Labels: Audio, Discernment, Healing, Revival, Terry Virgo
“As I conclude, let me say that I have tried hard to withhold coming to many firm conclusions because I was only there one night. There are other things I have heard which have gone on in the past about which I am not going to comment. Instead, I have tried to limit my remarks only to those things that actually happened while I was there. I would have the following two main warnings, which seem pretty basic to me:
First, beware of the tendency to overstate what’s going on. One of the interesting things about this whole event is that it is the first time something of this scale has taken place in the blog era. News about Lakeland is getting out at an amazing rate. After just 45 days, it’s been fascinating to see how quickly the world has learned of it and started talking about it. In my former blogging career, I read a Challies article about how the blogosphere has contributed to a resurgence of interest in reformed doctrine, and I mused at how technology might impact the charismatic aspects of our doctrine as well, renewing an interest in revival.
I guess the caution would be that things look a little different on television than they do when you are there in person. I did watch one night on God TV, just to check it out, and then closed the computer, opened my Bible, and had a pretty significant encounter with the Lord, being filled with the Spirit and ministered to by God so that my faith was increased. No doubt God can use the Internet or a television broadcast to minister to us, speak to us, and fill us. Of course, when I was actually there, I did not have such a significant encounter with God. I guess the caution would be that some of the things that are being said—both good things and bad things—by people who have never actually been present at any of the meetings can tend to overstate what’s actually going on. For example, this has been compared to the Toronto Blessing. When I first heard about it, I wondered if it might be true that God was doing something like he did in Toronto again. But having been there, it really doesn’t seem very much like what happened in the mid-90’s at this point—not that it couldn’t grow into that. But it seems like comparing it to that time of refreshing is an exaggeration. It seems like a smaller group of people are getting more world-wide attention because of technology, although to the degree that it stirs people to pray and thirst for more of God, it can be a good thing.Second, beware of the tendency to discount everything. Let me end by saying that we should avoid the tendency to write everything off. For example, when I heard about the girl being raised from the dead, my initial response was to say, “Yeah, right.” But I think the Lord kindly asked me why my inclination was immediately to doubt. I do believe that miracles are for today, so why should I find it so difficult to believe it when one actually occurs? Just because there are some oddities or theology that I find unbiblical doesn’t mean that God is not still working. There are many miracles being done. God is healing people. This is something that should be celebrated. This is the kind of thing that the New Testament prescribes as part of our experience; that God apportions various kinds of gifts, including healing and miracles. Therefore, just because we didn’t have an amazing encounter with God, or just because we don’t have a gift of healing, this should not cause us to doubt people who do encounter God at these meetings and give testimony to gifts of healings.
I pray that God uses what is going on and the attention it is receiving to cause the world to begin to pray for revival so that this little shower in Lakeland can grow into a storm.”— Jesse Phillips
E-mail: me@jessephillips.net
Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival
“Fourth, there was not an emphasis on preaching from a doctrinal standpoint; rather, there seemed to be a great emphasis on faith, wholeness, healing, and inner light.Continued in part 5 . . .Again, many things were said that are true. But I think what was missing was that the gospel was not preached very clearly. Even in its most basic forms—that Jesus died for my sins so that I don’t have to pay for them, even though I have offended a holy God—the gospel was not mentioned. Instead, something to this effect was said: “Jesus bore the crown of thorns to deliver us from our mental infirmities.” Although it’s true that we can be healed of mental illness through the powerful name of Jesus, the teaching left something to be desired. Many past revivals have centered around strong, anointed preaching. This one seems to have little or no strong preaching at all.
I also have a concern about what seemed to me to be a limited understanding of the nature of sin. The teaching in this meeting seemed to be that sin is primarily something that happens to us, and from which we need to be delivered, not something that first and foremost dwells in us. Some passages about healing through the blood of Christ which seem, in context, to refer at least to spiritual healing were applied in a way that made it seem that they referred exclusively to physical healing. There have also been some reports on YouTube and the God TV broadcast that Mr. Bentley has a personal angel called Emma. Again, I'm not speaking from experience, because nothing about angels ever came up the night I was there, but these reports would be concerning to me because I think they could potentially lead people astray.
