Dear Reformed Brother, Was Jesus Righteous Before He Kept the Law?
Time and time again, this ministry has demonstrated that the reformed standard for justification is perfect law-keeping rather than the new birth. Here is a summary of the salient premises (what reformed theology must assume to be true to arrive at their conclusion). It goes something like this:
- Man is totally depraved.
- Because man is totally depraved, no one can keep the law perfectly.
- Because no one can keep the law perfectly, we need someone to keep the law on our behalf.
- Jesus is the only one who ever kept the law perfectly.
- Because Jesus kept the law perfectly, we must depend on Jesus to keep the law for us.
- God “declares” us righteous because Jesus’ obedience is imputed to us.
- When God looks at us He doesn’t “see” our sin, He only sees Christ (covering/atonement)
There might be a few more details one could add in there, but the conclusion is this:
The standard for righteousness is perfect law-keeping.
The list of problems with this line of reasoning is extensive, not the least of which is the fact that the Bible says righteousness is apart from the law. But when we keep thinking about the ramifications of the above assumptions, the conclusions are obvious. In this construct, a believer is only declared righteous as long as he keeps living by “faith alone”. So if at any time he ceases to live by “faith alone” he puts his justification at risk. This means he is never really “righteous” until he gets to the end of his life. And even then, his righteousness depends on the degree to which he lived by “faith alone”. In other words, no believer can ever really “know” if he is really righteous until all the facts come in. There would have to be sufficient “proof” that reveals that his justification is authentic.
But I want to camp on a notion that I doubt very few have ever stopped to consider. If the basis of righteousness is perfect law-keeping, then how is Jesus righteous? Would not He too be required to live a perfect life? Of course the protestant response to this is a resounding, yes. They openly declare that it was by His perfect law-keeping that Jesus was righteous. That is one of the assumptions listed above. But now consider this. How could a claim be made for Jesus’ righteousness until He had demonstrated perfect law-keeping His entire life? It is impossible to claim that Jesus was righteous before he ever demonstrated one good work. Ironically, the same standard that the reformed use for believers MUST also apply to the One who makes 
justification possible according to their theology. And this just will not work because it makes Jesus’ own righteousness suspect (which the reformed conveniently do not allow for). You cannot reason something after-the-fact!
The Reformed gospel makes Jesus’ righteousness a function of works and not intrinsic to His nature. Jesus was not really righteous UNTIL He had demonstrated perfect law-keeping. Furthermore, such a conclusion of His righteousness could not have been realized UNTIL the end of His life.
Jesus is righteous by virtue of the fact that He is God’s Son. He has His own righteous nature because He was born of God, God’s offspring. He was not righteous because of His perfect law-keeping. It was intrinsic to who He is.
I can go to the NFL’s web store and order a jersey of my favorite football player, maybe Peyton Manning. When I receive that jersey in the mail I can now say I have Peyton Manning’s jersey, or I have the jersey of Peyton Manning. Does that mean that I have Peyton Manning’s ACTUAL jersey that he ACTUALLY wore when he played in games? Of course not. But it is still a jersey. It is similar (identical, like in kind) to Peyton Manning’s in every way with one exception; this one belongs to me.
Our righteousness is this way. Does this mean that we have the ACTUAL righteousness that Christ had? Only in the sense that it is IDENTICAL to it, the exception being is that the righteousness we have actually belongs to us! Why is that? Because it was given to us the moment we were born again. It is not a covering. It is intrinsic to the nature of our being as a child of God.
Whether reformed/protestants want to admit it or not, the fact remains that their construct of righteousness is works-based justification. It might not be “us” doing the works, but works are works no matter who does them. Not only is it works-based, it is progressive, meaning it must be performed throughout one’s life. This is why there is NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever between Catholicism and Protestantism. They both believe in a works-based progressive justification. Protestants have simply taken the “work” away from us and given it to Christ. And in the process, they have made Christ’s own righteousness predicated on works.
