Forgiven

A Sip

Salut blogworms! The Lord’s Grace, mercy and peace, through forgiveness, to you. Well, with university back in the swing of things and rolling along, this is the first blog for 2010 based on a message I facilitated for our university Christian ministry, ‘Bond Christian Connection’ (BCC), last night. The series we chose to do this semester is based on a book by the son of the famous and respected modern Reformed Christian theologian R.C. Sproul called “Believing God: 12 Biblical Promises Christians Struggle to Accept”.

Sproul’s son, funnily enough called R.C. Sproul Jr., wrote the book in response to what he considered a polarised reaction by primarily the orthodox side of the fence against the heresy of the prosperity gospel movement. What Sproul Jr. observed was that, whereas the proponents of prosperity theology abused, misinterpreted and perverted God’s promises, the orthodox Evangelicals had reacted against this by reluctantly believing any of the promises of God. Sproul Jr.’s book aimed to reveal the errors on both sides; the self-glorifying narcissism of one and the dangerous skepticism of the other; and how we must come together and believe God on the most fundamental promises in Scripture. And like Sproul Jr., I also pray that this message will encourage and incite you to believe on this most pivotal and beautiful of all Biblical promises!

Please note that for those who are regular readers of this blog, this post will be a little bit of revision for you, drawing upon and containing sections of a few earlier posts such as “The Lord is Cross” and “The Good, The Bad & The Vine”. Nonetheless, this content is of such a fundamental nature that it cannot hurt to reiterate and revisit it. Blessed reading!

Spring Time!

The Biblical promise from Sproul Jr.’s book that I chose to facilitate is on forgiveness. Before we get into exegetically discussing this wonderful topic, let me share with you an excerpt from Sproul Jr.’s book where he recounts a story his father told him that typifies the struggle we as Christians have with the promise of forgiveness:

“My father tells a story from his days as a college professor. Like most professors, he spent several hours a week in his office meeting with students. A young lady came to see him, deeply troubled. It seems she had been behaving inappropriately with her boyfriend. She explained that her hardship was less about what she had done and more about her current condition – though she had repented frequently and with great vigour, she didn’t feel forgiven for her sin. She poured out her story and her heart to my father, who responded with great pastoral wisdom. ‘I think I know what you need to do,’ he said. ‘I’d suggest that you go back to your dorm room, get on your knees, and plead with God to forgive you of your sin.’ The poor girl was even more heartbroken after that. ‘Dr. Sproul,’ she said, ‘I’m afraid you haven’t been listening. Repenting is all I’ve been doing, and it hasn’t done any good.’ ‘I have heard you just fine,’ my father replied. ‘This time when you repent, I don’t want you to repent for what happened with your boyfriend. I want you to beg God to forgive you for not believing His promises. He said, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). God is utterly unimpressed with our efforts to beat ourselves psychologically for our sins. What He wants is a true humility that will manifest itself as faith, as believing God.’” (p.13)

So, here lies the stimulus Bible verse and promise for this topic, that “if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1Jn 1:9). O and what a glorious promise it is! And how we take it for granted! Philip Yancey in his book, “What’s So Amazing About Grace?”, quotes a counselor called David Seamands who summarises the spiritual condition that many Christians are in as a result of failing to believe this most important of Biblical promises:

“Many years ago I was driven to the conclusion that the two major causes of most emotional problems among evangelical Christians are these: the failure to understand, receive, and live out God’s unconditional grace and forgiveness; and the failure to give out that unconditional love, forgiveness, and grace to other people…We read, we hear, we believe a good theology of grace. But that’s not the way we live. The good news of the Gospel of grace has not penetrated the level of our emotions.” (p.15)

Notice that Mr Seamands puts the problem down to a “failure to understand, receive, and live out” God’s unconditional forgiveness? Well, as such, I have divided this message into these three sections; understanding it, receiving it, and living it out; and aim to tackle these three parts of the problem. However, as always, “unless the Lord builds the house, they labour in vain who build it” (Ps 127:1). In other words, I will do my best to address these parts of God’s forgiveness faithfully, but ultimately, whether this affects you or not is dependent on the working and illumination of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, I pray that He will open your eyes to the glorious truths discussed below!

1) UNDERSTANDING THE BAD NEWS - WHY DO WE NEED TO BE FORGIVEN?

Before we delve into what forgiveness means, we must first establish the reason forgiveness is even a topic in the Christian walk to begin with. What is it that we need to be forgiven of? Whilst some of you may yawn at such a ‘basic’ question, it is one which we often either do not fully understand, or one which we exhibit great indifference towards. I am, of course, talking about the problem of sin. Far from simply consisting of a few bad but ‘normal’ mistakes we have made in life, the Bible presents sin as the very serious and critical problem that mankind faces. It is not Global Warming, world poverty or alcoholism that is the major threat that we as humans face, but rather it is the source of all these horrors and more – our own filthy sinfulness.

To demonstrate and explore this and other necessary truths, let us observe the contextual passage which our stimulus Bible verse comes from, 1 John 1:5-6:

God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

What the Apostle John is here saying about sin is that it is in direct contrast and opposition to God’s very nature. Sin is, by definition, that which is contrary to God’s Holy character. It also tells us God’s stance on our sinfulness; that the darkness that is our sin cannot dwell with God. God detests sin and will not tolerate it. This, we will later see, is why sin is such the grave problem it is for us. John continues in 1 John 1:8-10:

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.

Here, John articulates not only the problem, but describes the essence of human nature - all men are sinners. John echoes the numerous powerfully convicting statements about what we call Original Sin that his fellow Apostle, Paul, makes in his Epistle to the Romans.

We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." (Ro 3:9-12)

It matters not where you are from or what your religion is, Paul baldly proclaims that “there is no difference [between Jew or Gentile], for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Ro 3:22-23). With repeated and systematic statements like this in all his epistles, Paul strikes fatal blows to any notion of what we now call, Pelagianism. This theological and hamartiological belief (which I explained in greater detail in my blog, “The Good, The Bad & The Vine”) basically held that men were born inherently good. Paul consistently and constantly counters this heretical view by explaining, “I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature” (Ro 7:18).

It is not simply that we as humans do sinful actions every now and then; it is that we are totally sinful in nature. This is not to say that we are as bad as we could be, but we are certainly nowhere near as good as we should be. But even our supposed ‘good’ deeds are tainted by our sinfulness. As Isaiah says in 64:6, “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.” None of us are exempt from the stain of sin in our lives, no matter how ‘good’ others (or even ourselves) may think we are. As theological professor Michael Horton so vividly expressed this in his book, “Christless Christianity”:

“The biblical message is far deeper and richer, however, both in its bad news and its good news. The bad news is far worse than making mistakes or failing to live up to the legalistic standards of fundamentalism. It is that the best efforts of the best Christians, on the best days, in the best frame of heart and mind, with the best motives fall short of that true righteousness and holiness that God requires. Our best efforts cannot satisfy God’s justice.” (p.91)

This anthropological truth that man, no matter how hard he tries, is sinful by nature and deed; that he is “abominable and filthy”, ‘drinking iniquity like water’ (Job 15:16); poses a problem because it means that, as Paul articulates in Romans 6:23, “the wages of sin is death.” Not only can we not dwell with God, but we must face punishment for our sin, both in the physical now, and the eternal after; we must die both physically here, and suffer eternal death in Hell. Someone has to pay the price for our disobedience and rebellion against our Holy God, and that someone is us…or is it?

2) UNDERSTANDING WHAT FORGIVENESS IS

Before we move onto the Good News in answer to that last cliffhanger question, we must first briefly address another ‘assumed’ and ‘basic’ question – what does forgiveness mean?

“I, even I, am He who blots out your transgressions for My own sake; and I will not remember your sins.” (Isa 43:25)

God’s forgiveness of His people’s sins features as one of the major themes in Isaiah’s writings. As God succinctly explains in the above verse, forgiveness is Him not remembering our sins, legally acquitting us of our guilt and concealing our sins (Joel 3:21). ‘What does He conceal our sins with?’ you may ask. Well, we will see in its glorious truth in the next section.

“I will pardon all their iniquities by which they have sinned and by which they have transgressed against Me.” (Jer 33:8)

Isaiah’s fellow Prophet, Jeremiah, also records God’s great words about His promise to forgive His people’s sins. Here, God also expresses another truth about sin – sin is first and foremost an offence against Him. Far from being a distant and impassive observer in our sinful affairs, God is directly involved and affected by our transgressions because ultimately, they are crimes hostile to Him.

The most commonly used word for forgiveness in Hebrew is the word, ‘calach’, which basically means to pardon or to spare from death. This gives us a clear definition of what forgiveness involves – God sparing us from the death we justly deserve, absolving us of our guilt. However, it is also interesting to note that in the Greek, it is the word ‘aphiemi’ which is commonly used to signify forgiveness. This Greek word can have a much wider usage and amongst other things, can mean ‘to suffer’. As we will later see, this connection between God suffering and God forgiving us our sins is central to the Good News.

For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward those who fear Him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us. As a father pities his children, so the Lord pities those who fear Him. For He knows our frame; He remembers that we are dust. (Ps 103:11-14)

God’s forgiveness is a reflection and manifestation of God’s mercy. God is not just a just and wrathful God, but He is also a loving and merciful God who pities us like children, casting our sinfulness as far away as possible. These great and beautiful theological truths should spur us to exclaim in wonder with the Prophet Micah:

Who is a God like You, pardoning iniquity and passing over the transgression of the remnant of His heritage? He does not retain His anger forever, because He delights in mercy. He will again have compassion on us, and will subdue our iniquities. You will cast all our sins into the depths of the sea. (Mic 7:18-19)

But, now that I have described what forgiveness means, let us turn to the most important question to answer – how is it that God forgives us?

3) UNDERSTANDING THE GOOD NEWS - HOW ARE WE FORGIVEN?

To fully answer this question, R.C. Sproul Jr. explains that there are two parts to God’s promise of forgiveness in 1 John 1:9. The first is that He is “faithful” to forgive us our sins.

“When we fail to believe His promises, we fail to believe that He is faithful. We think that His promises are much like ours, idle words designed to get what we want. But our Father is not like us. He has promised. And He alone cannot break His promise. It is His fidelity, not our worthiness, that guarantees the forgiveness. We slip once again into the folly of Pelagianism when we think that He forgives us because we are worthy, and so when we slip below some standard of worthiness, we think He won’t forgive us. We are sinners, but He is faithful, and it is by His faithfulness that He forgives. In what ways is God faithful in forgiveness? First, He is faithful to His promises, that if we call on the name of His Son we will be saved. This is His offer to us, free and certain. He is faithful to His Word. Second,…and most important of all, He is faithful to His Son. He keeps His promise to Him. It was for the promised bride that Christ went through His humiliation.” (pp.27-28)

The second part is that He is “just” to forgive us our sins. Herein is the real substance to the promise and the Good News, for if we fail to understand this aspect of our forgiveness we can diminish it, or as Sproul Jr. recapitulates it:

“Sometimes I’m afraid we are so eager to praise God for His mercy to us that we misunderstand it, and in a backward sort of way, denigrate it. That is, too often we make the mistake of thinking that we are forgiven for our sins just because God decided to be nice and to look the other way, that He winked at our sins. God is indeed merciful. And He does not remember our sins. They are as far from us as the east is from the west. But it is just that such should be so. Our debt is no more not because He whom we owe forgave it, but because it was paid. He is just to forgive us because He poured out the just punishment for our sins on His Son. And He is just to vindicate us. He raised His Son from the dead to demonstrate that He did not die for His sins, but for ours. In union with Him, raised with Him, we too are vindicated. The Judge of all the earth does judge rightly when He says that sinners like us are not guilty. Jesus paid our debt, and we owe no more. In fact, it would be unjust for God to demand retribution for sins covered on Calvary. In short, it is just that He should forgive us our sins, not because we are worthy, but because worthy is the Lamb.” (p.28)

To explore this justice of God, let us look once again to the rest of the contextual passage in 1 John:

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin…My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (1:7-2:2)

Here, John enlightens us as to how we are forgiven – through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. As I previously stated in the above sections, sin must be atoned for with the shedding of blood. In the Old Testament, the Israelites would sacrifice animals for their sins, but there was a problem, “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb 10:4). This was just a band-aid solution to their sinful states. What they (and we) needed was, as opposed to these animal sacrifices which were given regularly and frequently due to their imperfection and inadequacy, a definitive sacrifice for ALL our sins – past, present and future. This atoning sacrifice for our sins was foretold and promised by God through the Prophets, particularly Isaiah.

Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all…For the transgressions of My people He was stricken…Yet it pleased the Lord to…make His soul an offering for sin…By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities…And He bore the sin of many, And made intercession for the transgressors. (Isa 53:4-12)

This Messianic promise of self-sacrifice and what we call, ‘Substitutionary Atonement’, was ultimately fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ who Paul and John described as the “propitiation for our sins”. This essential doctrine basically means that Jesus took the punishment that we justly deserved on Himself.

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Ro 5:6-11)

Because He knew that we could never satisfy His wrath ourselves, God condescended to us in the person of His Son and died in our place on the Cross. Demonstrating His glorious love, He took the death sentence that we as God-hating rebels deserved so that we might be with Him for eternity.

He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins…For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight. (Col 1:13-23)

So, what is the answer to the question, ‘how are we forgiven?’ Well if it hasn’t been made obvious yet, I will clarify it further. We are forgiven through the blood of Christ. As Hebrews 9:22 explains, “without shedding of blood there is no remission.” In order for us to be justly forgiven by God, someone’s blood had to be shed for our sins as a just punishment. God could have justly let this blood be ours, but instead in His eternal and incomprehensible love, He took the initiative and sacrificed His only begotten Son in our place. Our forgiveness may be a free gift of Grace on our part, but it is forgiveness which has come at a cost for God – the blood of His Son. Let us glory in this truth forever and never forget this!

When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven you.” And some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, “Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” But immediately, when Jesus perceived in His spirit that they reasoned thus within themselves, He said to them, “Why do you reason about these things in your hearts?...The Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins.” (Mk 2:5-10)

It is through Jesus that we are forgiven and ONLY through Jesus that we can be forgiven. He alone, as He said in the above passage, has the authority to forgive us our sins. As God Incarnate, He was the only person to walk this earth who has been perfectly righteous, and as such, His sacrifice was perfect and able to be accepted by the Father. There has only ever been, and there will only ever be, ONE perfect sacrifice for our sins and that has been the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ our Lord. Either you can place your hands on this glorious and worthy Lamb and transfer the heavy burden of your sins onto Him now through Faith, or you can leave this burden on your shoulders and be crushed by its great weight later in Hell. As Martin Luther said, the choice is yours! I, for one, know which one I would rather.

To encapsulate this Good News, Michael Horton continues from the quote in the above sections:

“The biblical message is far deeper and richer, however, both in its bad news and its good news. The bad news is far worse than making mistakes or failing to live up to the legalistic standards of fundamentalism. It is that…our best efforts cannot satisfy God’s justice. Yet the good news is that God has satisfied his own justice and reconciled us to himself through the life, death, and resurrection of his Son. God’s holy law can no longer condemn us because we are in Christ.” (p.91)

4) HOW DO WE RECEIVE GOD’S FORGIVENESS? – CONFESSION AND REPENTANCE

So now that we know how it is that forgiveness by God has been made possible, here comes the application question – how do we receive this forgiveness? Before I answer this, Sproul Jr. has another quite touching story to demonstrate this answer anecdotally:

“In our family of seven children, we have a great deal of routine. We have schedules that we keep, patterns that we follow to keep our household from descending into chaos. Those habits extend even to the ways in which we discipline our children. We have a liturgy that begins with judgment but ends with gospel. Suppose my oldest son has decided to play Picasso with his peanut butter sandwich. Suppose he has smeared peanut butter all over the kitchen wall. He has never done such a thing, mind you, but he has, from time to time, sinned. Our pattern is this. First, I take my son to someplace private. I ask him, ‘Did you smear your peanut butter sandwich on the wall?’ ‘Yes, Daddy’ he replies. ‘Are you allowed to do this?’ ‘No, Daddy.’ At this point, I administer a brief but painful corrective to my son, at which point he hugs me and I hug him back. Then he tells me, ‘I’m sorry, Daddy,’ and I tell him, ‘Daddy forgives you, son, and Daddy loves you, all the time.’ Next my son says this three-part prayer: ‘Dear Lord, please forgive me for disobeying and smearing my peanut butter sandwich on the wall. Thank you that Jesus died for my sins so that I can be forgiven. Please help me to be more obedient.’ By this point, my son’s tears have usually dried up. But if they haven’t yet, if he is struggling to accept my forgiveness, I look my son in the eye and ask him this: ‘Son, what has God promised?’ He replies, ‘If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.’ In all likelihood, at this point I have tears in my eyes as I embrace my son once more and we rejoice in the glory of the gospel. Understand that when I punish my children, I do so not to even the scales of justice. My action isn’t retributive. The just punishment due to my children (and to my wife and me for that matter) was given two thousand years ago on Calvary. All my children’s sins, past, present, and future, are forgiven. But we are still called to repent.” (pp.26-27)

The answer to this question is the command that John the Baptist loudly proclaimed, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” (Mt 3:2). It is the same command that Jesus Himself proclaimed, “Repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). It is the command that Jesus’ Apostles proclaimed to the ends of the earth, “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord” (Ac 3:19). And it is the same answer to this very day. In order to receive this forgiveness, we must repent and put our faith in Christ (Jn 3:16).

But what is repentance? And what is its relationship to confession? Well, basically repentance is one part of a twofold response to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And repentance itself has two parts to it. The first part, is acknowledging your sinfulness (this is where confession comes in). In order to receive God’s forgiveness, we must first recognise what it is we are being forgiven of. We must confess that smearing peanut butter on our parents’ walls is a sin, so to speak. The second part of repentance is renouncing this sin and turning from it. This does not mean that we become completely sinless as we will still struggle with indwelling sin for the rest of our lives here on earth (see my previous post called “The Inner Canaanites”). But it does mean that when we do sin, we utterly detest it and strive to fight it. This is why repentance is not a once off vaccination shot in order to be saved. As Paul Washer rightly says, repentance is something which you do for the rest of your life.

“Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Ac 2:38-39)

Once you have repented, the second aspect to our saving response is to believe the Gospel. Not only must we turn from our sin, but we must now turn to God. Not only do we confess our sins, as though we were confessing in a vacuum to relieve our own guilty consciences and seek a moral catharsis, but we must confess our sins to God. If we turn to Him in Faith, this is only when the promise comes into effect. As Sproul Jr.’s son turns to the loving, yet firm, arms of his father, so too must we turn to the loving and forgiving, yet firm, arms of our Father. To show this repenting and believing response put effectively in practice, Jesus tells a parable in Luke 18:9-14:

To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men -robbers, evildoers, adulterers - or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

A powerful demonstration of the right response to the Gospel, Jesus shows us here the direct and important correlation between humility and repentance. Rather than coming before God puffed up with pride and deluded with self-righteousness, we must come before our Saviour, lowly in heart and despondent in our sinfulness, turning towards the comfort that only the Justification that He has already accomplished for us on the Cross can bring. As Mark Driscoll often says, sinners are called to repent of their sins, and likewise, religious people are called to repent of their religion. Both must regularly come before their Holy God in humility and gratitude.

Sproul Jr., in warning of a remote and infrequent view of confession, explains the joy that regular confession and repentance can bring:

“Here we walk a thin line. We do not want to view our verbal confession as magic words that lose their power over time. That is, heaven is not populated merely by those who managed to squeeze in a confession just before they died, with no time for another sin to slip through. On the other hand, we cannot adopt a cavalier attitude: ‘Hey, I confessed when I walked down the aisle. Why do I need to confess again?’ As is so often the case, the answer is balance. Our sins are forgiven, now and forever, if we are in Christ. But we remember the very joy of our salvation each time we confess our sins.” (p.27)

5) WHAT IS CLEANSING?

Though I have talked a great deal about God’s forgiveness thus far, there is a dual promise made in John’s First Epistle that we can easily pass over – God will cleanse us of all unrighteousness.

“Come now, and let us reason together,” says the Lord. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be as wool.” (Isa 1:18)

More than God’s wrath simply passing over us, He goes one step further and declares us to be righteous in His presence, imputing to us a righteousness that we have not earned by works (Ro 4:5); this is what we call ‘Positional Sanctification’. It is where God covers our sins with the cloak of Christ’s perfect Righteousness. God does not just turn a blind eye to our sin, but He promises that one day (when Christ returns at the Day of Judgment), He will remove all our sin from our persons. In the meantime, He is removing and cleansing our sins bit by bit. This is what we call ‘Progressional Sanctification’. However, as much as I would like to delve into explaining this interesting topic, it really deserves its own blog (plus, this blog is already running pretty long and I don’t want to bore you any more than I have to). Before we get back to the topic of forgiveness though, I will let Sproul Jr. summarise what the significance of cleansing is:

“When we stop with the promise of forgiveness, as grand and as shocking as it is, we still miss out on the fullness of the promise. For we long not merely to have God’s judgment pass over us, but to be made white as snow. The promise of the gospel isn’t just that we won’t be judged, but that, in the end, we will be good. Thus, John tells us that not only does He forgive us for our sins, He cleanses us from all unrighteousness. Now that’s a grand promise. Indeed, one of the greatest mysteries for me about the afterlife is found right here. How, I wonder, can I continue to be me, to have a consciousness that is connected to and continues from what I have now, that will have no sin? I wouldn’t recognise me, and I doubt anyone else would either. I’m afraid I’m so puzzled by this because I don’t spend enough time thinking about this promise and the promise of my sanctification. I’m afraid that in my tradition, we think of sanctification as a process at best and as a doctrine at worst. But we almost never see it as John shows it to us here, as a promise. This is His promise. As we despair in our sin, not only are we promised forgiveness, we are promised cleansing. The sorrow that follows in the wake of our sins is crushed now by gospel forgiveness. It is also crushed then, that is, in the future, by gospel cleansing. We need to believe His promises and crush the despair.” (pp.28-29)

6) HOW DO WE LIVE OUT GOD’S FORGIVENESS?

Now that we have dealt with the understanding and receiving aspects of God’s forgiveness, let us move on to the practical based section on how we live out God’s forgiveness in our interaction with people. In other words, what should our response be to this extravagant love that God has lavished on us in forgiving us all our sins?

And behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at the table in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil, and stood at His feet behind Him weeping; and she began to wash His feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head; and she kissed His feet and anointed them with the fragrant oil. Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying, “This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him, for she is a sinner.” And Jesus answered and said to him,…“There was a certain creditor who had two debtors. One owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing with which to repay, he freely forgave them both. Tell Me, therefore, which of them will love him more?” Simon answered and said, “I suppose the one whom he forgave more.” And He said to him, “You have rightly judged.” Then He turned to the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house;…you gave Me no kiss, but this woman has not ceased to kiss My feet since the time I came in…Therefore I say to you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little.” Then He said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” And those who sat at the table with Him began to say to themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?” (Lk 7:37-49)

The first way, is to respond to our glorious Triune God with praise and thanksgiving. Because He in His Grace has forgiven us, we should naturally respond by “singing and making melody in [our] heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:19-20). Put simply, the right response to God forgiving rebels is for them to worship Him, anointing His feet with expensive fragrant oil – their praises. As Jesus so aptly states in the above passage, unless we can begin to appreciate the extent and severity of the sin of which we have been forgiven, we will respond to God’s forgiveness with indifference and trivial love.

Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed ten thousand talents. But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt. But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ So his fellow servant fell down at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.” (Mt 18:21-35)

The second way we should respond to God’s forgiveness is for us to, likewise, forgive our neighbours. As we so often pray in the Lord’s Prayer, “forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (Mt 6:12). Part of the reason we should repent and confess our sins regularly is that it reminds us of the Gospel of God’s forgiveness. This Gospel of forgiveness, far from being something we learn then move on from, should be proclaimed frequently to the Church so that, like the wind which picks up a boat’s sails and moves it along in the ocean, this Gospel moves us to love our fellow man in a similar way, not out of obligation or seeking merit, but out of gratitude for what God has done for us. As that famous saying of English poet Alexander Pope goes, “to err is human; to forgive is divine.”

