“In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses” (Ephesians 1:7).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that in Christ we have the forgiveness of our trespasses. Obviously, Federal Visionists do not understand the first thing about the gospel.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is the heart of the gospel. Justification itself includes the two biggies: the forgiveness of trespasses and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. Yet, justification is also the key that unlocks all the other graces of the gospel. Once we have been justified, we are redeemed, reconciled, adopted, united to Christ, et al.
Federal Visionists assert that union with Christ is the priority. After we are united to Christ, then we receive the other graces of the gospel. They would even go so far as to say that union with Christ precedes justification. Obviously, this is a utter heresy.
We cannot be united with Christ until our sins are forgiven in justification. This is impossible. We must be justified before we can ever be united with Christ. Thus, technically speaking, we are justified apart from Christ.
Therefore, we would never say that we have forgiveness of our trespasses “in him.” Rather, apart from him we have the forgiveness of our trespasses.
Showing posts with label NT - Ephesians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NT - Ephesians. Show all posts
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Ephesians 5:25
“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her” (Ephesians 5:25).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is giving instructions on how to be a better husband. They assert that a husband, by imitating Christ’s example, can love his wife better by giving himself up for her. However, nothing could be further from the truth.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the only way that we can become better husbands is by looking to Christ. To the extent that we try to be better husbands, we are only cementing our failure. The law was given to drive us to Christ. If we try to “do” the law, then we are failing to rest in Christ.
Many read the commands of the Bible and think that we are supposed to try to obey them. They read Paul’s commands about marriage and think that he is actually writing about how we can improve our marriages. These same people go to marriage seminars and hear about how to be better husbands. They read books on marriage and think that these are helping their marriages.
However, this is fruitless. We do not need marriage seminars. We do not need to read another book on improving our marriage. This misses Paul’s entire point.
Rather, we need to love Christ and rest in his works. We need to stop working and simply look to Christ. Husbands need to stop being Marthas and be Marys.
Thus, Paul’s real message is revealed: husbands, do not love your wives, nor give yourselves up for her.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is giving instructions on how to be a better husband. They assert that a husband, by imitating Christ’s example, can love his wife better by giving himself up for her. However, nothing could be further from the truth.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the only way that we can become better husbands is by looking to Christ. To the extent that we try to be better husbands, we are only cementing our failure. The law was given to drive us to Christ. If we try to “do” the law, then we are failing to rest in Christ.
Many read the commands of the Bible and think that we are supposed to try to obey them. They read Paul’s commands about marriage and think that he is actually writing about how we can improve our marriages. These same people go to marriage seminars and hear about how to be better husbands. They read books on marriage and think that these are helping their marriages.
However, this is fruitless. We do not need marriage seminars. We do not need to read another book on improving our marriage. This misses Paul’s entire point.
Rather, we need to love Christ and rest in his works. We need to stop working and simply look to Christ. Husbands need to stop being Marthas and be Marys.
Thus, Paul’s real message is revealed: husbands, do not love your wives, nor give yourselves up for her.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Ephesians 2:8-9
“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Federal Visionists claim to love these verses, but what they take away with the left hand, they give with the right. They only quote this passage to make themselves seem orthodox, but they don’t really believe it.
Federal Visionists constantly whine about being misunderstood, but this is the plea of all heretics. No, Federal Visionists are actually easy to figure out. Here’s a simple, two-pronged approach to attacking the Federal Vision:
1) If a Federal Visionist says something that is unorthodox, then take them at their word and prosecute them as heretics.
2) If a Federal Visionist say something that seems to be orthodox, then do not take them at their word. They are lying. They really believe the opposite and need to be persecuted as heretics.
Thus, no matter what Federal Visionists say, they cannot win. They are either telling the truth about their unorthodoxy or lying about their orthodoxy. These are the only two options.
Federal Visionists claim to love these verses, but what they take away with the left hand, they give with the right. They only quote this passage to make themselves seem orthodox, but they don’t really believe it.
Federal Visionists constantly whine about being misunderstood, but this is the plea of all heretics. No, Federal Visionists are actually easy to figure out. Here’s a simple, two-pronged approach to attacking the Federal Vision:
1) If a Federal Visionist says something that is unorthodox, then take them at their word and prosecute them as heretics.
