An inevitable schism?

A storm is brewing in the Southern Baptist Convention. Not a storm over women pastors or gay marriage or evolution or Biblical inerrancy. This storm is over the centuries old debate about Calvinism. It has been coming for a long time, and like many major engagements it has had a series of skirmishes leading up to the main event. As someone who used to be part of Southern Baptists churches and church life, I watch these events from afar with a mixture of fascination and sadness. Many peripheral players have been poking at this issue for a decade or more but recently a shot across the bow has prompted a more serious response and a path that I am afraid only ends one way .

Recently a manifesto of sort was published by a number of well known and respected Southern Baptist leaders, men like Malcolm Yarnell, Paige Patterson and Jerry Vines as well as other characters like Emir Caner, brother of disgraced former anti-Calvinist crusader Ergun Caner. The manifesto is rather grandiosely titled A Statement of Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God's Plan of Salvation and is really just a statement of why Southern Baptists have allegedly traditionally understood God's plan of salvation in a way that is, well it is not Calvinist.

The responses have been fast and furious. Nothing is quite like a bunch of Calvinists who feel disenfranchised responding on the internet! Of those responses, two stand out. Tom Ascol of Founders Ministry has been putting a comprehensive response together and Al Mohler weighed in this morning with a sober piece that warns of the danger of creating theological traibalism within a group, a warning that he rightly applies to both Calvinst and non-Calvinist alike. These are important issues to be sure but not issues that should divide us from one another and distract from our common mission.

Unfortunately I don't see this as a friendly debate. There are lines being drawn and words being said that cannot be undone. As someone who is more clearly sympathetic with the Calvinist camp and as someone who has been a part of the SBC, I have long felt there is something of a witch hunt going on.  In my opinion the instigators have almost always been on the non-Calvinist side. I don't think I have heard any Reformed Southern Baptists pushing to drive non-Calvinists out of the convention or muzzle them but plenty of that talk coming from the Arminian side.  I think I somewhat understand why. As the "Conservative Resurgence" wound down and Southern Baptists found themselves with a Bible everyone affirmed, it wasn't long before issues of interpretation started springing up. While more old school capital "S" Southern Baptists are generally Arminian at best, the younger men coming up are more and more Reformed, thanks in large part to the influence of Al Mohler at Southern Seminary and other notable leaders like John Piper and John MacArthur. There is a disconnect between the young, enthusiastic and zealous (often overly so) Calvinists who are filling the clerical ranks in the SBC and the more traditional older men who sit in the positions of power and the pulpits of the biggest and most prosperous churches.  This conflict I believe can only end one way, ultimately a functional if not a overt split of the Southern Baptist Convention followed by unseemly squabbling over the vast wealth of the SBC.

As a sideline observer I watch this with a great deal of sadness and headshaking. When you look at the vast resources of the SBC in terms of seminaries, local churches, academic powerhouses, money and most of all people and think about those resources being used to start and refute a pogrom of purging over an admittedly important theological issue but one that does not rise to the level of the Gospel, it is nothing short of tragic. When people bemoan the powerlessness and the irrelevance of the church in America, events like this are Exhibit A. The lost among us are really not interested in the doctrine of God's sovereignty in salvation or man's free will. They are watching us and what they see all too often are a people who fight and squabble and split and hate one another . When the world looks at us, they certainly aren't seeing Jesus and they likewise don't see anything they are interested in learning more about. Who can blame them? It is not the foolishness of the cross they reject, it is the pride and foolishness of man that they reject and rightly so.

There was a time not too long ago that I would have been out on the electronic front lines waving the banner for Reformed theology, smiting Arminians with righteous fury. Those days are past and I repent of the pride that drove that attitude. I make no apology for affirming what I firmly believe is the clear witness of Scripture of the sovereign election, predestinating, effectual calling and keeping of the elect. I also make no apology to others who affirm these truths when I say I would rather stand side by side in the work of ministry to help the poor and reach the lost with an Arminian than sit around talking theology with a Calvinist who agrees with me safely surrounded by the walls of a "church".  My voice holds no weight in the Southern Baptist Convention but I plead with my brothers who do have a voice to stop the infighting before it goes too far. The SBC has plenty of issues and problems but a divided SBC is not going to improve our witness to a lost and dying world in desperate need to hear about the Lamb who was slain and rose again. Brothers I humbly ask you to step back from the brink before it is too late.

