“Christian Greetings, Christian Grace, Christian Glory”
Some of those greeted were of the Roman aristocracy. Households of Aristobulus and Narcissus, Christians who were family members or slaves of powerful men.
Rufus – Mark 15, son of Simon the Cross-Bearer
Paul greeted people he had never met, but only had heard about. But he prayed for them and came to cherish them. He was united to them in Christ by the Holy Spirit through his prayers.
Satan’s lies are being untold, his head crushed, in the work of the church. The liturgy, prayers, hymns, preaching, confessions, sacraments, fellowship of saints, discipline, repentance, and pardon are all his undoing.
Grace is not a thing. Grace is Jesus Christ. “The grace of our lord be with you.” The Word and sacraments are the means of Christ.
The drama of Romans: Doctrine leads to discipleship, leads to doxology. Read the intro and then the conclusion of the book.
A product of consecration, being set apart for spiritual service, is Holiness, which is moral fiber. The Holy Spirit consecrates us for the temple that is to come
There is nothing lacking to be the Son or Spirit, only distinction
The Spirit acts in ordained ways (note, ordained – ordinary) now and in the Old and New Testaments. His work was still ordinary then as it is now. The operating environment was different in each time. This supports the doctrine of the immutability of God.
“The Lord and giver of life: who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets.” – Constantinople 5th on Holy Spirit Oration, Gregory of Nazianus
John Calvin, Theologian of the Holy Spirit
Quote from the Book of Beb, “It was the ordinary times when his life changed.”
References:
Called To Serve - Brown (ed.)
Chapter 9: “Calvin on the Eucharist”
Chapter 10: “Table Manners”
Church Order of the URCNA, articles 41-46
Belgic Confession, article 35
Heidelberg Catechism, questions and answers 75-82
Canons of Dort 14, 17
With Heart And Mouth - D. Hyde
Calvin's Institutes 6
1 Corinthians
How was Calvin’s view of the Lord’s Supper different than Zwingli’s?
Opposed to Zwingly, the supper is not just a memorial, but a true sacrament, means of grace and a sign connected to the thing signified by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is a mystery, and Calvin says so in his writing, quite clearly. Zwingly was a rationalist, as was Rome – Calvin achieved the realistic view in his conception of the Supper, both objective in its flow from Scripture and its experiential aspect in sensory impression
Does Calvin’s view of the Lord’s Supper conform to the view outlined in in our confessions?
Calvin’s view actually is the view of the Reformed churches. The Three Forms of Unity and the Westminster Standards are outworkings of Calvin.
What was Calvin’s argument with regards to frequency of communion?
Calvin was thoroughly for a frequent observation of the eucharist. At least weekly. Geneva rejected his petition for frequent communion and he complied with the quarterly schedule.
What frequency of the Lord’s Supper observance is permissible according to our confessions and church order?
URCNA church order indicates no less than quarterly.
Why is it necessary for the elders to supervise the Table?
Elders are commissioned to preserve the purity of Word and sacrament. They are to both promote the supper to those who are to be permitted and to engage, educate and limit, if necessary, those who may not be fit for the Table. Since the event comes with both blessing and curse, the mission is to protect those who do not understand or are not qualified and to ensure that the means of grace is offered rightly for those who will benefit from it.
Who is permitted to come to the Lord’s Table?
Those who are confessing believers, baptized members of churches that confess the ecumenical creeds (“Bible-believing churches”) and are not openly rebellious, impenitent, unrepentant and are of maturity to discern the supper. IOW: Local members, similar non-members, no others.
What are the different categories and/or methods of fencing the Table?
Open, which includes anyone who professes belief, which is usually a minimum of the simple gospel. Contemporary churches will either not require this profession or the requirement results in at best an unintelligible assent to general Christian doctrine.
Closed, which limits participation to local church or denomination
Close, which includes and excludes those in questions 5 and 6 above
Is the practice of “paedocommunion” permissible according to our confessions and church order?
No. This is the sacrament that requires a conscious state capable of discerning the value and meaning of the event, to be able to receive it by faith. “Discerning the Body” includes knowing what is to happen. Conversely, an infant could not eat and drink judgement on himself, therefore the idea of paedocommunion is absurd.
Notes from discussion:
The table, as offered by the Reformed churches, is what sealed me to the Reformed, biblical system of theology, piety and practice.
How does a member of the Reformed churches approach the Supper as it is practiced in non-reformed churches? For instance, while on vacation, the only option is a church which may preach the Gospel, but teaches that the Supper is only a memorial and does not fence the table.” – Are our church standards to guide our participation outside the Reformed church? Or does communion of the saints have a place in consideration? Intinction practiced?
It is remarkable that rationalists are all about the unmediated personal experience, mysticism, bordering the magical. The Reformed confession is realistic, objective, and yet has a mediated experiential model that does not violate the Scriptures.
If people knew what the Reformed churches actually believe about the sacraments, they might not be as likely to bypass directly to Rome or the Orthodox.
Bonus notes
“I’m not smarter with age, I have simply achieved a different type of stupid”
Bumper sticker idea
“The Reformed – Confessing the dogging of Rome since 1564”
The God has come down for his creation. No other god has done this.
Written for our encouragement, so that we can participate in his humiliation and exaltation. But all of this is to point away from us, toward Christ, for our salvation.
HC 60 “and as if I had been as perfectly obedient as Christ was obedient for me.”