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace?…Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. (Ro 6:15; 3:31)

The final way we should respond to God’s forgiveness, is to our remaining indwelling sin. D.A. Carson recounts a story from his past in his book, “The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God”, which demonstrates not only the incorrect response to our sin, but sadly, also the most common response to our sin:

“Many think it is easy for God to forgive. I recall meeting a young and articulate French West African when I was studying in Germany more than twenty years ago. We were both working diligently to improve our German, but once a week or so we had had enough, so we went out for a meal together and retreated to French, a language we both know well. In the course of those meals we got to know each other. I learned that his wife was in London training to be a medical doctor…Pretty soon I discovered that once or twice a week he disappeared into the red light district of town. Obviously he went to pay his money and have his woman. Eventually I got to know him well enough to ask him what he would do if he discovered that his wife were doing something similar in London. ‘Oh,’ he said, ‘I’d kill her.’ ‘That’s a bit of a double standard, isn’t it?’ I replied. ‘You don’t understand. Where I come from in Africa, the husband has the right to sleep with many women, but if a wife does it, she must be killed.’ ‘But you told me that you were raised in a mission school. You know that the God of the Bible does not have double standards like that.’ He gave me a bright smile and replied, ‘Ah, le bon Dieu; il doit nous pardonner; c’est son métier [Ah, God is good; he’s bound to forgive us; that’s his job].’ It is a common view, is it not?…Even when people do not put things quite so bluntly, the idea is popular, not least because, as we have seen, some ill-defined notions of the love of God run abroad in the land – but these notions have been sadly sentimentalised and horribly stripped of all the complementary things the Bible has to say.” (pp.75-76)

Far from giving us a blasé attitude to our sin, causing us to be indifferent to our sin since we will be forgiven anyway, God’s forgiveness should, as the Apostle Paul afore stated, establish the Law. God’s forgiveness should spur us on to do good deeds, not to earn salvation, but out of freedom and gratitude. Rather than taking God’s forgiveness of our sins for granted, this forgiveness should rouse us to the same indignation that God has for our sin, turning to Him to wage war on it.

Waves

And with that, we finish another blog. I pray that if you have never heard any of this truly Good News of forgiveness through Christ, that the Holy Spirit will apply these truths to you, changing your naturally hardened heart into a heart of flesh unto your Salvation (Eze 11:19). And for those who have heard this Good News before, I also pray that the Holy Spirit will apply these things unto you so that you are filled with a new sense of God’s forgiveness and shaken from Gospel apathy, reawakening a zeal for Christ to please Him and reminding you of your first love (Rev 2:4-5). So until next time, put that in your cloud and rain it (Jude 12).

Christus Regnat,

MAXi

The Inner Canaanites

A Sip

Bonjour blogworms! I hope this blog finds you in the receipt of the Lord’s Grace and peace. The topic for this particular blog is, once again, one of those ones that have lain stagnant in my mind for months now. However, as usual, I recently saw something which reminded me of this often perceivably despondent topic and stirred me to write about it. This topic is something which I’m sure every Christian reading this will identify with. It is something which brings much pain and despair to many and thus, I pray God will bring comfort and hope to you through this blog. It is also something which is very healthy and, as I hope to show, has a purpose. So, with this in mind, on with the blog!

Spring Time!

The stimulus that prompted me to write this blog was a film I watched last night on the life of the famous German Christian Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor, lived in Germany during World War II. As a respected man of God, he was often tormented and challenged with how to justly respond to the threat, corruption and horrendous evil of the Nazi regime, and yet still do what is pleasing to God. Bonhoeffer eventually gave in to his growing revulsion for the Nazi brutality and participated in the planning of an assassination attempt on Hitler’s life. Needless to say, the assassination plot failed and Bonheoffer was subsequently arrested, detained and finally executed, sadly, a few months before the end of the War.

But it was these scenes of Bonhoeffer’s inner struggle between murder and justice; between sin and what is good; between the flesh and the Spirit that spurred me to write this blog. For it was in these scenes that I could empathise with Bonhoeffer with my own periods of struggling with sin as a Christian. It is something that we all, as Christians, can identify with. This struggle is a source of much anguish for believers because throughout the New Testament, it is proclaimed that once we are in Christ, our sinfulness has been conquered and we are new creations. For example, in Romans 6:6-14, the Apostle Paul makes one of his typical declarations about our new lives in Christ, explaining that “our old man was crucified with Him [Christ], that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin…For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” Yet whilst this victory over sin is announced and trusted upon by believers, the reality of sin is still very much present in our lives. This seeming inconsistency and contradiction between what is ‘factual’ and what is ‘actual’ has been frustrating believers ever since Christ died, rose and ascended 2000 years ago.

1) THE PROBLEM – SINNER OR SAINT?

Like Bonhoeffer, we can all as Christians cry out in frustration with the Apostle Paul in Romans 7:14-25:

For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God – through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

O how we can relate to this struggle! But believe it or not, some theologians would argue that Paul is here not talking as a Christian, but as a pre-converted Jew. Though I do not agree with this position, I will not go into the arguments as to why this is because John Piper does a great job doing exactly that in his six part sermon series called, “Who is This Divided Man?” If you have the time and are unsatisfied with what I have written here, I would highly recommend either listening to the series or reading it here: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/ByScripture/10/57_Who_is_This_Divided_Man_Part_1/

Nevertheless, this passage is repeated and paralleled by Paul in his letter to the Galatians in 5:17 when he says, “The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit lusts against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish.” For arguably the greatest Christian to ever live, this battle against sin was an ever-present reality. Whilst God changes our God-hating and rebellious wills to God-loving and obedient wills through Regeneration by His Spirit, we still sin. Though we may not sin anywhere near as much or as severely as we used to before coming to Christ, we still sin nonetheless. And so there is this inner battle between what we want to do (please God) and what we often actually do (disobey God).

This is also shown by another Apostle – Peter. If any of the Apostles knew what it was like to struggle with sin, it was impetuous Peter. I mean, who else can claim to have chopped off someone’s ear (besides Chopper Reed that is), managed to walk on water and still nearly drown, and disowned the Incarnate and earthly Jesus three times? That said, though we may not have had the privilege of being alive when Christ walked the Earth, I’m sure we are all guilty of having been foolishly impulsive, doubtful and faithless, and embarrassed of Christ at times of weakness (and ‘strength!’). But for those who would rebut that these incidents happened before Christ’s resurrection and the Day of Pentecost, and hence, when the fullness and strength of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit had not yet become manifest, Paul gives us another example of Peter’s remaining ‘old man’ coming out in Galatians 2:11-13:

Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.

Though many years had passed since Jesus had first selected him to be a Disciple, and hence experiencing many years of the sanctifying work of the indwelt Spirit, Peter still struggled with that same fear and hypocrisy that he had shown all those years earlier when he first came face to face with his Messiah. You see, no matter how far we progress in our walk with Jesus here on Earth, sin will always be at war in our flesh. Its frequency and severity may be slowly diminished by the ongoing work of the Spirit over time, but this residual sin still rears its ugly head when we least expect or want it.

Although the Apostles Peter and Paul were such great proponents of Christ’s victory over sin, they also knew through their own personal experience that we are not yet glorified and are being sanctified progressively. Though we are positionally declared righteous by God’s Grace through faith in Christ alone, we still have what Paul calls in Romans 7 ‘indwelling sin’, thus being simultaneously both sinner and saint. Though our old sinful self is dead and has been defeated by Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection and ascension, God chooses to leave a remnant of this ‘old man’ in us until He returns to resurrect the dead and complete the good work He started in us (Phil 1:6).

2) THE REASON – WHY HAS GOD LEFT INDWELLING SIN IN CHRISTIANS?

So, this then begs the question – why has God chosen to leave this remnant of our sinful nature in us? If God could, by His very Word and decree, permanently eradicate sin forever at this very moment in time from all His people, why hasn’t He? For what purpose has He left this sin in us? Well, there is an element of God’s Hidden Will in activity here, and as such, we must respond with what Martin Luther explains as awe, reverence and fear for this sovereign and majestic will (see my earlier blog, “Un-Free Willy [Part 1]”). As Luther says, reiterating Paul in Romans 9:20, as finite and foolish humans, we should not question God’s will but adore it. Nonetheless, after much careful and prayerful contemplation, I have come up with at least three reasons from Scripture that may be reasons God has left this residual sin in us.

And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong. (2Co 12:7-10)

The first possible reason I picked up from Paul in this passage. Now, I know that Paul is not exactly clear as to what this ‘thorn in the flesh’ is and there has subsequently been much debate as to its identity, some saying eyesight problems, some saying a certain person, others saying it was a particular sin. Nonetheless, I maintain that the basic principle conveyed by this passage can be applied to the topic of indwelling sin regardless of whether Paul’s ‘thorn’ was actually sin or not. As the reassuring message is universal in its application to anything that causes distress and struggle, indwelt sin certainly falls into this category.

So that said, the first reason that I think God has chosen to leave sin in us is that, like Paul says, it humbles us. Rather than thinking we can do everything on our own and being puffed with pride, indwelt sin prevents us from exalting ourselves and turns us from autonomy, revealing our utter dependence on Christ’s Grace and strength. Further, as it makes us weak, it provides an opportunity for God’s strength and power to be displayed. In this, it also moves and entices us to turn to Christ whose “yoke is easy and…burden is light” (Mt 11:30).

As John Piper says in Part 4 of his series, the reality of indwelling sin conveyed by Romans 7 is purposed “so that you will know your real condition as a Christian and will walk the precarious line between cocky presumption that you are above sin, and hopeless despair because you never live up to the demand for perfection in this life. My goal is to push you away from pride toward humility, and away from despair toward hope. The biblical realism of Romans 7 is meant to save you from moral pride on one side and immoral hopelessness on the other side. Romans 7 is a great help in balancing on this tightrope.”

Now these are the nations which the Lord left, that He might test Israel by them, that is, all who had not known any of the wars in Canaan (this was only so that the generations of the children of Israel might be taught to know war, at least those who had not formerly known it), namely, …all the Canaanites…And they were left, that He might test Israel by them, to know whether they would [keep the ways of the Lord, to walk in them as their fathers kept them – Jdg 2:22]…Thus the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites…And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons; and they served their gods. (Jdg 3:1-6)

The final two reasons come from linking this analogy in the Old Testament to the current topic. Generally speaking, whereas much of the Old Testament is concerned with natural and physical matters, the New Testament is more concerned with the spiritual. So whereas this passage is concerned with a physical war over a physical place with physical enemies, I think it is fair to use it (albeit, rather loosely) as an analogy for the Christian’s inner spiritual war. Instead of the land of Canaan, our land is our soul; instead of a physical war with the hostile and evil enemy Canaanites over possession of this land, we war spiritually with the hostile and evil enemy Sin over control of our body (in case you were wondering, this is where I got the idea for the title of this blog from).

So with these correlative parallels distinguished, the first reason gauged from this passage as to why God leaves sin to dwell in us is to test us. Just like when God left a remnant of Canaanites to dwell in Canaan to test the faith of the Israelites, so God leaves a remnant of our sin to dwell in us so “that the genuineness of [our] faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honour, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love” (1Pe 1:7-8). The second reason extracted from this Biblical analogy is that by leaving a hostile sin in us, this teaches us through practice how to fight and war against it, inciting us to ardent spiritual warfare. Rather than leaving us to a potential spiritual lethargy, by letting a portion of our sin remain in us this stirs and provokes us into a spiritual fervor and zeal for God, hoping for, praying for and depending on His victory.

3) THE SOLUTION – HOW SHOULD WE RESPOND TO THIS INDWELLING SIN?

Therefore, with these two questions answered comes the most important and practical based question – what do we, as Christians, do when we are struggling with our indwelt sin? What do we do when our ‘old man’ crops up again?

So the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord…Therefore…the children of Israel cried out to the Lord, [and] the Lord raised up a deliverer for the children of Israel, who delivered them. (Jdg 3:7-9)

The first and most important thing, like the Israelites here did when they had sinned against God through idolatry, is to cry out to God and turn to Him. God has promised to deliver us from our sin and we must trust in this promise. However, unlike the Israelites who had a human deliverer, we have the greater fulfillment of this promise in the divine person of Jesus Christ our Lord. He is our great Deliverer, Redeemer and Saviour and we must turn to Him in times of spiritual struggle!

God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us. My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (1Jn 1:5-2:2)

The second thing we should do after turning to God is to, like John says here, confess all our sins before God. Rather than ignore them, we must repent of any indwelling sin and take full responsibility for it. As John says, we all have sin and if we deny this basic yet crucial truth, we make Jesus to be a liar and I put to you, possibly worse than this, we make him to be obsolete. For if we have no sin as Christians, what does Christ save us from and thus what use is His death? Coming to Jesus is not a one-off vaccination shot against sin, but a lifelong journey and relationship of repentance.