Can spiritual unity replace communal unity?

I read something interesting this morning from Tom Ascol of Founders Ministries. Tom often writes very thought provoking stuff and is one of my favorite Reformed writers because he is not nearly as dogmatic about it as some other self-appointed defenders of all things Reformed. He wrote this morning about Christian unity and referenced a devotional from Octavius Winslow. Here is something Tom said that I found especially interesting:

Nevertheless, there are some who, rather than join in this movement of God's Spirit, seem intent on undermining with accusations of conspiracies and compromise. I pity such people. Their spirit is contrary to spirit of Jesus and the Word of God. Winslow understood that. And his morning thought for today could not be more timely.

I think anyone who has spent much time in the blogosphere and especially among the most common Reformed haunts will recognize what Tom is saying. There are some, few in number but with an especially loud voice and influence far beyond what is reasonable, who delight in searching for signs of “compromise”. I am as stalwart as anyone when it comes to the Gospel and standing firm for it. There is no room for compromise on the core essentials of the Gospel nor of the fundamentals of the faith like justification by faith alone. These are not the compromises that garner the most response. It is the secondary issues that divide us that generate the most passion: baptism, church governance, end-times positions, etc. and it is largely because of these secondary doctrines that we give primary importance to that the church is splintered and fragmented.

The quote from Wislow that Tom references is what really caught my eye:

The one family of God is composed of “many brethren.” They are not all of the same judgment in all matters, but they are all of the same spirit. The unity of the family of God is not ecclesiastical nor geographical, it is spiritual and essential. It is the “unity of the Spirit.” Begotten of one Father, in the nature of the Elder Brother, and through the regenerating grace of the one Spirit, all the saints of God constitute one church, one family, one brotherhood—essentially and indivisibly one.

Yes but also no. I absolutely believe that I am in the same church as a brother in Brazil or a sister in South Korea but the reality of our spiritual unity in the universal church should not excuse our division in the local gathering of the church. Saying I am unified with my brothers in my geographic area but then denying full fellowship because of denomination or secondary points of doctrine is a de facto denial of the universality of the church. It is not sufficient to say "I recognize you as a brother" in theory but not in practice. In many churches Christians who are not “members” are denied even the ritualized observation of the Lord’s Supper, much less the full communion of the body of Christ in a meal. Most members in a local gathering are expected to be mute, how much more so those who are visiting. Our "unity" is predicated on your adherence to our rules, rules that have no basis in Scripture but are as unchanging and inflexible as the strictest code in Scripture.

We cannot merely acknowledge our unity in Christ in theory but deny full fellowship with one another in practice. Unity in doctrine without a matching practice is not unity in any real sense and makes a mockery of the universality of the church of Jesus Christ.

Some things never change

One of them is the tendency of some of the old guard in the Southern Baptist convention to use the spotlight to advance their vendetta against Calvinism. This year had the spectacle of Morris H. Chapman, from the SBC Executive Committee making the following comment:

The Southern Baptist Convention is experiencing a resurgence in the belief that divine sovereignty alone is at work in salvation without a faith response on the part of man.

Some are given to explain away the “whosoever will” of John 3:16. How can a Christian come to such a place when Ephesians says, “For by grace are you saved through faith” (Eph. 2:8)? I do not rise to become argumentative, or to change minds already convinced of one perspective or the other. But I do rise to state the obvious. Man is often tempted to design a theological theory in light of a biblical antinomy in order to clarify what God is trying to say.

Man’s system will be inferior to God’s system now and forever. Why is it so difficult to accept from God what we cannot fully explain? After all, He didn’t begin to tell us everything He knows, but what we need to know to be redeemed and live righteously. The belief that sovereignty alone is at work in salvation is not what has emboldened our witness and elevated our concern for evangelism and missions through the ages. This is not the doctrine that Southern Baptists have embraced in their desire to reach the world for Christ.

