the door (cf. John 10:9). There have been many people in history striving to enter the door, but only One has done so. Jesus. He is the door and He is the only human who has ever entered the door by His own merits.
Therefore, since Christ alone has entered the door, we must be in Christ. How can we enter the door as well? Only by being in the One who is the door. That is the only way. Only Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6). Jesus Christ Himself is the end of all self-justifying activity. Every mouth is stopped and every deed is a filthy rag.
He washes us, sanctifies us, and justifies us. (1 Corinthians 6:11) So take and eat, this is His true body and blood given for you for the forgiveness of sins. (Matthew 26:28)
It really is all about Jesus. Really.
O Almighty God, whom to know is everlasting life, grant us without all doubt to know your Son Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life that, following his steps, we may steadfastly walk in the way that leads to eternal life; through Jesus Christ, our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.
Amen.
8/24/13
Forward to the Font!
Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation
244. Who is to be baptised?
"All nations" are to be baptised, that is, all people, young and old.
245. What distinction is to be made in baptising?
A. Those who can receive instruction are to be baptised after they have been instructed in the main articles of the Christian faith. (Acts 2:38-39, 41, Acts 8:26-39, Acts 16:25-33))
B. Little children should be baptised when they are brought to Baptism by those who have authority over them. (Mark 10:13-15)
246. Why are babies to be baptised?
Babies are to be baptised because
A. They are included in the words "all nations"; (Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:38-39)
B. Jesus especially invites little children to come to Him; (Luke 18:15-17)
C. As sinners, babies need what baptism offers; (John 3:5-6, Ephesians 2:3)
D. Babies also are able to have faith, (Matthew 18:6)
248. What great and precious things are given in Baptism?
Baptism
A. Works forgiveness of sins; (Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16)
B. Rescues from death and the devil; (Romans 6:3,5, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 1:13-14, Colossians 2:11-12)
C. Gives eternal salvation; (Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5)
Tomorrow, my newborn daughter, Anastasia Hope Taylor, will be baptised into Christ at 8:30 AM EST.
Praise to You, O Christ, for your gracious gifts.
244. Who is to be baptised?
"All nations" are to be baptised, that is, all people, young and old.
245. What distinction is to be made in baptising?
A. Those who can receive instruction are to be baptised after they have been instructed in the main articles of the Christian faith. (Acts 2:38-39, 41, Acts 8:26-39, Acts 16:25-33))
B. Little children should be baptised when they are brought to Baptism by those who have authority over them. (Mark 10:13-15)
246. Why are babies to be baptised?
Babies are to be baptised because
A. They are included in the words "all nations"; (Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:38-39)
B. Jesus especially invites little children to come to Him; (Luke 18:15-17)
C. As sinners, babies need what baptism offers; (John 3:5-6, Ephesians 2:3)
D. Babies also are able to have faith, (Matthew 18:6)
248. What great and precious things are given in Baptism?
Baptism
A. Works forgiveness of sins; (Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16)
B. Rescues from death and the devil; (Romans 6:3,5, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 1:13-14, Colossians 2:11-12)
C. Gives eternal salvation; (Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5)
Tomorrow, my newborn daughter, Anastasia Hope Taylor, will be baptised into Christ at 8:30 AM EST.
Praise to You, O Christ, for your gracious gifts.
8/23/13
Faith Alone Means Baptism Can't Possibly Do Anything! Bzzz. False.
When you come to two groupings of Scriptures that are both very clear, they're both true.
Keep that in mind as we move on. I will grant that there are passages in Scripture that are unclear and/or difficult to interpret because they do not give us a full picture for one reason or another. Yet, there are many very clear passages of Scripture. And those clear passages of Scripture say what they mean, mean what they say, and usually are repeated in one form or another numerous times and places.
What am I getting at here? A very common evangelical argument that is leveled at the Lutheran doctrine of baptismal regeneration is that it adds works to our salvation and denies justification by grace through faith, apart from works (Eph 2:8-9). But here is the problem: Lutherans firmly hold to the solas of the Reformation. So, unless you're not listening to the Lutheran stance (and the Bible!), you may just be erecting a false dichotomy and a strawman. Since nobody wants to do that, let us examine the passages. I will group the passages into two groups. Group #1 will be a group of passages that clearly teach justification by faith. Group #2 will be passages that clearly teach that baptism unites us to Christ, saves, regenerates, and so on. The lists will not be exhaustive, but I will post enough for the picture to become clear.
Group #1:
John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Romans 10:9-10, 13: because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Acts 16:31a: And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved
Ok, so there are some passages that teach that we are saved by faith. Along with this all-important one:
Ephesians 2:8-9: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Group #2:
Acts 2:38-39: And Peter said to them, “Repent and come forward to the altar call and say the sinner's prayer be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Romans 6:3-4: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Colossians 2:11-12: In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
1 Peter 3:21: Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Titus 3:4-7: But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
So there is group 2, and they're all pretty clear. I'll even grant the evangelicals Titus 3:5 because it doesn't use the word 'baptism' or 'baptized.' Yet, it's pretty clear that it is talking about baptism.
So here is the thing. You have group #1 of passages that are very clear regarding faith. You have group #2 of passages that are very clear regarding baptism. Group #1 is clear that faith justifies and we are saved by faith. Group #2 is clear that baptism unites us to Christ, saves us, and regenerates us.
Instead of using group #1 as a hammer to make group #2 untrue or to reinterpret all of the group #2 passages to mean something other than what they mean at face value - we have to determine how both of these groups can be true. In other words, we must stop pitting clear Scriptures against other clear Scriptures, when God's Word is all true. So when the evangelical surmises that since faith saves, baptism cannot, they are in effect creating a false dichotomy. The two are not mutually exclusive. To pit faith alone against baptism is to pit faith alone against grace alone. You just don't do that.
This brings us back to Ephesians 2:8-9, which is very clear that we are saved by grace through faith, not of works. The evangelical interjects here: "See! See! Baptism is a work, therefore it cannot save!" But this interjection and argument rests on a false assumption in the first place. Where does Holy Scripture say what the evangelical says about baptism? Namely, where does it say that baptism is an outward sign of something that already occurred inwardly and that in order to be baptized a person must be able to confess their Christian faith and know what baptism is? Where does Scripture say that? Perhaps it's in the lost book of 2 Apollos, chapter 7. I don't know. But once you see that this interpretation of baptism is foreign to God's Word, well, then it becomes much more clear.