We should also not let this indwelt sin cast dangerous doubts on of our salvation. It’s not whether we sin, but how we respond to that sin which characterises a Christian. As Piper says in Part 3 of his series on what indwelt sin means to our salvation, “This does not mean we are not Christian. The test is, Do we love the law? Do we hate our failure? Do we cry out in dismay over our sinful condition? Do we look to Christ and his righteousness? Do we fly to the cross? Do we confess and repent and renounce Satan and set our faces to go forward with Jesus on the Calvary road? Do that! Let us pray for each other that we do that.”

“The point of this text [Romans 7] is not that we should make peace with sin, but that we should make war on sin in our own lives and know how to understand ourselves and how to respond when we suffer tactical defeats in the war. Chapter six makes clear that we will win the war against sin (see Ro 6:14). Chapter seven makes clear that this will not be without tactical defeats that will make us love our Saviour all the more. It’s the earnestness of the war and the response to defeat that show your Christianity, not perfection.” (John Piper from “Who Is This Divided Man? - Part 3”)

Finally, we as Christians should not be content with indwelt sin once we become convicted of it. Rather than ignore or this sin, we should instead wage war against it, taking up “the whole armour of God, that [we] may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Eph 6:13). The war has already been won; we are merely living and playing it out to its rightful conclusion in time. So with this in mind, let us advance in confidence and faith in the victory of Christ.

To finish, Piper sums this all up in Part 4 of his series:

“I am not saying that Christians live only in defeat. But I am saying that no Christian lives only in perfect victory over sin. And in those times when we fail to triumph over sin, Romans 7:14-25 shows us the normal way a healthy Christian should respond. We should say:

i) I love the law of God (verse 22);
ii) I hate what I just did (verse 15);
iii) Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death (verse 24)?;
iv) Thanks be to God! The victory will come through Jesus Christ my Lord (verse 25)

…No Christian settles to live this way. But if we do live this way for a time, we shouldn’t lie about it. No hypocrisy. No posing. No boasted perfectionism. No churchy, pasted smiles or chipper superficiality. God save us from blindness to our own failures and the consequent quickness to judge others. God help us to feel worse about our own shortfalls than the failure of others. God give us the honesty and candor and humility of the apostle Paul in this text!”

As one of my favourite Christian bands, Casting Crowns, says in their song “East to West”:

“I start the day, the war begins, endless reminding of my sin.
Time and time again Your truth is drowned out by the storm I’m in.
Today I feel like I’m just one mistake from you leaving me this way

…I know You’ve washed me white, turned my darkness into light.
I need Your peace to get me through…this night.
I can’t live by what I feel, but by the truth Your word reveals.
I’m not holding on to You, but You’re holding on to me. You’re holding on to me.

Jesus, You know just how far the east is from the west.
I don’t have to see the man I’ve been come rising up in me again.
In the arms of Your mercy I find rest.
‘Cause You know just how far the east is from the west, from one scarred hand to the other.”

Waves

Well, there you have it. I pray that this has spurred you on to not be either self-righteous and proud, nor desperate and hopeless, but full of hope and humility; that you will “put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts” (Ro 13:14). But if your indwelt sin does rear its ugly head (and I’m betting it does), don’t run away in fear, but turn unto the Lord and fight it by the strength of Christ so that you can one day say with the Apostle Paul, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2Ti 4:7). As John Piper said in Part 4 of his series, “There is a difference between the divided man of Romans 7 and a sellout. Don’t sell out. Trust Christ and fight sin.” So until next time, put that in your cloud and rain it (Jude 12).

Christus Regnat,

MAXi

The Lord Is Cross

A Sip

Greetings blogworms! I pray this blog finds you well in the Lord. This blog falls into the category of one of those blogs which I have been thinking about for some time but hadn’t the time to write – actually, I have quite a few of those kinds of blogs in my head. It’s something that has been annoying me for a while now and I think it’s important that the Church not only rediscovers this particular topic, but preaches it from the pulpit, as it is not only highly relevant, but pivotal and crucial to our Faith. In fact, it is what the whole Gospel hinges upon and I fear that we are raising up a generation of believers who are either ignorant or apathetic towards this particular topic, and in turn, having a poor understanding of who God is. Anyway, without further ado, on with the blog! (And I’ll try and keep it short this time).

Spring Time!

Like I’ve already stated, this particular topic has been stewing in my mind for quite some time now but it wasn’t until today, after reading something which bothered me, that it was brought to the forefront of my mind again. You see, I am reading a brilliant book at the moment by Westminster Seminary professor Michael Horton called, “Christless Christianity.” In this book, Horton astutely describes, analyses and critiques the sorry state that Christianity is in here in the West, targeting its primary captors; Pelagianism, ‘moral therapeutic deism’ and the prosperity gospel. One of the sections that I‘m up to reading, which deals especially with the latter of the three, is on ‘smooth talkers’. And who else should Horton use to typify and analyse this heretical phenomenon but everyone’s favourite smiling pastor, Mr Joel Osteen.

Osteen, being a bestselling author and pastor of the Houston mega-church, “Lakewood Church”, personifies the sort of Bible-twisting, narcissistic, motivational self-help drivel that Horton critiques. So much so, that Horton spends quite a large section of his book quoting Osteen and exposing the underlying heterodoxy and vanity in his words. It is one such quote of Osteen’s that rekindled this blog topic and my grievance. In the quote, taken from his bestselling book, “Become a Better You: 7 Keys to Improving Your Life Every Day”, Osteen said, “I know my heart is right. To the best of my ability, I’m doing what pleases Him [God]…Frankly, it’s not because of what you have or haven’t done; God loves you because of who you are and because of who he is. God is love” (p.89).

Whilst it would be real easy to point the finger of blame solely at Osteen, I think Osteen’s views are tragically a reflection of the views of the majority of both the Christian and Secular worlds. This commonly held and preached view, which omits, ignores or misinterprets the Cross of Christ, is something which at first glance is sweet, attractive and instinctively Biblically correct; ‘God is a loving god and He loves you just the way you are.’ However, even if its proponents in both evangelical and liberal camps are well meaning, dig a little deeper and what this watered-down and “nice” seeker-sensitive message actually does is either make Christ’s death on the Cross obsolete, or it makes God out to be a benign and simple grandfather figure in the sky. Both of these, as I will show below, are detrimental to our knowledge of God, Christ, Salvation, us and the Gospel.

1) THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CROSS

The tendency we have as Christians when seeing the Cross, is to focus on the love; we only see the love of God. Now, don’t get me wrong, the Cross is a wonderful and glorious sign of God’s love, but, to the detriment of the true meaning of the Cross, we tend to overlook the other side; the darker and uglier side of the Cross. This side is key to understanding the necessity of Jesus’ crucifixion. This darker side is God’s wrath.

You see, it is true that God is a God of love, but He is not ONLY a God of love. He has other characteristics such as His Holiness, His justice, His mercy and His Righteousness to name a few. And these other characteristics, particularly His justice in the case of the Cross, must be satisfied and adhered to in conjunction with His loving nature. Those, like Osteen, who make God out to be only a God of love with no mention of His wrath or His justice make Him out to be an easy going old man in the sky who benignly pardons us with seemingly no cost to us or Him. As Horton rightly notes:

“Osteen’s God is uncomplicated. Characterized by only one attribute (love), God’s forgiveness is cheap. His love does not require consistency with his justice, holiness, and righteousness. Therefore, it is not merciful love – that is, compassion toward those who deserve judgment. By contrast, the God of the Bible is far more interesting and majestic. Finding a way to love sinners that does not violate his holy character, God gave his Son to fulfill the law and bear our judgment in our place. The biblical plot of the redemptive drama is rich, while Osteen’s story is thin – with me rather than God at the center.” (p.89)

2) GOD’S WRATH

So what has the Cross got to do with God’s wrath? Everything! Those who either ignore the Cross or reduce it to merely a sign of God’s love also reduce its power and, inevitably, its significance and meaning to our Faith, Salvation, and ultimately our relationship with God Himself. You cannot understand the Good News until you understand the bad news; you cannot understand God’s love until you understand His wrath. So what is God’s wrath?

For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God…for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. (Eph 5:5-6)

The wrath of God is the divine punishment, distributed by a God who is a “consuming fire” (Heb 12:29), to those who are guilty of “all ungodliness and unrighteousness” (Ro 1:18), disobediently transgressing His Holy laws and sinning against Him. And unfortunately, the bad news is that includes ALL of us (Ro 3:10-12, 23). For all of us by our human nature can be neither pure nor righteous before God (Job 15:14). Man is “abominable and filthy”, ‘drinking iniquity like water’ (Job 15:16). It is for this reason that God’s wrath remains on all of us by default unless we have faith in Christ’s work on the Cross (Jn 3:36).

For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness, Nor shall evil dwell with you. The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity. You shall destroy those who speak falsehood; the Lord abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. (Ps 5:4-6)

So why does sin so much invoke God’s wrath then? It is because sin in its purest form is being in opposition to God’s nature which is that of the Spirit (Ro 8:5-11). And God, being a Holy and Righteous God, cannot be in the presence of such filth of the flesh (Jn 3:5-6). Like two opposite magnetic charges that repel one another, so is sin and God’s Holiness; sin brings separation from God and thus the wrath of God (Isa 59:2-3). As David says in the above Psalm, God detests sin and, whilst longsuffering sin in us temporally in forbearance of our later justification, sanctification and glorification (Ro 3:25), He cannot eternally tolerate it. As such, all those whose sins are not forgiven through Faith in Christ must be Eternally Destroyed.

Thus, those who ignore this bad news and only focus on the Good News, or God’s love and forgiveness, render the Cross obsolete, and likewise, reduce the Church’s understanding and gratitude for the Lord’s work on the Cross. Rather than realise their utter helplessness, that man cannot save himself, they assume that they could have saved themselves but God let them off the hook. They fail to realise that no matter how hard we try and no matter how good we think we are, God looks at our hearts and sees the sinful pride and motivations with which these so called ‘good works’ were done (Pr 16:2) and thus justly condemns us. As Horton again astutely says:

“Grab all the glory now. No cross, no wrath, no judgment. Just be all you can be. We are constantly bombarded in our culture by appeals to our native narcissism…The biblical message is far deeper and richer, however, both in its bad news and its good news. The bad news is far worse than making mistakes or failing to live up to the legalistic standards of fundamentalism. It is that the best efforts of the best Christians, on the best days, in the best frame of heart and mind, with the best motives fall short of that true righteousness and holiness that God requires. Our best efforts cannot satisfy God’s justice. Yet the good news is that God has satisfied his own justice and reconciled us to himself through the life, death, and resurrection of his Son. God’s holy law can no longer condemn us because we are in Christ.” (p.91)

Instead of appreciating the enormity of their sinful condition, the enormous price God has paid to redeem us and thus, understanding how much we have been forgiven of, they view their sin as merely mistakes and failures which God has lovingly pardoned. And because the gravity of their sin is diminished and reduced, so is their appreciation for God’s saving work and His love in doing so. God’s forgiveness is cheapened and as such, they respond with cheap love for their Saviour. As Jesus said, “to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little” (Lk 7:47). Of course, with me using the words ‘they’ and ‘their’ I must not get carried away and forget that I can sometimes be just as guilty myself in not appreciating what my Saviour has done on the Cross.

3) WHAT DOES THE CROSS MEAN?

So if the bad news is that we are all sinners and we are born with God’s wrath upon us (Jn 3:18), then the consequence of this wrath is that in order for it to be satisfied, blood must be shed (Heb 9:22). As one of my favourite Christian musicians Keith Green puts it in his song, “Altar Call”, “Most people don’t find out, ‘til it’s too late, that someone has to pay the price. You can pay it yourself (ha!), or let someone else. But who would be that nice, to pay a debt that isn’t His? Well I know someone like that, and He’s your best friend, He really is, He really loves you.” In other words, something or someone must die for our sins. This is explained by Paul in Romans 6:23 when he says, “For the wages of sin is death.”

Before Christ’s death on the Cross, the Israelites had shed the blood of animals to atone for their sins, but this was just a temporary band-aid solution “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb 10:4). Since these animal sacrifices were required regularly and often, they aimed at revealing to the Jews the inadequacy of such sacrifices and, hence, reveal their need for a better one. They were purposed, like much of the law, to point towards Christ. But alas, most of them missed the arrow.

Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all…For the transgressions of My people He was stricken…Yet it pleased the Lord to…make His soul an offering for sin…By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities…And He bore the sin of many, And made intercession for the transgressors. (Isa 53:4-12)

This prophecy, written hundreds of years before Christ’s Incarnation, shows that God had premeditated and preordained that He would send His Son to die on the Cross. This was not something which was unforeseen or spontaneously decided on as a solution; this was something which God had planned since before the creation of the world and any of us in it. You see, before creation, God loved His Church (Eph 1:4-5). However, He was faced with a serious dilemma. Knowing full well that man would become sinful and thus could never save himself, God (as a loving God) wanted to be with His people, but at the same time (as a just and holy God), He also had to punish this sinfulness. The solution that God conceived is the most glorious climax of all world history; God condescended in the form of His Son to take the penalty of our sins on Himself. As opposed to some “theologians” like Brian McLaren who accuse God of “cosmic child abuse” in doing this, Jesus tells us Himself that He was not forced to die for His sheep, but rather He laid down His life willingly out of love (Jn 10:18). Christ loved us so much that He gave “Himself for us [as] an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma” (Eph 5:2).

For He Himself is our peace, who has…broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances…thus making peace, and that He might reconcile [us] to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity…For through Him we…have access by one Spirit to the Father. (Eph 2:14-18)

In taking the penalty of the sinful Church’s sins on Himself, Christ has successfully satisfied God’s wrath and as such, has reconciled the two parties so that now the Church can dwell with God forever in His Kingdom. God has reconciled all those who have faith in Jesus by forgiving them in both a merciful and just way (Ro 3:26), freely justifying them “by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood” (Ro 3:24-25). This word ‘propitiation’ is not commonly used anymore, but it is a beautiful word which basically means a ‘sacrifice of atonement’.

But now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. (Heb 9:26-28)

This fundamental doctrine is popularly called ‘Substitutionary Atonement’ in theological circles. Basically, it means that Christ suffered the punishment we justly deserve for our sinfulness as a substitute, taking our spot on the Cross and dying in our place. The Cross is not simply Jesus showing us what is morally ideal or just pointlessly showing us how much He loves us. No, in order that our sins might be justly forgiven and God’s wrath lovingly satisfied, someone’s blood had to be shed and that person’s blood was God’s Himself in the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Christ bore the penalty of our sins and thus took on Himself much more pain than simply the nails in His wrists and feet. Oh no, Christ bore the full wrath of God. Christ, out of the love He has for His sheep, suffered the wrath and separation from His Father that sin brings as a definitive sacrifice, once and for all.

“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” (2Co 5:21)

Christ lived a completely sinless and Holy life, yet as the Lamb of God, our sins were imputed to Him so that He became the symbol of all the Church’s sin and hence, He suffered separation from the Father for them. This is most clearly expressed by Christ Himself when He agonisingly exclaimed on the Cross in Matthew 27:46, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?” In a fallen world with much suffering, everyone (even Atheists, terrorists and serial killers) still experience the blessings that God’s common grace and presence bring. Can you imagine if He took all of that away and you experienced what it would be like to be separated from the goodness of God? Well, that was what Christ experienced on the Cross for your sins, suffering the torment of separation from a Holy God that you rightfully deserved.

Furthermore, when Christ finally and climactically says, “It is finished!” (Jn 19:30) before giving up His Spirit and dying, this reveals to us the nature of the work that Christ had completed on the Cross. You see, the Greek word that is used here for ‘finished’ is ‘teleo’ and is a legal term. It basically means to pay, execute or discharge a debt. What this shows us is that the Cross is not merely Jesus exemplarily taking a bullet for some of His friends, but it is an official legal transaction in God’s eyes. God did not simply forget the debt, but paid it Himself. Christ paid this debt we owed to God that we could never pay. And He did this out of His extravagant love by suffering and paying with His life!

4) WHY DID GOD REDEEM US ON THE CROSS?

So why did God do all of this? Some people like Osteen might answer this question with something along the lines of, “Because He loves you for who you are.” What nonsense that is! This only pacifies Christ’s work on the Cross and diminishes God’s love. As I already discussed above, we are sinners and God’s Holy nature is such that He cannot tolerate sin.

For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him. (Ro 6:5-8)

As this verse tells us, Christ died on the Cross to eliminate and conquer sin in us; to free us from the captivity that our sinfulness had on us. Christ died so that we in our sinfulness would also die with Him, and thus, we would be a new creature, being “sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb 10:10). What this means is that God sent His Son to die on a cross so that not only will your sins be forgiven, but that you will be sanctified and transformed into the likeness of Christ. You see, God does not love you for who you are, He loves you DESPITE who you are!

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Ro 5:6-11)

How much more glorious is this love that the Father lavishes on us if we do not deserve it as filthy sinners. For if He loves us for who we are, then there is an element of worthiness and value in that love; that there is something about us that merits God’s affection. But if we realise that we are totally undeserving of the Father’s love; that He died for us not because we were righteous and deserved it, but because we were totally sinful and undeserving; how much more glorious and unfathomable is this love, and thus, how much more appreciative we will be for what He did on the Cross.

He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins…For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight. (Col 1:13-23)

Christ died on the Cross not because God was happy with the way we are, but because He DETESTED the way we are, so much so, that it required a radical solution – the Cross. Yet though He detests the way we are, He still loves us! – “Who is so great a God as our God?” (Ps 77:13). Christ’s death on the Cross not only reconciles us ungodly and wicked rebels to God, but it also is designed through the working of His Spirit to change us from who we are as sinful dead reprobates, into the perfect image of His Son. For just as our sin was imputed to Him, so is His perfect obedience and Righteousness imputed to us. This is the mysterious miracle of Justification; that though I am an unworthy sinner undeserving of God’s Grace, I can stand before Him clothed in the Righteousness that is not mine, but that of Christ that comes through Faith in Him (Eph 4:24; Phil 3:9).

“For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.” (Ro 8:29)

The word ‘foreknew’ used here means much more than mere factual knowledge, it is used in the same sense as when Adam knew Eve; it means to intimately know someone – to love them. God loved us so much before we were even created, that He wanted to transform us from our sinful state into the fullness of life in His Son. How amazing and incomprehensible is this promise of God; that we will one day be like Jesus Himself, free from sin and death, sharing in His Glory!

Waves

So, with that said, I pray that I have been enabled by the Spirit to demonstrate to you as best as possible the richness of the love of Christ on the Cross. Jesus’s death was not a trivial epitome of loving moral behavior for us to imitate or the simple pardoning of sin, but the amazing saving grace of a God who dealt with our radical problem of sin with a radical solution of self-sacrifice, our forgiveness coming at an expensive cost; the death of His Son; and that you will respond to this with the thanksgiving, praise and worship that is due to Him.

I hope that the Spirit will make you better understand the depth of love shown on the Cross; that you can only do so by first understanding the wrath of God as divine punishment for our sin and your own contemptibility before a Holy God; that He loves you not because of who you are, but despite who you are; that you will cherish the Cross as a sign of God paying the death penalty you deserve Himself and reconciling you to Him out of a totally undeserved and unmerited love. So powerful is this symbol of God’s gracious love, that I pray that you will say with the Apostle Paul, “I [am] determined not to know anything…except Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (1 Co 2:2).

And now, having reconciled us, I finally pray that you accept “the ministry of reconciliation” that God has bestowed upon us to preach; “that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them” (2Co 5:18-19). So until next time, put that in your cloud and rain it (Jude 12).

Christus Regnat,

MAXi

Un-Free Willy (Part 1)

A Sip

Greetings blogworms! The topic for this certain blog is bound to be another controversial one. It is on the topic of free will. Since it is such an interesting and profound topic, there has been much written on it. However, I have chosen (pun unintended) to utilise two particular resources which I have found especially useful in discussing and explaining this (at times) complex concept. These will be Martin Luther’s magnum opus, “The Bondage of the Will”, and Jonathan Edwards’ “Freedom of the Will”. Because of the enormity of these texts, I will split the discussion into two blogs, one for each text. This blog will use Luther’s masterpiece whilst my next blog will use Edwards’. So without further ado, let the juices flow!

Spring Time!

Before we get on to what Luther argues, we should first look at the context of his book. For those who don’t know, Martin Luther was one of the leaders on the frontline of what we call the Reformation, a time when the corruption of the Roman Catholic church was being exposed and critiqued, eventually leading to a split which resulted in Protestantism and all its subsequent denominations we have today.

Luther and his other Reformers are arguably best remembered as being guided by several principles, better known as the ‘Solas’; ‘sola fide’ (faith alone), ‘sola gratia’ (grace alone), sola Dei Gloria (to God alone be the Glory), solo Christo (Christ alone), and ‘sola Scriptura’ (the Scriptures alone). But perhaps the most important of these, from which all others are derived, is the latter one – ‘Sola Scriptura’. You see for the Reformers, the Bible was their only binding authority on anything concerning the Divine. It was through this banner, proudly raised in their battle for the truth, that many Biblical truths were rediscovered, and subsequently, many perversities of that truth also uncovered.

Because of the nature of their battle, many of the Reformers were persecuted. Luther was not immune to this. He was prejudicially tried, slandered, excommunicated, and even had threats upon his life. But throughout all these ordeals, Luther would not budge from holding and proclaiming the clear truths contained in Scripture. In fact, the ordeals seemed to harden his resolve to proclaim them even more. This refusal to recant anything Biblically true is epitomised in the words he is best remembered for, given at his trial at the Diet of Worms in 1521, “Here I stand. I can do no other.”

This attitude was perhaps best shown when in 1524, one of Luther’s many Catholic detractors, the widely acclaimed and respected Humanist theologian Erasmus of Rotterdam, published a work on the contentious subject of free will. The work, entitled “Diatribe on Free Will”, stated its intention as neutrally discussing and setting forth the arguments for both sides. On the contrary, what it actually did was assert free will and confute the arguments against it, held most prominently by Luther. If this did not enrage Luther directly, then Erasmus using the authority of certain church fathers and theologians, rather than what he explained were obscure Scriptures, certainly did the trick. Whilst Luther never had the intention to write on the matter of free will, Erasmus’ blatant challenge to his Reformed theology provided him the opportunity to not only defend these views, but write what is considered (and Luther himself considered) his magnum opus; the best of all his works. So the next year, Luther got to work responding to Erasmus’ work in Luther’s typical (and at times comical) brilliant wit, Biblical insight and sharp tongue, systematically attacking Erasmus’ definitions, his logic and his Biblical exegesis.

But I’m sure by now, some of my modern readers will be asking the question, “Why did Luther see the topic of free will so important as to argue about it in a 280 page book? I mean, aren’t there many more important and practical topics we can talk about as Christians? You know, like charity, poverty and Spiritual Warfare?” Well, as I hope to demonstrate in this blog, the topic of free will has many significant implications to Christianity and the Truth than we at first may think.

1) WHY IS THE TOPIC OF FREE WILL IMPORTANT?

Erasmus held the view that no doubt countless others in this age hold, that free will is useless and utterly pointless to discuss, there being far more important topics to discuss (the hypocrisy and contradiction in the fact that Erasmus wrote a book on a subject that he considered not worth discussing was exposed by Luther early in his book). Right off the bat, Luther explains in s.7 that free will is important to discuss first and foremost because it concerns salvation. In other words, if I have a free will, I should want to know not only what God has to do, but likewise what I must and can do to be saved. As Luther says, “if I know not the distinction between our working and the power of God, I know not God Himself. And if I know not God, I cannot worship Him, praise Him,…nor serve Him; for I shall not know how much I ought to ascribe unto myself, and how much unto God” (p.31).

2) PREDESTINATION AND FREE WILL

Luther then goes on to explain his view on free will which is commonly known as ‘fate’ amongst Pagans, and called Predestination or the Doctrine of Necessity by theologians (s.11); “that God foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will” (p.33). This means that what appears to us to have been done mutably and contingently, is in reality done necessarily and immutably by the will of God (s.9). Therefore if this is true, Luther argues, then there can logically be no such thing as free will.

