A Final Appeal: The First Reformation Applied to the Contemporary Context (Part 1)

Recovering the First Reformation - Toward a Proto-Protestant Narrative of Church History (XVII)

The time is now.

These essays have attempted to survey Church history and re-cast it in a narrative frame at odds with the often tight, packaged, and frankly sometimes disingenuous renderings provided by denominational partisans and the advocates of Christendom – or the fiction that is often referred to as Judeo-Christian civilisation. This revisiting and questioning of common Protestant and Evangelical narratives of Church History is essential if one is to understand and navigate the present context.

The Moral Law: Ezekiel 20, the Sabbath, and the Decalogue

Moreover I also gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them.(Ezekiel 20.12)

The Sabbath was a covenantal sign that was to 'mark out' the people of God as distinct from the Gentile nations. The Sabbath therefore was not universal, it was not a law that was to be applied in all places and at all times. This is actually fairly clear when one reads the Old Testament and it is even explicit in places like Ezekiel 20.12. It was a covenantal sign and as such was only binding upon those in union with Jehovah.

But this presents a real dilemma for some Christian groups today.

Inbox: Kingdom Clarity and Soteriological Fog

As usual I have reworked the questions a bit but essentially I was asked the following. If God has made the distinctions between the Kingdom and the World with such lucidity and clarity, why then do I argue that issues like Justification are so nuanced? Why would God present something as critical as what it takes to be made right with Him, what it takes to possess eternal salvation... in terms that seem so unclear? Isn't Sola Fide, the question of justification the primary focus of Scripture from beginning to end?

It's a very interesting way of framing the question to be sure and one I've not encountered before.

Washer's Ten Indictments Against the Modern Church: Critiquing the Critics (Part 2)

Washer refers to infant baptism as the golden calf of the Reformation. To put it bluntly, he's wrong... but there's a sense in which he's right. He's wrong on the issue of paedobaptism there's a hint of truth to his statement.

Paedobaptism is Scriptural and despite Baptist assertions to the contrary it is even testified to in the book of Acts but the problem is when it's applied in a Sacralist milieu. Then it becomes distorted and destructive. Baptism, paedo- or otherwise should never be universally applied to a tribe, nation or culture. It is applied only to the separatist pilgrim Church that has come out of the world and continues in perseverance. Within that context paedobaptism has its import and can function correctly. Sacralism necessarily waters down discipline to the point of near irrelevance and it destroys the Church's distinct identity and (as a consequence) renders the Word and Sacrament almost meaningless.

Washer's Ten Indictments Against the Modern Church: Critiquing the Critics (Part 1)

Recently I decided to revisit Paul Washer's Ten Indictments Against the Modern Church. You can get it in pamphlet form but in this case I wanted to listen to it and so I went to SermonAudio. I'm not usually one for highly impassioned preaching with shouting and all the rest, but if I am going to listen to someone do it, it's going to be along the lines of Paul Washer.

It's been a good eight years since I listened to it last. I remember what I was doing at the time and can place the date in 2010. I remember being pleasantly surprised by his candor and largely accurate assessment of Evangelicalism in the 21^st century. Of course, I don't agree with him on every point but overall it's excellent.

Prolegomena and the Question of Final Salvation Part 2

But again, isn't certainty eliminated? By no means. Does it become all but impossible to form creedal statements and confessions? Not in the least, but of course I question the motives behind this impulse. The statements will out of necessity become broader and thus more inclusive. Once again at this point I will be accused of being an ecumenicist, a liberal, one whose doctrinal sea is a mile wide but an inch deep.

Prolegomena and the Question of Final Salvation

I write this as something of a sequel to the essay on Salvation and the Question of Works.

It's one thing to discuss the nature of saving faith and to refute the spurious charges of rapprochement with Roman Catholic soteriology. But there's another issue or aspect of this debate that also deserves mention. This is the question of what is sometimes referred to as Final Salvation. I have written about it before and alluded to it in the recent aforementioned post but a few more comments are in order.

I mentioned that Eternal Security and Perseverance of the Saints are not the same thing. I would argue that the older Reformed doctrine of perseverance has all but degenerated into a Once-Saved-Always-Saved baptistic version of Eternal Security. I also talked about how salvation is presented in larger terms in which Justification is an essential component or aspect but it is not given the place of prominence, at least not in the way Solafideist theology has prioritised it. Additionally I mentioned how even these soteriological questions are cast in terms of the Already and the Not Yet.