During worship, I thought to myself, “With this level of anticipation and faith, imagine the impact a dynamic, theologically rich song like In Christ Alone would have!” My heart was aching to sing of the glorious reality of the blood and suffering of Christ, and then the absolute exultation of the line:“Then bursting forth in glorious day,
Up from the grave He rose again!
And as He stands in victory,
Sin’s curse has lost its grip on me.”
Then, with an amazing realization of the power of the cross, to proclaim:“No guilt in life, no fear in death—
This is the pow’r of Christ in me;
From life’s first cry to final breath,
Jesus commands my destiny.
No pow’r of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from His hand;
Till He returns or calls me home—
Here in the pow’r of Christ I’ll stand.”
In Christ Alone
Words and Music by Stuart Townend and Keith Getty
Instead, we sang about being a generation who will stand and fight.
So often I can be so theologically sound and doctrinal, but lack a sense of urgency, anticipation, and faith. I am lazy and comfortable with where I’m at. Then, in an environment of real faith and excitement, I think of the power that a theologically sound and rich song and the gospel message would have in that context. I was disappointed because, while I think they do well in the faith category, I think more of an emphasis on the anointed preaching of the gospel and God-centered worship, not man-centered songs, would have a tremendous impact to stir religious affections and motivate a lot of the revival that's being prayed for.
I know some people will think I am quenching the Spirit by desiring more of an accurate theology or a clearer description of who this God is that we’re excited about, but why should we have to choose between doctrine and expectation? Why can’t we have it all? Our excitement is baseless and will never last if it is not grounded in the gospel, and all of our theology, however fine-tuned, will never by itself produce revival. I guess what you’re hearing are the longings of a reformed-charismatic who desires the best of both worlds, yet so often sins by doubting such a thing is possible.”
Labels: Discernment, Gospel, Healing, Revival, Worship
“Those are the events that stand out in my mind as I look back over the evening. I was able to draw out my father-in-law a bit, who has been to Toronto and Kansas City during various times of outpouring, and develop some perspective about the Lakeland Revival. There were several things that stood out to me:Continued in part 4 . . .First, there was an inspiring atmosphere of expectancy. As I said earlier, there was an amazing sense of hunger and thirst for God to do something great. Everyone present anticipated seeing amazing evidence of the active presence of God. Martyn Lloyd-Jones says that a sense of contentment and complacency is a great cause of apathy and hindrance to revival, and there was certainly no contentment present, but hunger. That was convicting. I thought to myself, “How often do you just show up and treat each Sunday like just another Sunday?” In the days after Toronto, I’ve heard, there was such an expectancy for God to work in power, that one pastor said, “I’m never going to look at Sunday the same way again.” Each time we gather, God will honor an atmosphere of faith and anticipation. I say this very hesitantly, but even if there is some bad theology mixed in, I still think God honors our faith and child-like trust in him. So I would encourage anyone who would be tempted to write this whole thing off as demonic, or to call Todd Bentley the anti-Christ, that there does seem to be a strong genuine thirst for revival and faith that God is stirring one up.
My initial thought about the whole thing when I first learned of it was that, like a brief shower during a great drought, this rain that was falling was going to demonstrate just how dry and thirsty the ground really is. That prophetic leaning was confirmed as I was there last night. There are certainly some healings taking place, and I think these outpouring of healings are exciting people and causing them to thirst for more, to desire a genuine outbreak of the presence of God. I was amazed at how many people seemed to be genuinely hungry for God to work wonders.
Second, I did not feel an incredibly strong sense of God’s presence. I’ve been part of meetings where the presence of God seemed so thick you could almost cut it with a knife. On the ride home we were talking about Toronto and how it was like that. There was one time in Toronto when a man from China was asked to intercede in his native tongue. When he started praying, the presence of God was sensed so strongly through the power of the prayer that people who did not even understand the language began weeping. Then, when asked to give the translation, the prayer was interpreted as, “God, the blood of the martyrs cries out to you.” The environment in this meeting was not like that. Again, I’m not saying that God wasn’t present. I know that he was present, but my subjective experience was that while there was certainly much excitement about the healings that had taken place, and people were certainly being rallied up to pursue the fire of the Spirit and healing power, there wasn’t an overwhelming sense of “Wow, God himself has drawn near!” Someone asked me today, “Is there a real move of the Spirit there?” I answered, “I don’t know.” I expected to walk into the room and instantly be aware of God's presence, and that something was 'going on.' That’s what can typically be the experience in seasons of outpouring. To me, the environment seemed more casual than that. It was very electric and excited, but lacking that general overwhelming sense of God’s immanence and holiness that just makes you stop in your tracks and worship.