Andy
Believers No Longer in Protective Custody
The ancient Greek cultural practice of “pederasty” was the homosexual relationship between an adult male (the “erastes”) and an early-adolescent male. In the city of Athens particularly, pederasty entailed a formal bond between an adult man and an adolescent boy outside his immediate family, consisting of loving and often sexual relations. As an erotic and educational custom it was initially employed by the upper class as a means of teaching the young and conveying to them important cultural values, such as bravery and restraint.
Athenian society generally encouraged the “erastes” to pursue a boy to love, tolerating behavior such as sleeping on the youth’s stoop and otherwise going to great lengths to make himself noticed. At the same time, the boy and his family were expected to put up resistance and not give in too easily, and boys who succumbed too readily were looked down upon. As a result, the quest for a “desirable boy” was fiercely competitive. (source: wikipedia – Athenian Pederasty)
Often, fathers who wished to protect their sons from such unwanted advances, as described above, would send a household slave to accompany the boy wherever he went, particularly on his way to school. These slaves were known as “pedegogos”. The word literally means a “boy leader”. The pedegogos acted as a “guardian” for the young boy, to protect him.
It is important to understand the cultural use of this word “pedegogos” in the first century, because this is the word that the apostle Paul uses in describing the relationship between Old Testament believers and the Law.
“But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.” ~ Galatians 3:22-25
The King James uses the word “schoolmaster”, but it is this Greek word παιδαγωγος “pedegogos”. It is better translated as “guardian”.
But before we examine that word some more, we need to take some time to clear up a reformed miss-conception about this passage. It has to do with this expression “concluded all under sin”. Traditionally this has been taught to mean that the logical conclusion of scripture’s teaching is that all are under sin. We simply need to look at the grammar to see that this is not what Paul is saying. “All under sin” is a group of people that are the focus of his argument. The word translated “concluded” is the Greek word συνκλειω (soonk-lee-oh). It is a compound word made up of the prefix “soon” meaning “together with” and the word “kleio” meaning “to shut up” or “to enclose”. It has the idea of taking something into custody for the purpose of protection.
What Paul is teaching in this passage is that in the Old Testament, the role of scripture (or Law) was to take all of those “under sin” into custody for the purpose of protecting them. (Please note, that “under sin” is not the same as “under law”.) This is important to understand, and this protection was the “atoning” aspect of the Law. Because Jesus, “the Promise”, had not yet come to end the law and its condemnation, Old Testament believers were actually protected by the law, because sin was imputed to the law and not to the believer. The law took them into custody.
Paul repeats this idea in the very next verse:
“…before faith came, we were kept under the law…”
The word “kept” is the Greek word φρουρεω (froo-reh-oh). It means to be a watcher in advance, or to mount a guard or a sentinel, like a guard in a watchtower. Again, the idea is one of offering protection. Notice carefully that the phrase is “kept under the law” and not kept “under law”. To be kept under the law means that it is the law that is performing the “keeping” or “protecting”. This in no way whatsoever means that believers are still “kept (remain) under law” as reformed doctrine would have us believe. It means that the Old Testament believers were protected by the law.
Why was this protection necessary? Because “the Promise” had not yet come. The law, while it did not impart righteousness, in this manner it served as a protection from condemnation. And the law’s ability to condemn would not be ended until Jesus’ crucifixion. Therefore, this protection, this “atonement” was available until that time would come. Paul makes this very point in verse 24.
“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ…”
Notice that he is NOT saying that the law leads us TO Christ. The reformed interpretation of this is that the purpose of the law is to lead us to Christ to show us how much we are in need of salvation, but that is not the case. In the context of the passage, the law WAS (past tense) a guardian (pedegogos) until the time when Christ came. “Pedegogos” is a very provocative word, knowing what we know about its meaning. Paul could have used any other word do express the idea of a guardian or protector. But he specifically chose to use “pedegogos” knowing full well that his audience would have understood the cultural implications behind it. He was obviously wanting to make a very powerful point on the matter!
But what has happened since Christ died? What happened once “the Promise” came? There is no longer any need of a guardian. Why? Because the law is ended. The law can no longer condemn. Believers are not under law, they are under grace. This is a joyous reality! But there is also a sense of foreboding as revealed by the writer of Hebrews.