But what about the thief on the cross? He wasn't baptized! Ha! Got you!Well, crapnuggets, I never thought of that. You got me now. I have to retract this whole thing.
The problem is, this is not a good argument at all. Just because the thief on the cross was not baptized does not mean that baptism doesn't save or that baptism is not the normal means by which we are united to Christ. Baptism is a Word of promise from God that saves us. The thief on the cross got one of those too. There was some guy on another cross next to him. Not sure who He was, but I think His name started with a J. And this other guy gave the thief on the cross a word of promise that he would be saved and be with Him in paradise that day. Logic destroys the thief on the cross objection. More importantly, Scripture destroys it.
So, how can group #1 and group #2 both be true? Let's look at Ephesians 2:8-9, which states that we are saved by grace through faith, not of ourselves and not by works. Solely by God's gift. Grace is a gift, faith is a gift, and salvation is a gift. The whole thing is a gift.
If baptism does what Holy Scripture says it does, the solution to the problem is quite simple. Only Christ's work saves us, and it is given to us by grace alone, not of works. If baptism regenerates us, unites us to Christ, and saves us, it cannot be a work, and it has to be grace (Rom 11:6 is pretty clear). Only grace saves. If baptism is grace, it must do something to us that delivers the work of Christ to us personally and objectively. And if it is grace, it also must bring the gift of faith with it; per Ephesians 2:8-9, since this is what grace does. It delivers to us Christ and faith.
So, if baptism is grace and delivers faith, there is no contradiction at all. Baptism is simply a means of grace. It is God's work done to us, not our work done to God out of the pious purity of our heart. It is one way in which Christ is delivered to us. In fact, it is the usual way in which we are united to Christ. The norm, as it were.
Baptism unites us to Christ (Rom 6, Gal 3). Why? Because God baptises us in baptism. It's all Him and none of us. We are baptized, not active workers to save ourselves by works.
We are washed, sanctified, justified (1Cor 6:11), reborn (John 3:5, Tit 3:5), and saved (1Pet 3:21) in baptism. Why,because we are just so obedient, that's why. No, no. These things occur because God delivers His grace through means, of which baptism is one of them; just as the Lord's Supper and the preaching of the Gospel. In short, it is the Word of God with these Sacraments that do these things. Not just water in baptism, but being washed with water and the Word (Eph 5:26).
Baptism is the normal means that God grants us faith. It is pure grace, delivering the crucified Christ to you, personally and objectively. We are saved by grace through faith and we are justified by faith alone. But this faith comes by grace and this grace is delivered through means. We receive it through light rays when we read the Word, sound waves when we hear the Gospel and receive absolution, water in baptism, and bread and wine in the Eucharist.
What most evangelicals are actually against is the idea that baptism can do anything, especially to infants, because it's against their sovereign right to choose. In short, they're against divine monergism, because baptizing an infant (especially an infant) violates their free will because they haven't chosen to be baptized and haven't made their own personal confession of faith. The majority of them won't ever be able to see or consider the biblical stance of baptismal grace which imparts faith because to them faith = choice. This plays off of a false dichotomy as well that equates faith with free will choice and not a gift of God. They've sadly missed the point that we are passive receivers of God's good gifts. Pastor Matt Richard has aptly pointed that out over at Steadfast Lutherans. The article can be found here:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=28761
And Pr. Richard's excellent blogwork can be found here:
http://www.pastormattrichard.com/
Baptism is in no way contrary to faith alone. Baptism is grace that delivers faith to us. God set it up that way. He saves the natural world by connecting His supernatural and eternal Word to natural means. You know, like water, bread, and wine. And stuff.
Keep that in mind as we move on. I will grant that there are passages in Scripture that are unclear and/or difficult to interpret because they do not give us a full picture for one reason or another. Yet, there are many very clear passages of Scripture. And those clear passages of Scripture say what they mean, mean what they say, and usually are repeated in one form or another numerous times and places.
What am I getting at here? A very common evangelical argument that is leveled at the Lutheran doctrine of baptismal regeneration is that it adds works to our salvation and denies justification by grace through faith, apart from works (Eph 2:8-9). But here is the problem: Lutherans firmly hold to the solas of the Reformation. So, unless you're not listening to the Lutheran stance (and the Bible!), you may just be erecting a false dichotomy and a strawman. Since nobody wants to do that, let us examine the passages. I will group the passages into two groups. Group #1 will be a group of passages that clearly teach justification by faith. Group #2 will be passages that clearly teach that baptism unites us to Christ, saves, regenerates, and so on. The lists will not be exhaustive, but I will post enough for the picture to become clear.
Group #1:
John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Romans 10:9-10, 13: because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Acts 16:31a: And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved
Ok, so there are some passages that teach that we are saved by faith. Along with this all-important one:
Ephesians 2:8-9: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Group #2:
Acts 2:38-39: And Peter said to them, “Repent and
Romans 6:3-4: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Colossians 2:11-12: In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
1 Peter 3:21: Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Titus 3:4-7: But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
So there is group 2, and they're all pretty clear. I'll even grant the evangelicals Titus 3:5 because it doesn't use the word 'baptism' or 'baptized.' Yet, it's pretty clear that it is talking about baptism.
So here is the thing. You have group #1 of passages that are very clear regarding faith. You have group #2 of passages that are very clear regarding baptism. Group #1 is clear that faith justifies and we are saved by faith. Group #2 is clear that baptism unites us to Christ, saves us, and regenerates us.
Instead of using group #1 as a hammer to make group #2 untrue or to reinterpret all of the group #2 passages to mean something other than what they mean at face value - we have to determine how both of these groups can be true. In other words, we must stop pitting clear Scriptures against other clear Scriptures, when God's Word is all true. So when the evangelical surmises that since faith saves, baptism cannot, they are in effect creating a false dichotomy. The two are not mutually exclusive. To pit faith alone against baptism is to pit faith alone against grace alone. You just don't do that.
