Words Mean Things
Paul,
You have raised many issues in the last post that would take a book to answer. If I may, I would like to ask a few questions that might help us to clarify the issues on which we disagree. First, I want to state a couple of points on which I think we agree. Incidentally, I am convinced Piper and others would also agree.
1. Justification and sanctification are separate works of God.
2. Justification is based on the work of Christ alone and our works do not contribute to it at all.
3. Sanctification involves our obedience to the commands of Christ.
4, Our obedience to Christ contributes to our assurance since obedience demonstrates the reality of our faith.
Questions:
1. Is it possible for a professing Christian to be deceived?
2. Can a person who has professed faith in Christ but whose faith is not genuine, continue to rest in his good deeds to justify him before God?
3. Can the works he believes he is performing in the process of sanctification become a snare for him so that he continues to trust in his own works rather than trusting in the finished work of Christ?
4, Do such persons need exhortation to avoid “falling from the grace of God” as Paul did in Galatians?
5. If a person should return to a system of legal obedience and thus forsake the way of grace, would we not agree that such a person was never truly justified?
6. Do you believe faith is something we profess once and sort of get that part of it over with and then everything else is accomplished apart from faith, or does the believer go on believing in Christ for life? If his faith doesn’t continue, how can he be pleasing to God, since without faith it is impossible to please him?
7. Have you never known anyone who gave the clear impression that their obedience in sanctification had become their basis of hope for justification? Do you not think such people need to be exhorted to trust in Christ alone and not in anything of their own obedience, i.e., not to trust their own efforts but Christ alone?
8. Do you see not difference between telling a person not to trust his own performance in sanctification and telling him he doesn’t need to obey in the process of sanctification?.
|
Submitted on 2011/12/08 at 11:49 am | In reply to gracewriterrandy.
Randy, 1. Separate works, but the same thing. Sanctification, or what they call “progressive sanctification” because they lie all the time, is “justification in action.” Both are justification, but one is a legal declaration, and the other is “the power of the gospel.” That’s what all neo-antinomians believe. 2. First, justification is not by Christ ALONE. If God didn’t elect Christ, elect the elect, and draw them to Christ, along with with sacrificing His only Son, what Christ did would have been for naught. So, justification is not by Christ alone. 3. That’s NOT what New Calvinists believe. They believe that Christ obeys for us. This is well documented in the book, chapter 13. 4. Right. 100% true. 1. Professing? Or genuine? You don’t clarify. 2. Such a person has a wrong view of salvation. How they experience their false profession is not relevant and has no bearing on a theological discussion. 3. No, because it’s not really sanctification. Like New Calvinists, he believes the two are one and he must contribute to maintaining his just standing before God. New Calvinists also believe the two are one, but rightly conclude that there is no way we can maintain our just standing before God. That’s why their daddy, Robert Brinsmead, came up with a theological system where Jesus obeys for us. Graeme Goldsworthy supplied the necessary hermeneutic for the system, Jon Zens helped with how the Law related to the system, and Geoffrey Paxton was the promoter and wrote most of the articles in their theological journal. 4. Yes, in regard to justification, but NOT sanctification. The notion that the first four chapters of Galatians is about sanctification is an antinomian lie. 5. Legal obedience? This is the view that people can sincerely, truthfully, and correctly apply the word of God to their lives, but for the purpose of maintaining their just standing before God. This model is a biblical anomaly. Works salvation, as described in the Bible, ALWAYS involves rituals and standards that are the “traditions and precepts of men.” I reject the premise of your question because it is biblically unfounded. When people are really saved, they have been given a love for the truth, and that’s why they seek to apply it to their life correctly. Therefore, true obedience for the sake of maintaining the legal declaration is an oxymoron. But of course, New Calvinists continually present this type of model in their teachings because they lie all the time about almost everything. 6. Here, you are employing the either/or communication technique. Faith is EITHER all about the Christ/gospel that saved us, OR all about other things that don’t require faith. It’s either/or, faith can only refer to the gospel that saved us. No, faith applies to other realms within sanctification that please God. 7. Again, you present the oxymoronic biblical aonomaly of people presenting true obedience to God in kingdom living for the purpose of maintaining their just standing before God. Unsaved people can have no such desire for the truth. That’s why works salvation always presents an unbiblical standard or ritual. 8. I have a problem with the use of the word “trust” in your question. Again, you employ the EITHER/OR communication technique. The only “trust” there can be in sanctification is EITHER trust in our performance, OR trust in the gospel/works of Christ. In sanctification, it’s trust in the word of God which results in our performance. Also, as Christians in sanctification, we don’t “obey a PROCESS.” We “observe all that I have commanded you.” If Christ meant to say, “teaching them to observe all of the gospel and my personhood,” that’s what He would have said. |
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Paul,
I have known many professing Christians over the years who confused the evidencies of faith with the object of faith. Such people never seem to be able to feel at peace in terms of their acceptance by God. Others seem to have faith in faith rather than faith in Christ. Such people need to be told that no amount of. “obedience” on their part will ever give them the sense of acceptance they are seeking. The only truth that will profit them is the truth that Jesus has satisfied His Father’s righteous demands once and for all. We must not refrain from preaching this truth for fear that someone might find in it a license to sin. God’s true people will not react to the truth that way, “How shall we who died to sin go on living in it any longer?” In fact, it will motivate God’s true people to obey him all the more diligently.
LikeLike
Randy,
The Bible is clear in many places: we experience the assurance of our salvation through obedience. Jerry Bridges teaches that we gain assurance by preaching the gospel to ourselves and remembering that acceptance doesn’t depend on anything we do. Therefore, he is lying by fusing justification with how we experience the reality of our salvation. 2Peter chapter one could not be clearer on how we make our calling and election sure [in feeling confident]. 1John is very clear on this as well.
LikeLike
Paul,
The NT Scriptures speak of three different types of assurance, the full assurance of understanding, the full assurance of faith and the full assurance of hope. Which of these three are you talking about? It makes a big difference.
LikeLike
Randy,
I’m talking about “making our calling and election sure,” whatever category you want to put that under.
LikeLike
Do you understand that there is a difference between the full assurance of faith and the full assurance of hope? The “full assurance of faith” (Heb.10:19-22) is our settled confidence that IF we are in Christ, his work and his work alone cleanses our consciences before God. It rests on God’s unchangeable promise and oath and cannot be lost as long as we have faith. This depends on Christ’s sacrifice alone, and our obedience has nothing to do with it.
The “full assurance of hope” (Heb. 6:11) requires our diligence. It is the assurance that we are truly united to Christ and will certainly enjoy the inheritance God has promised us. This assurance can be lost if we are walking in disobedience or neglecting the things of God. It does not question that all who are in Christ are made spotless in God’s presence by his work alone; it questions the reality of our attachment to Christ.
LikeLike
Randy,
That’s only half the story. Paul told Timothy to “keep a clear conscience” which obviously comes through obedience.
LikeLike
What is only half the story? Can you not read? Look at what I wrote. “The “full assurance of hope” (Heb. 6:11) requires our diligence.” Don’t you think that involves our obedience? Man, you have to start paying attention to what people are saying. No wonder you keep accusing people of writing/saying things they have never said.
LikeLike
Paul,
I am still waiting for an answer to the question, “Would you suggest that at some point we Christians stop believing the gospel that saved us?”
LikeLike