“This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin…For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.” ~ Hebrews 10:16-18, 26-27
When Christ died to end the law, He also ended its atoning work. Not only are believers no longer in need of a guardian, but there IS no guardian, period. That results in fear. If one is still under law the natural response is fear which comes from the reality of condemnation. No more protection from condemnation is available. Also, the only ones who CAN sin are those still “under law”. Those under grace CANNOT sin because they have been born again, and the law is ended. (1 John 3:8-9) A guardian is not necessary because they cannot be condemned.
I think people intuitively know this. I daresay that the reason so many “christians” are in constant fear of losing their salvation (or just fear in general) is because their theology keeps them “under law”. It is the cognitive dissonance produced when they know in their hearts that the law cannot save them, and they know that it can no longer protect them. This is why a proper understanding of the role of the law is so vital to the true gospel. Any gospel that makes law the standard for righteousness is a false one.
Andy
Thank You for Going to the Concert
The Protestant Reformers, for all practical purposes, made every verse in the Bible about justification. Hence, according to the primary interpretive hermeneutic of the Reformers, the Bible is not God’s statement about the multifaceted state of being, but rather what we call a “metaphysical narrative.” This is the idea that God controls everything perceived in reality as a story that pleases God only. Your reality is a prewritten experience for God’s glory only.
That may mean that your life will glorify God by you realizing how depraved you are, and thereby obtaining gratitude for God’s saving acts that are in the narrative. The more you understand your depravity, the more gratitude you have, and the more God is glorified. According to the Reformers, whatever happens in life is the metaphysical prewritten narrative, and the Bible is the handbook that guides us in interpreting the story. This is the redemptive-historical hermeneutic.
In Martin Luther’s doctrinal construct, this is the Theology of the Cross, or the “Cross Story.” All those who do not interpret their existence according to this worldview, according to Luther who is the father of the Reformation, are advocates of the “Glory Story.” In Martin Luther’s formal worldview, all of reality is divided between the Cross Story (the story of God for His glory) or the Glory Story (the story of man and his glory) with NO in-between objective reality. Those who are part of the Glory Story are predetermined by God as well and will suffer in eternal hell; likewise, for God’s glory and good pleasure.
This idea is what led evangelical “pastor” Steve Lawson to suggest that Christ Himself will personally torment people in hell forever. Protestantism, whether people will face it or not, is predicated on the idea that God is just as pleased with eternal torment as He is with eternal joy; BOTH bring Him glory. Ever perplexed by the goofy things that go on at the local Baptist church? However far removed from the primary premise, the behavior finds its roots in Reformed tradition; particularly the lack of wherewithal to deal with spiritual abuse.
This reality, no pun intended, is what makes articles like the one recently written by Dr. Albert Mohler egregiously disingenuous. In that article, Mohler bemoans Bible illiteracy among evangelicals. And of course, his kind of biblical prowess is the answer after Protestant academics have created the problem to begin with. There has been no movement ever in history that has made more money by creating misery and then presenting itself as the cure.
TANC ministries is focused on an interpretation of reality based on what God truly intends for it to be. This necessarily involves a focus on sanctification in the same way that Protestantism focuses on justification albeit an errant one. In the same way that a skewed understanding of sanctification distorts justification, a skewed view of justification makes Christian living a study in steroidal confusion. TANC has dedicated five years of research to justification, with a prior investment by me of three years totaling eight. The TANC assertion has always been that a proper understanding of justification is the key to understanding the deep waters of Christian living, viz, sanctification. This is now where TANC has redirected its focus; the time has come.
This new focus necessarily demands a plenary investment by all of God’s people without any caste mentality. Religious academia not only contributes little to the cause, it is an immanent threat to the testimony of Christ and the true gospel as unrevised history has well documented. The collective free and independent interpretation by Spirit-filled Christians is essential as well as a breaking down of barriers between the library and the walk of the new man in the world; the Bible interprets reality, and multifaceted real-life experience lends vast understanding to what is being stated in the Bible.