2) If a Federal Visionist say something that seems to be orthodox, then do not take them at their word. They are lying. They really believe the opposite and need to be persecuted as heretics.
Thus, no matter what Federal Visionists say, they cannot win. They are either telling the truth about their unorthodoxy or lying about their orthodoxy. These are the only two options.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Ephesians 2:1
“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1).
This is one of the most important verses in all of Calvindom. The classic reading of this text has always held that unbelievers are dead in their sins. This was true of us. As unbelievers, we were dead and could not respond to the gospel. The Holy Spirit regenerated us, and then we responded in faith. This is Calvinism 101.
Federal Visionists claim to believe all of this, but do not be duped by their assertions of orthodoxy. Federal Visionists argue that Paul was speaking of death as a metaphor, not as a literal reality. Thus, unbelievers are not literally dead. Rather, Paul used death as a metaphor to describe how radically unbelievers are separated from God: it is as if they are dead. Obviously, this implies that regeneration is also not a literal reality, but only a metaphor for how radical the change is from unbeliever to believer.
Conversely, the Reformed faith has always insisted that Paul was speaking of literal death. Unbelievers are literally dead. They are corpses. They need literal regeneration. They need to be brought back to life, literally.
Of course, unbelievers are not really dead. Their bodies are alive. Their souls are alive, too. What part, then, of an unbeliever is dead?
The Reformed faith has always insisted that unbelievers are dead spiritually, that is, their spirits are dead. Man has three constituent parts: body, soul, and spirit (Hebrews 4:12). The bodies and souls of unbelievers are alive, but their spirits are dead. Regeneration is the literal resuscitation of their spirits. Thus, trichotomy becomes a key weapon in fighting the Federal Vision heresy.
This is one of the most important verses in all of Calvindom. The classic reading of this text has always held that unbelievers are dead in their sins. This was true of us. As unbelievers, we were dead and could not respond to the gospel. The Holy Spirit regenerated us, and then we responded in faith. This is Calvinism 101.
Federal Visionists claim to believe all of this, but do not be duped by their assertions of orthodoxy. Federal Visionists argue that Paul was speaking of death as a metaphor, not as a literal reality. Thus, unbelievers are not literally dead. Rather, Paul used death as a metaphor to describe how radically unbelievers are separated from God: it is as if they are dead. Obviously, this implies that regeneration is also not a literal reality, but only a metaphor for how radical the change is from unbeliever to believer.
Conversely, the Reformed faith has always insisted that Paul was speaking of literal death. Unbelievers are literally dead. They are corpses. They need literal regeneration. They need to be brought back to life, literally.
Of course, unbelievers are not really dead. Their bodies are alive. Their souls are alive, too. What part, then, of an unbeliever is dead?
The Reformed faith has always insisted that unbelievers are dead spiritually, that is, their spirits are dead. Man has three constituent parts: body, soul, and spirit (Hebrews 4:12). The bodies and souls of unbelievers are alive, but their spirits are dead. Regeneration is the literal resuscitation of their spirits. Thus, trichotomy becomes a key weapon in fighting the Federal Vision heresy.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Ephesians 4:4-5
“There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:4-5).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is saying that there is only one baptism, that is, that water baptism and spirit baptism are identical. Or, as one Light-hearted Federal Visionist often says, “baptism is baptism.” Obviously, this is a regurgitation of the Roman Catholic heresy of baptismal regeneration.
The Reformed faith has always held that there are two baptisms: water baptism and Spirit baptism. Spirit baptism is where the action is: regeneration, union with Christ, Covenant of Grace Membership, Invisible Church Membership, etc. Water baptism is where you get wet in front of the church.
Anyone should be able to see the clear difference between these two kinds of baptism. The failure to distinguish water baptism from spirit baptism means that you have exited the Reformed freeway and are now on the Roman road, ecclesially speaking.
One of the great things about the current Anti-Federal Visionist reign of terror is that it unites all Christians under the label “Reformed,” including Baptists (as long as you are willing to be called a “Reformed Baptist”). This is because baptism has nothing to do with being Reformed. Thus, a Reformed Baptist is just as Reformed as a Presbyterian. There’s no difference!
