“For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it” (Mark 8:35).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that salvation hinges upon whether one is willing to “lose his life.” However, this is the classic Pelagian mistake of confusing Law and Gospel.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the Gospel is an unconditional gift appropriated by faith alone. Conditions such as being willing to “lose your life” are not part of the Gospel. This is the Law.
If you try to “lose your life” for Jesus’ sake, then you are trying to save yourself. You are putting yourself back under the Law. Far better to simply rest in Jesus and forget about “losing your life.”
Discerning Law and Gospel is the key to being Reformed. Until you’ve read the Bible through Law-Gospel glasses, you are missing everything.
Along these lines, we have good news: Law-Gospel glasses will soon become obsolete! Ophthalmologists have been working closely with The White Horse Inn to develop a Lasik procedure that will produce perfect Law-Gospel vision.
Theologians who were previously unable to discern an indicative from an imperative can now have 20/20 Law-Gospel vision just one week after the surgery. WSC has already made Law-Gospel Lasik surgery a prerequisite for enrollment, and NAPARC is considering making it mandatory for those seeking ordination in Reformed churches.
There are risks with Law-Gospel Lasik surgery. Side effects include increased pompousness, a propensity towards sectarian hyper-abstract theological issues, an inability to take the Bible at face value, and a man-crush on Caspar Olevianus.
It is unknown whether Law-Gospel Lasik surgery is reversible, but you can overcome the side effects of this procedure through a cranial-rectal extraction.
Showing posts with label NT - Mark. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NT - Mark. Show all posts
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
Mark 6:12
“So they went out and preached that people should repent” (Mark 6:12).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Jesus sent his twelve disciples out to preach the gospel. While a common misconception, this is an utter departure from the Reformers.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the heart of the gospel is justification, which is received by faith alone. Repentance is a post-justification work of sanctification. It has nothing to do with justification, and therefore, nothing to do with the gospel.
Thus, when Jesus commissioned his disciples to preach that people should repent, he was sending them out to preach the message of sanctification, not the gospel.
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that Jesus sent his twelve disciples out to preach the gospel. While a common misconception, this is an utter departure from the Reformers.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that the heart of the gospel is justification, which is received by faith alone. Repentance is a post-justification work of sanctification. It has nothing to do with justification, and therefore, nothing to do with the gospel.
Thus, when Jesus commissioned his disciples to preach that people should repent, he was sending them out to preach the message of sanctification, not the gospel.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Mark 1:15
“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that preaching the gospel includes both a call to repent and a call to believe. They even claim that the call to repentance can precede the call to faith. Obviously, this denies sola fide.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is by faith alone, which means that repentance is not part of justification. Thus, the call to repentance is not part of the gospel. The call to repentance is the call to sanctification.
For this reason, the call to faith must always precede the call to repentance. If you switch these, then you have fallen from Modernist Reformation. Thus, only a Pelagian would say, “repent and believe in the gospel.”
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that preaching the gospel includes both a call to repent and a call to believe. They even claim that the call to repentance can precede the call to faith. Obviously, this denies sola fide.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is by faith alone, which means that repentance is not part of justification. Thus, the call to repentance is not part of the gospel. The call to repentance is the call to sanctification.
For this reason, the call to faith must always precede the call to repentance. If you switch these, then you have fallen from Modernist Reformation. Thus, only a Pelagian would say, “repent and believe in the gospel.”
Monday, April 14, 2008
Mark 1:6
“John was clothed with camel’s hair and wore a leather belt around his waist, and his diet was locusts and wild honey” (Mark 1:6).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that John’s diet bears some symbolic significance. They assert that locusts and wild honey should call to mind some of the Old Testament types and inform us of a “deeper” meaning.
For example, in the prophets, locusts were used to symbolically portray the enemies of Israel. Thus, John eating locusts teaches us that Israel’s enemies were going to be defeated.
Also, the Promised Land was flowing with milk and honey. However, John is eating wild honey in the desert. Supposedly, this absence of honey in Israel symbolizes how the land of Israel is under the curse of God.
Obviously, such fanciful typology strains the limits of rationality. The Reformed faith has always emphasized sound exegesis over whimsical allegory.
Clearly, locusts represent the Law, and honey represents the Gospel. This is incontrovertible. John would eat locusts first (the Law), and then wash these down with honey (the Gospel).
As we never tire of reiterating, the key to maintaining a modern Reformed understanding of the Scriptures is the Law/Gospel hermeneutic. Don't leave home without it!
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that John’s diet bears some symbolic significance. They assert that locusts and wild honey should call to mind some of the Old Testament types and inform us of a “deeper” meaning.
For example, in the prophets, locusts were used to symbolically portray the enemies of Israel. Thus, John eating locusts teaches us that Israel’s enemies were going to be defeated.
Also, the Promised Land was flowing with milk and honey. However, John is eating wild honey in the desert. Supposedly, this absence of honey in Israel symbolizes how the land of Israel is under the curse of God.
Obviously, such fanciful typology strains the limits of rationality. The Reformed faith has always emphasized sound exegesis over whimsical allegory.
Clearly, locusts represent the Law, and honey represents the Gospel. This is incontrovertible. John would eat locusts first (the Law), and then wash these down with honey (the Gospel).
As we never tire of reiterating, the key to maintaining a modern Reformed understanding of the Scriptures is the Law/Gospel hermeneutic. Don't leave home without it!