This brings us back to Ephesians 2:8-9, which is very clear that we are saved by grace through faith, not of works. The evangelical interjects here: "See! See! Baptism is a work, therefore it cannot save!" But this interjection and argument rests on a false assumption in the first place. Where does Holy Scripture say what the evangelical says about baptism? Namely, where does it say that baptism is an outward sign of something that already occurred inwardly and that in order to be baptized a person must be able to confess their Christian faith and know what baptism is? Where does Scripture say that? Perhaps it's in the lost book of 2 Apollos, chapter 7. I don't know. But once you see that this interpretation of baptism is foreign to God's Word, well, then it becomes much more clear.
But what about the thief on the cross? He wasn't baptized! Ha! Got you!
The problem is, this is not a good argument at all. Just because the thief on the cross was not baptized does not mean that baptism doesn't save or that baptism is not the normal means by which we are united to Christ. Baptism is a Word of promise from God that saves us. The thief on the cross got one of those too. There was some guy on another cross next to him. Not sure who He was, but I think His name started with a J. And this other guy gave the thief on the cross a word of promise that he would be saved and be with Him in paradise that day. Logic destroys the thief on the cross objection. More importantly, Scripture destroys it.
So, how can group #1 and group #2 both be true? Let's look at Ephesians 2:8-9, which states that we are saved by grace through faith, not of ourselves and not by works. Solely by God's gift. Grace is a gift, faith is a gift, and salvation is a gift. The whole thing is a gift.
If baptism does what Holy Scripture says it does, the solution to the problem is quite simple. Only Christ's work saves us, and it is given to us by grace alone, not of works. If baptism regenerates us, unites us to Christ, and saves us, it cannot be a work, and it has to be grace (Rom 11:6 is pretty clear). Only grace saves. If baptism is grace, it must do something to us that delivers the work of Christ to us personally and objectively. And if it is grace, it also must bring the gift of faith with it; per Ephesians 2:8-9, since this is what grace does. It delivers to us Christ and faith.
So, if baptism is grace and delivers faith, there is no contradiction at all. Baptism is simply a means of grace. It is God's work done to us, not our work done to God out of the pious purity of our heart. It is one way in which Christ is delivered to us. In fact, it is the usual way in which we are united to Christ. The norm, as it were.
Baptism unites us to Christ (Rom 6, Gal 3). Why? Because God baptises us in baptism. It's all Him and none of us. We are baptized, not active workers to save ourselves by works.
We are washed, sanctified, justified (1Cor 6:11), reborn (John 3:5, Tit 3:5), and saved (1Pet 3:21) in baptism. Why,
Baptism is the normal means that God grants us faith. It is pure grace, delivering the crucified Christ to you, personally and objectively. We are saved by grace through faith and we are justified by faith alone. But this faith comes by grace and this grace is delivered through means. We receive it through light rays when we read the Word, sound waves when we hear the Gospel and receive absolution, water in baptism, and bread and wine in the Eucharist.
What most evangelicals are actually against is the idea that baptism can do anything, especially to infants, because it's against their sovereign right to choose. In short, they're against divine monergism, because baptizing an infant (especially an infant) violates their free will because they haven't chosen to be baptized and haven't made their own personal confession of faith. The majority of them won't ever be able to see or consider the biblical stance of baptismal grace which imparts faith because to them faith = choice. This plays off of a false dichotomy as well that equates faith with free will choice and not a gift of God. They've sadly missed the point that we are passive receivers of God's good gifts. Pastor Matt Richard has aptly pointed that out over at Steadfast Lutherans. The article can be found here:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=28761
And Pr. Richard's excellent blogwork can be found here:
http://www.pastormattrichard.com/
Baptism is in no way contrary to faith alone. Baptism is grace that delivers faith to us. God set it up that way. He saves the natural world by connecting His supernatural and eternal Word to natural means. You know, like water, bread, and wine. And stuff.
8/22/13
Why Lutheran? Baptism.
Baptism is one of the biggest hot button topics in Christianity. There are churches who consider it a sacrament and others that consider it an ordinance; churches that believe that it does something and God works through it and churches that believe it does nothing and is a bare sign of obedience; churches that believe baptism belongs to the Gospel and churches that believe it belongs to the law.
To determine what baptism is and what baptism does (or doesn't do) the place we have to go is Holy Scripture. To do so, we go mainly to the didactic epistles of Sts. Paul and Peter as well as the book of Acts, penned by St. Luke.
The baptism debate gets off on the wrong foot far too often by people wrangling about the meaning of the Greek words. The fact of the matter is, the Greek word(s) used for baptism have a wider range of meaning than some people would like to admit. One camp, namely baptists, sometimes claim that the word only means to immerse. Others (rightly, imo) say that the emphasis in the word baptism is on the washing with water, which certainly can be done by immersion. The symbolic stance doesn't even have a washing involved. A washing is something done to you that actually accomplishes something. There is nothing in baptist theology other than 'I went and got myself dunked but nothing actually happened other than I professed my personal relationship with Jesus.' Oh that they would see the gracious gift that baptism is and what it accomplishes!
Here are some of the didactic texts that deal with baptism and use the word baptism:
Romans 6:3-4: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Galatians 3:27: For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Ephesians 4:4-7: There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.
Colossians 2:11-12: In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
1 Peter 3:21: Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Here are a couple of the passages from Acts that speak about baptism:
Acts 2:38-39: And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’
And here are some passages from the didactics that talk about washings:
Ephesians 5:26: that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word
Titus 3:5: he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
1 Corinthians 6:11: And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
This is not an exhaustive list of course. The reason I chose these passages is because they either directly say or hint at what baptism does and what baptism is. There are many other examples of people being baptised in Scripture with no description or hint of what baptism does or does not do.
To make a long story short, how can baptism possibly be only an outward sign for professing believers alone done out of obedience if baptism does all the things that Scripture says it does? Romans 6 and Galatians 3 say that it unites us to Christ. If baptism is a work of obedience, then St. Paul here is pretty clearly teaching works righteousness. Colossians 2 says that it not only buries us with Christ, but also raises us in faith. There is only one thing that works faith in persons, and that is the grace of God (Eph 2:8-9). We are saved by grace through faith, and faith itself is even a gift of God. St. Peter is so blunt as to say that baptism now saves you. St. Peter again, in Acts 2:38-39, says that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins and in it we receive the Holy Spirit. St. Paul puts the efficacy of baptism on God's Word in Ephesians 5, just one chapter after he gets done saying that there is one baptism. (See also the Nicene Creed on this) He also refers to baptism as the washing of regeneration in Titus 3 which closely parallels Jesus' statement in John 3:5.