Third, there were no prophecies. I’m not saying that there have to be prophecies in order for God to really work; I just thought it was interesting that there weren’t any prophecies shared. There was more of an emphasis on healing than hearing. With previous moves of the Spirit there has been a very strong prophetic tone, a great sense of what God was up to, and how each member present was to be a participant, and to be affected. Obviously, I was only there one night, but I must say I was hoping for more of a prophetic dimension. 1 Corinthians 14:1 makes it clear to me that one of the chief gifts of the Spirit to be desired is that of prophecy, when it comes to a large gathering. I’m not saying that there is no place for any other gifts—far from it—but I would have liked for there to have been more prophecy. I kept thinking to myself, “Lord, what are you saying through all of this? What are you doing in all of this?” I thought to myself, “I don’t just want to see God at work, I want to hear his voice also.” Galatians says that miracles come through “hearing with faith” (Galatians 3:5). I think that an added presence of prophecy and the preaching of God’s Word would have greatly complemented the miracles and greatly increased my anticipation as I heard with faith.
Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival
"One of the features of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit that affected so many in ‘94/’95 was the fact that it was something that could be ‘caught’ or ‘transferred.’ People who attended certain meetings became ‘carriers’ of a kind of ‘spiritual contagion’ which subsequently broke out elsewhere.
It would be true to say that this has been a mark of historic revivals. People visited the 1905 Welsh Revival, for instance, and on returning home, found that God’s presence had accompanied them in an extraordinary way . . .Various phenomenal responses were noted when the Holy Spirit’s presence seemed to be strong. Some fell, some shook, and some laughed. Some seemed to happen in an involuntary kind of way; others perhaps were imitation. The pressure to conform on these occasions can become very great.
What influenced me most significantly was not the extraordinary physical manifestations, but the extraordinary lasting change that I observed in the lives of people I knew. Many displayed a new love and devotion to God and a new sensitivity to the Spirit’s presence. Some embraced a new commitment to Christ and his mission to win the world for his name. The physical manifestations gradually faded, but the transformed lives have remained . . .
How do we evaluate? We must get our doctrine clear.
We often imagine that God’s gifts are proofs of holiness or marks of maturity given only to the most advanced Christians to demonstrate God’s approval of their spiritual progress. But this isn’t the case. God’s gifts aren’t rewards! If that had been the case in Corinth, the church would have been completely devoid of gifts because, as D. A. Carson declares, the believers were ‘wretchedly, unacceptably, spiritually immature’ (The Cross and Christian Ministry, Baker 1993). But Paul said that they ‘didn’t lack any spiritual gift’ (1 Corinthians 1:7). In spite of their immaturity and carnality, God gives gifts freely on the basis of grace. Christ’s righteousness qualifies you to receive amazing gifts of the Holy Spirit . . .
We should pray for 32-year-old Todd Bentley, whose high profile through exposure to daily television broadcasts circling the world would frighten the most experienced preacher. Some of his references to angelic visitations are at least vulnerable to misunderstanding and, tragically, stories of shipwreck associated with previously high profile ministries who spoke frequently of angelic visitation are well documented.
In the midst of what has been historically regarded as authentic and powerful revival, Jonathan Edwards found himself exposed to extraordinary phenomena on all sides. He neither dismissed it all nor accepted it all, but offered his own critique, sometimes defending and sometimes challenging what took place."
Read Terry's complete post . . .
Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival, Terry Virgo
“After worship, Stephen Strader, pastor of Ignited Church in Lakeland, whose father, Karl, had previously been the pastor of Carpenter’s Home Church, stood up and gave some testimonies, as well as some background on the revival for those of us attending for the first time. He explained how the revival was a melting pot of a bunch of different backgrounds. ‘It’s former rain and latter rain,’ he explained, adding that it consisted of folks from the Jesus Movement, charismatic folks, Pentecostal folks, and even some Quakers and Shakers—all together seeking the Lord. He said the message was a “whole gospel,” not one in which certain parts were cut out. What he seemed to be referring to were people who did not agree in the presence of modern-day healing and some of the other things that were emphasized throughout the night.Continued in part 3 . . .Strader stated that this series of meetings is now in its forty-fifth day. It started back on April 2nd when he invited Todd Bentley to come for a series of five meetings or so. Todd ‘made himself at home’ and decided to stay. People had come from at least ten or twelve different countries. There were testimonies of eight people who have been raised from the dead.
Of course, this struck me as amazing, and I waited to hear some explanation. There was a story told of a three-year-old girl named Jaden, who died. The family had begun to make funeral preparations. Lily, a schoolteacher who was part of these meetings, prayed with her class for God to work a miracle. Jaden was an organ donor, and died on Monday. On Tuesday a match was found for someone to accept her organ donation, and on Wednesday her body was in transit to the surgery room for the organs to be removed. On the way there, she coughed and sat up. After telling the story, Strader exclaimed, “Funeral cancelled!” Another story was told about a child who had flat-lined during dialysis. Her testimony was that she had an out-of-body experience, and was sent back down to the earth just before being pronounced dead and sat up praising God.On the issue of excess and judging the legitimacy of the revival, Strader made the comment, ‘Todd [Bentley] and I know that not everything that’s happening here is of God. There’s a whole lot of flesh going on here as well.’ He then warned the group that if they saw anyone acting out in the flesh they would kick them out. Of course, he said, the surest sign of someone in the flesh was someone refusing to participate, writing off everything as demonic. He encouraged the group using the parable of the tares—that God alone can judge, and at the appropriate time he will separate the wheat from the tares.
I was somewhat disappointed to find out that Todd Bentley, the man who has been primarily leading the meetings, was not present. He was in California. In his place, Keith Miller from Stand Firm World Ministries, was addressing the group. He encouraged us to push to a new depth of faith and belief in God for great things. On one occasion he told an individual to stand up, named the cancer they were suffering, it proved to be an accurate word of knowledge, and then he prayed for that cancer to be healed right then and there. His message seemed to be a bit wild, a mix of different texts being read, interrupted by people coming up on stage, 'throwing' the Holy Spirit to hit people in the back, calling out various ailments and praying for a surge of power to heal. You can watch on God TV to get a feel for yourself of the flavor.”
Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival
The thing I was immediately impressed with as we showed up, and throughout the whole night, was the overwhelming sense of anticipation and faith. This is something that, quite frankly, some of us could use a bit more of, myself included. The people at these meetings expect God to do great things when they gather. Too often I expect God to do nothing. My faith was certainly challenged as I thought about my posture in the gathering of my church each week.
One interesting thing I noticed during the worship time was that there were several people throughout the arena who had flags. One of them had the crown of a king on it, another had a heart shape printed on the front. People were very expressively waving flags, an element of worship I can’t say I’ve ever seen before. There were also a couple of people who had loud horns that were blown at various times.Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival, Worship
Anyway, back to Lakeland and Todd Bentley. As a result of my self-imposed TV channel poverty, I know little or nothing about the events in Florida. For the past few weeks I have been studiously avoiding commenting here on the blog about something I know very little about. I did read a piece over at Pyromaniacs, but felt that I did not want to reject these events which I have not studied.Labels: Discernment, Healing, Revival, Terry Virgo
UPDATE—November 3, 2007
Phil has now written part two of his reply, and I have responded with a post entitled, "Of Tone, Discernment, and the Charismatic Question."
UPDATE—October 29, 2007
Phil Johnson over at Pyromaniacs and I have been debating the issues raised by my criticism of him in the comments section of his original post. Just search for "Adrian" using the "find in page" function if you want to follow our specific debate. Phil has also written a new post, "If you can't say something nice," and we are debating in the comments on that post.
I will leave this post at the top of my blog for a couple more days as I want to give you all a chance to read it. If you are interested in some of my related thoughts on this subject, you could read the following posts:
- My Visit to the Billy Graham Center
- I Don't Want Balance, I Want It All!