Christ’s active (working) and passive obedience. He not only suffered in his obedience throughout his life, but on the Cross, he earned our salvation. His obedience demonstrates his status as the Last Adam. He died for the First Adam and his progeny. Perfection in life and satisfaction in death.
“Being found in appearance as a man”: Revealed or discovered as he is, a man in this case, and not simple (easily) as being truly God, but is also truly Man. A man must be perfect to obtain what Christ obtained. See Anselm (must be God to endure God’s wrath, and must be man to die for man).
Christ’s life is what makes his death so valuable – The God-Man had to be under the law, suffer, assume the curse for himself, fulfill all the prophecy about himself and die with all the indignity of a criminal under judgement of the pagans. But the pagans did not judge him, the Father did.
If he died solely for our sins, he only brings us back to the clean-slate of Adam’s original estate. His obedience and death win us our sanctification and glorification, not just a verdict of “innocent” or forgiven. This is opposed to the Roman and Federal Vision models of salvation by baptism and perseverance through good works.
Christ consumed the curse of Genesis 2. He drank the cup of the curse so that we might drink the cup of blessing.
Christ’s life was humility and service – Our lives are humility and service.
Christ took on the form of a bond-servant – we are God’s bond-servants (Abraham, Joshua, Isaiah, David, Paul, Peter)
He humbled himself and was obedient. “For this reason also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name” – Christ’s worthiness to obtain our salvation
Death on a cross: Cursed is anyone who hangs from a tree. The worst death in the Roman arsenal for the worst criminals. Not any death is sufficient for our salvation. It must be death that is punishment, that represents a curse. He died as we would have died – alone, cursed, suffering, without reprieve or hope of release.
1 Peter 1:3-5
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again (resurrected) to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable, undefiled, and will not fade away, reserved (kept, maintained) in heaven for you, who are protected (kept, maintained) by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
Our living hope is in the past, present and future.
Christ died
He is risen
He will return
For our hope – If God has done this, He will continue to do it and finish it
For our preservation
Without our merit
Possessed now, but revealed in time
Our suffering is not for nothing! We are saved in the now, not just in the end.
This passage is a Trinitarian formula. Verse 2 sets the stage. Father…Spirit…Jesus
Our inheritance is Christ
“I will be your God and you will be my people!”
Psalm 16
The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and my cup
You support my lot
The measuring lines have fallen for me in pleasant places
Indeed, my inheritance is beautiful to me
Psalm 16
The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and my cup;
You support my lot.
The measuring lines have fallen for me in pleasant places;
Indeed, my inheritance is beautiful to me.
Inheritance means family. Adoption. Brothers of Christ.
Salvation is here and now. Salvation was there and then. It is coming with the clouds on the day of judgement. Christ himself is our salvation. He is THE temple of God, the ISRAEL of God and the HOLY LAND of God.
This is a very cursory discussion on how to approach Christian education outside of specifically theological environments. I’m thinking of the sciences and such, which pertain to general revelation and natural law.
Most importantly, we should recognize that creation does not lead one to saving faith. General Revelation can (and should) lead one to a theistic belief, and to an understanding of the subordinate place in which man exists in relation to God. It does reveal the essentials of God’s holiness, righteousness, justice and mercy – This is found in his act of creation, sustaining of Creation, the order, complexity, interrelationships and perfection of what he has made. The failure of men to maintain a morally creaturely relationship with God is apparent as well. For example, we destroy, murder, do what is unnatural to our design.
Since these things must be backed up by scripture (to demonstrate that God says the same things that he has provided in Special Revelation). It is clear in scripture that we should know God’s creation, see many aspects of his nature on display in it, wonder at it, and praise him for it. This constitutes worship, a good work, or sacrifice of praise (think of this hymn: O God Beyond All Praising).
“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.” – Psalm 19
“How many are your works, Lord! In wisdom you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures. There is the sea, vast and spacious, teeming with creatures beyond number – living things both large and small.” – Psalm 104
“For the Lord is the great God, the great King above all gods. In his hand are the depths of the earth, and the mountain peaks belong to him. The sea is his, for he made it, and his hands formed the dry land.” – Psalm 95
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Romans 1
“When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.” Psalm 8
Can we lead someone to Christ using what is observable and deduced from General Revelation? No. General Revelation will reveal the Natural, or Moral Law, as we read in Romans. Special Revelation is required for the understanding of God’s redemptive plan, the Gospel, our origins and our ends (both eschatological and telos). A mistake sometimes made is to conflate passage about creation and general revelation in scripture with general revelation itself. I believe this is incorrect use of scripture. Scripture is written for the purpose of God revealing the truth about the condition, need, the solution and end-state of men, and its statements regarding general revelation are incorporated into that narrative for that purpose.
Example: We are destroying the rainforest – God is angry about that – We need to preserve the rainforest. The idea here is that we are not correctly acting as we should, since God has placed us here as rulers of the earth. Sounds right, but what is missing? The point being made in scripture is that we are fallen and need a savior, not that we need to save the rainforest. This simple train of logic should inform our interaction with all of creation, culture and society. Men are thoroughly broken (sinful) and cannot redeem themselves through social or ecological justice measures.
