“For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” (1 Peter 4:17).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that the household of God obeys the gospel. However, this is the toxic cocktail formed by mixing law and gospel.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that law and gospel are mutually exclusive categories. They are as different as night and day. They are certainly not to be mixed.
Law is God’s demand for perfect obedience. Hence, obedience is only associated with the law.
Gospel is God’s free gift. It cannot be earned or merited through obedience. Obedience has nothing to do with gospel.
Thus, “obedience” and “gospel” are incongruous. Those who attempt to “obey the gospel” find themselves plunging towards Pelagius.
Rather, we appropriate the gospel by faith alone. This faith alone rests upon the gospel. In no way should we ever attempt to obey the gospel. This is turns gospel into law, which is not good news.
Showing posts with label NT - 1 Peter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NT - 1 Peter. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
1 Peter 5:6
“Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time” (1 Peter 5:6).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we should humble ourselves with the expectation that God will exalt us. The promises of God should motivate us to obey, they claim. However, this is the yoke of moralism.
The Reformed faith has always taught that our only motive for obedience is gratitude. Because our eternal destinies are absolutely secure, there is no reason to obey God, unless you are feeling grateful.
Our modern Reformed faith has been very careful to sever any connection between our works and the promises of God. There is no link between what we do and what God promises to do for us. This is old-fashioned moralism.
Thus, we should never dwell on the promises of God because if we obey thinking that we will receive a reward, then we are legalists.
As St. Peter would say, God may exalt us or he may not. Certainly, this does not depend upon whether we humble ourselves or not. We humble ourselves strictly out of gratitude. It’s guilt, grace, gratitude. Anything else and you are not Reformed.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we should humble ourselves with the expectation that God will exalt us. The promises of God should motivate us to obey, they claim. However, this is the yoke of moralism.
The Reformed faith has always taught that our only motive for obedience is gratitude. Because our eternal destinies are absolutely secure, there is no reason to obey God, unless you are feeling grateful.
Our modern Reformed faith has been very careful to sever any connection between our works and the promises of God. There is no link between what we do and what God promises to do for us. This is old-fashioned moralism.
Thus, we should never dwell on the promises of God because if we obey thinking that we will receive a reward, then we are legalists.
As St. Peter would say, God may exalt us or he may not. Certainly, this does not depend upon whether we humble ourselves or not. We humble ourselves strictly out of gratitude. It’s guilt, grace, gratitude. Anything else and you are not Reformed.
Friday, January 4, 2008
1 Peter 3:21
"Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21).
Federal Visionists love this verse because Peter says, “baptism now saves you.” By wrenching such statements out of context, this brings them into union with Rome regarding baptismal regeneration.
The Reformed faith has always taught that we are saved by faith alone (sola fide). Baptism is no way saves us. Had Peter known how the Federal Visionists would pervert his statement, he surely would have phrased this differently.
If Peter really meant to say that baptism now saves us, what he meant was that Spirit baptism now saves. When an elect person is regenerated, he is also baptized in the Spirit. This kind of baptism saves us.
While this should be abundantly clear, it is best to far away from any language that sounds remotely Roman, such as "baptism now saves you." It is better to stick with the time-honored solas.
Federal Visionists love this verse because Peter says, “baptism now saves you.” By wrenching such statements out of context, this brings them into union with Rome regarding baptismal regeneration.
The Reformed faith has always taught that we are saved by faith alone (sola fide). Baptism is no way saves us. Had Peter known how the Federal Visionists would pervert his statement, he surely would have phrased this differently.
If Peter really meant to say that baptism now saves us, what he meant was that Spirit baptism now saves. When an elect person is regenerated, he is also baptized in the Spirit. This kind of baptism saves us.
While this should be abundantly clear, it is best to far away from any language that sounds remotely Roman, such as "baptism now saves you." It is better to stick with the time-honored solas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)