If there is any doctrine of grace that drives men to argue and debate more than it drives them to pursue lost souls and persuade ALL MEN to be reconciled to God – then it is no doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man both are taught in the Bible. Both are necessary elements in the salvation experience. A healthy tension (an antinomy) exists in the Bible with regard to these two important biblical truths. Both are present in the salvation experience.

Egad! I haven't heard such ridiculous rhetoric and blatant caricatures since the last time Ergun Caner embarrassed himself by attacking the sovereignty of God in salvation. I love that Mr. Chapman quotes the first half of Ephesians 2:8 and not the second half. Pretty convenient, check out the whole verse with the second half in bold:

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, (Eph 2:8)

I always get a kick out of people using verses to attack Calvinism that in reality support one or more of the five points. Even the faith you have is not found in yourself, or your righteousness, or your piety or your "decision to ask Jesus into your heart". The faith that any Christian possesses is a gift from God, sovereignly enacted through the regeneration of our stony hearts, making those who were dead in our sins (Eph 2:1) and enemies of God (Eph 2:3) reconciled to His Son. It is fun to see what happens when you actually read a verse in it's entirety and in it's context instead of plucking it out to make a point.

I like the plain spoken way Tom Ascol referred to these remarks:

It may be that the anti-Calvinist messenger was emboldened in his opposition by the foolish remarks of the president and chief executive officer of the Southern Baptist Convention's Executive Committee, Morris H. Chapman which were made earlier in the day during his report.
-----
Dr. Chapman's comments were out of place and sounded more like the incendiary rhetoric of years past than the more respectful kinds of exchanges that have tended to characterize the Calvinist debates since the Building Bridges Conference in 2007.

Amen Tom! Foolishness should be called what it is.

Tom Ascol - Back in the Pulpit

Dr. Ascol has been recovering from the lightning strike and is preparing to preach again this Sunday. It is well worth your time to read the words of a man who is humble but resolute, confident in His God and with no confidence at all in his flesh.

Welcome back Dr. Ascol, you have been missed!

Read all about it here:

Founders Ministries Blog: Thanks for your prayers

A call to repentance

The Southern Baptist Convention this past week at it's annual meeting passed a resolution on regenerate church membership. It is not as strong a resolution as I would have liked, a resolution like the one proposed again by Tom Ascol of Founders Ministry, but it is a start and a recognition. It is not just the Southern Baptist Convention that is need of repenting over church membership, but as the largest and perhaps most public of the conservative denominations, the SBC takes the lead for good or ill on many issues. If we are going to covenant with someone in membership in a local church, we need to a) make as sure we can that they are a Christian! and b) hold the accountable to the body. Membership in a local church is the focal point of the Christian life and when we take it too lightly we do harm to the church as a whole. A good start, but certainly it is just a start.

Kickin' over straw men...

Tom Ascol at Founders Ministries pointed out an article by Dr. Elmer Towns of Liberty University, an article that asks the question:

WHAT SHOULD SOUTHERN BAPTIST DO WITH CALVINIST?

(His spelling, not mine)

Set aside for the moment the question of what makes Elmer Towns an authoritative voice for what Southern Baptists should or should not do. The entire article is a litany of pejoratives, unsubstantiated claims, self-important declarations and not an ounce of interaction with arguments made by Calvinists or the Scriptures. What we are treated to instead:

- We have the Calvin wasn’t a Baptist, so a Baptist shouldn’t be a Calvinist argument. Along with that we have the I am a Calvinist, just not a five point Calvinist. I would argue that if you reject one of the tenets of Calvinism, typically limited atonement, you kind of abandon the whole thing. I began to wonder if Dr. Towns is familair at all with Calvinism.