Sure, there are superficial differences in their practice of baptism: Reformed Baptists use a lot of water whereas Presbyterians only use a little. Presbyterians baptize babies whereas Reformed Baptists only baptize the elect.
While their practices differ, their doctrines of baptism are virtually identical, separated mostly by semantics. Presbyterians sometimes talk about baptism as a “means of grace,” but after thoroughly qualifying this, they are on the same ground as Reformed Baptists.
Thus, the key to being Reformed is whether you are a Tulipist or not. (Side note: we hesitate to say Calvinist because Calvin’s view of baptism may have been proto-FV. We’re not sure because we don’t bother reading primary sources anymore. Better to site Reformed scholars like Kuyper and Ryrie).
In summary, to be Reformed, you only have to believe in TULIP. That’s it! Everyone who is Tulipistic is Reformed. Here’s an easy tautology to remember this:
Reformed = TULIP
Getting back to the task at hand, what Paul means by “one baptism” is that there is one real baptism or one genuine baptism, which is, of course, Spirit baptism. While water baptism is probably important for some reason, Spirit baptism is the only one that really counts.
(See here for how to circumvent the obviously-Tridentine language of the Nicene Creed.)
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is saying that there is only one baptism, that is, that water baptism and spirit baptism are identical. Or, as one Light-hearted Federal Visionist often says, “baptism is baptism.” Obviously, this is a regurgitation of the Roman Catholic heresy of baptismal regeneration.
The Reformed faith has always held that there are two baptisms: water baptism and Spirit baptism. Spirit baptism is where the action is: regeneration, union with Christ, Covenant of Grace Membership, Invisible Church Membership, etc. Water baptism is where you get wet in front of the church.
Anyone should be able to see the clear difference between these two kinds of baptism. The failure to distinguish water baptism from spirit baptism means that you have exited the Reformed freeway and are now on the Roman road, ecclesially speaking.
One of the great things about the current Anti-Federal Visionist reign of terror is that it unites all Christians under the label “Reformed,” including Baptists (as long as you are willing to be called a “Reformed Baptist”). This is because baptism has nothing to do with being Reformed. Thus, a Reformed Baptist is just as Reformed as a Presbyterian. There’s no difference!
Sure, there are superficial differences in their practice of baptism: Reformed Baptists use a lot of water whereas Presbyterians only use a little. Presbyterians baptize babies whereas Reformed Baptists only baptize the elect.
While their practices differ, their doctrines of baptism are virtually identical, separated mostly by semantics. Presbyterians sometimes talk about baptism as a “means of grace,” but after thoroughly qualifying this, they are on the same ground as Reformed Baptists.
Thus, the key to being Reformed is whether you are a Tulipist or not. (Side note: we hesitate to say Calvinist because Calvin’s view of baptism may have been proto-FV. We’re not sure because we don’t bother reading primary sources anymore. Better to site Reformed scholars like Kuyper and Ryrie).
In summary, to be Reformed, you only have to believe in TULIP. That’s it! Everyone who is Tulipistic is Reformed. Here’s an easy tautology to remember this:
Reformed = TULIP
Getting back to the task at hand, what Paul means by “one baptism” is that there is one real baptism or one genuine baptism, which is, of course, Spirit baptism. While water baptism is probably important for some reason, Spirit baptism is the only one that really counts.
(See here for how to circumvent the obviously-Tridentine language of the Nicene Creed.)
Monday, February 11, 2008
Ephesians 1:3
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ” (Ephesians 1:3).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that God gives every spiritual blessing to those who are in Christ. They argue that when we are united with Christ, it is through this union that we receive justification, adoption, redemption, etc. Besides disturbing the sacred ordo salutis, this reveals the corrupt hearts of Federal Visionists.
First, the Reformed faith has always held that justification is the heart of the gospel; it is the foundation of our salvation. Everything starts with justification. Without justification, there is no union with Christ. We cannot be united to Christ without first receiving his righteousness in justification (which we receive by divine fiat). Once we are justified, we receive all the other unimportant parts of salvation (union with Christ, adoption, redemption, etc.).