A theology class is the correct place to bridge the gap between God’s law and the gospel. Our social or ecological “justice” activities can only come out as fruit, good works – the result of our being made into a new creation which is enabled to do good. Without this, we fool ourselves into thinking we have made God happy with us for our good deeds (works which Paul considers rubbish in Philippians 3). The doctrine of total depravity means that what we do, apart from the work of the Holy Spirit, is worthless; and even then, works are God’s gift. They don’t make us better in his sight.
Since we are perfected in Christ, we do not need to do good to earn favor from God. I think we should consider the long-standing belief that our works are out of thankfulness for what we’ve been given, out of love for God and for our neighbor. A lot of times, the errant leap from Law to saving the planet or culture leads to restoration or dominion theology, which are theologies of glory, not of redemption.
Recommendation: Review C. S. Lewis’ discussion of Natural Law in Mere Christianity. His context is in the process of logically leading one to believe there is a God, and that the qualities and nature of God, deduced from nature, are in keeping with Scripture’s truth.
Quotes:
Abraham Kuyper (To Be Near Unto God), “From of old the church has pointed to nature and to the Bible as the sources of knowledge of God … the Reformed confession truly and beautifully declares that all creation is as a living book, the letters of which are the creatures … God himself is behind nature … In everything that lives in nature, rustles, throbs and stirs itself, we feel the pulse beat of God’s own life … In nature also everything is for the sake of religion, to reveal to us in it the glorious presence of God, to bring us the fostering sense that in nature everywhere the living and almighty God is with us on every side, and to fill us with the sublime impression of his Power, Divinity and Majesty.”
John Calvin (Commentary on Genesis), “The custody of the garden was given in charge to Adam, to show that we possess the things which God has committed to our hands, on the condition that, being content with the frugal and moderate use of them, we should take care of what shall remain … let everyone regard himself as the steward of God in all things which he possesses.”
Creation found in the church’s confessions
Westminster Larger Catechism:
Q. 15. What is the work of creation?
A. The work of creation is that wherein God did in the beginning, by the word of his power, make of nothing the world and all things therein for himself, within the space of six days, and all very good.
Gen 1; Ps. 33; Heb. 11; Rev 4; Rom 11
Belgic Confession:
Article 12. We believe that the Father created heaven and earth and all other creatures from nothing, when it seemed good to him, by his Word – That is to say, by his Son.
He has given all creatures their being, form, and appearance, and their various functions for serving their Creator.
Even now, he also sustains and governs them all, according to his eternal providence, and by his infinite power, that they may serve man, in order that man may serve God.
Gen 1; Gen 2; Isa 10; Jer 32; Col 1: 1 Tim 1, 4; Heb 11; Rev 4
Does God have the first and last word in worship? Do the people invoke and then depart in song or prayer? I believe it may be arguable for both of these cases.
Argument for God’s word: The people are called by God in Scripture. That’s pretty simple. Most churches with an intelligent, reasonably scripture-based liturgy will maintain a call to worship which starts with God speaking. I am inclined to think that, especially since the Call is God’s, and we respond to it, that he would have the final word as well, meaning the benediction is the last component of the service. We are entirely in debt to him for his ministry to us in the Word and Sacrament.
Argument for the people acting first and last: Psalms of ascent? As Jews made their way to the temple in Jerusalem, they apparently sang the psalms of ascent as they traveled. This would make biblical sense in our New Testament worship. There is a sense of invocation in this idea, much as there is one in prayer. See Scott Clark’s latest podcast series on the Lord’s Prayer: https://heidelblog.net/2022/01/heidelcast-209-our-father-1-what-prayer-is-and-is-not/ and while this is an option, would it also not make sense that, when God commissions his people to their work in the world, the ministry of Word and Sacrament having been completed, would they not be appropriate in departure to sing his praises?
Based on these two reasonable arguments, I suspect the particulars of call to worship and benediction may be adiaphora in their application. A correct interpretation of RPW should lead to mandatory use of both of these aspects of the stated service. How they are done may be up to interpretation. I personally favor the first, with God opening and closing the service. But I do not have a disagreement on the latter where the people are the first actors.
What is vitally important here is that these potentially optional applications of the beginning and end of a service should be as carefully considered in light of scripture as the confession, Supper, or baptism. All parts of worship must be deliberate, with a defensible rationale for their place and conduct. “Just because somebody else’s church does it and we like it” is hardly sufficient for a pastor, session or consistory, or a congregation to adopt a practice in worship. The RPW demands more than just tradition. In fact, it trumps tradition, and I am inclined that, in this particular case in our Reformed religion, it should be reconsidered by each church every time – not for the sake of change, but that each church can demonstrate, to herself as well as others, that worship is being conducted in accordance with God’s command and that its purpose and meaning has been carefully understood in all parts, from beginning to end.
Further quick thoughts: Formally, stated service needs the greeting and farewell. My argument that the people may sing in an approach and departure does not have to be an inclusion, necessarily. Much like the piano introit and announcements (also note, some churches do announcements after the benediction), the extraneous songs and works of the congregation surrounding the stated service could be part of the overall program while not being included in the stated service. Sing away as we come to the Lord’s House, and again as we file out to meet our daily work beyond the sabbath.
This is an analysis and refutation of John Piper’s statements about salvation. A bonus clarification of why Piper is not Reformed is included at the end. My comments are in bold and are indicated by the left-border line from the body of the interview.
Why is this important? The Christian’s assurance is at stake. Moreover, most vitally, the GOSPEL is at stake. Christians are either saved by Christ alone or by their works ALONE. There is no middle-ground.
