Showing posts with label RC Sproul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RC Sproul. Show all posts

Saturday, September 15, 2012

RC Sproul And Michael Horton Talk Christless Christianity

I make no secret of the fact that Christless Christianity, by Michael Horton, is one of the most influential books I have read over the last five years. What I love about this book is that Horton reveals the works righteous gospel as something that runs far deeper than I ever realized. It is a plague that is evident in liberalism, fundamentalism, and many in between. Horton calls it the religion of "moralistic therapeutic deism" and there is a decent chance that you might be a subscriber to this religion.

The following discussion between Horton and RC Sproul is well worth watching to hear two great modern Christian thinkers discuss this issue of eternal consequence:

Friday, July 20, 2012

Spicy Q&A With Macarthur, Sproul, And Lawson


I have to confess that I have become a bit of a Q&A tragic in recent years. I just love it when the theological heavyweights get together and speak frankly about hot button issues. And I, for one, am thrilled that this session from the recent Ligonier Conference with RC Sproul, John Macarthur, and Steve Lawson was captured on video and made available for public viewing. This session is loaded with good stuff. They answer questions ranging from the salvation of ethnic Israel to the importance of an historical Adam and a heap of stuff in between. It opens with a question on how they stand together considering the areas where they differ.

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Dumb And Dumber 2 Starring Ed Young Jr.

My old rugby league coach used to call an act of inexplicable stupidity on the sporting field a "brain explosion". I think he would have to ratchet that phrase up several notches to describe the recent "rant" by Ed Young Jr. against Calvinism. This may well be dumber than anything I have ever heard Jesse Duplantis say. "Not possible" I hear you say? Your skepticism is entirely understandable but wrong nonetheless . . .





Calvinism is clearly in the firing line right now. But why would any Arminian need an enemy when you have someone as unqualified and incompetent as Ed Young fighting for your cause?

In all fairness to "Pastor Ed", when your schedule is packed with providing fashion tips for pastors, producing bad rap music for sensitive seekers, scouring the world for superficial novelties to amuse undiscerning church goers, and polishing your private jet; it is entirely understandable why he cannot find the time to make an appointment with a Bible. And having such "creative flair" would certainly seem to eliminate the need for such an old book.

But it is hard to hide your stupidity when you get something wrong on so many levels. This is full of so many errors, straw men, delusions of grandeur, and false accusations I just don't know where to begin. Reformed theology is about digging wells in Africa? Phariseticalism? Calvinists have built in election detectors? Calvinism is sexy and cool? Has RC Sproul been getting around in skinny jeans? Well at least Ed can speak with a great deal of authority about "deformed ecclesiology" as he is certainly an expert in that field. I do have James White's phone number - why don't you give him a call Ed so you can straighten him out on all that Hebrew and Greek stuff you know so much about? Nonetheless there is one question that does intrigue me concerning this whole Ed Young brain explosion on steroids. As the Calvinist debate takes front and center stage in the Southern Baptist Convention and since Ed Young Jr. is a part of that convention - will he be disciplined by the SBC for using the pulpit for lying and slandering? Just wondering . . .

PS In a desperate attempt to defend the ridiculous claims he made, Ed Young Jr. has just submitted what he calls "Exhibit A"


Monday, October 31, 2011

RC Sproul On Reformation Day

It was wonderful yesterday to attend church and commemorate the Protestant Reformation. My friend Mikael preached a thrilling sermon on the imputed righteousness of Christ, how wonderful this reality is to be forgiven and declared righteous, and how all gospels that deny this (including Catholicism to this very day) are false.

In honor of Reformation day RC Sproul at Ligonier Ministries has written the following article which I just had to post here. And guess what, if you scroll down to the bottom you can click on a link where you can get a special free download of a children's audio book by RC Sproul in honor of this historic day. Be quick, the free download is available for a limited time!


On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther tacked up 95 theses on the church door at Wittenberg. With this act, he hoped to provoke a discussion among the scholars about the abuses of the indulgences by the Roman Catholic Church. He was not trying to create a public furor by any means, but within a fortnight, these theses had spread through the country like wildfire. The last thing Luther had in mind was to start some kind of major controversy, but nevertheless major controversy did begin.

From the discussions at Wittenberg, the disputations began to accelerate and escalate. Copies of the theses reached Rome and critical meetings were scheduled with the young monk. In these debates, Luther was maneuvered into proclaiming publicly that he had questions about the infallibility of church councils and also that he thought that it was possible that the pope could err. In 1520 a papal encyclical was issued which condemned Martin Luther as a heretic. Luther burned the document in a public bonfire and his defiance before the church was now a matter of record.

