grace – Page 3 – Christ the Truth

We are not saved by grace – Mike Reeves 10

glenscrivMay 3, 201210 Comments

After yesterday's post I remembered this sparkling gem from Mike:

John Bunyan believed that Christians are saved by grace. Of course. It was what everyone seemed to say. The thought left him pretty miserable, though. In fact, when he really thought about it, it left him profoundly depressed. God is gracious, he knew: but how gracious, exactly? And that made him wonder: ‘my peace would be in and out, sometimes twenty times a day; comfort now, and trouble presently’...

...For all that we speak of grace, and however strongly we speak of it, we will remain prisoners of spiritual insecurity for as long as we imagine that we are independent islands. And rightly so: all spiritual blessings are to be found in Christ alone. Just read Ephesians 1 for an avalanche of verses to prove that. There is no hint of salvation to be found anywhere else. God only ever blesses through Christ. He is the vine of God’s blessing. And the only way to be blessed is to be grafted into him.

It's only short, read the whole thing.

Grace is not a cheese sandwich 5

glenscrivMay 2, 20125 Comments

Recently I read an internet discussion on how much "grace" we should preach. You know, as opposed to preaching the life of the kingdom, the demands of discipleship, missional living, that kind of thing. One side said they'd like to see more grace, another side said they'd like to see less.

Perhaps you're thinking "I know which side Glen would take." Don't be so sure. I think they are falling off either side of the wrong horse.

Let's call one side "the more grace people." These were keen to argue that none can perform the works of the kingdom without the empowerment of "grace." The "less grace people" kept saying "Yeah, but, c'mon. Commands are there. Loads of them. Stop sidelining half the Bible!"

And back and forth it went. The more I read, the more I wondered whether I'd stumbled across some intramural Roman Catholic dispute. Whatever differences they thought they had, both sides seemed to assume that grace was a substance. Both spoke of the empowerment and encouragement of 'grace', but the real concern of both parties seemed to be our life of discipleship. Thus, it was really a discussion about motivational techniques. Some thought that carrots are better, others reached for the stick.

On this view, "grace" is like the cheese sandwiches which David brought to his brothers at the front line (1 Samuel 17:17-19). Here grace is an encouragement and empowerment from the christ to go out and fight the good fight. The christ gives you strength, victory is down to you.

And if that's grace, then naturally, some people think David should make some really tasty sandwiches, top quality pickle, mature cheddar, olive focaccia bread and plenty of it. Other's say, "Don't stuff the troops, keep 'em lean and mean, teach 'em how to fight!"

Now if that was the dispute then, really, I have no desire to weigh in on the optimum cheese-sandwich / military-briefing balance.

What I want to declare to both sides is the true meaning of grace. Grace is not David's sandwiches, grace is David's victory. Grace is David volunteering to fight for his doubting and disdainful brothers. Grace is David delivering the killer-blow for troops who would otherwise be slaughtered. Grace is David himself, the anointed champion, doing everything to win the day. To put it another way - "grace alone" is just another way of saying "Christ alone".

Once you see that, you, your Champion and the whole battle has been shifted.

Suddenly we've been plucked from the front-lines, our lives in the balance, and now we find ourselves caught up in a victory we could never have won. Now we're shouting with joy and advancing on the Philistines to plunder them.

And yes, at this point, both sandwiches and briefings come in handy. But they must be rightly related to David's victory. Without it, David's sandwiches may as well be poison.

And if anyone thinks they can ignore the victory of our Champion and move straight to the 'battles we must fight' they've completely misunderstood the gospel. Yet I find that both the sandwich people and the pep-talk-people do this. Both the "more grace people" and the "less grace people" carry on as though David's victory can simply be assumed and the Christian life boiled down to our attempts at plundering.

The real distinction is not between gracious or legal motivations towards our work. The real distinction is between Christ's work and our work. Which battle do we think we're in? Are we facing down Goliath or are we victors already? That really is all the difference in the world.

You might say: But Glen, we all know that we're victors through Christ, let's get on and tell people how to plunder. I say: Really? We know we're victors through Christ?! Not even "the more grace people" seem to know it!