Erasmus preempts Luther’s arguments for Predestination and argues that even if it were true, it should not be preached as it is confusing, removes any motivation for morality and most importantly, because it creates division in the Church. Luther counters this, explaining that even if it does create disturbance of peace and commotion, God’s Word and its Truths must be proclaimed no matter what (s.19). It is not up to us to decide what parts of the Bible can be preached based on keeping peace, as Jesus Himself said boldly and plainly, “I came not to send peace, but a sword” (Mt 10:34). Luther further argues that these seemingly paradoxical truths should be preached as Predestination (and its subsequent teaching of Election);

i) Humbles Christians – “A man cannot be thoroughly humbled, until he comes to know that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsel, endeavours, will, and works, and absolutely depending on the will, counsel, pleasure, and work of another, that is, of God only. For if, as long as he has any persuasion that he can do even the least thing himself towards his own salvation, he retain a confidence in himself and do not utterly despair in himself, so long he is not humbled before God; but he proposes to himself some place, some time, or some work, whereby he may at length attain unto salvation. But he who hesitates not to depend wholly upon the good-will of God, he totally despairs in himself, chooses nothing for himself, but waits for God to work in him; and such an one, is the nearest unto grace, that he might be saved” (p.54); and

ii) Allows for faith – “Therefore, that there might be room for faith, it is necessary that all those things which are believed should be hidden. But they are not hidden more deeply, than under the contrary of sight, sense, and experience... This is the highest degree of faith - to believe that He is merciful, who saves so few and damns so many; to believe Him just, who according to His own will, makes us necessarily damnable, that He may seem, as Erasmus says, 'to delight in the torments of the miserable...' If, therefore, I could by any means comprehend how that same God can be merciful and just, who carries the appearance of so much wrath and iniquity, there would be no need of faith. But now, since that cannot be comprehended, there is room for exercising faith” (pp.54-55).

Finally, it is an important truth to preach as God’s trustworthiness hinges upon it, because “if you doubt, or disdain to know that God foreknows and wills all things, not contingently, but necessarily and immutably, how can you believe confidently, trust to, and depend upon His promises?” (p.37). If God’s will can be changed and affected by what we do, then how can He guarantee that He will fulfill His promises? How can He even guarantee victory over sin, death and Satan if the end is not certain and unchangeable?

3) WHAT IS FREE WILL?

In my short amount of experience with discussing this topic of free will with both believers and non-believers alike, I can tell you that one of the reasons there is so much debate and disagreement is primarily because of a confusion and misunderstanding of the term ‘free will’. Luther responds to this by recommending that the term should cease to be used altogether because it is a deceptive term, falsely conveying to the public the ability the will has in and of itself to change itself and being subject to no one, when theologians use it in a completely different sense to denote the least ability that is ineffective of itself without Divine Grace and thus naturally held captive by Satan (s.26). Luther does come to a reluctant compromise though, explaining that if people must use the term ‘free will’, they may not use it in reference to things above man ie Salvation, but only with reference to the things below man such as using his possessions (though even in this God still overrules by His free will) (s.26). All this being said, Luther admits that the term ‘necessity’ is also an inadequate term when discussing human will as it denotes to lay people a sense of compulsion; that is, that humans are forced to do things contrary to their will, which is certainly not the case (s.10).

Erasmus gives the definition of free will in his book as being “a power in the human will, by which, a man may apply himself to those things which lead unto eternal salvation, or turn away from the same.” Luther attacks this definition by arguing it is too narrow and vague, suggesting a more apt term would be “mutable will” or “vertible will” as only God can be described as truly ‘free’; that is, under no restraint to do what He pleases (s.41). It would be ludicrous to call man free when he cannot will any number of things such as death, perdition or to even turn himself into a butterfly (s.44). Luther also argues that there is no medium between willing good and not willing good, as Erasmus would argue (s.49). Willing can never be a mere neutral willing; it must be accompanied by striving and an endeavour towards something (s.49). As Jesus says in Matthew 12:30, “He that is not with Me is against Me.” Here, Jesus draws the eternal line in the sand; either you serve Him, or you serve sin and the enemy, Satan. There is no middle ground.

Furthermore, Luther argues from 1Co 2:9-10 that man does not have the power in himself to apply himself to the things pertaining to Salvation because he does not and cannot comprehend the things pertaining to Salvation without the Spirit revealing them to us (s.43). Experience and history testify to this truth as how many great non-Christian philosophers and thinkers of the past even came close to knowing anything of the Gospel or Salvation? Put bluntly, none. So logically, if man cannot naturally know the things of God, how can he then apply himself to things which he is ignorant of?

Therefore, Luther continues, only God by His Grace can work those things in us pertaining to Salvation. Thus, a man without the Grace of God is bound to only do evil by necessity (s.25) and must serve sin (s.50). But this does not mean he is forced to do evil against his will; on the contrary, he willingly does evil (s.25). Even when he is externally forced to do something against his will, his will still remains the same internally (s.25). You see, the only will that is strictly free is God’s (s.26) and as such, we cannot change our own wills (s.48). The only way that our wills, which are born bound to the service of sin, can be changed so as to desire and seek that which is Godly and good is for God to do so by His Grace:

“When God works in us, the will, being changed and sweetly breathed on by the Spirit of God, desires and acts, not from compulsion, but responsively, from pure willingness, inclination, and accord; so that it cannot be turned another way by anything contrary, nor be compelled or overcome even by the gates of hell... In a word, if we be under the god of this world, without the operation and Spirit of God, we are led captives by him at his will, as Paul says (2Ti 2:26). So that, we cannot will anything but that which he wills. For he is that "strong man armed," who so keepeth his palace, that those whom he holds captive are kept in peace, that they might not cause any motion or feeling against him; otherwise, the kingdom of Satan, being divided against itself, could not stand; whereas, Christ affirms it does stand. And all this we do willingly and desiringly, according to the nature of will: for if it were forced, it would be no longer will. For compulsion is (so to speak) unwillingness. But if the "stronger than he" come and overcome him, and take us as His spoils, then, through the Spirit, we are His servants and captives (which is the royal liberty) that we may desire and do, willingly, what He wills.” (pp.56-57)

Thus, Luther describes the human will aptly as “a beast between the two. If God sit thereon, it wills and goes where God will...If Satan sit thereon, it wills and goes as Satan will. Nor is it in the power of its own will to choose, to which rider it will run, nor which it will seek; but the riders themselves contend, which shall have and hold it” (p.57). In other words, our will is either a slave to Satan and free from God, or a slave to God and free from Satan – but it is never truly free. He further shows this by using another analogy; that of a log falling (s.45). He explains that the human will is like a log that can go either upward or downwards. Due to gravity, it can only fall downward though. The only way it can go upwards is if someone helps it. So like this log, it would be false and misleading to describe it as free to go or turn whichever way it wants as it can only ever go one way without help. Thus, ‘free’ is very much an empty term to Luther (s.50).

4) WHAT IF A CHRISTIAN DOESN’T AGREE?

Luther responds to Erasmus’ long list of church fathers who supposedly affirmed free will in their theology by explaining that not everything a Christian says is true (s.31). We, as Christians, can often speak by the Spirit on one topic, and by the flesh on another (s.29). Furthermore, none of the miracles or martyrdoms of any of the church fathers were done to verify their stance on free will, but rather the truth regarding the Christ (s.29). And even when these past Christians have confessed a belief in free will, Luther goes on to argue, their feelings, experience and practice have contradicted what they have said (s.30).

Erasmus also reasons that if free will was such an important issue, then why did God overlook its correction in so many men? Luther responds to this by explaining that God usually suffers His people to be in error, using examples like the kings of Israel (s.32). But even amongst such widespread error in His Church, He always reserves for Himself “seven thousand” (ie. a small section of His people) who are not so in error and are in the truth (Ro 11:14). He also corrects many on their death bed (s.32). However, Luther cautions Erasmus in trusting that every person in the visible church who claimed to be a Christian and asserted free will, was actually Christian (s.32). It is often difficult to know who the wheat are, and likewise who the tares are; who the sheep are, and likewise who the wolves are.

5) WHAT DO THE SCRIPTURES SAY?

So how should we respond to the vast array of works by past Christian writers, who at times contradict each other? Well to the Reformed mind of Luther, the answer is quite plain – the Scriptures. Whereas the words of men are often vague, uncertain and unarticulated (particularly on this topic) (s.30), the Word of Scripture (and that means ALL of it [s.37]) is clear and certain, being the only authority for discussing anything Divine in nature (s.34). Rather than interpret and evaluate Scripture through men’s words (as Erasmus had done with such men as Jerome and Origen), we should interpret and evaluate men’s words through Scripture. Where what a man has said is contrary to Scripture, we should discount it as spoken by his flesh; where what he has said aligns with Scriptural truths, then we should affirm that as being spoken by the Spirit (s.33).

To Erasmus’ skepticism of this clarity and infallibility of Scripture to men, Luther replies by explaining that many have been blind to the clear truths concerning the falsehood of free will (and other clear Biblical truths) because of Satan’s stronghold over the human mind (s.38). This is so that the power of God can be displayed more fully and for longer, lest by one word God could open the eyes of all men to all truth and knowledge, thus being saved and made perfect instantly (s.38). Because if God did this, what need would there be for a Bible or faith or hope, or more importantly, His Glory and strength manifest in human weakness?

So for Luther, not only does experience not attest to any power of so called free will, but the Scriptures are most clear on the topic – they neither mention free will nor assert it anywhere (s.40). Therefore, those who assert the affirmative should have the onus of proof of proving free will (s.29). Nonetheless, so high is Luther’s view of Scripture and so confident is he in their clarity, that he spends the rest of his book taking the onus on himself and arguing solely from the Bible, exegeting countless verses both beautifully and insightfully. There are so many verses that Luther uses to disprove free will that I will have to pick the best few to discuss below as I’ve already written quite a bit, lest I turn this blog into its own book. So, let’s move on to the most important section - what the Bible says on the matter!

NB: Due to word limit, was forced to omit discussing some important verses used by Luther which affirmed God’s sovereignty and disproved free will; these were; Jer 10:23; Pr 16:1,9; and Pr 21:1.

6) THE COMMANDMENTS

Luther explains that man is left to his own counsel and will for the things beneath him (eg. dominion over animals), but for the things concerning the things above him (eg. things of God and Salvation), he is subject to divine precepts and commands (such as the 10 Commandments), being directed and led according to God’s will and counsel (s.51). By God giving these divine precepts and commands, He is not telling us what we CAN do, but rather what we OUGHT to do (s.54). He is not inferring that we have the natural inherent ability to obey these commands, but rather making our depravity known to us so that we may call for the aid of the Divine Physician (s52). As Paul says in Romans 3:20, “through the law we become conscious of sin.”

“I have set before you life and death...therefore choose life.” (Dt 30:19)

Luther opposes Erasmus’ inferring from this verse free will, explaining that the command ‘choose life’ does not necessarily infer that man can or will choose life; for if he could do so by himself, what need would there then be for the Spirit or Christ (s.56). Luther draws a parallel here to Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:13, whereby there also are two paths described. Following Romans 3:20, Luther argues that this command is used to demonstrate the impassibility of one path, and how wide and easy the other is (s.56).

Responding similarly to Erasmus’ own analogy of a man commanded to raise his right arm, Luther contends that the man has his right arm tied and his left arm free, thus, when he is commanded to raise his right arm, he is roused from his ignorance to know that his right arm is bound and he can only raise his left arm (s.58). In other words, when a man attempts what is commanded, he learns of his impotency which he did not know of before (s.57). Man is ignorant of this impotency because Satan holds men captive to sin so that they are blind to it (s.58). As Jesus exclaimed on the Cross, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do” (Lk 23:34). This says that not only is man unable to will that which he does not know, being that which is good, but he is also naturally unable to know the evil that he does do (s.73). Thus, the purpose of these commands is to reveal to man his misery so that he would be prepared, “bruised and confounded with the knowledge of himself, for grace, and might send him to Christ to be saved” (p.117).

“Return to Me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord of hosts. (Mal 3:7)

Likewise, this verse (and others like it using the conditional tense) does not show what man can do, but (again) rather what man ought to do for God to do something (s.60).

So He [Jesus] said to him, “…But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Mt 19:17)

This verse combines both the conditional and the imperative tenses, showing us again not what we can do, but what we are unable to do ourselves to be saved (s.68). Instead, it shows man what God must do in him to be saved; that is, for God to change his will so as to give him a new will to keep the commandments (s.68). After all, only what God wills happens, including whether we will good or not (Isa 1:19) (s.59). So on the contrary, rather than showing man’s ability, this verse, Luther argues, shows man’s total inability and reveals the need for God’s Grace (s.68).