In response, Martin Luther picked up his pen to challenge the entire penitential system of the Roman Catholic Church, which undermined in principle the free remission of sins that is ours in the gospel. By doing so, he was unswervingly advocating his commitment to sola fide, the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

In 1521, Luther was summoned to the Imperial Diet, an authoritative meeting that involved the princes of the church, called by the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire to be held in the city of Worms in Germany. Luther was an outlaw. For him to appear at the Diet was to risk his very life; therefore, he was given safe conduct by the Emperor to attend. With a few friends, Luther traveled from Wittenberg to Worms. The eyewitnesses of that episode tell us that when Luther’s little covered wagon appeared around the corner of the bend, there were lookouts posted in the church tower at Worms. All the people were agog waiting for the arrival of this notorious person. When Luther’s caravan was sighted, people were throwing their hats in the air, blowing trumpets, and creating all the fanfare of the arrival of the hero. It was the 16th century answer to a ticker-tape parade.

Things, however, became very solemn in a hurry because the next day he appeared before the Diet. His books were stacked on a table in the room, and he was asked and ordered to recant of his writings. This surprised Luther because he thought he was going to have an opportunity to defend his writings; but the only question really of any importance that was asked of him was this: “Are these your writings?” And when he said yes, they said, “Are you ready to recant of them?”

Hollywood has their version of Luther standing there boldly with his fist in the air saying, “Here I stand!” and so on. But instead he dropped his chin on his chest and muttered something that nobody could understand, so they asked him to speak up. “What did you say?” He said, “May I have 24 hours to think about it.” And so Luther was granted a reprieve of 24 hours to return to his room to contemplate the seriousness of this occasion.

The prayer that Luther wrote in that ensuing 24-hour period was one of the most moving prayers I have ever read in my life. In that prayer, Luther cried out for God in his sense of total loneliness fearing that God had abandoned him, and proclaimed, “O Lord, I am Thine, and the cause is Thine, give me the courage to stand.”

And on the morrow, Luther was called once again back to the court and was told to reply to the question. He said to the Diet, “Unless I am convinced by sacred Scripture or by evident reason, I cannot recant, for my conscience is held captive by the Word of God, and to act against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me.” And with that there was an instant uproar.

The Emperor himself later indicated his regret that he even gave Luther a safe conduct, and immediately put a new price on his head. As Luther was leaving the city, his friends staged a kidnapping to protect him and took him away in a fast horse through the forest. They hid him for a year in Wartburg at the castle disguised as a knight. During that year, Luther undertook the task of translating the Bible from the biblical languages into German. And that perhaps was his most important legacy of that time - that he made the Bible available to the common people. And with that the Reformation was born.

—R.C. Sproul (from the series, Heroes of the Christian Faith)

Click Here To Download A Free Audio Book By RC Sproul (for a limited time only).

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Just Added - Creation And Change

Professor Doug Kelly's outstanding exegetical work on Genesis 1 and 2 has now been added to the resource directory. This is the book that persuaded RC Sproul to change camps from an old earth view to the correct view.

CREATION AND CHANGE
Doug Kelly

Category: Creation/Evolution
Click Here To Order
In this book Professor Douglas Kelly persuasively argues for a literal interpretation of the seven day account of creation found in Genesis chapters 1 and 2. He assesses both the biblical details and the scientific data to show that there is a convincing case for this understanding and how it is scientifically viable. How are Christians to develop their thinking on origins? Where do we start? “The Bible is God's revelation of his Word to us and includes all we need to know concerning his will for our lives. Notice how God chose to begin this all important book. He initiated his whole revelation with a description of creation, demonstrating that it is not only primal in the historical sense, but primary for the understanding of other doctrines as well” (p.16). This emphasis pervades the book: Douglas Kelly sets out to expound, teach and discuss the text of Genesis 1:1 – 2:4 regarding it as foundational for Christians.

Friday, August 19, 2011

Exposing And Expelling Heretics (Part 7)

Today we pick up from where we left off on our expository journey through the Epistle of Jude. Jude represents the first expository assignment I have been tasked with in our church plant in Denmark - Kristuskirken. Though short in length, Jude is a letter jam packed with information on why we should hunt down false teachers that conceal themselves in the church, how we should identify them, and that we as Christians should go to war against them secure in the knowledge of being kept in the safety of God's preserving grace. Much of the credit for this series must go to John MacArthur whose teaching on this Epistle has been my major source.