Saving Faith and the Question of Works

Recently I encountered someone bringing a rather novel interpretation to the 'Lord, Lord' passage of Matthew 7. The well-known pericope contained within the Sermon on the Mount is for many (and rightly) a source of trembling. It speaks to self-deception and false faith.

Signs and Symbols: Israel and Covenant in Romans 9.6

In Romans 9 Paul launches into a discussion regarding Israel and brings up the very important question regarding the fate of the Jewish people. Were these people so long in covenant with God now simply abandoned? With the inclusion of the Gentiles into the New Covenant were the Jews no longer part of God's plan? Paul addresses these questions by probing the plan of God throughout history and unveiling another layer essential to understanding both the Old Testament and the nature of salvation in general. He expands on the message he's already been discussing, that salvation has always been by faith in Christ even before Christ came upon the scene. There is a grand uniting story but it is told in two very different ways and historical settings.

The Law-Gospel Hermeneutic and The Great Commission

Recently I heard what I considered to be an extreme example of the Law-Gospel hermeneutic at work. It struck me in the same way Hyper-Calvinist readings of John 3.16 or 2 Peter 3.9 can. It was a clear case of system taking precedent over the text.

Revisiting Evangelicals and Catholics Together

Commentators are revisiting the issue of ECT or Evangelicals and Catholics Together. The original document was penned in 1994 and since it has been about twenty years, it's definitely a time for reflection.

Sadly I'm not terribly impressed with the analysis.

Pietism, Higher Criticism and the Prussian Union of 1817

Over the years I have encountered numerous Missouri Synod Lutherans who continually rail against Pietism. I mean they really have very strong feelings about it. I was reminded of this recently when I listened to podcast dealing with the Prussian Union of 1817.

The Battle over Quiet Time

For many Christians 'Quiet Time' is an important part of their spirituality. They take some time out of every day to read their Bible and spend some time in prayer and possibly reading some other Christian focused book whether it be devotional, commentary or theology.

Hyper-Solafideism Part 6- Two forms of the Law/Gospel Hermeneutic

 This also brings us to what is often called the Law/Gospel hermeneutic. As we've discussed, there are several dynamics at work in how the Old and New Testament relate to each other.

There is an overarching unity in substance...Salvation by Grace through Faith Alone rooted in the Person and work of Jesus Christ. Everyone from Adam to now was saved the same way regardless of their chronological placement. The Eternal Covenant and Jesus Christ are inseparable and form the basis of the Unity.

Hyper-Solafideism Part 5- Vosian Hyper-Eschatology, Federal Vision's Bestial Agenda, and a few observations regarding the Lutheran Legacy

Thus far I have been in agreement with the Vosian crowd rejection of the Federal Vision understanding of Redemptive-History. But at this point I switch sides. Unlike the Federal Vision folks I certainly affirm the concept of merit, that Christ's Active Obedience helped to pay for our sins and I wholeheartedly agree with the Garden-Works principle, and the reiteration of this under the Mosaic order in typological form applied to the Corporate body of Israel.

Hyper-Solafideism Part 4- The Adam problem and conditionality in the contemporary debate

I wish to touch on a few more issues. This series is not very popular. It's not being read by a lot of folks. Either people already decided they don't agree or some may find it unpractical or perhaps too difficult.

At this point this series is being written to those who are familiar with the contemporary debates and have some familiarity with the terms and players. I'm not taking a great deal of time to define some of these things because those interested probably already know and those who don't know the terms probably aren't bothering to read these.

For the handful of folks that aren't familiar and yet are interested, don't hesitate to comment or ask me directly. I'm happy to clarify or suggest resources. If you're interested and want to understand, don't get discouraged.

Someone might say...I don't need to know all this stuff. That's correct. You don't need to know the in's and out's, the little tweaks and nuances, the way the factions have formed up. You don't need to know these things to know God and to trust in Jesus Christ.

That said.....it is important and plays out even if not everyone can see just how. These ideas affect the Church. They have in the past, continue to do so, and will certainly shape the future. And, in my case I want to know and understand. It's not about knowing so we can keep up on the latest thing. Instead as we work through these things, we are driven to Scripture and forced to think it through. Doing this, we come to know our God even better and we can stand in awe as we consider His ways.