None of these passages make much sense at all if baptism is noting more than an outward sign of an inward reality, as our baptist brothers like to say. If the things Holy Scripture says about baptism are true, and baptism actually means baptism, then baptism cannot be a work of obedience, unless one is willing to claim that we are saved by works, regenerated by works, united to Christ by works, and so on.
If we are to be biblical and cling to the words of Scripture, we have a much different picture than gets painted by all stripes of evangelical decision theology. Baptism is a means of grace God gave to us. In it we are united with Christ (Rom 6), regenerated (Tit 3), saved (1Pet 3), born again (John 3), raised in faith (Col 2), and forgiven of our sins (Acts 2).
Baptism can do these things precisely because the efficacy is in the Word of God. It is a work of God done to us, not a work of us done for God. We are passive receivers of a divine promise in baptism, not workers showing God how serious we are. Evangelical decision theology, to put it bluntly, has no sacramental theology, and what they call the ordinances are nothing but works, plain and simple.
So instead of trying to explain away all the baptism passages based on presuppotions of what baptism is because that's what you've always been taught - a better idea would be to allow Scripture to dictate to us what baptism is. And Scripture is clear, it's something that does a whole lot for us in s salvific sense. If it raises us in faith as Colossians 2 says, it is a means of grace. Only the grace of God can work faith in us; not our works or obedience. We do not create our own faith. God gives us faith, sustains our faith, and strengthens our faith. But He does this through specific means. Namely, Word and Sacrament, of which baptism is one of these means.
At the end of the day, we as Christians must allow Scripture to dictate to us what is true. Baptism saves us. That is true.
To determine what baptism is and what baptism does (or doesn't do) the place we have to go is Holy Scripture. To do so, we go mainly to the didactic epistles of Sts. Paul and Peter as well as the book of Acts, penned by St. Luke.
The baptism debate gets off on the wrong foot far too often by people wrangling about the meaning of the Greek words. The fact of the matter is, the Greek word(s) used for baptism have a wider range of meaning than some people would like to admit. One camp, namely baptists, sometimes claim that the word only means to immerse. Others (rightly, imo) say that the emphasis in the word baptism is on the washing with water, which certainly can be done by immersion. The symbolic stance doesn't even have a washing involved. A washing is something done to you that actually accomplishes something. There is nothing in baptist theology other than 'I went and got myself dunked but nothing actually happened other than I professed my personal relationship with Jesus.' Oh that they would see the gracious gift that baptism is and what it accomplishes!
Here are some of the didactic texts that deal with baptism and use the word baptism:
Romans 6:3-4: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Galatians 3:27: For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Ephesians 4:4-7: There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.
Colossians 2:11-12: In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
1 Peter 3:21: Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Here are a couple of the passages from Acts that speak about baptism:
Acts 2:38-39: And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’
And here are some passages from the didactics that talk about washings:
Ephesians 5:26: that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word
Titus 3:5: he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
1 Corinthians 6:11: And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
This is not an exhaustive list of course. The reason I chose these passages is because they either directly say or hint at what baptism does and what baptism is. There are many other examples of people being baptised in Scripture with no description or hint of what baptism does or does not do.
To make a long story short, how can baptism possibly be only an outward sign for professing believers alone done out of obedience if baptism does all the things that Scripture says it does? Romans 6 and Galatians 3 say that it unites us to Christ. If baptism is a work of obedience, then St. Paul here is pretty clearly teaching works righteousness. Colossians 2 says that it not only buries us with Christ, but also raises us in faith. There is only one thing that works faith in persons, and that is the grace of God (Eph 2:8-9). We are saved by grace through faith, and faith itself is even a gift of God. St. Peter is so blunt as to say that baptism now saves you. St. Peter again, in Acts 2:38-39, says that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins and in it we receive the Holy Spirit. St. Paul puts the efficacy of baptism on God's Word in Ephesians 5, just one chapter after he gets done saying that there is one baptism. (See also the Nicene Creed on this) He also refers to baptism as the washing of regeneration in Titus 3 which closely parallels Jesus' statement in John 3:5.
None of these passages make much sense at all if baptism is noting more than an outward sign of an inward reality, as our baptist brothers like to say. If the things Holy Scripture says about baptism are true, and baptism actually means baptism, then baptism cannot be a work of obedience, unless one is willing to claim that we are saved by works, regenerated by works, united to Christ by works, and so on.
If we are to be biblical and cling to the words of Scripture, we have a much different picture than gets painted by all stripes of evangelical decision theology. Baptism is a means of grace God gave to us. In it we are united with Christ (Rom 6), regenerated (Tit 3), saved (1Pet 3), born again (John 3), raised in faith (Col 2), and forgiven of our sins (Acts 2).
Baptism can do these things precisely because the efficacy is in the Word of God. It is a work of God done to us, not a work of us done for God. We are passive receivers of a divine promise in baptism, not workers showing God how serious we are. Evangelical decision theology, to put it bluntly, has no sacramental theology, and what they call the ordinances are nothing but works, plain and simple.
So instead of trying to explain away all the baptism passages based on presuppotions of what baptism is because that's what you've always been taught - a better idea would be to allow Scripture to dictate to us what baptism is. And Scripture is clear, it's something that does a whole lot for us in s salvific sense. If it raises us in faith as Colossians 2 says, it is a means of grace. Only the grace of God can work faith in us; not our works or obedience. We do not create our own faith. God gives us faith, sustains our faith, and strengthens our faith. But He does this through specific means. Namely, Word and Sacrament, of which baptism is one of these means.
At the end of the day, we as Christians must allow Scripture to dictate to us what is true. Baptism saves us. That is true.
8/21/13
From Calvinism to Lutheranism
After some thought, I have decided to resurrect my old blog. I owe my Reformed friend Andy Underhile a debt of gratitude for digging the blog up. I thought I had deleted it and it was gone for good. I did this in light of my conversion to Lutheranism from Calvinism. I am glad Andy found it, however.