Alright, Pastor John, today we address a controversy you stirred up online. Back on September 25, 2017, just as Protestants around the globe were beginning to celebrate the Reformation’s 500th birthday, you spoiled the party with an article titled “Does God Really Save Us by Faith Alone?” In the article, you answered no — we are not saved by faith alone — leaving some Protestants dumbfounded and scratching their heads. In wishing for more clarity here, podcast listener Sam wrote to us.
“Hello, Pastor John. I have read your article on justification, saying that we are justified by faith alone but we are not ultimately saved by faith alone. You argue that works must be present for final salvation (or glorification) to be completed. Two questions: (1) Can you explain this a little further to us all on air? And (2) what then is the link between justification and glorification? From what I see in Romans 8:30, glorification is secured by our justification. How would salvation and works fit between the link here in Paul’s mind?”
“You argue that works must be present for final salvation (or glorification) to be completed.” This is what we are discussing here. The reformation thoroughly disagrees with and refutes this doctrine. It is antithetical to the doctrine of justification by grace. The comments I’ve added below are intended to identify Piper’s position and to refute it.
RCH
Well thank you, Sam. I love to talk about this issue because it is endlessly perplexing for people, and every effort we can make to clarify it, the better. Let’s start with some clarifications.
Declared Just
The biblical term salvation is used to cover past, present, and future dimensions of God’s work to bring us into everlasting perfection and joy. Ephesians 2:8 says, “You have been saved.” First Corinthians 1:18 says we “are being saved.” Romans 13:11 says, “Salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.” Past, present process, future completion.
This is why we have to be so careful about using the term justification interchangeably with salvation. It causes so much confusion. Justification, as we ordinarily use the term (as Paul ordinarily uses the term), refers not to a process, but salvation sometimes does refer to a process.
“We have to careful about using the term ‘justification’ interchangeably with ‘salvation.’ It causes so much confusion.”
Here is the setup. This is how each of the three contemporary violations of the doctrines of sola Christus, sola gratia, and sola fide start out – with the introduction of confusion and redefinition of these terms.
RCH
Justification is a point, like in geometry — a point where the Holy Spirit opens our blind eyes to see Christ for who he is and unites us to Christ by faith alone. In that instant, at that point, we pass from being under condemnation into God’s being one hundred percent for us. No virtue and no works in us brought about this new standing with God.
But… This is limited to justification in Piper’s system.
RCH
Justification is instantaneous and unchanging. On the basis of the blood and righteousness of Christ alone, we are counted instantaneously as righteous, and God is one hundred percent for us from then on. We’re connected with this new experience of acceptance with God by being one with Christ through faith alone, and that happens in an instant.
Work to Be Saved?
Now, the question rises, How do our good deeds, then, fit with justification and final salvation? My answer is — and it’s the answer of the entire mainstream of the Reformed tradition, and really not just Calvinists would talk this way; many others would as well — works play no role whatsoever in justification, but are the necessary fruit of justifying faith, which confirm our faith and our union with Christ at the last judgment. God can make a public pronouncement with a view to these works confirming the faith, which alone unites us to Christ, who is alone the foundation of our acceptance as perfect in God’s sight.
“Final salvation?” See what is happening here. Final salvation – not used anywhere else in the paragraph. Justification yes. Justifying faith CONFIRMING at the LAST JUDGEMENT? He implies that we are not necessarily saved. We need confirmation at the end? Final salvation something else.
What is “final salvation?” Do we believe in final salvation? Westminster does not. 16.2, “These good works, done in obedience to God’s commandments, are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith: and by them believers manifest their thankfulness, strengthen their assurance, edify their brethren, adorn the profession of the gospel, stop the mouths of the adversaries, and glorify God, whose workmanship they are, created in Christ Jesus thereunto, that, having their fruit unto holiness, they may have the end, eternal life.”
Heidelberg Catechism Part III is explicit in claiming our works are done out of gratitude. There is no sense that our works participate in justification or salvation.
“Works play no role whatsoever in justification” – according to the rest of this sentence, they DO play a role in salvation.
In his No Love Lost article from Feb 2018, he makes justifying faith a work: “Therefore, in speaking about sanctification and justification, it is helpful to insist that justifying faith means receiving, welcoming, embracing Jesus for all that God is for us in him.”
Piper is defining faith as obedience. He is saying Justification is an incomplete condition by claiming final salvation requires justifying faith, which, defined as obedience, is a work. Therefore, Justification is followed by works as requirements for completion.
2 Corinthians 5:17-19, “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, this person is a new creation; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their wrongdoings against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
“Justification is not a work of God, it is an act of God” – Rev Dan Borvan on HC60. A work is an ongoing process. An act is done and completed immediately. https://youtu.be/2hl_19cMVi0
RCH
Here’s what the Westminster Confession says from 350 years ago: “Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification” — distinguishing instrument from basis — “yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but works by love.”
Now that last line is an allusion to Galatians 5:6, where Paul says, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.” The faith that justifies is the sort of faith that bears the fruit of good works, love.
That is WCF Ch 11, Article 2. Read the rest of the WCF here:
1. Those whom God effectually calleth, He also freely justifieth: not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God.
2. Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.