Friday, April 4, 2008
Mark 1:4
“John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Mark 1:4).
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that forgiveness of sins is contingent upon repentance and/or baptism. Obviously, this is Pelagian and/or Catholic.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that forgiveness of sins is granted in justification, which is received by faith alone. Thus, forgiveness comes through faith alone. Neither baptism nor repentance has anything to do with forgiveness. In no way are they connected to forgiveness.
Repentance is highly recommended but also highly optional. Remember that repentance is a work. Hence, those who say that repentance is “for” the forgiveness of sins are teaching that you must do a work in order to merit forgiveness. Obviously, this is the essence of Pelagianism.
Baptism is a beautiful picture of the forgiveness of sins and a wonderful experience. However, in order for salvation to be absolutely free, baptism must be absolutely optional. In no way is forgiveness of sins dependent on baptism. Those who say that baptism is “for” the forgiveness of sins are teaching that baptism triggers forgiveness. This inevitably leads to the old heresy of baptismal regeneration, which is the calling card of Roman Catholicism.
Federal Visionists make the elementary mistake of forgetting that John the Baptist was an Old Covenant prophet. As the Old Covenant was simply a re-publication of the Covenant of Works, the Baptist’s message was blatantly Pelagian and proto-Tridentine. That’s what the Covenant of Works was!
Thus, John could make outlandish Pelagian statements because he was in a different dispensation. Thankfully, Jesus ushered in an entirely different dispensation, with an entirely different covenant (NC/CoG), and an entirely different message (JBFA). Praise God for discontinuity!
Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that forgiveness of sins is contingent upon repentance and/or baptism. Obviously, this is Pelagian and/or Catholic.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that forgiveness of sins is granted in justification, which is received by faith alone. Thus, forgiveness comes through faith alone. Neither baptism nor repentance has anything to do with forgiveness. In no way are they connected to forgiveness.
Repentance is highly recommended but also highly optional. Remember that repentance is a work. Hence, those who say that repentance is “for” the forgiveness of sins are teaching that you must do a work in order to merit forgiveness. Obviously, this is the essence of Pelagianism.
Baptism is a beautiful picture of the forgiveness of sins and a wonderful experience. However, in order for salvation to be absolutely free, baptism must be absolutely optional. In no way is forgiveness of sins dependent on baptism. Those who say that baptism is “for” the forgiveness of sins are teaching that baptism triggers forgiveness. This inevitably leads to the old heresy of baptismal regeneration, which is the calling card of Roman Catholicism.
Federal Visionists make the elementary mistake of forgetting that John the Baptist was an Old Covenant prophet. As the Old Covenant was simply a re-publication of the Covenant of Works, the Baptist’s message was blatantly Pelagian and proto-Tridentine. That’s what the Covenant of Works was!
Thus, John could make outlandish Pelagian statements because he was in a different dispensation. Thankfully, Jesus ushered in an entirely different dispensation, with an entirely different covenant (NC/CoG), and an entirely different message (JBFA). Praise God for discontinuity!
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Mark 8:34
“If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me” (Mark 8:34).
Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that salvation hinges on whether you deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow Jesus. However, this completely confuses the gospel with discipleship.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is by faith alone. That is, in justification, God only takes into account the presence of faith. Those who attempt to add conditions to promote a certain “quality” of faith are smuggling works into the gospel.
Unfortunately, Federal Visionists are among those who claim that “saving” faith must be a “self-denying faith,” a “taking-up-your-cross faith,” and a “following-Jesus faith.” Obviously, they missed the memo by the Reformers that salvation is by faith alone. If you add any conditions, then you are preaching a different gospel, which is no gospel at all.
This passage is easily understood when we realize that Jesus is speaking to Christians, not unbelievers. Notice that he says, “If anyone wishes to come after Me.” This is not the gospel or the call to salvation. This is the call to discipleship. As a prominent Reformed journal persuasively argues here, discipleship is a fuller experience of life in Jesus.
Once you are saved by faith alone, you are free to deny yourself, take up your cross, follow Jesus, and thus, become a disciple. Or, not. It’s your choice. Protecting sola fide means maintaining a strict distinction between salvation and discipleship.
Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that salvation hinges on whether you deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow Jesus. However, this completely confuses the gospel with discipleship.
The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is by faith alone. That is, in justification, God only takes into account the presence of faith. Those who attempt to add conditions to promote a certain “quality” of faith are smuggling works into the gospel.
Unfortunately, Federal Visionists are among those who claim that “saving” faith must be a “self-denying faith,” a “taking-up-your-cross faith,” and a “following-Jesus faith.” Obviously, they missed the memo by the Reformers that salvation is by faith alone. If you add any conditions, then you are preaching a different gospel, which is no gospel at all.
This passage is easily understood when we realize that Jesus is speaking to Christians, not unbelievers. Notice that he says, “If anyone wishes to come after Me.” This is not the gospel or the call to salvation. This is the call to discipleship. As a prominent Reformed journal persuasively argues here, discipleship is a fuller experience of life in Jesus.
Once you are saved by faith alone, you are free to deny yourself, take up your cross, follow Jesus, and thus, become a disciple. Or, not. It’s your choice. Protecting sola fide means maintaining a strict distinction between salvation and discipleship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)