I will leave all of my former Calvinist blogs up on the site and indeed I will stand behind much of what I have written in the past. If you're interested in where I stood on things as a Calvinist, just peruse my old blogs. I'll leave them there. For instance, as a Lutheran now, I remain a presuppositionist in the apologetics area. I'll still stack the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen up against anyone in an apologetics debate.
So why the conversion from Calvinism to Lutheranism? (LCMS to be precise) I'm not going to go into a ton of detail here, but I will offer up my main reasons for doing so. Without further adieu, here are my reasons; and no, I'm not going to just post a picture of Holy Scripture!
1. The Christocentric hermeneutic of Lutheranism. The hermeneutics of Lutheran theology I do believe to be correct in light of Scripture. It really is all about Jesus. I know this sounds snarky, and I certainly do not mean to imply that my Reformed brothers are not Christ-centered! But Lutheranism sees all theology through Christ, as opposed to Covenant Theology (which is a pretty solid system, for what it's worth).
2. The sacraments. I found Calvin's views on the sacraments to be untenable and not in-line with Scripture. I find the memorialist views on the sacraments to be crass and out of line with Scripture. The Lutheran views on them are simple, to the point, and take the words in Holy Scripture at face value. Not to mention, the Lutheran views on the sacraments have historical continuity to a much greater degree than the Reformed views.
3. Assurance of Salvation. Limited Atonement in Reformed Theology locates assurance in the individual, whether it intends to or not. Most Calvinists I know will cry foul on this one and I get that. I really do. But where else are you to look if Christ only died for some? You look to your fruits and your changed life. In Lutheranism, we look to objective monergistic gifts that God has given us that deliver Christ crucified to us. That is to say, we know Christ died for us and we know that He has given Himself to us in Word and Sacrament.
4. The Divine Service. I am a huge traditional liturgy homer. It's based in Scripture and centered on Christ, every week and every service.
I would also throw out that reading Scripture and studying church history are two other reasons. But for now, this will suffice.
Grace and Peace
I will leave all of my former Calvinist blogs up on the site and indeed I will stand behind much of what I have written in the past. If you're interested in where I stood on things as a Calvinist, just peruse my old blogs. I'll leave them there. For instance, as a Lutheran now, I remain a presuppositionist in the apologetics area. I'll still stack the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen up against anyone in an apologetics debate.
So why the conversion from Calvinism to Lutheranism? (LCMS to be precise) I'm not going to go into a ton of detail here, but I will offer up my main reasons for doing so. Without further adieu, here are my reasons; and no, I'm not going to just post a picture of Holy Scripture!
1. The Christocentric hermeneutic of Lutheranism. The hermeneutics of Lutheran theology I do believe to be correct in light of Scripture. It really is all about Jesus. I know this sounds snarky, and I certainly do not mean to imply that my Reformed brothers are not Christ-centered! But Lutheranism sees all theology through Christ, as opposed to Covenant Theology (which is a pretty solid system, for what it's worth).
2. The sacraments. I found Calvin's views on the sacraments to be untenable and not in-line with Scripture. I find the memorialist views on the sacraments to be crass and out of line with Scripture. The Lutheran views on them are simple, to the point, and take the words in Holy Scripture at face value. Not to mention, the Lutheran views on the sacraments have historical continuity to a much greater degree than the Reformed views.
3. Assurance of Salvation. Limited Atonement in Reformed Theology locates assurance in the individual, whether it intends to or not. Most Calvinists I know will cry foul on this one and I get that. I really do. But where else are you to look if Christ only died for some? You look to your fruits and your changed life. In Lutheranism, we look to objective monergistic gifts that God has given us that deliver Christ crucified to us. That is to say, we know Christ died for us and we know that He has given Himself to us in Word and Sacrament.
4. The Divine Service. I am a huge traditional liturgy homer. It's based in Scripture and centered on Christ, every week and every service.
I would also throw out that reading Scripture and studying church history are two other reasons. But for now, this will suffice.
Grace and Peace
11/1/12
The Evangelical Obsession With Satan
Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. ~1 Peter 5:8
In addition to the excellent book on apologetics I have been reading, authored by Dr. Greg Bahnsen, I have also had my nose in another book written by John MacArthur entitled Our Sufficiency in Christ. In it, he exposes the modern day obsession of Christians with Satan. His analysis, in my judgment, is spot on.
MacArthur opines, "I am amazed at the number of Christians being drawn into the burgeoning "spiritual warfare" movement. I am convinced it represents an unhealthy obsession with Satan and demonic powers. Judging from the turnouts, thousands of Christians really believe that if they don't attend a spiritual warfare boot camp and learn some strategy for fighting demons, Satan will have them for breakfast." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 214)
Now take careful note what MacArthur is and is not saying. He is saying that he believes that this participation in the spiritual warfare movement is unhealthy and represents a foolish obsession with Satan within the Christian community. He is not saying that spiritual warfare is a fiction and does not exist.
He continues: "Is that true? Is there some secret strategy to be learned from "experts" in the art of spiritual warfare? Do Christians need to study mystic teachings for confronting and commanding evil forces, "binding" the devil, "breaking the strongholds" of territorial demons, and other complex strategems of metaphysical combat? Is it simplistic to think that the basic armor described in Ephesians 6 is sufficient to keep us from being breakfast for Satan?" (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
The short answer is, why do we need to be trained by certain incantations to get rid of Satan? I will also propose another idea that needs to be considered. Is Satan omnipresent like God? That is, is Satan available to be everywhere all at once? If so, then many evangelicals may be right, Satan attacks them all the time. However, what Scripture do we have that supports this idea? Simply put, we have none. Scripture never tells us that Satan is omnipresent. It does tell us, however, that God is. My conclusion is that yes, Satan does go after the saints, but not all at once at the same time.
MacArthur continues, "Absolutely not. One of the glorious truths of our sufficiency in Christ is that we are alredy more than conquerors in the great cosmic spiritual warfare (Rom. 8:37). Satan is already a defeated foe (Col. 2:15, 1 Pet 3:22)." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
Why then are we so obsessed with Satan? Is he our enemy? Yes, absolutely. Are we supposed to seek him out and defeat him? Nope. In fact, Christ already defeated him via his work. Let us see what the Scriptures have to say about this topic.