1 Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, To those who are called, beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ: 2 May mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you. 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. (Jude 1-4)

In John 6 we see a great apostacy when Jesus has a great crowd following Him and most of them leave because of Jesus’ hard sayings. In the Old Testament apostacy always refers to Israel when they abandon God and Jeremiah 2 is a great example of this. But let’s look again at verse 4 of Jude as we head to one of the very controversial parts of Jude and perhaps in all of the Bible. Jude describes these apostates as people "who long ago were designated for this condemnation“. We know that this apostacy had been prophecied long ago, even as far back as Enoch before the flood of Noah. Jude says in verses 14 and 15 that:

It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him." (Jude 14-15)

But there is even more to this. We have already discussed how Jude comforts the believers with the doctrine of their election. Those who God elects He calls, those who God calls He keeps. The same is true of these apostates. These are false teachers that God has already appointed to damnation. This is a doctrine which I cannot deal with by pretending it is not in Scripture. I cannot deal with it by ignoring it. And I cannot fully explain it within the infinite mind of God. But I will tell you what the Scripture says of it. When Arminians ask if I believe in double Predestination I find it to be a redundant and antagonistic term. Antagonistic because they find the idea of God predestining people to damnation to be repulsive. Redundant because I can't see how God's Sovereign predestination could mean anything other than everyone being predestined otherwise God is not Sovereign. But there is far more to the equation than the oversimplified Arminian objections as we shall see from Scripture.

First of all we should not argue with God about anything because He made everything, He owns everything, and He knows a lot of things that we don’t know:

Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? (Matthew 20:15)

Second, the wicked serve their own evil desires, but this still ultimately serves the sovereign purposes of God:

The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.(Proverbs 16:4)

Third, even though God works all things together, including evil, for His glory – they are fully responsible for their sin.

You refuse to come to me that you may have life. (John 5:40)

Fourth God desires to see wicked people come to repentance:

Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live? (Ezekiel 18:23)

The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)


And fifth, though we struggle to understand this, all these things fit together in the infinite mind of God:

You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory — even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? As indeed he says in Hosea, "Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,' and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved.'" "And in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' there they will be called 'sons of the living God.'" (Romans 9:19-26)

This is a difficult subject and these verses are well worth meditating on. This is a real subject but one I prefer to leave in the hands of the Sovereign God Whose work is perfect and all His ways are just. As Abraham said "shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is right" (Genesis 18:25b). I also recommend RC Sproul's very helpful book on this subject - “Chosen by God”.

To be continued in three weeks time . . .

Go On To Part 8
Go Back To Part 6
Go Back To Part 1

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Just Added - Can I Be Sure I'm Saved

RC Sproul's short but excellent book on assurance has just been added to my resource directory.

CAN I BE SURE I'M SAVED
R C Sproul

Category: Apologetics
Click Here To Order
Many people in the church today are plagued by doubts about their salvation. Satan whispers that it is impossible that sinners such as they could be in a state of grace, and some churches compound the problem by teaching that it is possible for believers to lose their salvation. But assurance of salvation is possible in this life. Indeed, as Dr. R.C. Sproul argues in this Crucial Questions booklet, it is the duty of Christians to make their calling sure (2 Peter 1:10). To help believers reach this goal, Dr. Sproul defines assurance, shows how we can get it, reveals the blessings it confers, and warns of the dangers of false assurance. Here is assistance for those who struggle to know where they stand with Jesus Christ.

Friday, May 20, 2011

Finding God's Sovereignty In The Arctic Tundra

As you read this I will be on a plane from Down Under back to the Arctic Tundra. Ok, so Denmark is not quite an Arctic region geographically, but it certainly qualifies as a polar ice cap of Christian endeavor. Even though Ray Comfort continually refers to New Zealand as down under, my down under reference is for Australia. I remember pointing this out to Kirk Cameron when I was speaking with him and Ray, and Kirk then asked "if Australia is down under then what is New Zealand?" Well, looking at both countries from a northern hemisphere perspective I would have to say that if Australia is "down under" then New Zealand must be "left over". Please don't take offense at that my Kiwi friends because I do mean it in the nicest possible way.

My body has now been defrosted and my fellowship appetite has been filled with great quality time with great quality friends. I have no idea when I will return to my homeland so it is difficult to say farewell to so many people who I love so much. In spite of my feelings it is of great comfort to know and trust in the Sovereignty of God in all things.

Friday, February 18, 2011

Lame Attempts At Relevance (Part 1)

I just cannot believe the downward spiral that is modern seeker sensitive churches and their attempts to stay at the "cutting edge" of cultural relevance. RC Sproul was quoted as saying:

If there were such a thing as a seeker, what would he be seeking? The church growth movement seems to believe he would be seeking more of the same. In a world consumed with lighthearted entertainment, we offer up less professional, less entertaining lighthearted entertainment? Why, I keep wondering, would a “seeker” get up on a Sunday morning, and travel to some giant box to hear a third rate rock band preceding a third rate comic giving a third rate “message” that leaves him in the same state that he arrived in?