- Then, predictably, we get the Servetus issue that everyone from Arminians to cultists raise as an objection to Calvinism. Calvinism is NOT ABOUT CALVIN! If we reject every writing that comes from the hand of a sinner, we better start throwing out lots of books, starting with anything that Elmer Towns wrote. Dr. Towns and I and Calvin are all three different in lots of ways, but we are the same in one way: we are all three sinners.

- Tons of anecdotal “evidence” and blanket, unsubstantiated statements heavily peppered with pejoratives.

- The assumption that his years of teaching theology give him a insight over and above that of far more accomplished scholars. He proudly notes: “I’ve taught systematic theology since 1958 ”. Well, all that tells me is that he has managed to be wrong after half a century of teaching theology, and that hardly is a point in his favor!

- Spurgeon. It kills me how Arminians try to claim Spurgeon for themselves, even when the recognize that he was a Calvinist! Or maybe he was just a poor Calvinist who didn’t really believe it. But I guarantee this, get an Arminian Baptist going and he will always grab two figures out of history: Servetus and Spurgeon.

- What I find really troubling is the way that he makes his substantive arguments in the form of footnotes, whereas the main body is nothing but empty assertions. I also like how he uses the textbook that he wrote as a reference. That is like me referring to a blog post as a citation in another blog post, and assuming it is authoritative. Check out this scholarly footnote:

16 For those who want to carefully study Calvinism, I invite them to look at Theology for Today by Elmer Towns (Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001). In this volume I study the weaknesses of Calvinism, pointing out that I am a Calvinist. I examine the weaknesses of each of the five points of TULIP. The next chapter I discuss the weaknesses of Arminianism. At other places in this volume I discuss the weaknesses of the Covenant or Reformed view of theology. Since I am a dispensationalist, I discuss the weaknesses of baptism by sprinkling, and I examine the strength of baptism by immersion. Before one is quick to judge this paper, I would invite them to a full study of Calvinism from someone’s perspective that is not blinded by the limitations of Calvinism.

So anyone who disagrees with Towns or writes something contrary to Towns is “blinded by the limitations of Calvinism”. Only Dr. Towns has it all figured out, over and above men like Spurgeon and Albert Mohler and John MacArthur. I wonder if Mark Dever and Albert Mohler even realize how blinded they are by their Calvinism. He even speaks of himself in the third person!

The level of writing and scholarship expressed is embarrassing from a man who takes pains to point out that “I’ve taught systematic theology since 1958 ”. One would think that someone so quickly top throw his credentials around would at least live up to the expectations for one who holds those honors. He fails entirely to interact with Calvinism on a scriptural basis, but rather merely passes judgment on what the entire Southern Baptist Convention should do, which is ironic since it is so clear that many, if not most, of the founders of the Southern Baptist Convention were Calvinistic. The arrogance of his presumptive statements about what is or is not acceptable from churches that hold to Calvinism is incredible.

As his paper draws to a close, Dr. Towns resorts to clumsy attempts at being clever through the images of the TULIP acrostic of Calvinism.

Most of the time five point Calvinists are described by tulip, a lovely flower that grows from a single bulb in the ground. A tulip shares its beauty and aroma. But often five-point Calvinism is like the dandelion; beautiful in its yellow and black flower, but no dandelion ever stands alone like a tulip. Rather dandelions spread their seeds across the entire lawn, blown about by the winds of fads and self-examination. And what more do we know about dandelions, they kill the surrounding grass and as they spread across a beautiful lawn, they can destroy an entire lawn. I have often said that in a theological institution, every spring the dandelions come up. By that I am referring to young Calvinistic enthusiasts who suddenly feel they know systematic theology better than their professors. Over the years many have attempted to engage me, debate me and even convert me. If I have the time, I am usually gracious and take them to lunch. I discuss the whole plan of God with them, including the nature of God, the nature of regeneration, dispensationalism, and the mysteries of God that no human can explain. Usually my five point enthusiast wants to talk about five or six words they find in Scripture. I grant them that these words verify their narrow point of view; but there is much more scripture than just these five or six words. We arrive at true Bible doctrine when we look at all of the Biblical text.

