tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post6033549792083385529..comments2024-03-26T00:19:08.753-07:00Comments on The World's Ruined: Salvation Possessed By Faith - Expressed in Obedience Jack Millerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-20156171183775637102016-05-09T17:43:44.118-07:002016-05-09T17:43:44.118-07:00Piper's Forward to Schreiner---"we are ri...Piper's Forward to Schreiner---"we are right with God by faith alone but we do not attain and possess heaven by faith alone. "<br />https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/pipers-foreword/<br /><br />"Repent, for the kingdom is at hand" does not mean simply "forsake sin". It means to change your mind about the gospel and to leave the false gospel. The false gospel is sin and abomination to God. Forsaking the false gospel is not a "condition" for believing the false gospel. Forsaking the false gospel is part of believing the true gospel. Two sides of same coin.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-85244650078396044142016-05-09T11:02:20.841-07:002016-05-09T11:02:20.841-07:00According to the Marrow theology, in the preaching...According to the Marrow theology, in the preaching of the gospel God in Jesus Christ is offered to all but possessed by some (those who meet the condition of faith)--- “God moved with nothing but his free love to mankind lost, hath made a deed of gift and grant unto them all, that whosoever shall believe in this his Son, shall not perish, but have eternal life” .<br /><br />As confusing as the language is, specifically, the phrase, “deed of gift and grant,” it is evident that the statement intends to teach God’s would-be love to all humans who hear the preaching on the condition that they believe. Implied in this statement is the doctrine that Christ died for all humans without exception. The church must “go and tell every man, without exception, that here is good news for him! Christ is dead for him! and if he will take him, and accept of his righteousness, he shall have him”.<br /><br />The language is odd. “Christ is dead”? And Christ is dead for every human who hears the gospel? Not: “Christ died for every human.” But: “Christ dead for every human.” Contrast this confusing statement concerning the extent of the atoning death of Christ the clear language of the Canons of Dordt— For this was the sovereign counsel and most gracious will and purpose of God the Father, that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of His Son should extend to all the elect, for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith, thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation; that is, it was the will of God that Christ by the blood of the cross, whereby He confirmed the new covenant, should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and language all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation and given to Him by the Father, etc. (Canons of Dordt, 2.8).<br /><br />If what orthodox Reformed theology regards as the external call of the gospel is, in fact, a gracious deed of gift and grant of Jesus Christ to every human who hears the gospel, Christ must have died for all mankind lost, for every human without exception.<br /><br />Christ is not dead! Christ is not dead in relation to anyone, including the elect. Christ died, in the past. But Christ is NOT dead. Christ is alive, having risen from the dead. In order to introduce into Reformed churches the doctrine of an universal atonement which is not "possessed", the Marrow men resorted to linguistic subterfuge: “Christ is dead for you.” <br /><br />The Canons of Dordt make plain that the “offer” does not mean a gracious effort on God’s part to save all who hear, in view of a love of God for all hearers and with the desire to save them all. Head one of the Canons confesses the eternal non-election of some humans in a<br />hatred of God for them. Head two confesses that Christ died for the elect alone, according to God’s lasting love for them. Heads three and four confess that the saving call of the gospel, that which has its source in God’s election, is for some hearers of the gospel, not for all without exception.<br /><br />With regard to the Marrow’s assertion that the gospel is a deed of gift and grant to all who hear, head two of the Canons teaches that Christ “purchased” for the elect, not only forgiveness and eternal life, but also faith itself (Canons 2.8).Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-17475707178947686082016-05-09T11:01:57.771-07:002016-05-09T11:01:57.771-07:00
The non-elect unbeliever does not have a warrant...<br /><br />The non-elect unbeliever does not have a warrant to believe in Jesus Christ. He does not have the ability. But neither does he have the right. Faith in Jesus Christ is a privilege, a right earned for the elect by the death of Jesus. “Warrant” implies right. The non-elect hearer<br />of the gospel has the DUTY to believe in Jesus, but he lacks both the ability and the right. This truth demolishes the theology of the Marrow.<br /><br />If God in the gospel lovingly offers salvation to all humans without exception, on the ground of Christ’s death for everyone, Christ is not the whole savior. The sinner himself, by his acceptance of the offered Christ, is instrumental in his own salvation. The Arminians call this acceptance “free will.” The Marrow Calvinists call this acceptance “regeneration followed by instrumental faith”. But in both cases, Christ is not the savior because what God does to make the sinner accept Christ is the most fundamental part of salvation.<br /><br />According to Thomas Boston. the offer is God’s gracious gift of Jesus Christ to all who hear the gospel, including those who never possess salvation. On this view, the gospel is not a gift to effectually save anybody, but only makes Jesus available to all those God predestined to be in the same room with gospel preaching. . Boston uses the example of the gift of money to a poor man: “Even as when one presents a piece of gold to a poor man saying, ‘Take it, it is yours’; the offer makes the piece really his in a sense nevertheless, while the poor man does not accept or receive it, it is not his in possession, nor hath he the benefit of it; but, on the contrary, must starve for it all, and that so much the more miserably, that he hath slighted the offer and refused the gift”<br /><br />Boston comments— This giving, which in light of I John 5:11 is certainly gracious on God’s part, does not, however, put anyone in possession of eternal life. It merely makes it possible for humans to take possession”of eternal life. This giving of eternal life by God in the offer is not to and for the elect, but to and for all who hear the gospel, including those who may be reprobate, and perish. The party to whom eternal life is given by the offer is not the election only, but mankind lost.” In the offer, there is a giving of Christ and salvation to many where there is no<br />receiving, for a gift may be refused.”Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-3318094863322875982016-04-23T05:20:54.057-07:002016-04-23T05:20:54.057-07:00Many “Reformed” people teach us that “faith unites...<br />Many “Reformed” people teach us that “faith unites us to Christ”, and then after that, then God imputes Christ’s righteousness. Some “Reformed” even say that God counts this “uniting faith” for something it really isn’t—they say God counts faith as righteousness.<br /><br />A liberal view is that faith really pleases God so that God forgets the believer’s sins. The curse for sin is not a judge passing a death sentence or an offended king showing his wrath, but a father letting his wayward son learn the hard lesson, so that the son will finally give up on himself, remember the father’s goodness, and come home. The acts of salvation in history are therefore God’s means of reminding men of God's mercy, of which the death of Christ is the supreme revelation. In this view, the one and only sin becomes unbelief of the “offer” of the gospel.<br /><br />An Arminian view is that faith unites us to Christ, causes Christ to be present in us, and that then as a result the death of Christ covers those united from God’s judgment. In the Passover: the sinners themselves applied the blood of the lamb to their houses and escaped the plague of death. In this view, “Christ is dead for you”, and the death of Christ is sufficient enough to make an offer but not enough to cover any sin, unless one first “exercises the faith” which “unites us to Christ.<br /><br />I am not saying that either of these views deny the fact that God’s election decided for whom Christ would die. I am saying that Christ’s atoning does not have decisive priority in these two false views. .In both views, faith becomes the condition of “union” and “union” the condition of imputation. The Arminian view make us the ones who impute the righteousness to ourselves. And for all practical purposes, this view makes our faith our saving righteousness.<br /><br />Mark Jones----Should this cause people to despair regarding the future judgment? Only if one is a bona fide hypocrite. Christ will rightfully condemn the hypocrites in the church (Matt. 25:41-46). They are marked out as those who did not do good works. They are those who neglect the weightier matters of the law (Matt. 23:23).<br /><br /><br />We do not need to fear the final judgment if we are children of God. But, as children of God, glorified in the presence of Christ, we "must [nevertheless] all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil" (2 Cor. 5:10). And, yes, there will be those in the church who will not do so well at the final judgment because their faith was dead (i.e., did not produce fruit, John. 15:2-5, 10, 16).<br /><br />Mark Jones-- Now, of course, declarative justification gives us the right to life. Only the imputed righteousness of Christ can withstand the severity of God's judgment. But, demonstrative justificatio is the Father's approval of the Spirit's work - that is, the Spirit of Christ - in his people because of our union with the Savior. <br /><br />The Father who gave two gifts to us, the Son and the Spirit, will look upon us as justified in Christ and sanctified in Christ by the Spirit; and he will be well pleased with his work. He will accept us for Christ's sake and reward and vindicate us because of Christ's Spirit, who has enabled us to do good works, which were prepared in advance for us to do (Ephesians. 2:10). <br /> <br /><br />Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-34596004646953802252016-04-23T05:16:14.854-07:002016-04-23T05:16:14.854-07:00Returning to the "right" versus "po...Returning to the "right" versus "possession" distinction, Goodwin, who has affirmed that the right to salvation as received by faith alone, also posits: God will not "put the possession of salvation upon that private act of his own, without having anything else to show for it." This language is remarkably similar to Petrus van Mastricht: "God does not want to grant the possession of eternal life, unless there are, next to faith, also good works which precede this possession, Heb. 12:14; Matt. 7:21; 25:34-36; Rom. 2:7, 10." This is not a "Puritan" distinctive, as some seem to think. Dozens of Continental theologians spoke this way.<br /><br />God justifies apart from works, but he also will "go demonstratively to work" and clearly distinguish between a true believer versus a spurious believer. God will "justify his own acts of justification." Or, to put the matter another way, God will justify the faith of the believer who has been justified - the judgment will prove we had a lively faith that worked through love.<br /><br />The contrast between Paul and James is then brought into clearer view: "In a word, Abraham's person, considered singly and alone, yes, as ungodly, is the object of Paul's justification without works, Rom. 4:3-5. But Abraham, as professing himself to have such a true justifying faith, and to have been justified thereupon, and claiming right to salvation by it, Abraham, as such, is to be justified by works" (Goodwin).<br /><br />Goodwin speaks about what sense "a man may be said to be judged by his works at the latter day." All those judged will either be justified or condemned. "So there is no more danger to say, a man at the latter day shall be justified by his works, as evidences of his state and faith, than to say he shall be judged according thereto." He essentially argues that we will be justified by works, but only demonstratively as God justifies his own act of justification in each believer. After all, Christ speaks of a (demonstrative) justification according to works in Matthew 12:36-37, "...for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."<br /><br />Goodwin adds: "neither is it anywhere said, that God will judge men according to their faith only." (Justification "by faith alone" is ambiguous; the sense of "alone" has to be understood adverbially, not adjectively). "God will say, I am to judge thee so as every one shall be able to judge my sentence righteous together with me: 1 Cor. 4:5, the whole world may know that he justified one that had true faith indeed." The final judgment is as much about the vindication of the triune God as it is about true believers having their lives vindicated. <br /><br />The result of this, for Goodwin, is that "Paul's judging according to works, and James his justification by works, are all one, and are alike consistent with Paul's justification by faith only. For in the same epistle where he argues so strongly for justification by faith without works, as Rom. 3-4, he in chapter 2, also declares, that 'he will judge every man according to his works.'" <br /><br /> <br /><br />- See more at: http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2015/10/judgment-according-to-works.php#sthash.UDhLOGt3.dpufMarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.com