Hyperbole perhaps, but very close to the mark nonetheless. I can't help but believe that the following conversation has happened at the leadership level of hundreds of Willow Creek/Saddleback style churches.

Senior Pastor: Numbers are falling and those that come fall asleep during the service. We need to do something about this.

Youth Pastor: The key is reaching the youth. We need to get twenty-somethings attending regularly.

Late thirties/early forties Associate Pastor with a mullet and a mid life crisis: How about some 80's music (to reach people born after 1995). After all 80's music was very cool in the 80's!.

Senior Pastor and Youth Pastor together: Wow, why hasn't anyone thought of this before . . . like ever?

Associate Pastor: Why not get our worship team to present a poor man's version of a Van Halen song about suicide. I'm sure a lot of people would relate to that.

Worship Pastor: Right on man! I'll even get the bass player to jump one time during the second chorus. That should shatter the stereotype many people have that Christians aren't edgy and cool! Let's show the general public that we are the equal of any Bon Jovi tribute band going around right now!

Associate Pastor: Hey, and I'll see if I can find some Bible verses with the word "jump" in them! With so many lousy paraphrases to choose from I'm sure I'll find something.



Just check out the throng of trendy youth "getting down" in the church hall. Maybe they really did hit on something here - after all it got 96 hits on youtube!

It never ceases to amaze me that the most relevant thing of all is the ultimate statistic (one out of one people die) and it is also often the most neglected from the pulpit. Death and judgment will strike every man and it is the key to awakening the conscience and arousing our thirst for the righteousness found only in Christ. The law and the Gospel presented faithfully and passionately is as riveting as it gets.



Go On To Part 2

Saturday, July 31, 2010

Just Added - The Prayer Of The Lord

RC Sproul's recently published book on the Lord's Prayer has just been added to my resource directory!

THE PRAYER OF THE LORD
R C Sproul

Category: Prayer
Click Here To Order
What is the Lord’s Prayer? In The Prayer of the Lord, Dr. R. C. Sproul writes, “Jesus’ intent was to give His disciples a model prayer, an example to follow, one that would teach them transferable principles for conversation with God.” In short, Christ gave the Lord’s Prayer to teach His disciples about prayer, and Dr. Sproul, in his trademark fashion, brings out many of the truths Christ intended for His followers to learn. Readers will learn how not to pray, then will be led into a deeper understanding of such topics as the Fatherhood of God, the kingdom of God, the will of God, the nature of sin and forgiveness, the dangers of temptation, and the cunning of Satan. The final chapter includes questions and answers on various aspects of prayer not covered elsewhere in the book, and the appendix addresses the difficult question of the relationship of God’s sovereignty and prayer. The Prayer of the Lord is an eye-opening journey, one that reveals new vistas in familiar terrain.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Preaching Myths In Modern Pulpits (Part 2)

Myth 2. Doctrines only became true after they were written in creeds.

Let me explain by quoting popular emergent church leader Rob Bell from his best selling book Velvet Elvis:

“This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that ‘Scripture alone’ is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is . . . (Bell then goes on to say) When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true” (p. 67-68).

So Bell thinks that the Bible didn’t exist before the church voted on it. Is this true? John Macarthur had this to say:

When various councils met in church history to decide on the canon (and canon means books that are inspired by the Holy Spirit) they did not vote for the canonicity of the book but rather recognized, after the fact, what God had already written. The councils were formed to formalize what they already knew. They were also necessary because of all the fakes that were getting around at the time (taken from The Macarthur Study Bible).

Another great example of this is the first two articles of the Together For The Gospel (T4G) statement of Affirmations and Denials (what you get when Thabiti Anyabwile, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, John Macarthur, CJ Mahaney, Al Mohler, John Piper, and RC Sproul bang their heads together):

Article I: We affirm that the sole authority for the Church is the Bible, verbally inspired, inerrant, infallible, and totally sufficient and trustworthy. We deny that the Bible is a mere witness to the divine revelation, or that any portion of Scripture is marked by error or the effects of human sinfulness.
Article II: We affirm that the authority and sufficiency of Scripture extends to the entire Bible, and therefore that the Bible is our final authority for all doctrine and practice. We deny that any portion of the Bible is to be used in an effort to deny the truthfulness or trustworthiness of any other portion. We further deny any effort to identify a canon within the canon or, for example, to set the words of Jesus against the writings of Paul.


The last part of that statement would not have been written 10 years ago. But with new false teaching that appears through history, we are forced to respond to it. Using Jesus' words against Paul doesn’t suddenly become wrong because we added it to our doctrine statement.