3. Christ, by His obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt of all those that are thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction of His Father’s justice in their behalf. Yet inasmuch as He was given by the Father for them, and His obedience and satisfaction accepted in their stead, and both freely, not for any thing in them, their justification is only of free grace, that both the exact justice and rich grace of God might be glorified in the justification of sinners.
4. God did, from all eternity, decree to justify the elect; and Christ did, in the fullness of time, die for their sins and rise again for their justification; nevertheless they are not justified until the Holy Spirit doth, in due time, actually apply Christ unto them.
5. God doth continue to forgive the sins of those that are justified; and although they can never fall from the state of justification, yet they may by their sins fall under God’s Fatherly displeasure, and not have the light of His countenance restored unto them, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon, and renew their faith and repentance.
Galatians 2:16, “nevertheless, knowing that a person is not justified by works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the Law; since by works of the Law no flesh will be justified.”
RCH
Faith That Produces Works
James 2:17 says, “Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.” Dead faith doesn’t justify anybody; therefore, faith without works is not the kind of faith that justifies anybody. These works are — here’s where it starts to get difficult for people, but let me see if I can help — these works are necessary.
“These works are necessary” – for what, precisely? “Here is where it gets difficult” – refer to Piper’s first quote at the beginning – confusion about justification and salvation.
Isolated reading of James is akin to the same in Hebrews. The letter was written to Christians who would already be aware of the Gospel. It is a manual that is descriptive of what the Christian life looks like. More like beatitude than Law. If read in isolation, you have a book of law, which no man can fulfill. Law statements MUST be accompanied by “Jesus Did”, because law means “do this or die.” James must be in context with the rest of the N.T. or you kill Christians. In addition, James is addressing the problem of hypocrisy. A hypocrite is an unbeliever, or a believer who still acts as if his works are getting him somewhere. These two categories need to hear the law to lead them to recognition that they need their savior for their hope.
RCH
Hebrews says, “Strive for peace” — strive is the key word — “and [strive] for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14). We won’t see the Lord Jesus — that is, we won’t be finally saved — without this “striving for holiness.”
We are NOT saved by striving for holiness. Not in any part of the life of the believer. We are saved by Christ’s holiness, the Author and Finisher of our faith. Period. It is a fact that we WILL strive for holiness – that is the life of a Christian. But this striving is never a cause of salvation, it is a result of salvation.
RCH
“Works play no role whatsoever in justification, but are the necessary fruit of justifying faith.”
Justifying faith is justifying by its object, not its vitality, progress in strength or any other definition, and faith is not a verb in this case (faithfulness). The object of Justifying Faith is Jesus Christ, and therefore, being justified is still entirely dependent on Christ.
RCH
What is that? Why is that? The apostle John says, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:4). Or he says later, “We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers.” That’s how we know; it’s confirmed. “Whoever does not love abides in death” (1 John 3:14) — in other words, you haven’t been born again, you haven’t been united to Christ, you don’t have saving faith because it’s not confirmed by love.
Correct, however, Ephesians 2 clearly states that we are saved NOT BY OUR SELVES: “But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our wrongdoings, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the boundless riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.” – WE DO KNOW him – and therefore we keep his commandments as a result (work of the H.S. and out of gratitude) – not in any way contributing to our standing before God now or ever.
RCH
Obedience and love are the necessary confirmations that we are born again, truly united to Christ by faith alone. Here’s the way Paul says it: “God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:13).
Correct – through sanctification by the SPIRIT – NOT of ourselves. We Don’t Contribute. He is implying we do throughout this article, despite what he just quoted in 2 Thessalonians. Otherwise, why does Paul apparently contradict himself here against his words in Ephesians 2? Or is he talking about preservation, rather than Final Justification by works?
RCH
We are not justified through sanctification. Let me say it again: we are not justified through sanctification. But we are finally saved through sanctification — that is, through a real change in our hearts and minds and lives without which we will not see the Lord.
We are saved by GRACE, THROUGH FAITH. Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”
We do not believe in perfection. People will not reach a state of absolute sanctification in this lifetime. We can never be what Piper is calling for here – we will break God’s law because we have a sin nature. CHRIST has already satisfied the law FOR us. And we will see ourselves rescued from our sinful natures AFTER this life. Theology of perfection is not biblical.
RCH
Two Wrong Turns
Now, people hear this, and if they haven’t been well taught on these things, here’s what people do: They hear this, and they say, “Whoa — necessary? These things are necessary for final salvation?” And they draw two inferences from that statement, and both of them are false.
1. They say, “Final salvation, then, is dependent on us — decisively on us.”
2. Here’s the next false inference: They say, “Therefore, it’s uncertain. I could fail, I could lose my salvation, and I could be justified and then not justified. A child of God might lose his justification.”
Now both those inferences are dead wrong. Both logically wrong and biblically wrong.
He does not explain why Inference 1 is dead wrong. Inference 1 is the destroyer here. He is speaking out both sides of his mouth, saying God will accomplish but your works still play a part. Which one is it that finally saves us? Can’t be both.
RCH
The second inference is wrong because the Bible says, “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:6). You won’t lose it.
Romans 8:30 says, “Those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” No dropouts. At any one of those links in the chain, there are no dropouts between justification and glorification. I’ll say it again: “Those whom he justified” — in the twinkling of an eye, by faith alone, in union with Christ, once and for all — “will be” — all of them, no exceptions — “will be glorified.”
