Grace and works

And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray (Matthew 24:11 ESV)

There is an interesting thread on Mormon Coffee, the blog page of the Mormonism Research Ministry (a great ministry by the way!). The question has turned in part to the relationship between grace and works. More specifically, is grace alone sufficient with works as a result or is grace dependent on the obedience to works of the law to save? The mormon position is that faith alone is insufficient to save (keeping in mind that mormons have degress of salvation, it is not a heaven or hell duality but rather a gradient with some people getting a mediocre heaven, others a better heaven, mormons a great heaven and faithful mormon men get to become gods. But I digress). The Christian position is that not only do works not save you, but reliance on and pride in your own good works is an impediment to salvation. The Christian life is one of surrender, of bowing the knee and declaring our own helplessness, of calling on and turning to Christ and Him alone to save us. This is not intended to be an authoritative declaration on the sufficiency of the Cross, but rather it is designed to spur discussion of the relationship between grace and works, specifically do works add to salvation or do works result from salvation?

First, let's look at a few of the common Scriptural objections to justification by faith alone, sola fide. What of the seeming commandment towards perfection in Matthew 5:48 "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."? Doesn't that mean that we need to perfect ourselves, or at least strive towards perfection to be saved? Well not really. That isn't really much of a hurdle, unless you can find me a perfect person. So, the question comes up, the Bible is commanding to do something that the Bible also tells us it is impossible to do? Quite right! God is not here to be fair, He is not fair but rather He is just. His law reflects His nature, and as such requires perfection. Our sin has caused us to be at enmity with God, yet it is God who saves us.

There are a number of Scriptures that point to the fact that it is impossible for men to save themselves, or even assist with salvation and that only through Christ alone can a sinner be reconciled to God. If there is one theme that addresses this throughout the New Testament, it is summarized in the idea that when it comes to salvation with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. The disciples, trying to figure out what they had to do to be saved finally asked in exasperation how in the world could anyone be saved, and Christ gave this wonderful, humbling answer: When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, "Who then can be saved?" But Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:25-26 ESV) The Bible commands perfection, which is indeed impossible with man. If there were no way to be saved because of an impossible standard that would indeed be unfair and more importantly be unjust. But in the person and work of Christ, in His perfect obedience and the faith of His sheep in Him, His righteousness and perfection is imputed to the sinner, the great exchange of my sin for His righteousness.

What of then that old bastion of works based salvation, the Book of James? This is where the "grace plus works" crowd always turns, plucking a few verses out of context and declaring victory without a valid examination of the comprehensive Biblical message.

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. (James 2: 14-18 ESV)

Case closed, right? Well slow down a minute, what is James saying here? What the message is, I believe, is one of self-examination. There is all sorts of faith out in the world. Muslims have a very strong faith, the kind of faith that causes some of them to beat themselves bloody with chains, send mentally retarded people into markets and blow them up by remote control and fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people. Secular humanists have faith in themselves. Pagans have faith in all manner of gods and goddesses. But those sorts of faith do not save. It is the faith in the risen Christ, a faith that comes from being regenerated into a new creation by the power of the Holy Spirit, a faith that results in the performance of good works because of the change of heart wrought by God that saves. A dead declaration of faith, one that allows you to ignore the plight of your brother, is not Christian faith, it is not a living, saving faith. We ought to examine our faith to ensure that it is genuine faith in Christ, especially given a world of easy believism and decisional regeneration that we live in.

What is at issue here is a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature and scope of sin, not just among mormons but also among many Christians. Far too many people look at sin like this. Action A is a sin, action B is a good work, so if I avoid doing A and concentrate on doing B I will be OK. As long as the teeter-totter has more good works than sins, you get into heaven. But sin is not, and never has been, an issue of particular acts that must be avoided to be justified. Rather our sin is an issue of a state of being, of a human nature. Scripture is replete with references to the sinfulness of man. Of all the five points of Calvinism, the one that is the easiest to prove from Scripture is the first one, the total depravity of man.

So how then can we ever be saved? It is pretty easy to point out man's sin, but what of salvation? How can a wicked, depraved sinner ever hope to please and be reconcilled to a holy God? There is a Latin saying attributed to Martin Luther that captures the strange union, Christians are: simul iustus et peccator (simultaneously just and sinner). We are, at once, both a sinner and justified. Jesus didn't need to die to be perfected, He was already perfect. He gained no holiness, no righteousness on earth that added to his nature. So why did He come? Paul puts in succinctly and best in this declaration: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. Jesus came to save His sheep by laying down His life for them. His death on the cross served one purpose, to fulfill all righteousness and form the basis of salvation for His people: faith in Christ, and Christ alone, for justification.