Careful, lest you drift! 7

glenscrivFebruary 21, 20127 Comments

Our home group Bible study were finishing off Hebrews last night. We did a bit of an overview and I asked what we'd all take away from the book.

One person said that the warning passages leapt out at them. Things like:

We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. (Hebrews 2:1)

Another person said they were struck by the once-for-all finished-ness of Christ's work. Jesus - our Brother - has become our High Priest and accomplished it all on our behalf. Amazing grace!

So there I was, leading the study, sat between these two reactions to the Letter. How would I acknowledge both these realities?

Here's one option: "Indeed, you both make excellent points. We need to balance the warning passages against the grace passages. The grace stuff is nice, but the warnings prevent us going too crazy with the grace thing."

Have you heard that kind of teaching? It comes from people who have a high view of the Bible. They want to honour both strands of teaching and for that we can commend them. But...

Isn't there another way of taking both elements seriously?

Imagine if the warnings are grave admonishments not to forget the grace of Christ? Imagine if the thing we're tempted to drift towards is legalistic, ritualistic, earnest spiritual points-scoring? Imagine if Christ's finished work is the truth we're always forgetting?

Well then... be warned - Christ alone has achieved salvation, by grace alone, received by faith alone. Be warned! If that's true then there is no spiritual life to be found in any other message, any other system, any other life. Return at once to this hope:

Let us flee to take hold of the hope offered to us [that we] may be greatly encouraged. ¹⁹ We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, ²⁰ where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever. (Hebrews 6:18-20)

We must beware. All of us naturally drift in the Christian life. We must flee from those temptations. We must take hold of true gospel hope. But remember - the direction in which we're tempted to drift is towards earnest spiritual endeavour. When the Bible says, "Don't drift!" it's not trying to bring you back to serious-minded religious behaviour, it's calling you from it.

Don't drift! Open your Bible and return to your true hope - Christ alone.

PS - in this light, you might like to consider Dan Hames' post on Lent

Created for His glory 4

glenscrivFebruary 14, 20124 Comments

Jonathan Edwards here speaks of God's pleasure in creation:

"the pleasure God hath in those things which have been mentioned, is rather a pleasure in diffusing and communicating to, than in receiving from, the creature. Surely, it is no argument of indigence [i.e. neediness] in God that he is inclined to communicate of his infinite fullness. It is no argument of the emptiness or deficiency of a fountain, that it is inclined to overflow."

God creates from fullness not need. His glory is not about demanding but giving. From the Father's eternal begetting of the Son comes the logic of creation's in-time manufacture. Creation is not the first time God has to relate to another. Instead, creation finds its origin in His already-outgoing nature.

Creation is, therefore, birthed in self-giving love, not willed out of any necessity. We can rest assured - God has not called us forth to gain from us, but to give to us. In this sense we are "created for His glory." We exist precisely because it is His glorious nature to give life.

The Father has eternally poured life and blessings onto and into His Son by the Spirit. He continues to express this glory by pouring out life to the world through His Christ. In this way creation will be glorified, as the Lord gives of Himself, even to the depths of the cross.

Or to say it how Jesus did: "He who loses his life will find it." (Luke 17:33). First it is God who finds His life in losing it. He is who He is as He gives Himself away for the world. Therefore Jesus does not call us into anything He hasn't eternally and originally been part of. But now, through His invitation, we get to share in it. Glory!

“In my heart there is no quality that is called faith or charity” 9

glenscrivJanuary 4, 20129 Comments

Melancthon wrote to a guy called Brenz to clarify the difference between the Protestant position on justification and Augustine's. The difference is vital!

Luther being Luther, he couldn't help adding a P.S. to Melancthon's letter:

And I, dear Brenz, in order to get a better grip on this issue frequently imagine it this way: as if in my heart there is no quality that is called faith or charity, but instead of them I put Christ himself and say: this is my righteousness; He is the quality and my formal righteousness, as they call it. In this way I free myself from the perception of the law and works, and even from the perception of this object, Christ, who is understood as a teacher or a giver; but I want Him to be my gift and teaching in Himself, so that I may have all things in Him. So he says: I am the way, the truth and the life. He does not say: I give you the way, the truth and the life, as if He worked in me while being placed outside of me. He must be such things in me, remain in me, live in me, speak not through me but into me, 2 Cor. 5; so that we may be righteousness in Him, not in love or in gifts that follow.