Making It to the End
The reason no one will lose his justification is because God is the decisive worker. We work, but we’re not the decisive worker: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” By all means, strive for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. Why? “For it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:12–13).
Philippians 2:12-13: fear and trembling at the mighty work that God is doing in you. Not your work, but HIS, should be the cause of your fear and trembling. Paul is telling believers, who are already saved, how they are to behave in light of their salvation, not how to achieve salvation.
RCH
God’s sovereign keeping and working is the basis — the ground — of our pursuit of holiness. I start with the fact that I am kept. I start with the fact that I am justified. I start with the fact that God is one hundred percent for me, and on the basis of that, I pursue the killing of my sin.
Assuming this is in keeping with the rest of Piper’s assertions, the “killing of my sin” affects my Final Salvation.
Contrast with Heidelberg 62:
Q.Why can’t our good works be our righteousness before God, or at least a part of our righteousness?
A.Because the righteousness which can pass God’s judgment must be entirely perfect and must in every way measure up to the divine law.But even our best works in this life are imperfect and stained with sin.
Rom. 3:20; Gal. 3:10 (Deut. 27:26),Isa. 64:6
Bonus:
HC 63:
Q.How can our good works be said to merit nothing when God promises to reward them in this life and the next?
A.This reward is not earned;it is a gift of grace.
Matt. 5:12; Heb. 11:6,Luke 17:10; 2 Tim. 4:7-8
HC 64:
Q.But doesn’t this teaching make people indifferent and wicked?
A. No. It is impossible for those grafted into Christ through true faith not to produce fruits of gratitude.
Luke 6:43-45; John 15:5
RCH
Here’s what Paul says in Philippians 3:12. I love this. He says, “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.”
“Obedience and love are the necessary confirmations that we are born again, truly united to Christ by faith alone.”
Necessary for what? Necessary for Final Salvation? We have to know what necessary means. If you divorce the word from its subsequent, “confirmations” you have made it easy to submit to a works-salvation scheme.
RCH
Oh, get that logic right. When Sam asks, as he does at the end, “How would salvation and works sit between the link in Paul’s mind — between justification and glorification, where Paul says that all those who are justified are glorified?” he’s asking, “How does salvation and works fit in there?”
The answer is this: Glorification in Paul’s thinking is a process that begins at conversion. It doesn’t begin at the last judgment. It begins at conversion and includes sanctification. It’s consummated at final salvation.
We know this because of 2 Corinthians 3:18, where we look to Jesus and are being changed from “one degree of glory to another.” That’s glorification right now as we look to Jesus. Romans 8:30, then, when it says all the justified will be glorified, includes the promise that all the justified will be sanctified, because sanctification is included in glorification.
Finally Home
Our assurance of final salvation — which is so precious; we don’t believe that people should walk around unsure — rests on God’s past work by Christ, and his future work by the Spirit in us. Both, one outside of us and one in us, are rooted in God’s faithfulness to his covenant people. I’ll read this as my last verse.
This is 1 Corinthians 1:7–9: “You are not lacking in any gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.”
This, divorced from the rest of the interview, sure seems pretty much the answer to the question. Yes. We will be saved by Grace alone through Faith Alone in Christ Alone. As defined in Scripture, not by Piper.
As soon as Faith is defined as an experience, an attainment, obtainment, action, obedience or series of activities, even as “loving God” you have created a law. Do this or die. Moses rises again to condemn you.
Christ died to fulfill all the law. Because you cannot. Not in the first moment of your salvation, nor at any point following your salvation – while you breathe the air in this corrupt world as a sinner, you cannot keep the whole of the law. Piper says you have to.
Final comments.
I think Piper is at least suggesting that the John Wesley and Pelagius (two visible examples) ideas of perfection is possible in this life.
Piper does not accept the classic Reformed doctrine of the distinction of law and gospel. His theology denies it. The point of this statement is that he cannot, therefore, subscribe to the standards of the Presbyterian and Reformed (P&R) churches. He can use the standards for his purposes in teaching, however he is not bound to the whole, as we see in many of his writings and speeches – he cherry-picks, using Westminster, as in this interview, without context or a full reading of the statements in the Confession that pertain.
Piper does not have to subscribe to the P&R standards. That’s his choice. But for him to use his influence, as a well-known teacher with a history of good and helpful work, to make the claim that he and his contemporaries are Reformed, is misleading. The classical Reformed churches would not recognize him in his polity, piety or practice as one of them. Nor MacArthur, or Driscoll or any of the others who have sat in the camp of the YRR types. In transparency, there are plenty who do subscribe to the P&R Standards who still think these men are reformed. That is absolutely because we, Reformed, aren’t all consistent across the spectrum – there are plenty who are in this group for the liturgy, the basic sovereignty or doctrines of grace that are good and true, but are not interested in the deep keys to the faith that were the real underpinnings of the Reformation. As with Baptists, there are those who are not interested or just have not encountered the fullness of their denomination’s theology. That’s why we have so much conflict in the first place. None of this excuses Piper & Co from their non-reformed theology being presented as reformed.
Why is there a problem if Piper rejects (or ignores) the distinction of law and gospel? This is fundamental to interpretation of scripture. The law is a covenant of works (do this and live) that started out in the garden, was in Moses and continues today for those who are not in Christ. The gospel is that covenant of grace (again, in the Garden when God promises a savior), found in Abraham and fulfilled in Christ – that we get salvation by faith – not by works. When law and gospel are conflated, you get works-righteousness, another law. No exceptions – there cannot be phases of salvation or justification that include works. It cannot be. We are either fully saved by Christ or we are ultimately saved by our own efforts, no matter how Piper, Rome or Norman Shepherd or N.T. Wright or anyone else rephrases it.