Here’s another quote from Rob Bell’s book Velvet Elvis where he says that the doctrine of the Trinity:

“emerged in the several hundred years after Jesus’ resurrection” (p. 22).

Rob Bell is talking about the Athanasian Creed which was written in the fourth century AD. What Rob Bell is saying would be like me saying that nobody thought terrorism was wrong until September 11 2001 because that is when we first see all these new anti-terrorism laws appearing. But we know that flying a plane into a building was always wrong. We just never needed to write it down until it actually happened. So too with the Trinity. It is what Scripture always clearly taught and was always understood – they didn’t need a creed until a lot of the heresies about the Trinity started being taught. So just like anti terrorism laws were written in response to 9/11 so the Athanasian creed was written in response to false teaching that was happening concerning the Trinity.

Truth 2. The Christian creeds never invented anything new – they are a wonderful gift to us confirming what true Christians have always believed during church history.

The subject of the Trinity leads me to my third myth which I will discuss on Friday: Myth 3 - The Trinity can be illustrated by water, ice, and steam.

Go On To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

Friday, May 7, 2010

NT Wright v RC Sproul

The latest edition of Tabletalk Magazine features an array of theological heavyweights taking aim at NT Wright and his new perspective on Paul (ok, I know NT Wright is not the originator, but he is the one gaining traction). I discovered this only after writing my recent series on "NT Wright v the Gospel". It serves as strong confirmation that NT Wright's writings and teachings are gaining a substantial corrupting foothold in the wider "church community".

When it comes to reformed theology, the authority of Scripture, and the purity of the Gospel, RC Sproul would be at the top end of the heavyweights. Some of his books, including "The Holiness of God" are classic landmark Christian literature. For decades Sproul has been an ardent contender for the once for all delivered faith. So it was with great interest that I read his response to NT Wright and the "new perspective". Sproul harnesses years of experience and biblical awareness to cut through the fog of Wright's assertion that he can do a better job of explaining the Apostle Paul than the Apostle himself (that's my cheeky paraphrase anyway). What follows is RC Sproul's response:

Tilting at Scarecrows
by R.C. Sproul
“We are not justified by faith by believing in justification by faith. We are justified by faith by believing in the gospel itself—in other words, that Jesus is Lord and that God raised him from the dead.”
(N.T. Wright, “New Perspectives on Paul,” p 261)


In the past few years, the British bishop and New Testament scholar N.T. Wright has emerged as an icon of biblical theology around the world. His excellent work on the resurrection of Christ has influenced many people including his own country’s most famous philosopher and former atheist Antony Flew, who has converted to deism. Wright is also known, however, for being one of the chief architects of the so-called new perspective on Paul, in which he recasts the doctrine of justification in such a way as to transcend the historic dispute between Roman Catholicism and Reformation Protestantism. In a sense, Wright says, “A pox on both your houses,” claiming that both Rome and the Reformation misunderstood and distorted the biblical view of justification. In his response to John Piper’s critique of his work, Wright drips patronizing disdain for Piper and for those who embrace the traditional Protestant view of justification. He is critical of theological traditions that he thinks miss the biblical point.

In the course of debate, one of the most effective and fallacious arguments often used is called the “straw man” fallacy. The value of a scarecrow is that it is a counterfeit human being designed to scare away a few crows. It is an effective device, but not nearly as effective as a real farmer patrolling his fields with a shotgun. The farmer made of straw is not nearly as formidable as the real one. This is usually the case in the difference between the authentic and the counterfeit. The straw man fallacy occurs when one creates a false view of his opponent’s position in a distorted caricature by which he then easily dismantles that position in total refutation.

One of the statements that N.T. Wright employs, using this same stratagem, is the statement that “we are not justified by faith by believing in justification by faith.” To intimate that Protestant orthodoxy believes that we are justified by believing in the doctrine of justification by faith is the king of all straw men. It is the Goliath of scarecrows, the King Kong of straw man fallacies. In other words, it is a whopper. I am aware of no theologian in the history of the Reformed tradition who believes or argues that a person can be justified by believing in the doctrine of justification by faith. This is a pure and simple distortion of the Reformed tradition.

In Wright’s statement we see a straw man argument that falls by its own weight. It contains more straw than the stick figure can support. The doctrine of justification by faith alone not only does not teach that justification is by believing in the doctrine of justification by faith alone, but in fact, teaches that which is totally antithetical to the idea. The phrase “justification by faith alone” is theological shorthand for saying justification is by Christ alone. Anyone who understands and advocates the doctrine of justification by faith alone knows that the focal point is that which justifies — trust in Christ and not trust in a doctrine.