Second, we need to remember that in his letter to the Ephesians, Paul is not dealing with the gospel. As you may have noticed, Paul does not mention justification at all in Ephesians. There is a simple explanation for this: Ephesians is about ecclesiology, not soteriology. If you want to understand Reformed soteriology, study Romans and Galatians, not Ephesians.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that God gives every spiritual blessing to those who are in Christ. They argue that when we are united with Christ, it is through this union that we receive justification, adoption, redemption, etc. Besides disturbing the sacred ordo salutis, this reveals the corrupt hearts of Federal Visionists.
First, the Reformed faith has always held that justification is the heart of the gospel; it is the foundation of our salvation. Everything starts with justification. Without justification, there is no union with Christ. We cannot be united to Christ without first receiving his righteousness in justification (which we receive by divine fiat). Once we are justified, we receive all the other unimportant parts of salvation (union with Christ, adoption, redemption, etc.).
Second, we need to remember that in his letter to the Ephesians, Paul is not dealing with the gospel. As you may have noticed, Paul does not mention justification at all in Ephesians. There is a simple explanation for this: Ephesians is about ecclesiology, not soteriology. If you want to understand Reformed soteriology, study Romans and Galatians, not Ephesians.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Ephesians 1:3-4
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:3-4).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is speaking of ecclesial election rather than soteriological election. Do not be deceived. There is no such animal as ecclesial election. This is an invention of Federal heretics like Steve Wilkins.
For those who are non-scholars, you may have noticed that our English translations do not mention “election.” However, the Greek does. When Paul writes, “He chose us,” the word “chose” could also be translated as “elected.” Paul is saying that God “elected” us. This is simply the classic Reformed doctrine of election.
Federal Visionists have muddied the waters by trying to insert two kinds of election into the Scriptures: ecclesial and soteriological. That is, some are “elected” to be members in the visible church, while others are “elected” to eternal salvation. Conversely, the Reformed faith has always insisted that election always refers to eternal salvation.
Federal Visionists point out that Paul seems to use the word “elect” without qualification, meaning that all members of the Ephesian church would be elect. Some Anti-Federal Visionists argue that because Paul was intimately familiar with the church at Ephesus, he knew indisputably that everyone in the church at Ephesus was elect.
While we respect all who battle against Federal Visionists, this interpretation seems doubtful. Most scholars believe that the letter that we call “Ephesians” was actually a circular letter, intended for distribution in multiple churches. It is unlikely that Paul could have insured that only the elect would have read his letter.
We would like to propose the following alternative explanation. When Paul writes, “He chose us,” Paul is obviously using what Greek grammarians call the subjunctive accusative. The word “us” is in the subjunctive mood, which would change the translation slightly: “He chose some of us.” Thus, any church could read this letter with integrity, knowing that only the elect would be assured of their election.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Paul is speaking of ecclesial election rather than soteriological election. Do not be deceived. There is no such animal as ecclesial election. This is an invention of Federal heretics like Steve Wilkins.
For those who are non-scholars, you may have noticed that our English translations do not mention “election.” However, the Greek does. When Paul writes, “He chose us,” the word “chose” could also be translated as “elected.” Paul is saying that God “elected” us. This is simply the classic Reformed doctrine of election.
Federal Visionists have muddied the waters by trying to insert two kinds of election into the Scriptures: ecclesial and soteriological. That is, some are “elected” to be members in the visible church, while others are “elected” to eternal salvation. Conversely, the Reformed faith has always insisted that election always refers to eternal salvation.
Federal Visionists point out that Paul seems to use the word “elect” without qualification, meaning that all members of the Ephesian church would be elect. Some Anti-Federal Visionists argue that because Paul was intimately familiar with the church at Ephesus, he knew indisputably that everyone in the church at Ephesus was elect.
While we respect all who battle against Federal Visionists, this interpretation seems doubtful. Most scholars believe that the letter that we call “Ephesians” was actually a circular letter, intended for distribution in multiple churches. It is unlikely that Paul could have insured that only the elect would have read his letter.
We would like to propose the following alternative explanation. When Paul writes, “He chose us,” Paul is obviously using what Greek grammarians call the subjunctive accusative. The word “us” is in the subjunctive mood, which would change the translation slightly: “He chose some of us.” Thus, any church could read this letter with integrity, knowing that only the elect would be assured of their election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)