The Alluring Call of Lutheran Anti-nomianism

"2 Cor 3, 5–6 Paul writes:

"Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves;
but our sufficiency is of God, who also hath made us able ministers of the New
Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit; for the letter killeth, but the
spirit giveth life."

The apostle speaks of this apostolic activity. Preachers of this Christian era must bear in mind that they are preachers, not of the Old Covenant, but of the New. That is the reason why the apostle refers to the letter, that is, the Law, which kills, and to the spirit, this is, the Gospel, which gives life. A New Testament preacher as such has to preach nothing less than the Gospel. He is really discharging an alien function when he preaches the law. It is due to the horrible blindness that papists assert that in the Scriptures two doctrines must be distinguished, the old Law and the evangelical law. The latter term is self-contradiction. How can there be glad tidings in a law? Add to this that the Antichrist goes so far as to contend that the evangelical law is the more grievous of the two: for the Mosaic Law had been satisfied with external obedience, while the evangelical law lays its injunctions on men’s innermost heart." -C.W. Walther "Law and Gospel" Lecture 39

I remember reading Matthew after reading the Old Testament at Bible School and being horrified as I listened to Jesus and talked with my dad. I said to him "I was just getting used to the rigorousness of Jewish law - I could live with taht - but now Jesus is saying we have to be perfect and putting the heaviest yoke we've ever had on us", and I remember talking with Lance about the question: Didn't Jesus just make holiness harder for us, as God now judges everything according to the letter AND the spirit of the law? Oh anti-nomianism, how appealing you are sometimes. Until then, back to the rigorous rules of Rabbi Jesus 'be perfect as your father in heaven is perfect'

I think Walther's idea is neat but not backed up by scripture, the truth of the matter is that New Testament morality is a high bar, much higher than Old Testament. But I just like Walther's thoughts because being a Lutheran would be so easy - it's like the Utopia of religion, you don't have to do anything, you don't even have to be good and God still loves you, which sounds like a whole religion altogether. Didn't Luther say something about Religion and Gospel? ... ah nevermind, back to mass, rite of acceptance this week...

If God So Loved The World...

I have been haunted by Rob Bell's question in his video "the gods aren't angry", and it's emotional but powerful critique of Anselmic Atonement theology (Christ satisfies God's wrath in his suffering) and the Protestant doctrine of Penal Substitution (Christ died in our place). He says "Does your God need to hurt something to love?...Does your God say 'oh if I could only get more blood I would be so happy'...Does he think 'oh you killed that animal, now I love ya!...'"

I realize that all of our orthodox systems in Christian theology focus greatly on merit - even if it is hidden. Obviously for the Catholics, it is: belonging to the right Church, and doing the right motions, and the Priest saying the right words, and you having the right intent. This is the Catholic system of merit which has long been attacked and ridiculed etc.

BUT - the Protestant system equally relies on merit - though they try to hide it. I would argue that the Protestant system actually focusses more on Human merit than the Catholic one, in that the Catholic one actually shows grace to those who don't deserve it at a few points whereas the Protestant system shows grace to those who don't deserve it not even once. Let me explain this possibly ridiculous claim.

For the Protestant you have to have sola fide - faith alone and THEN you are Justified. You have to understand the gospel, accept the gospel, and decide. Just ask most Evangelicals (excluding the usual suspects: Lutherans, True Calvinists/Presbyterians, Anglicans) what they think about infant baptism. Chesterton says that men who wish to become Baptist ministers do so out of the 'horror that an infant could unconsciously come to Christ'. In Catholicism a baby who doesn't understand anything can be baptized and said to be unequivocally 'saved'. For Protestants (at least the modern ones) this is high heresy. The idea that someone could be saved without earning it by believing and having knowledge and rejecting false heretical papist versions of the gospel - that is terrible!

So we have the Catholics who are fighting their way through earth and purgatory by faith and works and sacraments to reach Heaven and the Modern Protestants who are preaching a sort of Gnostic idea that knowledge will save you and that if you say the sinners prayer of believe the "right" theology then you'll be saved (See Sproul on believing the "right" (Reformed) theology for salvation). Each equally trying to earn their way into Heaven or at least to point the finger at those around them to try and prove that they're more deserving than their neighbour.

There was once a man named Martin Luther who taught alot of things - but aside from his theories on driving the Jews our of Germany as dogs, he had one interesting idea (which Hitler didn't later advance). It was the reinterpretation of Sola Gratia - Grace Alone, and imputed righteousness. He was wild enough to propose that humans actually didn't have to do anything to be saved, that they were freely justified by grace alone and predestined by God to go to Heaven no matter what they did. (Luther was a Calvinist/Classic Reformed in this view but later Lutherans changed him) He wrote to Sin boldly with confidence in Christ. He was a grace-high psychopath who actually believed God loved people even when they didn't earn it.