Perhaps the reason that Calvinism spreads is that when people get away from the trite arguments of Arminianism, decisional regeneration, sensationalistic dispensation theology and start to dig into the Bible, what they find is not a few random verses supporting Calvinism but the totality of the Biblical record being one of man’s inability and God’s sovereignty. Calvinism is spread not because it is popular, because it is abhorrent to the heart of man, but through a study of the Bible that gets beyond the superficial and digs into the deeper things of God. The theology espoused by Towns, muddled though it is,

So Dr. Towns manages (after fifty years of teaching theology remember) to allegedly beat up on new seminary students who espouse Calvinism. I wonder how many debates he has held with mature Christians who hold to the Doctrines of Grace? After the Ergun Caner, Dean of Liberty Theological Seminary ducked and weaved to avoid debating James White and Tom Ascol on Calvinism, I suspect that Dr. Towns debating prowess is confined to verbal sparring with 22 year olds. Safe in the halls of academia, Dr. Towns is free to make blanket, unsubstantiated assertions and debate first years seminarians.

Another great book upcoming!

Back in print from Founders Press, The Baptism of Disciples Alone: A Covenantal Argument for Credobaptism Versus Paedobaptism by Fred Malone. Pre-publication priced to be affordable at only $15.95, from those who have read it is a great refutation of the idea that to be covenental requires one to be a paedobaptist. I am going to order my copy tonight!

Are unregenerate church members in the SBC validation for infant baptism?

In response to a statement that it is troubling that paedobaptists baptize people with absolutely no indication of them being regenerate, the response was made on Voice of the Sheep that Baptist church rolls have a number of names on them of clearly unregenerate people. There are two ways to approach this issue, the problem of unregenerate church membership.

One, is the method espoused by Les Prouty. In a comment response on Voice of the Sheep, Les makes the following statement in response to my concern for paedobaptists intentionally baptizing people who are not believers (for some reason you can't copy text in the comment section of VOTS, some quirk in Wordpress):

Witness: Southern Baptists for example, where millions on the rolls of SBC churches, baptized and members, cannot be found!

That statement is silly on it's face. There is an enormous difference between baptizing people who have made a confession of faith and baptizing infants. Every faithful, Bible believing Baptist church I know of makes a sincere effort to ascertain whether or not conversion has taken place. It is not perfect, but the effort is prayerfully made. No effort is made in paedobaptist churches. Mom and dad are members of the church (and believe me that paedobaptist churches baptize infants of unregenerate members, thus nullifying the promise), so you get sprinkled with water. That is the extent of their examination. Your kid has Christian parents, so he/she gets baptized.

So, the logic seems to go, if there are SBC members who are not regenerate but are still on the rolls, heck we might as well baptize infants. Indeed this brings us to my point that by the logic of infant baptism we might as well sneak up on people on the street and throw some water on them in the hopes that they might eventually become regenerate.

The second way to deal with that issue, the Biblical one, is to do as Dr. Tom Ascol at Founders Ministries has done, and introduce resolutions calling on the SBC to repent and clean up it's rolls and membership process.

Resolution on Integrity in Church Membership

Whereas the Baptist Faith and Message states that the Scriptures are "the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried" (Article 1); and

Whereas life in a local church should be characterized by loving discipline as the Bible teaches in passages like Matthew 18:15-18, 1 Corinthians 5 and Titus 3:10-11; and

Whereas the 2007 Southern Baptist Convention Annual Church Profiles indicate that there are 16,266,920 members in Southern Baptist churches; and

Whereas those same profiles indicate that only 6,148,868 of those members attend a primary worship service of their church in a typical week; and

Whereas the ideal of a regenerate church membership has long been and remains a cherished Baptist principle as described in Article VI of the Baptist Faith and Message; and

Whereas the significance of believers' baptism tends to be lost when churches that practice it fail to exercise loving care for all their members; therefore, be it

RESOLVED that the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana, June 10-11, 2008, urge Southern Baptists to repent of our failure to maintain responsible church membership, and be it further