Colossians 2:15: He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.
Matthew 12:25-29: Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.
In fact, I would argue strongly that Christ already has bound Satan. That does not mean that Satan doesn't exist or that Satan doesn't stir up strife or attack the saints. But it does mean that Christ, through His work, has defeated him already. The idea that God is trying really hard to defeat Satan and He needs our help to do it is absurd. Satan is already defeated. He is already bound. He has not once been able to rally the whole world together to make war against the saints since the work of Christ was completed at Calvary.
MacArthur continues, "Certainly we are involved in an ongoing "struggle...against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph. 6:12). But Christ is already the Victor in this spiritual war. When the apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesian Christians, he was not suggesting that they view their conflict with the powers of darkness as a battle whose outcome still hung in the balance. He was telling them they needed to "be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might" (v. 10); to "stand firm" (vv. 11, 13); to use the spiritual armor - truth, righteousness, the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, and God's Word - to resist the schemes of the devil. They were to fight from a position of victory, not out of fear that Satan might make them toast." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
How different this is than what is commonly portrayed and practiced today!
"Nor was the apostle suggesting that the church should infiltrate confrontations with evil principalities and powers. There's no need for Christians to seek to engage Satan in combat. Nowhere in Scripture are we ever encouraged to do so. On the contrary, we are to "be of sober spirit, [and] be on the alert," for he (Satan) prowls around like a roaring, devouring lion (1 Pet 5:8). After all, who is after whom?" (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215-216)
Excellent insight here from MacArthur. We are never commanded to seek out Satan and engage him. Why would a Christian ever want to do that? I'll let MacArthur have the final word.
"Since Satan is pursuing us, how do we keep from becoming instant breakfast? Certainly not by chasing after him, hunting him down, attempting to bind him, commanding him, or rebuking him with some incantation. We simply "resist the devil and he will flee" (James 4:7). Why? Because the One who indwells every believer is greater than the devil (1 John 4:4) - and all the powers of hell know it (Matt 8:28-32).
That a movement so obsessed with Satan and his minions could suddenly gain popularity among Bible-believing Christians is proof of the influence mysticism has had in the church. Many of the tactics these self-styled experts in spiritual warfare are advocating have no Scriptural warrant whatsoever. They are the fruit of mysticism run amok. Those who advocate them speak as if they had great authority, but the truth is you won't find biblical support for most of the techniques they recommend. Where does Scripture indicate, for example, that Christians should band together to wage prayer wars against crime and traffic jams or exorcise phenomena like the Bermuda Triangle?
Worst of all, such teaching actually encourages Christians to dabble in demonic affaris or to live in fear and superstition. That is exactly contrary to God's design. We are to equip ourselves for spiritual warfare by becoming experts in righteousness, not by focusing our thoughts and energies on the enemy and fearing his power (Phil 4:8, Rom 16:19).
To put it another way, our sufficiency in Christ fits us for the battle. The spiritual resources we gain in Him are sufficient to sustain us in the face of the enemy - apart from any maneuvers that might be learned in some spiritual warfare seminar. "We are not ignorant of his schemes" (2Cor 2:11); we have a greater power indwelling us (1 John 4:4); and we have God's own promise of absolute security in Christ (Rom 8:38-39)." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 216-217)
Indeed, it is Christ alone who has won the victory over Satan, sin, and death. Only in Him - and not by seeking out Satan and engaging Him - are we victorious. Precisely because He alone is the Victor. It's not "me and God against the devil." Satan is not sovereign, God is. Christ alone has already won.
In addition to the excellent book on apologetics I have been reading, authored by Dr. Greg Bahnsen, I have also had my nose in another book written by John MacArthur entitled Our Sufficiency in Christ. In it, he exposes the modern day obsession of Christians with Satan. His analysis, in my judgment, is spot on.
MacArthur opines, "I am amazed at the number of Christians being drawn into the burgeoning "spiritual warfare" movement. I am convinced it represents an unhealthy obsession with Satan and demonic powers. Judging from the turnouts, thousands of Christians really believe that if they don't attend a spiritual warfare boot camp and learn some strategy for fighting demons, Satan will have them for breakfast." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 214)
Now take careful note what MacArthur is and is not saying. He is saying that he believes that this participation in the spiritual warfare movement is unhealthy and represents a foolish obsession with Satan within the Christian community. He is not saying that spiritual warfare is a fiction and does not exist.
He continues: "Is that true? Is there some secret strategy to be learned from "experts" in the art of spiritual warfare? Do Christians need to study mystic teachings for confronting and commanding evil forces, "binding" the devil, "breaking the strongholds" of territorial demons, and other complex strategems of metaphysical combat? Is it simplistic to think that the basic armor described in Ephesians 6 is sufficient to keep us from being breakfast for Satan?" (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
The short answer is, why do we need to be trained by certain incantations to get rid of Satan? I will also propose another idea that needs to be considered. Is Satan omnipresent like God? That is, is Satan available to be everywhere all at once? If so, then many evangelicals may be right, Satan attacks them all the time. However, what Scripture do we have that supports this idea? Simply put, we have none. Scripture never tells us that Satan is omnipresent. It does tell us, however, that God is. My conclusion is that yes, Satan does go after the saints, but not all at once at the same time.
MacArthur continues, "Absolutely not. One of the glorious truths of our sufficiency in Christ is that we are alredy more than conquerors in the great cosmic spiritual warfare (Rom. 8:37). Satan is already a defeated foe (Col. 2:15, 1 Pet 3:22)." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
Why then are we so obsessed with Satan? Is he our enemy? Yes, absolutely. Are we supposed to seek him out and defeat him? Nope. In fact, Christ already defeated him via his work. Let us see what the Scriptures have to say about this topic.
Colossians 2:15: He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.
Matthew 12:25-29: Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.
In fact, I would argue strongly that Christ already has bound Satan. That does not mean that Satan doesn't exist or that Satan doesn't stir up strife or attack the saints. But it does mean that Christ, through His work, has defeated him already. The idea that God is trying really hard to defeat Satan and He needs our help to do it is absurd. Satan is already defeated. He is already bound. He has not once been able to rally the whole world together to make war against the saints since the work of Christ was completed at Calvary.