“My yoke is hard but hell is harder” 7

glenscrivJanuary 3, 20127 Comments

I was recently asked the old question: "But if we're in Christ forevermore, why be good?"

Any number of counter-questions might be appropriate:

Is fear of consequences really the only reason for avoiding sin?

Isn't unconditional love most likely to elicit a good response?

Why is being good the ultimate arbiter (rather than relationship with God)?

Others?

But as we spoke it seemed clear to me that the big misconception behind it all was a view that says: The Christian life is really, really, really hard and the only reason to live it is because there are other, basically unrelated, spiritual rewards. Take away these carrots and sticks and of course you'll sin. Because, you know, sin is really great. It's so great that God has to threaten us with hell to stop us having fun. Offer free grace and there'll be pandemonium.

As though the way of Jesus is stifling.

As though sin is life-giving.

As though God's a cosmic kill-joy.

As though only eternal damnation balances the scales enough to make Christianity the clever choice.

As though Jesus said "My yoke is hard, but hell is harder."

But what if Jesus really brings life and sin only brings death? What if Christ's yoke really is the easy one - the only one that properly fits? What if you don't have to dangle people's feet over the pit to get them to behave? What then?

Well you tell them "You're in Christ forevermore, why be bad?"

Come as you are [repost]

glenscrivNovember 11, 2011Leave a comment

From Spurgeon's book: All of Grace

Do not attempt to touch yourself up and make yourself something other than you really are, but come as you are to Him who justifies the ungodly. …The Gospel will receive you into its halls if you come as a sinner, not otherwise. Wait not for reformation, but come at once for salvation. God justifieth the ungodly, and that takes you up where you now are; it meets you in your worst estate. Come in your disorder. I mean, come to your heavenly Father in all your sin and sinfulness. Come to Jesus just as you are: filthy, naked, neither fit to live nor fit to die. Come, you that are the very sweepings of creation; come, though you hardly dare to hope for anything but death. Come, though despair is brooding over you, pressing upon your bosom like a horrible nightmare. Come and ask the Lord to justify another ungodly one.

And here's a paper I wrote on how to preach evangelistically to sinners without demanding repentance first.

Champion or Role-model? Freedom or Pressure?

glenscrivNovember 8, 2011August 16, 2014Leave a comment

On Friday I posted a video of Jason McElwain. He's the autistic kid who set the last four minutes of a high-school basketball game on fire.

As his six 3-pointers sail in, the crowd go absolutely bananas. It's exhilerating and heart-warming and all kinds of wonderful.

But then I watched this video. Same kid, same game, but it left me with a very different feeling...

I'm probably making far too much out of this (tell me if you think so), but this video makes me worry for young Eric.

-- 'They expected Eric to love the game. They didn't expect him to have autism...'

-- 'Terry Connolly has big dreams for Eric...'

-- 'Just maybe we can hold onto the hope that Eric can play basketball one day, it might only be for 10 minutes but... maybe one day...'

Leaving aside the point that Jason only played for four minutes... what's happening here? Jason is being celebrated as a champion yes. But very quickly, the hope he provides is turned into a model for emulation. And the impression that's left (on me at any rate) is that Jason begins as a hero to rejoice in, but soon becomes a standard to meet.

There is a question for Eric's parents. How will they 'preach Jason' to their son? You see Jason's efforts could be used just to ramp up levels of expectation for Eric (which would do neither him nor the parents any good). Or Jason could liberate the family through their joy in another's success. Which is it to be: Law or Gospel? Role model or Champion? Pressure or Freedom?

If they leave Eric, ultimately, with Gospel who knows what he might achieve. Literally, who knows? That's the point of 'gospel preaching' - it liberates a person into any number of unforeseen paths. He might even take up a proper sport, like cricket.