In Protestantism, people who have to function in the real world go to church every Sunday and allow those who live in libraries to interpret their reality, and for some bizarre reason, pay good money for it to boot. If you only pay 10% or less, you are supposedly robbing God by not paying money to people who couldn’t survive in your reality for one day. This is why of all world religions Protestantism makes the lesser sense of the bunch. Nothing is more confused than a Protestant.
In regard to justification, I spent the better part of eight years doing research, but now with the proper keys to understanding Christian living, I have found a career in what I think is very well fitted for lending understanding to life and biblical reality. That career regards ADL service; that is, aiding people in activities of daily living. As I reflect my experience against the wisdom of Scripture, learning and understanding is taking place. I wonder what empowers the individual more than understanding why we do what we do?
But there is another key ingredient to this understanding: others who get it. With the use of the Bible and things self-evident according to God’s vast creation design, TANC co-author Andy Young wrote a post this week about self-value and the value of others. This post lent understanding to how my conscience was guiding me in some issues regarding work. I have remained plugged into a particular client because my conscience was compelling me to do so, but I really didn’t understand why my conscience was pressing me in that direction.
I am presently working with clients that I initially envisioned myself working with. This has been a long process. However, I have a client who was one of my first and has much lesser ADL needs; specifically, nothing but house cleaning. This is far less unfulfilling for me than medical type ADLs. The perception is depth of need. But after reading Andy’s post, I understand why I am committed to this client; now I understand what my conscience was trying to tell me.
Now I understand why I can dismiss the voices of my past Reformed ideology posing as my conscience. In addition to the outrage against the very idea of self-value harassing me while I was reading the post, I can also dismiss the accusation that my conscience is telling to be a, “people pleaser. Did not the apostle Paul tell us to please others whenever possible unless they are trying to persuade us to do something not pleasing to God? Sure he did. But why?
Because we are wired by God with a desire to please others. But why? Because we place value in them. Because we are created in the image of God who values Himself and others. He also values what He created, viz, life, and He demands that others value it as well. This may very well lead us to do things for people that we don’t enjoy doing, but finding the joy in pleasing them through the act. If we enjoy doing what is pleasing the person, that’s a double blessing. But if we don’t enjoy doing what we are doing for the person; yet, joy is found in pleasing the person that we value. Nevertheless, does this eventually lead to finding joy in the task itself? I think it often does.
In this particular case, the client has put a high value on me because of my cleaning. The client is very insistent that I be her HHA (Home Health Aid). And I must say, she values me more than SOME clients who depend on me and others for medical type ADLs. A messy house is one thing, but lying in your own waste for any period of time is another. Yet, the one who values me praises me while the other curses me. Indeed, as I have learned, the level of task rendered by no means determines the value. And here is an aside that you may apply to many other areas of life including childrearing: aids often no-call/no-show clients; and why do they do this? They don’t value others. And by the way, because they do not value others, neither do they value God from whom all blessings flow.
What else did I learn from Andy’s post in partnership with God’s word and life experience? A why. Why are ADLs so important? Sure, I gain self-satisfaction in doing ADLs, but why does this make any sense? After all, these are people who can no longer contribute to others, right? The answer follows. They value themselves. They value their own lives. This is intrinsic. This is intuitive. This is how God wires us. To not value self and others is unnatural and against God’s creative elements. God values Himself and those He creates.
And this is fact: the more a client values their own life and strives to make the best of it, the more the aid values their work. And I believe life in general works little different from this. I have clients who strive to make everything of their life that they can. This endeavor for self-actualization regardless of their condition raises the self-value of the aid, and by this they love the aid by loving themselves. This idea is anathema to Reformed ideology which places no value on human life. Protestants deny this while proudly pontificating “total depravity” because like I said, Protestants are confused in general while funding Neo-Platonist academics who hate life.