RESOLVED that we urge the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention to repent of the widespread failure among us to obey Jesus Christ in the practice of lovingly correcting wayward church members (Matthew 18:15-18), and be it further

RESOLVED that we plead with pastors and church leaders to lead their churches to study and implement our Lord's teachings on this essential church practice, and be it further

RESOLVED that we encourage denominational servants to support and encourage churches that seek to recover and implement our Savior's teachings on church discipline, especially when such efforts result in the reduction in the number of members that are reported in those churches, and be it finally

RESOLVED that we commit to pray for our churches as they seek to honor the Lord Jesus Christ through reestablishing integrity to church membership and to the reporting of statistics in the Annual Church Profile.

I am not sure what chance this resolution has of passing, but the recognition by Dr. Ascol and many others is there that there is a problem. All churches, ALL CHURCHES, have membership problems. The difference is that Dr. Ascol recognizes the problem in the SBC. Les Prouty doesn't even see that there is a problem in paedobaptist churches. I think I like Dr. Ascol's method better.

Founders Ministries Blog: The Renaissance World--an online class for Middle Schoolers

Now here is a great idea! Tom Ascol at Founder's Ministries is announcing a pilot online course for middle-schoolers, "The Renaissance World" . I think this is a fantastic idea! What a great use of the internet, accessing the expertise of another, qualified, like-minded individual to broaden the education of our kids. I already fired off an email to get more information!

If there is an opportunity for the homeschool movement, it is this: one of the great strengths of the homeschool movement is it's tendency to fierce independence, but that is also a potential weakness. There are so many people with a broad range of talents, education and experience in the homeschool community, but they rarely interact. We tend to end up in like enclaves, but with the high speed internet access we currently enjoy there is no reason we shouldn't seek out ways to share the experiences and backgrounds that make us so unique. Thank you to Founders Ministries for at least trying something new!

Building Bridges Conference

The audio files for the Building Bridges Conference are slowly being added to the Lifeway page here. They have been, so far that I have listened, gracious on both sides

One of the most interesting things I heard was the intro report by Ed Stetzer in which he pointed out that there is a strong trend towards Calvinism among recent SBC seminary graduates. The graph above is mind boggling. Only 10% of all SBC pastors identify themselves as five point Calvinists, but almost 30% of recent graduates (since 1999) identify themselves as five pointers, and the more recent the grad, the higher the percentage. More data and the research methodology can be found here, but some other interesting factoids:

• Calvinists tend to pastor churches with a lower weekly attendance (Is it because Calvinists run into more opposition in being called to larger churches, or is it because Calvinists have higher standards for who is a member and who is baptized? The why is not answered)
• Calvinist pastors report sharing the Gospel with others outside of church services at a slightly higher rate than their non-Calvinist counterparts.
• While the churches are smaller, Calvinist pastored churches has a baptism rate similar to non-Calvinist pastored churches.

What does all of that data mean? That despite the strawmen used to falsely portray and attack Reformed Baptists, most of those who are both Calvinist and Southern Baptist take very seriously not just theology but also evangelism.

I listened to part of David Dockery's talk, and he was pretty funny. One of his jokes was a Jeff Foxworthy-esque one about those unsure of whether or not they are a Calvinist (paraphrasing here...)

If you have a son named John, whether named after Calvin, Knox, Edwards or Piper, you might be a Calvinist.

If you think the axis of error runs through Pelagius, Arminius and Finney, you might be a Calvinist.

If you think that a psalter is not the thing sitting next to the pepper shaker, you might be a Calvinist

If you didn’t laugh at any of these jokes, you might be a Calvinist!

One of the most encouraging things about the whole conference was not that minds were changed or that any new material was presented, but that the issue of Calvinism was spoken about by both proponents and opponents in a Biblically sound, Christ honoring way and that the recognition was there that theological discussion in the SBC is a positive thing, and the goal is not to convert the world to Calvinism but to win the world for Christ. If we can have more frank, honest, peaceful discussion it will only further the cause of the Great Commission and strengthen the SBC for the future. Those who seek to run Calvinists out of the SBC threaten the future of the Convention. Those who embrace theirs brothers in spite of difference of doctrine are the ones who truly see the future of the SBC.