One of the key terms in the phrase “justification by faith” is the word by, which signals that faith is the means or tool that links us to Christ and His benefits. The concept indicates that faith is the “instrumental” cause of our justification. What is in view in the Protestant formulation is a distinction from the Roman Catholic view of the instrumental cause. Rome declares the sacrament of baptism in the first instance and penance in the second instance to be the instrumental causes of justification. So the dispute of what instrument is the basis by which we are justified was and remains critical to the classical dispute between Rome and Protestantism. The Protestant view, following Paul’s teaching in the New Testament, is that faith is the sole instrument by which we are linked to Christ.

Closely related to this is the hotly disputed issue of the grounds of our justification before God. Here is where the biblical concept of imputation is so important. Those who deny imputation as the grounds of our justification declare it to be a legal fiction, a miscarriage of justice, or even a manifestation of cosmic child abuse. Yet at the same time, it is the biblical explanation for the ground of our redemption. No biblical text more clearly teaches this concept of transfer or imputation than that of Isaiah 53, which the New Testament church singled out as a crucial prophetic explanation of the drama of redemption. The New Testament declares Christ to be our righteousness, and it is precisely our confidence in the righteousness of Christ as the grounds for our justification that is the focus of the doctrine of justification by faith. We understand that believing the doctrine of sola fide will save no one. Faith in a doctrine is not enough to save. However, though we cannot be saved by believing in the doctrine of justification, the denial of that same doctrine can indeed be fatal because to deny the doctrine of justification by faith alone as the apostle Paul indicated in Galatians is to reject the gospel and substitute something else for it, which would result in what Paul declares to be anathema. The gospel is too important to be dismissed by tilting at scarecrows.

Go Back To NT Wright v The Gospel

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Why NT Wright Is Wrong

NT Wright, the Bishop of Durham, enjoys tremendous popularity among "thinking Christians". He is even getting a foothold in the secular bookstores, as evidenced by finding his latest book on display at the front of a Barnes and Noble store I recently visited. This has prompted me to write a post about him as he has not been previously discussed on this blog.

It is true that Wright's landmark book "The Resurrection of the Son of God" is widely recognized as an outstanding defense of Christ's bodily resurrection. Getting the resurrection right seems to have opened a lot of people's receptivity to Wright's subsequent books where he discusses the cross, justification, and penal substitutionary atonement (Wright even endorsed Steve Chalkes book in which Chalke described the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement as "cosmic child abuse"). Many reformed theologians have been greatly disturbed by the theology that NT Wright's subsequent works have revealed. It may well be that Wright's scholarly defense of the resurrection turns out to be a scholarly trojan horse concealing destructive heresies.

At the heart of Wright's many troubling ideas lies his view of the doctrine of justification, particularly the component of imputed righteousness. Over and over again, Wright attacks the classic Reformed and biblical doctrine that the righteousness of Christ is imputed, or reckoned, to the sinner's account, and it is on the ground of Christ's righteousness alone that we obtain our righteous standing before God. Wright says:

If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom . . . If we leave the notion of 'righteousness' as a law-court metaphor only, as so many have done in the past, this gives the impression of a legal transaction, a cold piece of business, almost a trick of thought performed by a God who is logical and correct but hardly one we would want to worship (p98 What St Paul Really Said).

Phil Johnson responded to these exact comments in a sermon by saying "Well, I, for one, am quite happy to worship a God who justifies the ungodly and who is both just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus."

John Macarthur has this to say about the importance of getting imputation right:

The cornerstone of justification is the reckoning of righteousness to the believer's account. This is the truth that sets Christian doctrine apart from every form of false religion. We call it "imputed righteousness". Apart from it salvation is utterly impossible (p197 The Gospel According to Jesus).

Here is an excerpt from an interview RC Sproul had with Michael Horton discussing the theology of N.T. Wright.

[Q] Considering Bishop N.T. Wright’s doctrine of justification, do you believe he is teaching another gospel?

[A] J.I. Packer has a great line: Tom Wright foregrounds what the Bible backgrounds, and backgrounds what the Bible foregrounds–but Wright does more than that; he denies a crucial component of justification, namely imputation. So, in answer to your question, yes–in denying imputation, Wright is preaching another gospel.

There’s a kind of fundamentalist approach to Scripture that Tom Wright seems to want to confront. And while he does a wonderful job of highlighting the fact that justification in Paul’s writings is understood within a broader redemptive-historical framework, something not all presentations and defenses of justification do, he is not confronting historic Reformed theology. Reformed theology always has understood justification within a broader redemptive-historical framework. If he were to read the Reformers and more recent Reformed writers, such as Geerhardus Vos and Herman Ridderbos, he would clearly see that justification is placed in its proper context with the believer’s union with Christ and within the whole history of redemption. Reformed writers speak of Paul’s treatment of justification being inseparable from the inclusion of the Gentiles. Then, when you read Tom Wright he makes it seem as if he’s the first person who saw these emphases of Paul, and that everyone else before him sort of taught the four spiritual laws. It’s an incredibly naïve view.