Saving Faith, Temporary Faith, and Justification by Faith

Here's a link to the text of a good sermon pertinent to the Hyper-Solafideism discussion. He does well in defining Saving Faith... avoiding Faith without Knowledge (which is mysticism) but also avoiding Faith being defined as mere assent which results in easy believism.

He's dealing with the classic categories of Knowledge, Assent, and Entrustment. Removing any of these gets you into trouble. He covers them briefly but well.

Hyper-Solafideism- Part 3

The Bible presents us with a strange dynamic, one that defies Aristotelian-like attempts at systemization. As with the Incarnation, we are presented with a dialectical soteriology. We have seemingly opposite and irreconcilable truths that we cannot reconcile. We cannot systematize them either by reaching a synthesis or by reading one pole in light of the other.

Just as the Scriptures seem to teach God predestines our free choices, we are also given a doctrine of Salvation by Grace through Faith Alone, grounded in election, and yet somehow cast in conditional terms dependent on our perseverance. We could say 'seemingly' dependent and that would probably be correct, but I would prefer to avoid this and other attempts at systematizing, because when we do this, we start the process of explaining it away. By throwing the word 'seemingly' or some other term if you prefer...in front of a word like dependent, we're viewing the conditional passages through the lens of election...which raises the types of dilemmas we often see resulting from System problems gaps.

Questions like....are the warnings genuine? are they written to believers? Is the gospel offer really sincere?

Once were asking these questions, we're on the wrong path. We're second guessing the text because it doesn't fit with our systemic presuppositions.

Hyper-Solafideism Part 2

 The Scriptures clearly teach that Salvation is a free gift. We can do nothing to earn it. We are lost, alienated from God, cursed and deserving of physical and eternal death. Adam the first man acted for himself and for his posterity. He was the Federal Head of the entirety of the human race. His sin, whether the actual sin or the resulting curse, passes on to all of us, all of his descendants. As CS Lewis put it, being descendants of Adam we can hold our heads high and yet also hang our heads in shame. We bear the image of God and yet we're cursed by sin.

Like it or not, we're united to Adam, we're in Adam. We need a 2nd Adam to come along and create a new race, a new people. Old Testament Israel represented both the 1st and 2nd Adams…a sort of repeat performance of the first and an anticipation of the second. This point is often missed, certain groups emphasizing the one to the exclusion of the other. The 2nd Adam comes and passes the test, completes the tasks and yet to rescue those under the curse of the 1st Adam he must pay the penalty of sin and make a way of reconciliation to God. Christ the 2nd Adam does this and now we are 'in' Him…united to Him, 'under' Him.

There's nothing we can do to affect this, to earn this, or even to maintain it. It truly is a gift. God out of pure love for His treasonous creatures did this for us. All of mankind is shown mercy, but only those of us who are saved can grasp the wonders, the breathtaking wonders of Grace. Its foundations in the Person and Work of Christ are rightly called amazing, and its application via the Holy Spirit…well, even the Angels are in awe of it.

Hyper-Solafideism and Meta-System Part 1

For those unfamiliar with theological jargon, this article will delve into unfamiliar waters. As much as possible I'm trying to avoid using too many terms but I'm afraid it is somewhat inescapable. In this post and several subsequent parts I will be discussing the doctrine of Sola Fide or Justification by Faith Alone and how that works both in the Bible and how we in seeking to understand the Bible, and teach it, run into certain dilemmas. These dilemmas and the way we deal with them are actually the source of the many divisions within the Church today.

Over the course of history people have lived in different contexts and these contexts affect how they think. Due to these contextual factors, we read the Bible in different ways and one group may really focus on one thing while someone else in a different time and place focuses on something else. I'm arguing we tend to overly focus on certain things and that sharply affects how we understand or in some cases don't understand the rest of the Bible.

In this particular series I'm dealing specifically with those who are committed to the Bible being the very Word of God and claim it as the Sole Authority for faith and life....Scripture Alone/Sola Scriptura. Thus far we're in agreement. But now how do we read it and what tools do we employ in seeking to understand it? That's a different question and one that I wish to raise.