Tom Ascol on Bi-Vocational Ministry

Tom Ascol, of Founders Ministry, posted a brief blog post on bi-vocational ministers that really struck home for many

Personally, while I would love to be full-time (or the preferred term of "fully funded") and I am a bit curious as to what my full-time brethren do all week since so many of them preach only once on Sunday, I do find being bi-vocational to be somewhat liberating. I feel pretty free to preach the truth, and not have to be as concerned about offending someone. It strikes me, and I have said on more than one occasion, that there seem to be a lot of preachers who get the truth and know what it is, but still flinch when they stand in front of the congregation on Sunday. I imagine that it would be hard in many ways to see someone look disapprovingly from the pews if you depended on feeding your family and paying your mortgage solely from what you made from your ministry.

That doesn't mean I don't want to minister full-time, but I am resigned in some ways to the reality of Northern Michigan means that unless God deigns to do some pretty mighty work around here, I have two options: a) continue to minister bi-vocationally indefinitely or b) relocate my family to minister full-time at a larger church. I guess this is where patience comes in, which has never been my strongest suit.

Toledo Reformed Theological Conference

--------

General Session Friday

--------

Tom Ascol
The Cross Our Only Boast
Galatians 6:11-18

--------
Addressing the problem of false teachers. Trusting Jesus was not enough, they must also keep the Old Testament ceremonies.
Faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone+NOTHING
(Dr. Ascol starts off right away by addressing unbelievers in the audience, which is great. It is easy to assume that those at a conference like this would all be saved, but you can never assume that and never should stand in the pulpit without calling sinners to repentance)
We are all born legalists and have that tendency always within us.
Gal 3:2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?
Is grace but the threshold into right relationship with God, faith gets you in but works get you on? That thought keeps us from treasuring Jesus Christ.
For a Christian the cross of Jesus Christ is everything.

There are some things that we love to talk about. There is something everyone glories in, that we can talk quickly and joyfully about. But what do we take the greatest joy in, boast the most about? For the Judaizers it was performance.
The Judaizers added to the Gospel by requiring new Gentile believers to be circumcised, so that “they may boast in your flesh.” (v. 13). Their boast was in their performance not in the cross of Christ.

But not even those who are circumcised keep the Law.

Their keeping of certain ceremonies meant nothing
Gal 6:15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
Keeping circumcision means nothing, not being circumcised means nothing.

It would be a mistake to assume that because we are here at a Reformed Christian conference, that we are freed from legalism or that we are freed from sin. (Tom is presenting the Gospel again. That is the sign of a true soul winner, a true evangelist!)

To any degree that we allow our performance to be part of the foundation that God finds us forgiven, we are not valuing Jesus Christ and His cross.
We you are having a good day, you will feel good about yourself, and the opposite when you don’t do devotions or witnessing. The basis cannot be in our performance.

Legalists boast in their performance, Christians boast in the cross of Christ.
Christ’s cross work saves us. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. If you sin, someone has to die.

Behold the Lam of God! Here He is, the perfect sacrifice!

How does the cross save a sinner?
By Christ dying in the place of sinners. He loved me and gave Himself for me, and His death has completely paid my sins.

Read Pilgrim’s Progress. You might be able to get into heaven without reading it by why take any chances?!

We should glory in, rejoice in, boast in the cross for what it has done for us but also for what it has done to us.
------
Gal 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

Three crucifixions in verse 14
- The cross of the Jesus Christ
- The world’s cross
- The Christians cross

( I suddenly feel woefully inadequate in my preaching…thanks Tom)

The cross of Jesus Christ changes how you view yourself and what is important and valuable to you. The world is crucified to us. We are crucified to the world.

Not just the justification but the sanctification

Richard Baxter: When your flesh would have it’s pleasure, remember Him who’s flesh had no pleasure…

Everything good thing that has come to us was bought for us on the cross of Jesus Christ