Dying with Jesus [repost]

glenscrivNovember 3, 2011Leave a comment

How do you think of judgement and salvation?

If you ask me - you shouldn't think like this:

Judgement&Salvation1

Instead think like this:

Judgement&Salvation2

Or to be a bit more nuanced - like this.

Now I could take this observation in many directions.

Perhaps we could explore its significance for an infra versus supra-lapsarian debate.

Perhaps we could discuss the strong link that some make between penal substitutionary atonement and limited atonement.

We could think about how to preach warnings of judgement (for instance warnings of exile in the OT) given that judgement is a-coming.

But I'm going to take the observation in this direction...

I'm becoming convinced that when Jesus says 'Take up your cross and follow me' (Mark 8:34) He's saying the same thingas Paul when he says 'I was crucified with Christ and I no longer live' (Gal 2:20).

Think of some of Jesus' words:

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (Matt 10:34-39)

So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:33)

Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. ²⁵ Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. ²⁶ If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him. (John 12:24-26)

In the context of Jesus' own judgement and salvation He tells His followers what it means to come after Him. It means being caught up in that same path - the only path of life. Seeds must die to live - so it is with The Seed so it is with themany offspring His death produced. Judgement then salvation. To be saved is to die with Jesus - to join Him for an early judgement day and pass through to find true life.

Compare this with some words from Paul:

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Gal 2:20)

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 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. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his, etc, etc (Rom 6:3-5 and following)

But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. (Gal 6:14)

Here Paul describes his history as utterly determined by the cross and resurrection of Jesus. Judgement and salvationhave happened for Paul because he has died and risen with Jesus to new life on the other side of wrath, death, sin, law, old creation. And (apart from his Adamic flesh that still clings to him) he is utterly dead to the world around him and utterly brought into 'newness of life'.

Now. Think of a sermon you've heard on the Jesus verses. And think of a sermon you've heard on the Paul verses. I imagine the tone of those two sermons was quite different. I imagine that the Jesus sermons spent a lot of time presenting His words as moralistic exhortations and 'if-then' conditions before (perhaps) the preacher retracted the force of them and told you not to forget that you're 'saved by grace' ('grace' understood along the lines of diagram 1 not diagram 2). And I imagine the Paul sermon comforted you with the whole 'union with Christ', 'newness of life' stuff and encouraged you that 'hey, you really are saved by grace.' (again, probably 'grace' as understood according to diagram 1)

I wonder if the Jesus sermons should sound more like the best of the Paul sermons. And the Paul sermons should sound like the best of the Jesus sermons. In other words, Jesus, the Seed, dies and rises on your behalf. If you are His rejoice that you are created, shaped and defined by this death and resurrection in which you are crucified to the the whole world, and the whole world is crucified to you. This is your salvation because there simply is no other way to resurrection than through the cross. 'Come and die' is not a fearful condition of life - maybe you're up to it, maybe not. It's the description of how that life comes, wrapped up in the announcement that Jesus really has crucified the world to raise it up new - come on in.

If you are not dead to the world, this might well be a sign that you are not His. Or that you have wandered far from Him. So go to Him and take that easy yoke onto your shoulders (Matt 11:28-30). Be constrained by the death and resurrection of Jesus, for this is salvation. Or else be wearied and burdened by your own, much heavier yokes which cannot lead youthrough the judgement to come.

But for those who are yoked to Christ, know that you have begun, even now, to live that newness of life. Even today as we walk together with Jesus, dying to sin and self and the praises and worries of this world, resurrection life is unleashed. This mystical union with Christ (the best of the Paul sermons) is earthed in the daily discipleship of living for Jesus (the best of the Jesus sermons). Let's have both.

I wonder if that's why Peter finishes his first letter (which is all about this judgement then salvation dynamic) by saying 'This is the true grace of God.' 1 Peter 5:12.

