The law was a covenant of works, not a covenant of grace. The “commandment of life” was “the day you eat thereof you shall surely die” (Gen 2:17). It was a commandment of life because, if Adam kept the commandment he would have entered into eternal life (see also Heidelberg 6, 9; Rev 22:14). The condition of the covenant was, to use the words of Christ, “do this and live” (Luke 10:28). His status before God was conditioned upon his obedience to God’s holy law. Continue reading →
God’s Word teaches us to have the highest, most reverent view of God’s law generally. The Psalmist declares “Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day” (v. 97; ESV). To be sure, in Psalm 119 the noun . . . Continue reading →
The source, fountain of good works is true faith. By using this expression, the catechism deliberately takes us back to Heidelberg 21, where true faith is defined and to Heidelberg 60 which are among the several places where true faith is said to be the sole instrument (sola fide) of justification and salvation. True faith is also the instrument of union and communion with Christ and it is the headwaters of the believer’s new, Spirit-wrought life in Christ. In other words, true faith is essential to good works. Continue reading →
he objectively, clearly revealed moral law as the baseline for Christian ethics is essential to Christian living and Christian liberty. James calls it “the law of liberty” (James 1:25) because it frees us from the tyranny of human opinion. It does not answer every question (it does not intend or claim to answer every question) but it is an essential starting place. What must a Christian do in response to God’s grace and in union with Christ? Love God with all his faculties and his neighbor as himself. Continue reading →
n what is a corpse interested? In nothing. Corpses do what they do: nothing. They just decay. They have nothing to do with the living world. They are literally inanimate. Spiritually, before God made us alive, we were spiritually inanimate. We were dead. We had no interest in Christ nor had we interest in his moral will. Now, by his grace, having been made alive we do. That’s a miracle. We have a new stance, a new disposition toward Christ and his moral will for us because we have new life. It’s imperative that we not reverse that order. We are not sanctified and we are certainly not justified or saved because we have a new disposition. That is Romanism. We have a new disposition and we are developing new habits of godliness because we are alive, because we are no longer spiritual corpses dead to Christ, his gospel, and his law. Continue reading →
Imagine that you were indebted to your neighbor. You lost your job and your neighbor loaned you enough money to get by but he did so at interest. You got a new job but the principal was large and the interest continued to accrue even as you worked to repay him. You work hard but you can never get caught up because the interest grows faster than you can repay. You are a slave. In this world (which really existed) there is no “do over,” there is no bankruptcy court. How will you escape your bondage? Death. Only in death are you free from your slavery to your debt and to your neighbor. This is what Paul is thinking as he describes our liberation from the bondage and dominion of sin. Continue reading →
The doctrine of the Christian life is remarkably simple. There are two parts: death and life. The practice of the Christian life, however, is quite another thing. The practice of the Christian life, the living out of our life in Christ, by . . . Continue reading →
Since the advent of the so-called Second Great Awakening, which shaped American evangelical theology, piety, and practice so profoundly in the 19th century, many American Christians have simply assumed that revivalist paradigm as correct. Many evangelicals have never seen any other approach . . . Continue reading →
Sanctification has another function in the Christian life: to bolster assurance. This doctrine has also been controversial in some circles. There is a view that says that sanctification can play no role whatsoever in assurance. There is also an approach that says that, in seeking assurance, the first place a believer looks is to his sanctification. Continue reading →
We should also reject soundly and unreservedly that teaching that will not say that believers, who are united to Christ by the Spirit, through faith alone, who are justified freely (sola gratia), through faith alone (sola fide), have no moral obligation to be conformed to Christ and thus to do good works. That is antinomianism. No, the Spirit is conforming us to Christ’s image. Those who have been given new life (regenerated) will do good works. They want to do good works out of thankfulness. Gratitude is not, as some say, a second blessing any more than oranges are a second blessing on an orange tree (see Belgic Confession art. 24) Continue reading →
The Heidelberg Catechism is in three parts: Law, Gospel, and Sanctification or Guilt, Grace, and Gratitude. This is not an artificial interpretation of the Catechism nor is it an artificial arrangement of the Christian faith. Question 2 outlines the Catechism for us: . . . Continue reading →
Baptism testifies and seals to us believers that we have been declared clean on the basis of Christ’s perfect righteousness and condign merit imputed to us. We have come “to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Heb 12:24). It also testifies and seals to us believers that we are being cleansed, i.e., that we are being progressively, graciously sanctified by Christ’s Spirit, that Christ’s sprinkled blood not only justifies but it is unto (toward) actual “sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:2). Continue reading →
64. But does not this doctrine make men careless and profane? No, for it is impossible that those who are implanted into Christ by true faith, should not bring forth fruits of thankfulness (Heidelberg Catechism 64) In part 1 we began to look . . . Continue reading →
Usually, if a boss wants greater efficiency and productivity from her employees, she sets up a system of incentives for her employees. If the boss is of the ordinary, uncreative sort, those incentives are likely to be negative. Fail to meet this goal and x (e.g., loss of pay, demotion etc) shall happen. A more creative boss might set up a series of positive incentives: meet this target and you shall receive y reward (e.g., extra paid vacation, flexible scheduling, company car etc). Whatever the nature of the incentive, the very structure is a covenant of works. Continue reading →
When the medieval church thought about rewards, it thought about merit. They distinguished between two kinds or aspects of merit. That which we most frequently discuss was called “condign merit” (meritum de condigno). Condign merit is intrinsically worthy. The second category was “congruent . . . Continue reading →
Neither Holy Baptism nor the Holy Supper create the realities they signify and seal but they are gospel sacraments. They are promises of good news to believers. Faith receives what they promise. Faith knows, assents, and trusts and receives all that they promise. The sacraments do not replace faith. They supplement faith. They confirm faith the way a registered letter embossed or stamped with a government seal confirms a declaration. Continue reading →
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.” Continue reading →
1. Regretfully I share the view that matters of substance, not merely of terminology are involved…. 2. I am unhappy with the way in which Mr Shepherd represents the historical theology behind the reformed doctrine of justification as stated in the Westminster . . . Continue reading →
Thesis #23 illustrates the problem: “…good works…though not the ground of his justification, are nevertheless necessary for salvation from eternal condemnation and therefore for justification.” This thesis is replete with the confusion of formulation that I’ve already mentioned. The good works are . . . Continue reading →
One of the more disturbing aspects of the reaction to antinomianism in recent years, whether that antinomianism is real or perceived does not matter for the purposes of this discussion, is how quickly some have been willing to write, speak, and act . . . Continue reading →