Luther further argues that it is not that man cannot merely desire or endeavour to keep the commandments, but rather that he does that have the ability in himself to keep any of them at all (s.53). If all the commandments, according to Jesus in Matthew 22:40, hinge upon the commandment, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind,” and not one of us have the ability to love God with ALL of our hearts etc, how unable are we to keep any of them (s.60)!

“For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend into heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you; in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it.” (Dt 30:11-14)

Rather than speaking of the innate ability and level of ease that men have to keep the commandments as Erasmus asserts, Luther argues that these words used convey nothing more than distance and destinations (s.65). It shows that Moses had been a faithful law giver who has given the law to the Israelites so that they are without excuse when they disobey them (God actually foretells and forewarns their upcoming disobedience and depravity); that is, the fault lies solely in them and not the law or the lawgiver as they had the law which was accessible and near to them (s.65). For as Luther afore stated, if man can keep the commandments with such ease, what need is there of Grace or Christ? In fact, the Apostle Paul explains Moses’ words here in saying, ‘the word is very near you’, as referring to the word of faith; that is, in Christ, not the law (Ro 10:5-10). As Luther repetitively reminds and teaches Erasmus and the reader, this verse and all others of the same ilk are designed to describe what we OUGHT to do, not what we CAN do or DO do, so that we may be wrought with our own impotency, wretchedness and fault (s.65).

7) THE EXHORTATIONS AND REWARDS

“Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Mt 5:12)

The New Testament and the Gospel consist of a number of promises and exhortations as opposed to the Old Testament which consisted of the law and threatenings (s.69). Because of these, Erasmus claims that they would be useless and unnecessary if man does not have a free will and thus cannot have any merit upon which these rewards and punishments may be given. Luther responds to this by explaining that when the Bible speaks of rewards and punishments, these do not refer to the merit of worthiness, but rather the merit of consequence (s.70). In other words, any rewards that God disperses to a person is not based on whether the person is worthy of such a reward, but rather the reward follows as a consequence of the person willing something (s.70). So though God determines who will will what, He rewards and punishes as a consequence of whether they do something which He has determined, not based on whether they deserve it so to speak.

Luther goes on to explain that the primary reason these rewards are promised is to exhort and threaten believers so they are comforted, can persevere and not become disheartened (s.71). Furthermore, those that are to receive rewards do not seek them, but rather they seek the Glory of God (s.70). They are given these rewards out of Grace, not because they have merited them through being worthy for then Grace ceases to be grace. Moreover, the Kingdom of Heaven was prepared for its sons before they were even born. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say these sons merited the Kingdom before they had done anything; instead it would be more correct to say that the Kingdom merited the sons rather than vice versa (Mt 25:34) (s.70). And in the same way that the Kingdom prepares and merits its sons, so likewise does Hell prepares and merit its sons (Mt 25:41) (s.70).

“You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:16-20)

Though we are judged by our fruit, this does not mean that we made the good fruit (s.73). Rather, this good fruit that believers produce is given to them as a gift from the Spirit of Grace, for ‘what do we have that we did not receive?’ (1Co 4:7) (s.73). So why then does God attribute these fruit to the trees then? As Luther reasons, just as we call a birthday gift which we did not buy our own, and claim ownership of our arms and legs though we clearly did not make them, so we claim the good fruit we produce as our own though we did not make them (s.73). Thus, any rewards given for this fruit is likewise given as a gift of Grace.

8) GOD’S WILL

“Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord God, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?” (Eze 18:23)

One of the great and comforting truths about God’s nature in the Bible, Luther explains that this verse concerns the preached and offered mercy of God rather than the secret will of God (s.64). Whilst the fact that God would will and predestine that man sin and hence suffers eternal damnation seems to contradict what this verse is saying, Luther argues that there are two seemingly different wills of God; the one is the revealed will and nature of God that we receive from Scripture; the other is the hidden and unrevealed will and nature of God that we know not (s.64). We will later see that Jonathan Edwards titles these wills the “will of decree” (Sovereign Will) and the “will of command” (Moral Will).

Luther states that we should respond to God’s revealed will and nature (eg. His mercy and love) by preaching it to all peoples, whereas we should respond to His hidden will (whereby He preordains who will partake and receive this preached and offered mercy) with reverence and adoration (s.64). We should not inquire into this hidden will, nor speculate as to its design, but rather accept and admire it (s.64). As Paul appositely says in Romans 9:20, “O Man, who are you to reply against God?”

God is infinite and incomprehensible to mankind, an “unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see” (1Ti 6:16) (s.66). In order for us to understand any of His infinite glory and nature, it requires God to reveal this to us in and through Scripture. However, we must not confuse the Word of God (His revealed will) with God Himself, as there is much that God is, does and wills that He has not revealed to us and has chosen to hide (s.64). We are to be concerned and deal with God as He reveals Himself to us by His Word, but concerning His hidden majestic self, we are to have nothing to do with Him (s.64). In other words, we are to be guided by His Word, and fear and adore His hidden will (s.64).

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!” (Mt 23:37)

This is an example of Jesus weeping over the Jews and their unwillingness. Here, we have God Incarnate (His revealed self in human form) expressing His sorrow over the perdition of the wicked, though His hidden will according to its purposes wills that some are left unwilling and left to perish (s.66). God preached deplores death, sin and wills all men to be saved, but God hidden neither deplores nor takes away death, working life and death in all things and reserving to Himself a free power over all things (s.64). So when a man dies and rejects God, it is his human will’s fault (s.64). However, God in His hidden will had determined either not to change the man’s will and its fault, and/or to leave his salvation up to the will (s.64). Luther again responds to this seeming paradox by declaring that it is not for us to question and inquire as to why this hidden will purposes what it does, but rather to simply revere and adore it (s.67).

9) THE TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF THE HUMAN WILL AND FLESH

And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” (Ge 6:3)

Luther uses this verse to show how early on in Scripture the Spirit of God is contrasted with the flesh of man. When it is used thusly, rather than arbitrarily signifying a corporeal body as in John 1:14 and Matthew 19:5, it signifies the corruption of ALL men (s.111) and is used to denote everything that is contrary to the Spirit; that is, sin (Jn 3:6) (s.113). The Hebrew word for ‘strive’ in this context would be better translated as ‘judge’, Luther argues (s.112). Therefore, this declaration by the Lord is the declaration of an angry God and Judge who had declared that He would, in 120 years, withdraw His Spirit from the world which had been judging the flesh of the world; in other words, the Spirit had been rebuking its sin through the Spirit-full preaching of Noah (s.112). However, because flesh is flesh, but for the Grace of God, it becomes hardened and sins more severely, so God brought on the flood (s.112).

Then the Lord said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.” (Ge 8:21)

Here, God is promising not to give man what he deserves lest He be continually bringing a flood to destroy him as he is evil from birth (s.114). This is not some men, or simply one generation, but it is very clear from this context that God attributes evil to ALL men of every generation; yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (Ge 6:5)

These verses show that all men are not merely prone to evil, but are evil continually and always; ‘all days’ of their lives (s.114). This is not some part or section of man, but includes every aspect of his being; his mind, his heart, his spirit; ALL of it. This especially includes their wills which are thus bound to the service of sin and hence NOT free. If this were not the case, and there was some part of man which was inherently good and righteous before God, then Christ would thus only become a Redeemer of part of man and thus He would not be Lord of all of a man, only that part which needed redeeming (s.121). If this were indeed the case, then Christ would only be a part-redeemer, and moreover, He would be inferior to that inherent good in man, and dare we speak it, Christ would cease to be Lord of all and God would cease to be sovereign over all – we would instead be sovereign and lord of all; we would be god (s.121). What blasphemy this sort of semi-Pelagianism, Humanism and Arminianism leads to!

It is interesting to notice that both these verse speak of the ‘imagination’ and ‘thoughts’ of man, rather than his actions. This is significant as it shows that God (like Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount) does not gauge sin as merely from the actions of men, but also from his thoughts, intentions and will, all of which being invisible to the eyes of men. Man’s will does nothing but sin willfully and will sin. As Jesus says in Matthew 7:17-18, a bad tree can never bring forward good fruit (s.114). This is not to say, however, that through God’s Prevenient Grace, His Spirit cannot effect a morally good act prior to conversion, as in the case of Cornelius in Acts 10:31 (s.116).

“All flesh is grass, and all its loveliness is like the flower of the field. The grass withers, the flower fades, because the breath of the Lord blows upon it; surely the people are grass. The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.”

Luther uses this analogy from Isaiah 40:6-8 to show that the seeming glory and good deeds of men and the flesh, their ‘flowers’; their ‘righteousness’, their ‘wisdom’ and their ‘kingdoms’; is all in vain and hence sin (s.118). This applies to all men because they are all born of the flesh (Jn 3:6) (s.119). What a man (not born of the Spirit) does that may seem to be meritoriously good before other men is in fact evil as it seeks self glory (s.120). Put simply, a carnal man does ‘good’ to seek the glory of himself or others, whereas the spiritual man does true and pleasing good to seek the Glory of God (s.120). As Luther afore asserted, there is no medium. Man is either in one of those two categories; either he is of the flesh or he is of the Spirit (s.120).

Since ALL men are naturally of the flesh, God sent His Spirit to justify the ungodly and unrighteous to regenerate them; to make them born from above because those born of the flesh cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Jn 3:3-6) (s.120). So those unregenerate souls are flesh and will be destroyed in the Eternal Fire (s.122). And those fortunate souls who are regenerated become spirit and ceases to be flesh, although a remnant of the flesh is left behind to war against the firstfruits of the Spirit thus received (s.122).

10) ROMANS

Luther then finally turns his attention to his “two champion generals” in the fight against free will; the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans, and John the Evangelist in his Gospel (s.134).

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Ro 1:18)

Luther uses this verse to again reiterate that the wrath of God is directed at ALL men, not just some (s.135). To Luther, this is a pivotal point, because the Gospel is not for some at the exclusion of others, but rather the Gospel is for everyone because “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Ro 3:23). To Luther (and Paul), all peoples need the Gospel and Salvation, be they Jews or Gentiles (Ro 1:16) because “there is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who seeks after God” (Ro 3:10-11). All men have their wills bound to sin and therefore require the liberation that comes from Grace and the Gospel preached.

No man has the ability in himself to seek God or seek the Salvation and Righteousness that comes from Faith (Ro 3:21-22), and must therefore be ‘circumcised’ by the Spirit (Ro 2:28-29) who justifies freely (s.143). That which is done by Faith is righteous and that which is done with Faith wanting is sin; there is no middle ground (Ro 4:1-6) (s.147). Either man’s will is totally depraved and requires the Grace of God freely given to justify it, or man’s will has some ability to merit his salvation by some work, in which case, Grace ceases to be grace (Ro 11:6) but a debt earned (Ro 4:4) (s.149).

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (Ro 8:5-8)

Again, Luther shows how the Spirit is contrasted with the flesh. As he already has established, all men are naturally flesh thus, Paul explicitly states that man does not naturally have the ability to either keep the law or please God, only being able to be hostile towards God (s.154). Therefore, Luther rightly concludes from this that the human will is bound to only sin and not able to do the things of God (with Grace wanting); hence, there is no free will (s.154).

(For the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” What shall we say then? Is there righteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. (Ro 9:11-16)

Luther uses this passage to demonstrate that Jacob attained the birthright (a reward) and the Lord’s favour, not through merit or free will as neither Jacob nor Esau had done anything good or evil, nor had been born when God had decided whom to love, but by the Grace of He who calleth (s.99). However, this story and verse does not strictly apply to just the persons Jacob and Esau, but also concerns eternal Salvation (s.100). The person Jacob also refers to a people of God (which is the meaning Malachi intended in Mal 1:2-3), therefore the birthright also pertains to the Spirit of God eg. the blessing, the Word, the Spirit, the promise of Christ and the Kingdom (s.100). As God loves and hates immutably from eternity (since God does not change), God called Jacob and his spiritual descendents (that is, us) because He loved them before they were even born, but not because they first loved Him or because there was any merit in them that caused Him to love them (s.101). Likewise, the hatred of Esau is not temporal only in talking of afflictions, but as pertaining to Eternal Damnation (s.102). One people were chosen to be saved, the other left to be destroyed (s.102).