Seeking faith when you should be seeking Christ 22

GlenSeptember 4, 201122 Comments

In 1738 John Wesley returned from the mission field convinced of one thing: He was not a Christian. He wrote in his journal, "I am fallen short of the glory of God... my heart is altogether corrupt and abominable... alienated as I am from the life of God I am a child of wrath and heir of hell." (Arnold Dallimore, George Whitfield, vol 1, p179)

He was certain at this point that the only way of salvation was "by faith" - whatever that meant. He knew he needed "faith" and he also knew he didn't have it.

"I was strongly convinced [he wrote] that the cause of my uneasiness was unbelief, and that gaining a true, living faith was the 'one thing needful' for me." (p181)

At this point the Moravians made a lasting impact on both John and Charles. Yet the "faith" which they preached was oftentimes an internal religious experience rather than an outward-looking reliance on Christ. This was the kind of "faith" which the Wesleys sought.

Arnold Dallimore comments "The views to which the Wesleys were led by these means became of historic importance, for these views influenced the beliefs they held throughout life. They both spoke of 'seeking Christ', yet as one analyses the pertinent passages in their Journals it becomes evident that they were actuallly seeking faith more than they were Christ. Faith had become the great desideratum in their thinking, insomuch that they began to look upon it as an entity in itself. Under [the Moravian] Bohler's instructions they had forsaken their trust in personal endeavours and works, but faith had become a kind of new endeavour which they substituted for their former endeavours and a work which took the place of their former good works. They had still learned nothing about receiving Christ in the fullness of His person and the completeness of His saving work, but were concerned about faith itself and what measure of it might be necessary for salvation. Charles expected that the coming of this faith might be associated with some visible presence of Christ, and John looked for an experience which would be accompanied by an emotional response. 'I well saw', he wrote, 'that no-one could, in the nature of things, have such a sense of forgiveness and not feel it. But I felt it not.'" (p181-2)

They both embarked upon a tortuous spiritual path in order to discover this faith. On the 24th May 1738, at a religious society meeting in Aldersgate Street, London, John heard someone reading Luther's preface to Romans. As Wesley described it, Luther's writing was a "description of the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ." That in itself is an interesting take on Luther's concern! But, understood in this way, Wesley found himself responding to these truths. He famously wrote in his Journal:

I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for my salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.

This is considered by many to be John's conversion. Yet other factors cast doubt on it.

Within a week Wesley was, in his own words, 'thrown into perplexity' when a friend asserted that faith must be fully assured or it is no faith at all. He took a trip to Herrnhut, home of the Moravians, to enquire about 'the assurance of faith.'

But this gave no clarity. As Dallimore writes, "since the Moravians formulated their beliefs to a considerable degree on personal experience, their answers to Wesley's enquiry were many and vaious. One preacher said that 'the full assurance' was a blessing received at the same time as justification, but another asserted that it was a separate experience to be entered into after conversion. Another stated that it was the coming of the Holy Spirit subsequent to conversion... and still another claimed that it was no more than a rich Christian maturity and was attained simply by steady Christian growth."

Dallimore lists the effects of this confused spiritual counsel on a perplexed Wesley:

"First, it influenced him towards combining Scripture and experience in formulating doctrinal beliefs. Secondly, it increased in him that introspective tendency. Thirdly, it caused him to believe that the Moravians possessed something which he did not have, and therefore that (as some of them intimated) a second Christian experience was possible - an experience, he believed, which would accomplish in him that larger victory in which the experience at Aldersgate Street had failed. By the time he returned to England, Wesley had become something of a Moravian himself." (p194)

And what was the result for Wesley personally? Well in the short term he continued to be greatly perplexed about his spiritual state. So much so that eight months after his Aldersgate Street experience, John wrote this in his Journal:

"My friends affirm that I am mad because I said I was not a Christian a year ago. I affirm I am not a Christian now. Indeed, what I might have been I know not, had I been faithful to the grace then given, when, expecting nothing less, I received such a sense of forgiveness of sins as till I then never knew. But that I am not a Christian at this day I as assuredly know as that Jesus is the Christ." (p196)

What an astonishing thing to say! Completely assured that Jesus is the Christ. Completely convinced he's not a Christian.

What do we learn from this? Class?