When you seek to add your own works to grace, you stand up and say to Christ that His death on the cross was helpful but ultimately insufficient. His sacrifice made salvation possible for all people (ignoring the Biblical doctrine of election), but it was because of your own righteousness that you were saved. That guy over there is not wise enough, not holy enough, not worthy enough or hasn't worked hard enough on their own to be saved. It is the ultimate in arrogance, an arrogance that says that Jesus is not your Lord, not your Savior but instead your partner in your salvation. That arrogance brings to mind a parable told by our Lord:

"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.' But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted." (Luke 18: 10-14 ESV)

Don't let yourself be the Pharisee who relies on his own righteousness. Rely on Christ and His righteousness, for that is in the end your only hope.

Romney Drops Out

In a somewhat surprising move, at least this quickly, Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race to be the Republican nominee. It was a pretty classy exit statement:

Mitt Romney suspended his presidential campaign Thursday, telling a stunned conservative group that continuing his uphill battle against John McCain would hurt the Republican Party and make it more likely that the Democratic candidate would win the general election in November.

“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention … I’d forestall the launch of a national campaign and frankly I’d be making make it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win,” Romney told the Conservative Political Action Conference. “Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”

As early as yesterday, the Romney campaign was drafting a road map to winning the nomination, despite trailing McCain badly in the race for delegates. But according to a campaign spokesman, Romney decided to drop out as he was writing the CPAC speech late Wednesday.

“This isn’t an easy decision. I hate to lose,” Romney said Thursday, as many in the crowd booed the decision. “If this were only about me, I’d go on, but it’s never been only about me. I entered this race because I love America, and because I love America in this time of war, I feel I have to now stand aside, for our party and for our country.”

I assume Huckabee will follow shortly, and the party can begin to rally around McCain. Time for the Rush Limbaugh/Ann Coulter cabal to swallow their pride, keep McCain honest from a conservative standpoint but quit bellyaching and threatening to support Hillary or stay home. Romney was very gracious in defeat and bowing out, his supporters should take their cue from his actions and support the nominee. Not everyone is being gracious about it though:

Evangelical leader Pat Robertson told FOX News Radio Thursday morning that he and other evangelicals would not support McCain, citing his temper.

Robertson referenced a Wall Street Journal article describing him as a “capped live volcano,” adding: “You never know when he’s going to explode … If you’ve got a guy who’s the commander in chief with his hand on the red button, I just don’t know, I wouldn’t like to be in WWIII, and I just have a feeling he wants to show how macho he is and we might just get ourselves in something we don’t want.”

Uh, someone who called for the assassination of the leader of a foreign nation and has prophesied untold destruction on America is being critical of someone else for being intemperate and unstable? McCain may be a hothead, but he served this nation in war and spent years being tortured by the North Vietnamese. He knows far better than the vast majority of Americans, including Pat Robertson, what war is really like.

I hate to break it to you Pat, but you ceased to be relevant to Christians as a whole many, many years ago. I don't know of any Christian under the age of 60 who gives a rip what Pat Robertson says or thinks. He has become like the crazy old great uncle at family events that people tolerate because they are trying to be polite. He has no business and no right declaring who evangelicals will or will not support.

Images of Muhammad Cause Uproar

Apparently the Wikipedia page that covers Muhammad contains a couple of pictures (very old pictures) that depict Muhammad and for some reason are deemed offensive to Muslims. Fox News reports that some 100,000 people have signed a petition demanding that the offending images be removed...

Online encyclopedia Wikipedia has again stirred up controversy — this time over a biographical entry on the prophet Muhammad.

Nearly 100,000 people worldwide have signed a Web-based petition asking Wikipedia to remove all depictions of the Prophet from its English-language entry, viewable here.

"I request all brothers and sisters to sign this petitions so we can tell Wikipedia to respect the religion and remove the illustrations," the creator of the petition at The Petition Site asks.

One can be sure that offensive pictures of Christ that may appear on Wikipedia or anywhere else wouldn't be removed no matter how many people sign a petition. Offending Muslim sensibilities is absolutely forbidden, but taking shots at Christianity is not only permissable but encouraged and a sign of being open-minded and enlightened. Interesting and scary times we live in.