MacArthur continues, "Certainly we are involved in an ongoing "struggle...against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph. 6:12). But Christ is already the Victor in this spiritual war. When the apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesian Christians, he was not suggesting that they view their conflict with the powers of darkness as a battle whose outcome still hung in the balance. He was telling them they needed to "be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might" (v. 10); to "stand firm" (vv. 11, 13); to use the spiritual armor - truth, righteousness, the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, and God's Word - to resist the schemes of the devil. They were to fight from a position of victory, not out of fear that Satan might make them toast." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215)
How different this is than what is commonly portrayed and practiced today!
"Nor was the apostle suggesting that the church should infiltrate confrontations with evil principalities and powers. There's no need for Christians to seek to engage Satan in combat. Nowhere in Scripture are we ever encouraged to do so. On the contrary, we are to "be of sober spirit, [and] be on the alert," for he (Satan) prowls around like a roaring, devouring lion (1 Pet 5:8). After all, who is after whom?" (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 215-216)
Excellent insight here from MacArthur. We are never commanded to seek out Satan and engage him. Why would a Christian ever want to do that? I'll let MacArthur have the final word.
"Since Satan is pursuing us, how do we keep from becoming instant breakfast? Certainly not by chasing after him, hunting him down, attempting to bind him, commanding him, or rebuking him with some incantation. We simply "resist the devil and he will flee" (James 4:7). Why? Because the One who indwells every believer is greater than the devil (1 John 4:4) - and all the powers of hell know it (Matt 8:28-32).
That a movement so obsessed with Satan and his minions could suddenly gain popularity among Bible-believing Christians is proof of the influence mysticism has had in the church. Many of the tactics these self-styled experts in spiritual warfare are advocating have no Scriptural warrant whatsoever. They are the fruit of mysticism run amok. Those who advocate them speak as if they had great authority, but the truth is you won't find biblical support for most of the techniques they recommend. Where does Scripture indicate, for example, that Christians should band together to wage prayer wars against crime and traffic jams or exorcise phenomena like the Bermuda Triangle?
Worst of all, such teaching actually encourages Christians to dabble in demonic affaris or to live in fear and superstition. That is exactly contrary to God's design. We are to equip ourselves for spiritual warfare by becoming experts in righteousness, not by focusing our thoughts and energies on the enemy and fearing his power (Phil 4:8, Rom 16:19).
To put it another way, our sufficiency in Christ fits us for the battle. The spiritual resources we gain in Him are sufficient to sustain us in the face of the enemy - apart from any maneuvers that might be learned in some spiritual warfare seminar. "We are not ignorant of his schemes" (2Cor 2:11); we have a greater power indwelling us (1 John 4:4); and we have God's own promise of absolute security in Christ (Rom 8:38-39)." (MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ, p. 216-217)
Indeed, it is Christ alone who has won the victory over Satan, sin, and death. Only in Him - and not by seeking out Satan and engaging Him - are we victorious. Precisely because He alone is the Victor. It's not "me and God against the devil." Satan is not sovereign, God is. Christ alone has already won.
9/12/12
How Serious is it to get Original Sin and the Fall of Man Correct? Deathly Serious.
I’ve been aware that there has always been a group of
persons claiming the name of Christ who deny original sin and the fall of man. It's not like these ideas are new.
What I was unaware of is just how openly prevalent it is now days. I’ve run into many
of these folks online lately, so I am compelled to speak about this topic. The
more I think about the topic, the bigger of a deal it clearly becomes. Not that
it’s becoming any worse than it already is, but you see quite clearly what
other foolish stances people derive from this denial of these core Christian
doctrines.
If I can see OK, what I have been seeing lately is that a
denial of original sin and the fall of man results in an entire superstructure
of theology that is completely wrong and unbiblical. For the sake of ease here,
I will stick to the core belief superstructure at the root of this denial:
Pelagianism.
Pelagianism basically can be summed up in six points. Here
they are.
1.
Even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died.
2.
Adam's sin harmed only himself, not the human
race.
3.
Children just
born are in the same state as Adam before
his fall.
4.
The whole human race neither dies through Adam's
sin or death, nor rises again through the resurrection
of Christ.
5.
The Mosaic Law is as good
a guide to heaven as the Gospel.
6.
Even before the advent
of Christ there were men
who were without sin.
These were the six main ideas espoused by Pelagius, a 5th
century English monk, and his close associate, Caelestius. Now, when we look at
them as a whole, they all make sense within the framework of Pelagian theology.
Namely, if we deny original sin and the fall, they fit together.
#1: Even if Adam had not sinned, he would have died.
This assertion disregards the integrity of the original
creation. God said it was good, but He created Adam in a body of death anyways.
Scripture tells us that death itself is part of the curse that was rendered to
the whole creation as a result of Adam’s sin.
Yet this assertion makes sense within Pelagianism due to the
fact that Pelagians deny that the fall of man affected everyone else post-Adam.
Why? It’s based on evidence of the fact that everyone post-Adam has died (save
for Enoch and Elijah). Thus, death cannot be a result of sin, since that would
mean that there would be zero people who have ever lived perfectly and never
sinned. Thus, Adam had to be mortal pre-fall to account not only for sinless
living, but also to account for the fact that infants and small children, who
are not sinners, die all the time. So, this makes sense in Pelagianism because
death cannot be the result of sin, since Adam’s sin does not apply to anyone
other than Adam, and people who are innocent die all the time.
#2: Adam's sin harmed only himself, not the human race.
This is explained mainly in the last point, but again,
within Pelagianism, this makes perfect sense. This is in essence a denial of
the Christian doctrine of the fall of man. Adam had his own fall, which began a
process of spiritual dying (but not physical, because that has nothing to do
with sin). Likewise, we all have our own personal falls that starts our own
process of dying spiritually. But we certainly are not sinners by nature, we’re
only sinners after we choose to sin.
#3: Children just born are in the
same state as Adam before his fall.
Here is the blatant and outright denial of the doctrine of
original sin. Not much else needs to be said here, but this ties in directly
with the first two.
#4: The whole human race neither dies through Adam's sin or death, nor rises
again through the resurrection of Christ.