But, I began to wonder something even MORE crazy, something heretical, something unorthodox... what if God actually loved people unconditionally.

....

Seriously, like REALLY unconditionally.

Like if he loved Richard Dawkins. Like if someone cursed God and spit on him and God still loved that person.

Clearly that's not the biblical view of God as he says that those who keep his commandments will be loved by him (Jn 14:21) and that we will be judged by our works (Mt 25:44, Rev 22), and that he hates the proud, and obviously hates the Canaanites as he ordered their genocide. And obviously God hates Idolaters as they were killed by the Levites after Moses brought down the 10 commandments and the people were worshipping the golden calves..

What if God loved people who worshipped golden cows...

Well philosophically I'd then have to say that God would not be Just or Holy or a bunch of other good things that he is, and apparently there's no loophole for him to get out of his obligation to hate sin. But it boggles my mind that someone who can see everything and upholds all existence would be so shocked and appalled by sin. It kind of reminds me of when I watch Lord of the Rings and I KNOW Boromir is going to die, but Boromir is my favourite character and I get angry and sad and cry every time I watch it. Does God do that every day as he upholds our existence and sees the endless sin of humanity, does he cry and lament our every sinful and human mistake which he consequently knew would happen and even allows to continue to happen.

Even if Deism does show us an uncaring God, at least it makes sense in that God can deal with the consequences of his creation, it's almost like the God of theism created a sandcastle on the beach and then freaks out and blames the castle for being knocked down by the waves.

But ya, I'd have to be some kind of wild non-Christian Episcopalian to believe nonsense like God actually loving people who don't have the right religion. What was I thinking.

Jesus - A Message Worth Teaching

I was talking with one of my old Baptist pastors on friday night about my conversion and why I'm becoming Catholic. It was actually ironic because I explained to him the logical arguments and why I felt I was obligated to become Catholic whether I wanted to or not and then I started complaining about the Church and about how no one actually knew Jesus or the gospel in it to the point that he started defending it lol. I found that ironic. Again today in RCIA we spent the time discussing papal infallibility (which is important) and we still haven't even covered the question the bible addresses in every page 'teacher what must I do to inherit eternal life?'

I was reading about my 'hero' Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams and his views on Jesus and the Apostles Creed. He said he thought "(Jesus)who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary" was an intentional metaphor...

....

....

This man is in charge of the souls of 70 million worldwide in the Anglican communion and he thinks the gospel is a metaphor... What is the point of liberal theology? It's just vague moral platitudes and empty ritual. (as opposed to clear legalistic morality and meaningful ritual - which is Catholicism j/k). I no longer have any desire to become Anglican, and I have no more respect for the Archbishop.

I was listening to John MacArthur on the radio the other day and he was preaching about Jesus - a topic of his which I prefer to his previous series 'Evolution: Fact or Fiction' in which he claimed all proponents of theistic evolution or old earth creationism were heretics. But Johnny Mac was preaching like Spurgeon on the centrality of Christ. He was talking about how the Christology in Colossians says that Jesus created the Aeons (i hope that's the right greek word) and he explained it as:

'Jesus created every age, and the framework for ontological
existence, every second that the world continues to function it does so by his will and power. I often find it ironic that as Jesus walked the earth he was upholding not only his own existence but that of the entire universe' - John MacArthur (paraphrased by my memory)

Wow. And he didn't mean that metaphorically.

In mass today they read aloud: "For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor 3:11), and I opened my missal to a hymn in the back and read:

When I survey the wondrous cross
on which the Prince of glory died,
my richest gain I count but loss,
and pour contempt on all my pride.

See, from his head, his hands, his feet
sorrow and love flow mingled down
did e'er such love and sorrow meet,
or thorns compose so rich a crown?

O wonderful cross!
O the wonderful cross
bids me come and die
and find that I may truly live.

O wonderful cross!
O the wonderful cross!
All who gather here by grace
draw near and bless your name.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
that were an offer far too small;
love so amazing, so divine,
demands my soul, my life, my all.

O wonderful cross!
O the wonderful cross
bids me come and die
and find that I may truly live.

O wonderful cross!
O the wonderful cross!
All who gather here by grace
draw near and bless your name.

O wonderful cross!
O the wonderful cross
bids me come and die
and find that I may truly live.

Jesus. YWHW is Salvation. "and on that cross where Jesus died the wrath of God was satisfied". That is a message worth teaching.

Billy Graham and John Paul II

This is an amazing article worth reading:
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/11/remarkable-joint-cooperation-of-pope.html

Why I Fear The Emerging Church

What happened to Classical Evangelicalism? Oswald Chambers? Charles Spurgeon? Billy Graham?