Do we want a President who cries all the time?

Hillary, on the eve of a big day on Super Tuesday, broke out her New Hampshire secret weapon and cried on stage today....

For the second time just before a big election, Clinton choked up before the cameras, this time being triggered by a former law professor at Yale University who introduced at an event in New Haven, Conn.

“I said I would not tear up,” she told a boisterous crowd. “Already we’re not exactly on that path. ”

This isn't a gender issue (ever seen Margaret Thatcher cry?). It is an issue of someone who shamelessly uses emotional displays to get votes. I don't much care for Obama, but at least he isn't sobbing at his campaign stops. How can even die-hard liberals stomach her? If you want to really see something that should make you cry, Hillary revealed a feature of her swell health insurance plan....

WASHINGTON — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC’s “This Week,” she said: “I think there are a number of mechanisms” that are possible, including “going after people’s wages, automatic enrollment.”

Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, “it will be affordable for everyone.”

That is Hillary-care, a huge government program that can lead to your wages being garnished if you choose not to enroll in a socialized "insurance" program. Perhaps they will send the police after you and drag you to the doctor, for your own good. That is the key to Hillary-care, and everything her administration would stand for: we know better than you what is good for you, so shut up and do as I say, or else. Go to the doctor now, because if Hillary gets in the White House you will be standing in line to see a doctor before you know it. At least you know Ann Coulter will be in line with you since she is such a big fan of Hillary all of a sudden.

Sweet!

I don't care one way or the other about the Giants

I don't like Eli Manning, I think he is an overrated punk

I like Tom Brady, him being a Michigan man and all

But....

I despise New England, the people, their sports, their smarmy attitudes, their whiny inferiority complex towards New York. So how sweet is it that the Pats lose to the underdog Giants on a late Eli Manning TD?

VERY VERY VERY SWEET!

Stick that in your chow-da, you funny talking punks!

Time for fantasy baseball!

There will be blood in the streets! Every argument will turn into the shootout at the OK Corral! Only cops should possess guns!

That is the rhetoric we always hear from gun control advocates, that the common people shouldn't be trusted with firearms at all and certainly not carrying them concealed in public. Despite the fact that gun crimes do NOT go up when concealed carry laws are enacted and there has never been widespread abuse of the concealed laws by legally authorized private citizens. That is why this report, while not really funny, is certainly ironic...

Officer Suspended After Gunfight With Another Cop in Georgia Street

BUFORD, Ga. — Two off-duty officers from different police departments wounded each other in a gun fight in the middle of a road in an Atlanta suburb, authorities said.

Both officers suffered non-life-threatening wounds, police said. Their conditions were not immediately known on Saturday.

Officer Jay Daily, a five-year veteran of the Duluth Police Department, exchanged multiple gunshots with Fulton County officer Paul Phillips on Friday afternoon, police said.

I guess the next step for Hangun Control Inc and the Brady Center is to outlaw police officers from carrying guns.

Not looking good for Mitt

Despite the sniffing and hand-wringing by National Review and Rush Limbaugh (is he still on the air?), it is not looking good for Mitt Romney with Super Tuesday three days away... According to the latest Real Clear Politics polls, Romney is not ahead in any of the Super Tuesday states. If he gets swept in every state on Super Tuesday (except his home state of Massachusetts ), where does he go from there? I guess he can keep pouring his seemingly endless personal fortune into a failed campaign, but after all he touts himself as being a businessman so he must come to the point where he realizes it ain't gonna happen and drops out.

Huckabee is also looking like he is at the end of the line, but at least he still has a shot to be on the ticket. His support through Tuesday from social conservatives will sink Mitt in the South.

Adding to the fun is this insane comment from formerly relevant, alleged conservative Ann Coulter saying she would both vote and campaign for Hillary Clinton if John McCain is the nominee....



Huh. So all of a sudden, opposition to torturing people is a leftist position. Last time I checked, John McCain knows a little more about torture than Ann Coulter, inflicted on him while doing more to defend freedom than Coulter has even dreamed about.

Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? (Romans 2:4 ESV)

One of the hallmarks of modern Christianity, and religion in general, is the emasculating of God by focusing exclusively on His love without tempering that love with His justice and holiness. God becomes either a loving teddy bear of a being, or a helpless bystander obligated to save people while they sneer at Him. But He has revealed Himself to be nothing of the sort. His mercy, His grace, His forbearance, His longsuffering tolerance of us is not a sign of His weakness but grace. Grace is not what is portrayed by many, a tolerance of sin, but rather a soveriegn show of underserved mercy towards sinners. Men are saved in spite of their own righteousness, not because of it. God's mercy and grace do not reveal Him to be weak, but the strongest of Sovereign Lords. His mercy passes over us as an act of forbearance designed to lead to repentance.

When you read the Bible, and get a full sense of how incredibly fallen mankind is, it should strike you with wonder that God doesn't immediately smite the whole world and be done with it. One of the key components of the Gospel message is, indeed must, start with man's sin. All too often sermons and Christian books focus on grace, but in doing so they skip right over sin. We sing of grace, we praise His grace, we name our churches after grace but can we truly understand grace if we don't grasp sin? Grace is wonderful and makes us feel great, but grace is not God adding His righteousness to our own inherent goodness. It is the imputation as a merciful act of the meritorious work of His Son upon sinners. It can be hard to tell someone (especially yourself!) that they are a sinner, but really how can one appreciate grace and understand the need for salvation without a recognition of their own sin? You do not do anyone a service or favor by talking about grace and glossing over sin.

God's mercy and forbearance is not a sign of weakness but rather of love. Don't denigrate His mercy by seeing it as a right, but as the wonderous and underserved gift that it is.

More on Together for the Gospel

The T4G blog notes that Ligonier has made available some of the videos from the T4G 2006 conference, and I am watching Sproul speaking on sola fide, justification by faith alone. A pretty powerful and sobering message, while still being encouraging. Sproul likens Together for the Gospel as equipping soldiers on the front line of the spiritual war, the pastors, for that conflict. As someone who once stood on those front lines, and then shot myself in the foot like a coward, I certainly am in need of that encouragement. I am looking forward with excitement and fear to this year's Together for the Gospel. His will be done.

Together for the Gospel topics

The Nine Marks blog tipped me off that the speakers for Together for the Gospel have announced the topics of their talks. If you are a Christian and support the type of ministry that is the hallmark of all of these speakers, this list ought to get you excited!

Ligon Duncan - Sound Doctrine - Essential to Faithful Pastoral Ministry: A Joyful Defense and Declaration of the Necessity and Practicality of Systematic Theology for the Life of the Church

Thabiti Anyabwile - Bearing the Image: Identity, the Work of Christ and the Church

John MacArthur - The Sinner Neither Able Nor Willing: The Doctrine of Absolute Inability

Mark Dever - Improving the Gospel: Exercises in Unbiblical Theology

RC Sproul - The Curse Motif of the Atonement

Albert Mohler - Why Do They Hate It So? The Doctrine of Substitution

John Piper - How the Supremacy of Christ Creates Radical Christian Sacrifice

CJ Mahaney - Sustaining a Pastor's Soul

Nothing on the Purpose Driven Life or Living Your Best Life now, just rock solid teaching and doctrinal meat!

Great post on Romney

Joe Carter at the evangelical outpost, an ardent Huckabee supporter, has a great post on why he doesn't support Romney. There is a sense in which some people modify their position over the years, but with Romney it is a pattern of changing seemingly at a whim. An editorial in The Wall Street Journal argues that it is not because Romney is a flip-flopper but that the he lacks any real convictions and thus his positions are suspect and subject to change at any time. Whatever the reason, Romney is untrustworthy to be the sort of President he claims he would be on the campaign trail.

(For some real fun, check out the breathless defense of Romney in comment number 5 by a guy named Baggi. He argues that it is the conservative position to nominate pro-abortion judges and that claiming to be a lifelong hunter when Romney never really hunted is not a flip-flop. Funny stuff!)

More on the death of Gordon B. Hinckley

Came across this article on the memorial services for GBH and while it is not official mormon dogma, the mindset was interesting...

"He definitely makes you want to be a better person," said Michelle McAllister, 21, who arrived in the early-morning cold Thursday for the viewing at the conference center of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. "He's recognized everywhere for being such a kind person and a good example of optimism."

The focus is what a good person he was and how he made people want to be better people. The man was supposed to be a prophet and people remember him for being optimistic and kind? Hinckley was the prototypical modern mormon "prophet", that is to say he was an administrator and goodwill ambassador and not else. Those aren't bad things, but I long for the days when Brigham Young called down curses on Gentiles. Now there was a prophet!