Why are we all inspired by disabled people who excel in life and happiness? Because they put a value on their life, and life in general which increases our own value when we help them. This pleases God and we value Him as the first priority. Striving to please those we value is a natural element of creation. This is why I am so overjoyed that a client of mine is going to a concert next month. If you knew this client, you would be very surprised that he would venture to go to a concert. But the client’s love for life increases my value and the service I supply. This is why an aid’s job is harder when a client fails to love themselves—to value themselves. Therefore, to all those who need help with ADLs…
…thank you for going to the concert. By loving yourself you are loving me.
paul
Authentic Protestantism (aka “New Calvinism”) is Totally Debunked by 2Peter 1:1-15
This is a revised version of an article originally published on January 16, 2012
2 Peter 1:1-14 contradicts almost all of the major tenets of authentic Protestantism: Christocentric salvation; Christocentric interpretation; double imputation; Christocentric sanctification; the total depravity of the saints; sanctification by faith alone; the imperative command is grounded in the indicative event; assurance based on gospel contemplationism; sanctification is not “in our OWN efforts”; the apostolic gospel.
Christocentric Salvation
“Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ” (v1).
Salvation is not Christocentric. Peter states that we obtained our faith by God the Father AND Jesus Christ.
Christocentric Interpretation
“May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord” (v2).
The benefits of salvation are multiplied by the knowledge of both the Father and the Son. Of course, this knowledge can only come from the Scriptures. Obviously, knowledge of both is required for the multiplication of grace and peace. One may also note that when Peter restates this truth in verse 3, he only mentions the one “who called us” which of course is God the Father.
Double Imputation
“The imputed righteousness of Christ” is an often heard slogan among reformed. But it is the righteousness of God that was imputed to us by the New Birth when we believed in Christ (see v1). The believer is righteous because he is God’s literal offspring. Christ lived a perfect life as a man because of who He is (the Son of God), not for the purpose of imputing obedience to us as part of the atonement in sanctification.
Christocentric Sanctification
“His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence” (v3).
Again, God the Father is the member of the Trinity who called us. Knowledge pertaining to the Father is efficacious in sanctification.
The Total Depravity of the Saints
“His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, 4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire” (v3,4).
“Partakers” is: koinōnos from koinos; a sharer, that is, associate: – companion, fellowship, partaker, partner. Koinos means: common, that is, (literally) shared by all or several and is derived from a primary preposition denoting union; with or together, that is, by association, companionship, process, resemblance, possession, instrumentality, addition, etc.: – beside, with. In compounds it has similar applications, including completeness.
Sanctification by Faith Alone
“For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love” (v 5,6,7).
Obviously, if sanctification is by faith alone, Peter wouldn’t tell us to ADD anything to it.
The Imperative Command is Grounded in the Indicative Event
“For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. 10 Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For if you do these things, you will never fall, 11 and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (v8,9,10,11).
Glorification (and one could argue assurance as well) is an indicative act, but in these verses, it is contingent and preceded by imperatives. Peter uses the conjunction “if” three times to conjoin imperatives preceding the indicative.
Assurance Based on Gospel Contemplationism
One of the more hideous teachings of the Reformation is that guilt is indicative of not understanding grace. Therefore, saints will not be told to take biblically prescribed action to relieve guilt, but will be told to further contemplate the gospel. There is barely anything more powerful in the Christian life than full assurance of salvation, and Peter tells us in no uncertain terms how to obtain it: aggressively adding certain things to our faith.
Sanctification is not “in our OWN efforts.”
Authentic Protestantism, by default, disavows our effort in sanctification by continually utilizing the either/or hermeneutic: it’s either all our effort, or all of Christ. Though we can do nothing without Christ, Peter makes it clear that peace and assurance will not take place if we do not “make every effort” (ESV).
The Apostolic Gospel
“So I will always remind you of these things, even though you know them and are firmly established in the truth you now have. 13 I think it is right to refresh your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body, 14 because I know that I will soon put it aside, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. 15 And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things” (v12,13,14,15).
Think about it. It had been revealed to Peter that his departure was near, so his ministry was focused on what he thought was the most important thing that they needed to be continually reminded of. Where is, “The same gospel that saves us sanctifies us”? Where is, “We must preach the gospel to ourselves every day”? Where is, “Beholding the face of Christ as a way of becoming”?
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
3 comments