This seems to offend and affront our human reason so much, but it is this same human reason that praises God when He saves the undeserving yet accuses the same God when He also damns the seemingly ‘undeserving’ (s.107). Luther shows by this how the foolish and selfish human reason simply serves its own profit (s.107). Instead, Luther suggests we praise God for both, and though we do not understand fully why He saves those He does now, we will see why when the Kingdom comes (s.107). God works without respect to merit of worthiness, thus impious ones murmur and complain, judging God’s judgments (Ro 9:19), to which He replies, “Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?” (Mt 20:15) (s.106). And so it is with this current incomprehensibility of God’s wrath (s.107). It is not up to our wills to determine who God will show mercy on, it is up to God’s will alone (Ro 9:16) (s.92). Thus, our human wills are subject to the will of God, especially in relation to things pertaining to Salvation, and hence not free.

For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honour and another for dishonour? (Ro 9:17-21)

Luther immediately argues against the absurd trope that some use to interpret God’s hardening (s.77). Luther exposes this absurdity by stating that if, like Erasmus and others say, God hardens by longsuffering the sinner, allowing him to harden himself, and shows mercy by inflicting afflictions and punishments as to correct this hardening and offering repentance, then God showed mercy by punishing the Jews with Assyria and Babylon, and hardened the world by sending Christ (s.78). It also would mean by sending 10 plagues to Pharaoh, rather than instantly destroying him, God showed mercy by inflicting punishment to correct Pharaoh’s hard heart. However, as Moses and Paul both describe God as hardening Pharaoh’s heart, this trope is contradictory and hence false (s.79). Such statements are ludicrous and point to reading the passage in its plain and ordinary sense (s.78).

Again, Luther also refutes Erasmus’ absurd interpretation that there are two different kinds of free will, that which is cultivated and that which is uncultivated; that which responds positively to God’s mercy and repents, and that which responds negatively and is hardened (s.81). Luther argues that there are no such kinds of will, only one human will as God makes man from the ‘same lump’ of clay; all men have this same will, that which is bound to sin and not free (s.81). God makes the will of the wicked evil not by making or creating evil in them, but by choosing to make them from a corrupt and evil seed; from a sinful clump of clay (Pr 16:4) (s.83). And although He did not make sin, yet, He continues to form and multiply that nature which is defiled by sin from the withdrawal of His Grace and His Spirit (Ps 51:5; Job 14:4) (s.83). God chooses to use evil instruments, using the evil found in them, so He Himself does no evil, but uses this evil for His purposes (Eph 1:11) (s.84). Just like if a man rides a lame horse he rides badly, yet the fault lies with the horse unless the horse be made sound, so God is not in fault for our evil (s.84).

Luther defines ‘hardening’ as to turn the wicked man totally the way of his selfishness and to not seek God or His things, seeking instead his own kingdom, glory, wisdom and power that when someone with an aversion to God opposes him, he is more enraged and roused to indignation against his adversary and God (s.85). Thus, when Moses came to Pharaoh and told him God’s threats to take away his power and his kingdom, the more Moses opposed Pharaoh, the more this hardened his heart and because God did not give him His Spirit, Pharaoh’s heart grew angry, swelled with pride and burned with rage (s.85). When God is said to harden us, this evil is not created anew as though we were passive and neutral vessels, but rather He finds evil in us (and Satan) and leaves it in us, carrying it along by His working, moving it which way He wills (see Shimei in 2Sa 16:10) (s.86). God knows that the will of man is evil and can will nothing but evil so that when He continually presented something contrary to Pharaoh’s will, out of necessity this corrupt will must resist God and be hardened (s.87).

But why did God not will that Pharaoh relent then? Luther replies with the response of Paul again; man should not search their majestic and sovereign Potter’s will, but adore it (s.88). God’s will is the rule of all things; that is, there is no cause or reason (s.88). In other words, God does not will something because it is right (as though He were bound to choose anything!), but rather it is right because God wills it (s.88). The fact that God is good and just to harden the wicked is no more absurd than Christ’s divinity or the Virgin Birth (s.82).

It must, however, be noted that Pharaoh’s hardening was different to that general hardening that is produced by God’s longsuffering of divine goodness (s.89). The purpose of this hardening was to show to the Israelites the promises and mercy of God that were fulfilled in the hardening, giving them hope and faith despite what appears to be trials and suffering (similar to Jesus at the Last Supper regarding future persecution), God miraculously displaying His power to confirm their faith (s.90). God was in control of Pharaoh’s heart otherwise His words of promise could not have been fulfilled (s.90).

Likewise, God foreknew and thus decreed from His certain and immutable will that Judas would by necessity betray Christ, therefore Judas could not have changed his own will nor God’s (s.96). This was not necessity by force (that is, Judas was not compelled to act unwillingly) but rather necessity of immutability (that is, God predetermined Judas to betray Christ infallibly at a certain time, though Judas himself was still willing) (s.97). Luther reaffirms that whilst the desperation that comes from the offence of predestination against our human reason or common sense is healthy, we should respond to the fact that God’s will accomplishes all things by necessity in us with those humble words our Lord taught us, “thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Mt 6:10).

“I was found by those who did not seek Me; I was made manifest to those who did not ask for Me.” (Ro 10:20)

Paul uses this verse from Isaiah to show that Grace comes so free, that no thought, attempt or desire after it precedes it (s.155). For example, Paul (formerly Saul) himself had willed what he thought to be most meritoriously good by persecuting the Church, clearly seeking not Christ, yet he received Grace even when he was furiously maddened against it (s.155). Luther again uses this to show that it is not in man’s power or will, therefore, to either save himself or seek after the things of God, thus requiring God Himself, by His Grace, to take the initiative to reveal Himself to such blind rebels and ignorant God-haters, changing their defiant wills.

11) JOHN THE EVANGELIST

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. (Jn 1:10-11)

The ‘world’ includes all men so that ALL men naturally hate and reject Christ and His people and His Spirit (s.156). This world is the kingdom of flesh ruled by Satan; all that is not transformed into the Kingdom of the Spirit, ie. Christ’s (s.156). All its subjects are held captive as are there wills.

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (Jn 1:12-13)

Luther then brings forth this shining sword, the verse (in my opinion) which most strongly and clearly lays waste to any notion of free will. Here, John explains that it is not by blood (as the Jews wrongly assumed), nor the will of the flesh (the works of the law), nor the human will (s.156). John with one fatal blow crushes any person thinking that they became a child of God, and hence saved based on their human birth, their devoted efforts to be morally good enough, or by their own choice (s.156). No, as Luther so accurately identifies, John teaches that it is not by our choice that we are saved as our will is deficient to choose Salvation and Christ, being bound and not free; no, it is through a divine sovereign choice and birth from above that any of us are saved (Jn 15:16) (s.156). And furthermore, we receive this gift by the Grace of Christ’s merits, not our own (Jn 1:16).

“The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?” (Jn 3:8-9)

Luther uses Nicodemus as the epitome of so-called ‘free will’; he is a respected teacher of Israel, he has an in-depth knowledge of Scripture, he believes in God, he confesses Christ to be true, and he seeks to learn from Christ (s.158). But although he possesses all these seemingly meritoriously good qualities pertaining to salvation, when Christ reveals the true way of Salvation of the New Birth, it confounds him and shows he never sought it (s.158). If Nicodemus’ will could never seek the true way of Salvation, how so all the great philosophers and thinkers of the past who never could have even dreamt of such things as the Son of God, the Spiritual Birth, or Salvation through Faith in Him; no, all these were “wisdom hidden in a mystery” (1Co 1:23-24) revealed by the Gospel and which human will could never seek to attain by its own works (s.158).

“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Jn 6:44)

If John 1:12-13 is Luther’s shining sword, then this verse is his trusty crossbow. With this verse, Luther shows the utter inability that any man has in himself to come to Christ and thus be saved. Though a man may externally hear the Word of God, unless the Father draws and teaches the man from within through the application of His Grace by the Spirit, NO ONE can have saving faith in Christ (s.162). Luther goes on to explain that, in one sense, there is the drawing of man by external means where Christ is held forth, illuminated by the Spirit, where man is then drawn unto Christ through the sweeter drawing where he is passive whilst God speaks, teaches and draws internally (s.162).

Respected theologian and Bible teacher R.C. Sproul explains that the word that is translated ‘draws’ here would actually better be translated as ‘drags’ because the Greek word used, ‘helkuo’, is used elsewhere in the New Testament to denote someone being successfully dragged somewhere, such as Paul in Acts 16:19 and 21:30 when he is dragged by enraged people to the authorities or dragged away from the Temple to be beaten. Thus, Sproul quotes Jonathan Edwards in calling this act of God drawing (or dragging) by His Grace as “the Holy rape of the soul.” Nonetheless, if this can be indeed called such ‘Holy rape’, I am glad and grateful that He did so to me for I would still be a wretched soul stuck in darkness destined for Hell.

“And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.” (Jn 10:28-29)

One of my favourite verses from the entire Bible which has been a source of much comfort, Luther, like me, also glories in our Salvation being placed in God’s hand (s.164). For if our Salvation was truly up to our supposed ‘free will’, how uncertain we would be as to what to do to fully satisfy God and how weak we would be in having to fight off devils stronger than He (s.164). No, I must concur with Luther here when he says that even if he were offered to control his Salvation through his own will, he would still reject it and place it in God’s strong and mighty hands (s.164). I still do not fully understand how any Christian can reject or deny this beautiful Reformed doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints.

“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.” (Jn 15:5)

Last, but by no means least, we come to another of Luther’s “Achillean and invincible weapons” (s.126). Delivering another fatal blow to any notion of ‘free will’, Luther explains that the word ‘nothing’ is used here to show that man cannot produce good fruit without Christ and His Grace. Contrary to Erasmus’ interpretation that ‘nothing’ refers to that of which is in degree (that man cannot produce ‘perfected’ good fruit, but can still produce ‘imperfect’ good fruit), Luther argues that either Satan has full captivity of unregenerate man who cannot contribute anything to his liberation and the production of ANY good fruit (be they perfect or imperfect), or Christ is a liar (s.127).

Luther goes on to explain that the good fruit mentioned refer not to the essence of nature (that is, to eat, to drink and other human works), but refers to the essence of grace (that is, evangelical fruits) (s.130). Without Christ and His Grace, man cannot receive the Spirit and His Gifts (Jn 3:27) (s.130). Luther argues this is not to say that ungodly man does not co-operate willingly with God as He carries them along by His omnipotence in their iniquity, nor the regenerate and justified new creatures do not co-operate with His Spirit (s.131). For example, Paul co-operates with God in preaching from without whilst God teaches his listeners from within, Paul explaining that we Christians are led by Him (Ro 8:14, 30) (s.131). However, lest some would see this as inferring our Salvation is ultimately dependent on our co-operation (or Synergism as it is called in Theological circles), just as before we were created we did and endeavoured nothing towards our creation, and after we were created we did nothing toward our preservation in continuing in existence, so it is with regeneration (Jas 1:18) (s.131).

Luther concludes by saying that as many verses there are which exalt the assistance of Grace, these same verses show the need of Grace and hence the insufficiency of the human will, its captivity to sin and its impotency (s.132). For Luther, we should either attribute all to free will, or we should deny it altogether and attribute all to God (Monergism), bearing any seeming contradictions (s.134). In other words, there can be no moderate or medium view allowed as the Semi-Pelagian Arminians would assert (s.134). To allegations against Luther that he argues with too much ardour, he himself admits this and humbly pardons his and Erasmus’ flaws as “men touched with human infirmity”, as we all can identify with (s.134).

Waves

Well, there you have it. I hope you found this discussion useful and insightful. I know many find this topic tedious and pointless, but I pray that I have demonstrated through Luther’s still powerful and God-centric words the importance and relevance of such matters. I also hope, like me, you’re looking forward to the next installment as the more philosophical Jonathan Edwards expands on a lot of Luther’s ideas, going quite in depth. But alas, do not fear, I will try and simplify as best I can.

But for those who may disagree with what has been written in this blog, I pray like Luther that the Holy Spirit will sway your contrary opinion by His Grace and reveal a greater understanding of the Sovereignty of God and His Glory (s.153). As Luther so humbly and brilliantly puts it, “if you cannot manage this cause…do, I pray you, remain content with your own proper gift…But as to this our cause – to this, God has neither willed, nor given it to you, to be equal, though I entreat you not to consider this spoken in arrogance. No! I pray that the Lord may, day by day, make you as much superior to me in these matters, as you are superior to me in all others. And it is no new thing for God to instruct a Moses by a Jethro, or to teach Paul by an Ananias” (pp.279-280) – and I dear blogworm, am such a Jethro or Ananias; at your service. So until next time, put that in your cloud and rain it (Jude 12).

Christus Regnat,

MAXi