Psalm 106: The people sinned, they were unfaithful. God saved them!
Psalm 105: God keeps his covenants! Abraham! He gave his people undeserved gifts!
These both point to Christ! He is our unmerited gift of salvation. We did not merit salvation before, and in Christ, we still cannot do anything to merit salvation. We are declared righteous – through no act or quality of our own.
Good works are fruit and evidence of our salvation. PERIOD. They are a result, not causal in our salvation. Christ is causal. God’s mercy and grace are causal. Works are a product. Faithfulness is a product. They do not help us in any way to obtain or maintain salvation.
The podcast above: Starting at 24:30 – Imputation of Active Obedience leads to antinomianism? No, if you DON’T teach it, you are promoting antinomianism. If our works are connected in any way to our salvation, we will give up, having (consciously or unconsciously) realized that we will always fall short and fail.
Teaching the imputation of active obedience releases us from the doom of responsibility to save ourselves and releases us to freely, joyfully do good works out of gratitude.
John Piper’s message about final salvation puts the burden on the believer to get or keep themselves saved. He hands salvation to the believer with one hand saying we’re justified in the orthodox formula, but takes it right back by substituting good works for the satisfaction of Christ. Piper’s theology of “satisfaction in God” or Christian Hedonism is a facade, in violation of Westminster and Heidelberg positions (WLC 1, HC 86) on enjoying God and being thankful to Him.
Belgic Confession (BC):
BC 21: “This [article] is one of the veiled polemics against Rome’s doctrine of initial justification at baptism, ongoing justification by means of sanctification through penance and good works, and final justification after purgatory” – Rev Daniel Hyde, With Heart and Mouth, p. 280
BC 22 naturally should lead one to ask, “why then should we do good works?” and we can provide the confessional answer in HC 86. “”Article 22 stands in direct opposition to the Roman Catholic Council of Trent, when it says, “Wherefore, no one ought to flatter himself up with faith alone, fancying that by faith alone he is made an heir, and will obtain the inheritance.” – Rev Daniel Hyde, With Heart and Mouth, p. 298- Rome anathematized Sola Fide.
If Piper is actually reformed, he would concur with this doctrine of salvation – it is what the Reformed churches confess – not just the URCNA, but all the classic, historical, orthodox Reformed churches.
Daniel Fuller’s book, Unity of the Bible, FWD by Piper. – This segment of the Heidelcast is a good, concise explanation of Piper’s position. Two-Stage system. Reading his own meaning into the 2 Thessalonians passage. Initial Justification and Final Salvation through works are not faithful to the Reformation, nor scripture.
For reference, see Piper’s church elders’ oath – Another distillation of the two stages.
For those who reject creeds and confessions,
Your church website has both. Statement of Faith, Mission and Vision.
For those who reject liturgy,
Your church provides one every single Sunday. Bulletin and Order of Worship.
For those who reject tradition,
You have one. It's your position in regards to religion. No church? That's a tradition. No denomination? That's a tradition.
For those who reject catechism,
Your church provides Bible study every week, Sunday School every Sunday. You have daily devotions.
Those who adhere to the idea of Sola Scriptura (plain reading of Scripture alone) and reject traditional hermeneutics,
You actually mean Solo Scriptura and you do have a hermeneutic.
Every Bible study book you have read, every preacher you've enjoyed, every theology you have been taught,
Those are your tradition and the source of your confession.
Examples,
John MacArthur Study Bible and Commentary
Joel Osteen sermon
Irenaeus or Augustine
David Jeremiah book
Westminster Confession and Catechism
Our Daily Bread
Kay Arthur
39 Articles
Schofield Study Bible
Reformation Heritage Study Bible
Your own pastor
Baptist Faith and Message
Three Forms of Unity
Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church
Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology
Evangelicals and Catholics Together
Here's the takeaway. You can't really make the case that you don't have a tradition, creed, confession or liturgy. What you can do is consider the relative value of those things as they appear in your religion. Ask yourself (and your church, if you have one) a few questions:
1. Is your system really free from the influence of all others? (independent)
2. Is your system in the line of a long-standing agreement of Christians? (historical)
3. Is your system a summary of someone else's summary? (fundamental)
4. Is your system intentional, planned and open to improvement? (intellectually honest)
5. Has your system every been critically contrasted with other systems that you do not accept? (validated)
I only have one question for you. Are you really okay with being a Christian who refuses to accept the obvious right in front of a Christian who hands you the obvious?
I wonder that we don't have the term Orthofoni in our lexicon. In these days of twitter and text (and this screen on which you are reading, your computer even), that we haven't made a wonderful advancement into the practice of "right speech."
We have orthodoxy, right doctrine.
We have orthopraxy, right practice
We have always had, probably best used in a negative sense, orthofoni.
You cannot have orthopraxy without orthodoxy. I wonder if we can, however, have right speech without either of the others embedded in our lives. I find it is easy to parrot a theological concept (especially if I can pull it right off a website with CTRL+C) into a combox and sound just perfect in a theological argument without ever internalizing the concept I'm communicating, and definitely, therefore, never putting into practice in my life, the outworking of the concept.