I was reading this post: http://highergroundonline.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/evolution-of-the-creeds/ , and feeling very glad that I'm still becoming Catholic. It is a great image of the destruction that happens when you abandon ecclesiology - the doctrine of the Church - (Catholic and Traditional Protestant alike). At least if you're a Baptist you can accept what the Baptist Church has decided and accepted (like the Trinity), if you're Emerging, suddenly everything can be thrown out. I love Rob Bell and lots of self-described Emergents, but I don't like this theological liberalism. In my opinion, when you ask the hard questions of theology you can do one of 5 things:

1. Become a Liberal, doubt everything and have no faith at all.

2. Stop asking questions, reject all philosophy and logic and base everything on feelings and emotions.

3. Become a Presbyterian/Calvinist.

4. Become a Catholic/Orthodox/Traditional Anglican/submit to apostolically succeeding bishops and Tradition and actually believe the catholic faith.

5. Stay Evangelical

1 Samuel (pt. 1)

"Beware of no man more than of yourself; we carry our worst enemies within us." - Charles Spurgeon

I'll say it, outside of reading for class and RCIA I haven't read the bible (until tonight) for weeks. I am afraid of what I have become. I'm so worned out with everything in life, I'm too afraid to go forth anymore. I feel extremely guilty about life and I read this passage tonight.

"There was a certain man ... whose name was Elkanah... He had two wives; the name of one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. Now this man used to go up year by year from his town to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts at Shiloh... On the day when Elkanah sacrificed, he would give portions to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters; but to Hannah he gave a double portion, because he loved her, though the Lord had closed her womb. Her rival used to provoke her severely, to irritate her, because the Lord had closed her womb." - 1 Samuel 1:1-6 NRSV

I was thinking about Hannah and how in her world she was probably seen as cursed by God. She had no sons, and in that world this meant she was shamed and had basically nothing - except her husband. The woman she has to compete with as wife also criticizes her. It says something hear that I always seem to gloss over when I read the bible. "year by year", or year after year. This was going on for years.

Years....

I'm only 20 years old and I have very few problems and stresses which have lasted for years, nothing this bad for sure.

I also like that Elkanah gives her a double portion. At this point in the story Hannah has not talked to God and did not know why she was in this predicament, and in all likelihood felt absolutely abandonned. But her husband gives her a double portion... because he loved her. I bet after all that time she ended up hating herself as well, and that her husband was the one who reminded her of her value and great worth. I think maybe, Hannah, was her own worst enemy.

In some small incomparable way, I feel alot like her.

GRACE ALONE => THE ONLY WAY

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law." - Romans 3:23-28

I love this passage. I was reading the Qu'ran the other day for World Religions and I was reminded of John Stott's quote about why he could never be any religion other than Christian, he says that it is the Cross, and that it stands at the centre of our faith, history, and the divine drama that we find ourselves in, it is on that Cross that Jesus made it possible for all men to come to faith (though Stott would disagree with the last part), and it is a redemption by GRACE, in fact it is a redemption by GRACE, ALONE!!!!

I was sitting in my heretical RCIA class today listening to the teacher exhort us in a Pelagian fashion that if we are nice to people and talk to them, even if we still hate them, this is Christian love and God will then let us into heaven if we do it.

"But if it is BY GRACE, it is NO LONGER ON THE BASIS OF WORKS; otherwise grace would no longer be grace." -Romans 11:6

This annoys me to no end. I'm definately not advocating justification by faith ALONE, but I am advocation salvation by Grace Alone, and Justification by faith first. (which is actually what the Catholic Church teaches, if you didn't know)

I read this passage from Peter Kreeft the other day who says that we cannot buy our way into Heaven by good works, and that we do not do good works to get to Heaven, we do good works because Heaven has gotten into us.

Kreeft also writes:

"The plant of our new life in Christ is one; the life of God comes into us by faith, through us by hope, and out of us by works of love. That is clearly the biblical view, and when Protestants and Catholics who know and believe the Bible discuss the issue sincerely, it is amazing how quickly and easily they come to understand and agree with each other on this, the fundamental divisive issue . . ."

But many Catholics to this day have not learned the Catholic and
biblical doctrine. They think we are saved by good intentions or being nice or sincere or trying a little harder or doing a sufficient number of good deeds . . .

"I remember vividly the thrill of discovery when, as a young Protestant at Calvin College, I read Saint Thomas Aquinas and the Council of Trent on justification. I did not find what I had been told I would find, `another gospel' of do-it-yourself salvation by works, but a clear and forceful statement that we can do nothing without God's grace, and that this grace, accepted by faith, is what saves us."

For the love of God, I hope everyone who knows me, knows firmly that Salvation is not by good intentions, nice things, or going to Church, it is about the gracious salvation that Jesus Christ is offering to you, you choose whether to accept it or not. I guess I'm still an Evangelical at heart, and pray that I always will be. I'll leave you with this line from an amazing hymn (which I happened to make an entire post ridiculing, but nonetheless it's good)

"For on that Cross where Jesus died the wrath of God was satisfied, for every sin, on Him was laid, here in the death of Christ, I live" - Hymn "In Christ Alone"