I know Tom Wright–not well, but we had a few conversations in my Oxford days; we’ve gone back and forth about these issues, and he simply doesn’t know historical theology. He’ll actually admit that when you catch him at a few points; he’ll say something along the lines of “well this really isn’t my area of expertise.” Well, if your thesis is that the Reformation fundamentally misunderstood Paul, it better be your area of expertise to at least know what the Reformers said–and he doesn’t. So, Wright creates a straw man. And the people who are swayed by him, who are enamored of him, are also in many cases ignorant of what the Reformers actually taught, what Reformed theology has taught on these matters. And let me offer an impassioned plea to folks: There are Reformed presentations of the doctrine of justification that include some of the very salient points that Tom Wright has raised and incorporated, without denying the very crucial component of imputation as Tom Wright does. Without imputation, justification isn’t good news. When he says that the Gospel is “Jesus is Lord,” I reply, there are many passages that tell me “Jesus is Lord” isn’t good news. There are many passages that tell me “Jesus is Lord” means to a whole lot of people “the great Avenger on the white horse with a sword in His hand, bringing the last judgment.” “Jesus is Lord” means that He will be your judge. On Mars Hill in Athens, Paul said there is a judgment coming, a last judgment coming, and God has given proof of this to everyone by raising Jesus from the dead. So Jesus is Lord is not necessarily good news. Only when God assures me that I am in Christ by grace alone through faith alone and kept by grace is the announcement “Jesus is Lord” good news rather than the worst possible news (online source).

It is worth noting that many false teachers survive on the basis of their lack of clarity. We tend to give people the benefit of the doubt when they speak in a foggy and unclear manner. NT Wright has become (unwittingly perhaps) the Mr Miyagi of the emergent movement for this reason. Wright communicates a different gospel in a way that is obscure enough not to be pinned down outside of orthodoxy. He is the master of answering questions by cutting a short story long and burying the initial question in the process. With this in mind, I have found a good rule of thumb when choosing our feeding grounds for Christian teaching. Sound biblical teachers are aways explicitly clear about the fundamental truths of the Christian faith. Choose feeding grounds that communicate the Gospel faithfully, accurately, and clearly.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Willow Creek "Revealed" - The Conclusion


Above, we see one of the many charts that highlight Willow Creek's understanding of the Gospel and how it drives their approach to mission and feeding their flock. Scripture undoubtedly talks about the process of sanctification whereby the true believer is brought closer to the likeness of Christ through obedience to God's Word and enablement by the Holy Spirit. But the idea of this sliding scale of people (some of whom are unbelievers) who are "exploring" (or seeking), and getting closer to Christ is without biblical basis.

The unregenerate man is dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1) and dead men can't move in any direction. Dead men must be born again - they need resurrection life! This requires more than making the "narrow gate" into a wide one. It requires a miraculous transforming work of God Himself - the God Who asked Ezekiel if those dead bones could live! RC Sproul had this to say:

Evangelicals today have unconverted sinners who are dead in trespasses and sin bringing themselves to life by choosing to be born again. Christ made it clear that dead people cannot choose anything, that the flesh counts for nothing, and that we must be born of the Spirit before we can see the kingdom of God, let alone enter it. The failure of modern evangelicalism is the failure to understand the holiness of God. If that one point were grasped, there would be no more talk of mortal enemies of Christ coming to Jesus by their own power (The Holiness of God p182-183).

Getting the Gospel wrong at this level leads only to an exponential unfolding of further disaster where we end up housing large groups of goats and try to coach them to act like sheep. I recently heard a visiting missionary say that "people are getting saved, but there are also miracles happening" as he proceeded to spend the whole hour talking about supernatural healing. Emergents like Rob Bell and Brian McLaren often disdainfully remark that is the Gospel only about salvation or is there more? These attitudes reveal a complete failure to recognize the miracle of conversion. As long as it remains, in there eyes, as something that happens when people pray recited prayers, or just decide to live like Jesus then they will persevere with this perverted view of what happens when God regenerates a man who is dead in sin.

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them (Ezekiel 36:25-27).

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new (II Corinthians 5:17).

Preach that which is "unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness. But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God" (I Corinthians 1:23-24). Let people leave the meeting convicted, converted, or angry . . .