I can give you incredible truths from scripture without ever reading them myself. Orthofoni. I'm sure people have always been able to do this. Just memorize a set of words and spit them out to someone else without ever considering them yourself.
Maybe dumping the SMS and the social media takes on a new value in light of this.
If I say "I'm praying for you." in a text message, that's too easy an opportunity to just say it for the comfort value of the recipient. There's a sort of moral obligation if I say the same thing while looking you in the eye. In fact, wouldn't the inclination better be to stop and pray right there, rather than just making a meaningless statement.
I'm not saying we can never communicate right words via modern text media. Certainly, if I tell you I'll pray, I intend to do just that. But there's a discipline in this format that I think might be just a bit more rigorous than in-person communication. I have to mean it and I have to commit to it and, finally, I have to remember to do it, if not right now, at least as soon as possible. If I fall prey to the placating statement that has no weight, am I not guilty of lying. And not just lying in the sense that I'm not going to do what I just said I would do, but lying in a deeply theological sense - I have promised to speak to God almighty on behalf of you, who need prayer. Is that not a greater evil?
This is postulation. But it's worth consideration. Similar to putting that "Christian" bumper sticker on your car and summarily speeding, cutting off traffic and generally making a jerk out of yourself, the misrepresentation of your role is apparent. But in this case, it's in a much more profound way.
Children, a lesson concerning truth. Compare the following two creeds. Evaluate their subject, object and purpose to the extent these are available in the creeds themselves. There is no research required, simply the comparison of the two as they are presented here. Your observations may be noted below in the "comments" box.
1.
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
2.
I am a United States Sailor.
I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and I will obey the orders of those appointed over me.
I represent the fighting spirit of the Navy and those who have gone before me to defend freedom and democracy around the world.
I proudly serve my country’s Navy combat team with Honor, Courage and Commitment.
I am committed to excellence and the fair treatment of all.
Lord’s Day 4
HC9
Q. But doesn't God do man an injustice by requiring in his law what man is unable to do?
A. No, God created man with the ability to keep the law. Man, however, at the instigation of the devil, in willful disobedience, robbed himself and all his descendants of these gifts.
HC10
Q. Will God permit such disobedience and rebellion to go unpunished?
A. Certainly not. He is terribly angry with the sin we are born with as well as our actual sins. God will punish them by a just judgement both now and in eternity, having declared: “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.
HC11
Q. But isn’t God also merciful?
A. God is certainly merciful, but he is also just. His justice demands that sin, committed against his supreme majesty, be punished with the supreme penalty - eternal punishment of body and soul.
The questioner in this case is trying to get out of responsibility for his total depravity (as depicted in questions 3-8) by changing God. The catechism is specifically refuting that which is taught in most churches today regarding God’s nature, his view of sin, of his justice, even his mercy and grace. These questions illustrate how we dearly desire to remain in our sin, unrepentant and free to continue on our merry way. The answers deny our desperate wishes to escape God’s justice.
Dr. Ursinus, “If a prince were to give a nobleman a fee and he were to rebel against him, he would lose it not only for himself, but for his posterity also; and the prince would do no injustice to his children by not restoring to them that which was lost by the rebellion of their father. And if he does restore it, it is because of his goodness and mercy.” God has not taken away our ability to keep his law perfectly. We have cast away our ability to do so. This section is calculated to lead us to acknowledge and deplore our inability.
So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. - Romans 7:21-25
Dr. Beeke, “When we are children and our parents ask us to do something, we say ‘I can’t do it’ - by which we mean, ‘I won’t do it.’ We are trying to avoid responsibility. When Adam ate from the tree, he committed suicide and murdered countless multitudes, willfully. We are willing participants in Adam’s murderous choice. And the flames of hell will never go out because even there, we will go on sinning and heaping guilt upon ourselves - we will never “get better” though we spend a thousand years in hell.
Sin is not just violation of God’s law, it is violation of our own original design, and rejection of God’s nature, even God himself. Sin is not offense against the law, but offense against the giver of the law. Think of it like this: God is not conforming to the law, his own standards, but is simply performing in keeping with his own character. Therefore, God punishes us for not only our evil actions, but for our evil hearts, for original sin must also be punished, that which infects all men as well as that which each man does on his own.
Rev Borvan, “Fallen man can only choose between types of evil. He is not able not to sin.” Our blessed hope is that, in the age to come, we will only be able to choose good.
The Purpose Of This Lesson in the Catechism is to lead us to TRUST IN HIM, to depend on HIM for mercy and forgiveness. It is to lead us to CHRIST. This is how we escape our horrible destiny of eternal punishment. There is no other solution. This is how we can have a God who is the God of both Justice and Mercy at the same time.
How can God be both righteous and merciful at the same time? He provided his Son to receive the judgement that we deserve. His son received, though he was innocent, that supreme penalty. This is substitutionary atonement, called the Great Exchange. Christ became sin for us, took our sin upon himself, and then God poured out his justice on Christ.
Sources:
Heidelberg Catechism Lord’s Day 4
Rev Dan Borvan, God’s Justice 24January2021
Dr. Joel Beeke, Divine Justice Justified 02March2003
Faith In Practice Podcast HC Q&A 9-11 06April2021
Dr. Zacharias Ursinus Commentaries on the Heidelberg Catechism
Cold Coffee and Flannel 