That they indeed quote Paul in the same sense does them very little good: “The doers of the law, not the hearers, are justified” [Rom. 2:13 p.]. I do not intend to evade the question through Ambrose’s solution: that this was said . . . Continue reading →
Law and Gospel Distinction
Romans 2:13—Justified Through Our Faithfulness? (4)
In part 3 we began looking at a document, from 1978, which proposed a two-stage doctrine of justification. It recognized that there is some risk, some difficulty, in speaking of a present justification and a future justification. Nevertheless, the document contends that . . . Continue reading →
Luther’s First Lecture On Romans 2:13 (1515–16)
13. But the doers of the Law will be justified. This passage is interpreted in a twofold way by blessed Augustine in chapter 26 of On the Spirit and the Letter. First in this way:The doers of the Law will be justified means that through . . . Continue reading →
Romans 2:13—Justified Through Our Faithfulness? (3)
In part 2 we considered Romans 2:13 in its own context (Romans 1:18–3:20) and the impulse to distinguish between an initial stage of justification sola gratia, sola fide, on the basis of Christ’s righteousness imputed, and a final stage of justification in . . . Continue reading →
Colquhoun: Repentance Does Not Give Us Title To Eternal Life
How then can his repentance atone for his iniquities, or entitle him to the favour of God and to the happiness of heaven? How can that evangelical repentance, which he is incapable of exercising till after his sins be all forgiven on . . . Continue reading →
Olevianus On Romans 2:13
In 1529, one of Luther’s principal opponents, Johannes Eck (1486–1541) published the first edition his Enchiridion Against Luther and Other Enemies of the Church a refutation of the Protestant errors. Under the heading, “De fide et operibus” he proposed thesis that “faith . . . Continue reading →
Yes Virginia, There Is A Law-Gospel Distinction
When Martin Luther appeared before the Diet of Worms (1521), on the day after he asked for time to think, his examiner asked whether all the books stacked on the table were his. Luther began to answer by distinguishing between the various . . . Continue reading →
Do The Reformed Distinguish Between Law And Gospel?
As a preliminary reply to Mark Jones’ recent post at Ref21 here are some resources to help clarify the picture regarding the Reformed appropriation of the law/gospel distinction: “Law and Gospel in Early Reformed Orthodoxy: Hermeneutical Conservatism in Olevianus’ Commentary on Romans,” . . . Continue reading →
Was Calvin A Lutheran?
By this answer Christ declared that he did not deliver any other rule of life than that which had formerly been delivered in the law of the Lord. Thus he both bore testimony to the divine law, that it was a doctrine . . . Continue reading →
The Most Destructive Problem At Present: Confounding Law And Gospel
Many are the mistakes at present about religious matters; but none are more destructive than those which concern the law and the gospel. The generality of our people confound them, and put one in the place of the other. Some suppose they . . . Continue reading →
The Sermon On The Mount In The First Use
So it is with the whole of the discourse. The new law of the Sermon on the Mount, in itself, can only produce despair. Strange indeed is the complacency with which modern men can say that the Golden Rule and the high . . . Continue reading →
ReformedCast: On The Distinction Between The Law And The Gospel
Thanks to Scott Oakland for inviting me to do episode 145 of the ReformedCast. We talked about the distinction between law and gospel. Scott asked good questions and we were able to cover a lot of what is currently being discussed now: . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 62: Nomism And Antinomianism (5)
The Heidelcast is working through The Marrow of Modern Divinity (1645) as a model for how to account for justification and sanctification, how to keep them together, without losing either and without confusing them. The circumstances in which The Marrow first appeared were . . . Continue reading →
Useful Myths And Reformed Identity Markers
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) first provides multiple definitions of the word “myth.” The first says, “A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology, or justification for something such as the early history of . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 61: Nomism And Antinomianism (4)
The first major section of the Marrow of Modern Divinity was a defense of the covenant of works. It is fascinating to see how, already in the 1640s, the covenant of works came under criticism from the nomists (legalists, moralists). Nothing really . . . Continue reading →
Heidelcast 60: Nomism And Antinomianism (3)
With this episode I had intended to begin a survey of The Marrow of Modern Divinity but Chris Gordon, my friend, colleague, and pastor at Escondido URC put in my hands a terrific little volume from 1831, which was an assessment of the Marrow . . . Continue reading →
Richard Greenham On Law And Gospel
What are the principal parts of God’s Word? The law and the gospel. What do you call the law? It is that part of the word that commands all good and forbids all evil. What if we could keep the law? Then . . . Continue reading →
Are God’s Demands Always Gracious? (Updated)
David Robertson is pastor in the Free Church of Scotland. He has a blog and recently he reviewed Tullian Tchividjian’s latest book, One Way Love. There has been some back and forth and most recently Robertson has written an Open Letter. In . . . Continue reading →
New Article: Law And Gospel In Early Reformed Orthodoxy
Richard Muller recently celebrated his 65th birthday to mark that occasion and as part the 20th anniversary of the PhD program at Calvin Seminary, he was presented with a Festschrift (celebration book) in his honor. Jordan Ballor has the details on Opuscula . . . Continue reading →
Beza On The First Use Of The Law
There then is the first use of the preaching of the law; to make known our innumerable faults so that in ourselves we begin to be miserable and greatly humble ourselves; in short, to beget in us the first degree of repentance . . . Continue reading →