I will allow Pelagian writer Lewis Loflin to answer this one: “This is the real reason why Christianity needs the Original
Sin doctrine. If Original Sin is false as the Old Testament shows and there are
clearly men who overcame sin without faith in Jesus, then by our own efforts we
can achieve this task. Thus we don't need Christianity, its institutions, and
leaders to control our lives. One is Jesus' own relatives prior to His birth.”
In short, we don’t need Christ to save us. We enter
into life by keeping the commandments. Loflin also accuses the apostle Paul of
inventing the “inherited sin” doctrine. In short, Paul is wrong, in his view.
He also denies the bodily resurrection, saying: “Adam was expelled from the
Garden for the express purpose he would not be made immortal. It seems God
never intended humans to be immortal, which throws any idea of life after death
(bodily resurrection) into question. Pelagius was right on this count.”
Pretty much (in his view) everything Paul said was
wrong and was nothing more than a perversion of the Old Testament.
#5: The Mosaic Law is as good
a guide to heaven as the Gospel.
Of course it would be, because we are capable of keeping it
perfectly in Pelagian theology. Thus, there is no need for Christ unless you
first go and screw it up by sinning and then after you sin, you still retain
all that natural and moral ability to throw yourself on Christ for forgiveness.
This is a denial of the Gospel. It opens up an additional way of salvation.
#6: Even before the advent of Christ
there were men who were without sin.
Pelagians will quote a couple Old Testament references to
try to prove this, but none of the references they quote say anything of the
sort. Numbers 14:24 is invoked, which says “But my servant Caleb,
because he has a different spirit and has followed me fully, I will bring into
the land into which he went, and his descendants shall possess it.” Next
up is 2 Kings 22:2: “And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and walked in all the way of David his father, and he did not turn
aside to the right or to the left.” This one is speaking of King Josiah.
The Pelagians will even go as far as to say that Abraham was sinless pre-Christ
because God called Abraham His friend (Isa 41:8) and Daniel “beloved” (Dan
9:23, 10:11)
So those are the six major points in
Pelagian theology. Zero of them are historically Christian and zero of them get
the human condition, or God, correct. In short, the Pelagians, just like any
other false religion, wrest passages everywhere from their context, force them
to mean more than they are actually saying, or make them mean something they aren’t
saying at all.
Regarding the Apostle Paul’s writings, I
have seen Pelagians take two approaches. One approach is the one Loflin takes;
to say that Paul was just dead wrong. Loflin sees, then, that Paul does teach
original sin and the fall of man. The other approach, which is more common, is
to try to reinterpret Paul to fit with Pelagianism. I’ve seen a couple efforts
in this regard and it just doesn’t work.
Here is a sampling of what some councils
and confessions have said about Pelagianism over the years.
Council of Carthage (418 AD)
That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema. (Canon 1)
That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema. (Canon 1)
Council of Orange (529 AD)
If anyone denies
that it is the whole man, that is, both body and soul, that was "changed
for the worse" through the offense of Adam's sin, but believes that the
freedom of the soul remains unimpaired and that only the body is subject to
corruption, he is deceived by the error of Pelagius and contradicts the
scripture which says, "The soul that sins shall die" (Ezek. 18:20);
and, "Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to anyone as obedient
slaves, you are the slaves of the one whom you obey?" (Rom. 6:16); and,
"For whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved" (2 Pet. 2:19).
(Canon 1)
If anyone asserts
that Adam's sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if
he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for
sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one
man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the
Apostle, who says, "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man
and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men
sinned" (Rom. 5:12). (Canon 2)
And thus according
to the passages of holy scripture quoted above or the interpretations of the
ancient Fathers we must, under the blessing of God, preach and believe as
follows. The sin of the first man has so impaired and weakened free will that
no one thereafter can either love God as he ought or believe in God or do good
for God's sake, unless the grace of divine mercy has preceded him. (Conclusion)
Augsburg Confession
(Lutheran 1530 AD)
Our churches
condemn the followers of Pelagius and all others who deny that original sin is
truly sin. Such people argue that humans can be justified before God by their
own strength and reason. This lessens the glory of Christ’s work and its
benefits. (Art 2, 3)
We condemn the
Pelagians and all others who teach that without the Holy Spirit, by the power
of human nature alone, we are able to love God above all things. Or that by our
own power we can do the commandments of God according to the substance of the
act. (Art 18, 8)
Belgic Confession (Reformed 1561 AD)
We believe that by the disobedience of Adam original sin has been spread
through the whole human race.
It is a corruption of all nature-- an inherited depravity which even
infects small infants in their mother's womb, and the root which produces in
man every sort of sin. It is therefore so vile and enormous in God's sight that
it is enough to condemn the human race, and it is not abolished or wholly
uprooted even by baptism, seeing that sin constantly boils forth as though from
a contaminated spring.
Nevertheless, it is not imputed to God's children for their condemnation
but is forgiven by his grace and mercy-- not to put them to sleep but so that
the awareness of this corruption might often make believers groan as they long
to be set free from the "body of this death." (Rom 7:24)
Therefore we reject the error of the Pelagians who say that this sin is
nothing else than a matter of imitation.
Canons of Dort (Reformed 1618-19 AD)
Who teach that in election to faith a
prerequisite condition is that man should rightly use the light of nature, be
upright, unassuming, humble, and disposed to eternal life, as though election
depended to some extent on these factors.
For this smacks of Pelagius, and it clearly calls into question the words
of the apostle: We lived at one time in the passions of our flesh, following
the will of our flesh and thoughts, and we were by nature children of wrath,
like everyone else. But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with
which he loved us, even when we were dead in transgressions, made us alive with
Christ, by whose grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with him and
seated us with him in heaven in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages
we might show the surpassing riches of his grace, according to his kindness
toward us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through
faith (and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God) not by works, so
that no one can boast (Eph. 2:3-9).
So how serious are the denials of original sin and the fall of man? Deathly
serious. Serious to the point where the followers of such grievous errors are
preachers of another Gospel and peddlers of something far outside of Christianity.
When these core doctrines are incorrect, an entire superstructure of false
theology slides in to take the place of the Scriptural report, as we have seen
above. Getting the beginning wrong, the rest falls like dominoes in a row, and you end up getting everything wrong. And it amounts to an outright denial of Christianity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)