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Great Christian Thinkers Tackling Big Issues

This was just two good to pass up. At the Ligonier's Conference last year Ravi Zacharias, Al Mohler, and RC Sproul came together discussing some hot button issues facing the Christian worldview. Listen up as they give their theological observations on evolution's compatibility with the Bible, God and evil, and the Emergent church. It's a great ride.



Favorite quote: "Evolution isn't even compatible with science" - RC Sproul



Sunday, March 30, 2008

RECOMMENDED BOOKS - R C SPROUL

Robert Charles Sproul, (born February 13, 1939, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) is an American Calvinist theologian and pastor. Dr. R.C. Sproul has served the church as a seminary professor, preacher, and author for more than forty years. He is the founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries and can be heard teaching daily on the radio program Renewing Your Mind, which broadcasts on more than 300 radio outlets in the United States and throughout 50 countries. Dr. Sproul has written more than 60 books and serves as Senior Minister of Preaching and Teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel in Sanford, Florida.


CAN I BE SURE I'M SAVED
R C Sproul

Category: Apologetics
Click Here To Order
Many people in the church today are plagued by doubts about their salvation. Satan whispers that it is impossible that sinners such as they could be in a state of grace, and some churches compound the problem by teaching that it is possible for believers to lose their salvation. But assurance of salvation is possible in this life. Indeed, as Dr. R.C. Sproul argues in this Crucial Questions booklet, it is the duty of Christians to make their calling sure (2 Peter 1:10). To help believers reach this goal, Dr. Sproul defines assurance, shows how we can get it, reveals the blessings it confers, and warns of the dangers of false assurance. Here is assistance for those who struggle to know where they stand with Jesus Christ.


PREACHING THE CROSS
Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, John Macarthur, C J Mahaney, Al Mohler, John Piper, R C Sproul

Category: Church
Click Here To Order
Proclaiming the gospel is without a doubt the most important task of pastoral ministry, yet often other, seemingly more urgent activities obscure it. From time to time all pastors and preachers need to be reminded of the primacy of the gospel. Preaching the Cross does just this. It is a call to expository, gospel-centered preaching as the center of pastoral ministry. This volume showcases an unprecedented combination of pastors representing a variety of evangelical traditions. Though they differ on some secondary points of church practice, they all enthusiastically celebrate the centrality of the cross of Christ — keeping the main thing the main thing. That message every reader can take away from this book and adopt in his pastoral ministry.


THE CONSEQUENCES OF IDEAS
R C Sproul

Category: Apologetics
Click Here To Order
If you think philosophy is irrelevant to your daily life, think again. You need only observe the world around you to discover how substantially the ideas of history's thinkers affect us still. You can hear it in the beliefs of your non-Christian friends. In the media, your music, your children's classrooms. You can see it in our public policies, on every bookstore shelf, in the way we understand our very existence - even in the visible church. We like to believe that we create our little worlds from scratch and then live in them. But the reality is, we step into an environment that already exists, and we learn to interact with it. The foundational thinking of philosophy tries to lay bare all of our assumptions, revealing our false and sometimes dangerous beliefs so that we may arrive at a coherent worldview. The greater our familiarity with the ideas that have shaped our culture over the centuries, the greater our ability to understand and influence that culture for Christ.


THE HOLINESS OF GOD
R C Sproul

Category: Theology
Click Here To Order
RC Sproul says that “when people ask me to name the Ligonier teaching material they should use to help them grow; I tell them, ‘You should start with The Holiness of God.’” This classic can help you better understand the biblical picture of God’s awesome holiness and why it is so foundational to God-centered, God-honoring theology and Christian living. In The Holiness of God , R.C. Sproul demonstrates that encountering God’s holy presence is a terrifying experience. Dr. Sproul argues that this struggle is nonetheless necessary because it is the only way to cure our propensity to trust in ourselves and our own righteousness for salvation.


THE PRAYER OF THE LORD
R C Sproul

Category: Prayer
Click Here To Order
What is the Lord’s Prayer? In The Prayer of the Lord, Dr. R. C. Sproul writes, “Jesus’ intent was to give His disciples a model prayer, an example to follow, one that would teach them transferable principles for conversation with God.” In short, Christ gave the Lord’s Prayer to teach His disciples about prayer, and Dr. Sproul, in his trademark fashion, brings out many of the truths Christ intended for His followers to learn. Readers will learn how not to pray, then will be led into a deeper understanding of such topics as the Fatherhood of God, the kingdom of God, the will of God, the nature of sin and forgiveness, the dangers of temptation, and the cunning of Satan. The final chapter includes questions and answers on various aspects of prayer not covered elsewhere in the book, and the appendix addresses the difficult question of the relationship of God’s sovereignty and prayer. The Prayer of the Lord is an eye-opening journey, one that reveals new vistas in familiar terrain.