- My Comments Policy
- Blogging Principles for Christians
Those of you with an eagle-eye will have already noticed that I am publicizing Tim Challies' forthcoming book, The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment. I doubt that many are surprised that I should want to encourage you to read his book, and I will show in this post why that is the case.
To begin with, however, I want to be very open and honest with you. When I first heard that Tim was writing a book I was actually a little concerned. This may surprise those regular readers who know how much I respect Tim and enjoy his blog. But I still had in my mind an old paradigm where those who are in some way "approved" as trained experts are the ones who should write books. Tim, like me, has no theological degrees. I also know that, just like me concerning this blog, he has been rather surprised by the way in which his readership has grown to an extent he never predicted (and, I should say, to a substantially larger figure than my own). So I was surprised that Tim put his neck on the line still further by taking on the challenge of writing a book.
Tim and I have both been riding a wave—the wave of blogging. In both the secular field and the Christian field, it seems that the most successful bloggers almost all seem to have something in common; they are not "officially trained" recognized global experts in their chosen fields. Perhaps this is because the real experts are too busy to write on a daily basis, or perhaps this is because of a new phenomena in our culture—one with which I'm not particularly thrilled, to be honest. In our 21st century culture there is a growing mistrust of any form of authority and of academics. It is actually rather sad to me that this now seems to be spilling over into the Church, and that it might seem, at first glance, to also include the Christian blogosphere.One of the most influential early articles discussing the Christian blogging phenomenon was titled, "We Know More Than Our Pastors," and it embodied this trend. It concerned me immensely. David Wayne summarized this piece and sounded some very valid concerns about it. For me, I wanted almost nothing to do with the concepts outlined therein.
Even as I have enjoyed the way that I have been able to be buffeted in this hurricane called blogging, I have also been somewhat concerned about some of the implications of this new marketplace of ideas. I suppose that, despite these reservations, I remain in the blogosphere because I am drawn to it as surely as a bee is to a flower in bloom, and as the Apostle Paul was to the debating spots of ancient Athens.
I am also here because somebody has to be. I am certainly not here because I imagine myself to be at the vanguard of some modern reformation that will sweep away the "old guard" in the way some bloggers (usually not Christian ones) speak about. I am here because, ironically enough, I see this new media as a way that we can proclaim the old, old message. I am here because, in some small way, I can act as a signpost to direct passing traffic to wiser heads than mine. The more readers I find visiting here, the more I feel the need to both quote and link to others. Whatever the size of your blog readership, that filtering process is the single best gift you can give both to your readers and to the writers of even the biggest blogs. I am pleased that the headlines from several bloggers who deserve to be read more than I do appear in the "Warnie Winners" box in my sidebar.
The blogging community can be thought of as a road system, a library, an ecosystem, or perhaps most aptly of all, a jungle. With no single classification system or map, what is needed are good wise guides. There are precious few of them online.
Read more . . . Blogging, Discernment, and a Book by Tim Challies
Labels: Blogging, Cessationism, Discernment, Leadership
As I discuss spiritual discernment with other people, one of the questions that always seems to arise is this one:“Isn’t spiritual discernment a gift of the Holy Spirit?”
The answer to this one is, “Yes, but . . .” Let me explain.“In 1 Corinthians 12:10 Paul writes about the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and in that list is “the ability to distinguish between spirits.” The Bible provides no further elaboration on this gift and does not tell us all that it entails. Whether this gift is the gift of discernment as we understand it today or whether it is a little bit different we can’t know. What we can know with some certainty is that there is a spiritual gift of discernment in operation today. There is a wide variety of gifts (certainly far more than the Bible lists) and discernment must be one of them. This gift will allow those who have it to identify and expose the spirit of Satan. While all believers are exhorted that they must “not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1 John 4:1), those with the gift of discernment have been given special ability and responsibility. They are equipped by the Spirit to expose the lies of Satan in the teaching of men. They are able to see to the heart of the issues and to see Satan’s shadow behind what does not accord with the Word of God. These people are given special skill and special responsibility in doing the work of discernment. These people are to be a blessing to the Church.
So is there a gift of discernment? Yes, there is. But do not allow this to preclude you from understanding discernment and putting it into practice in your life. For most of us, discernment is a discipline, a way of thinking about life and a skill that we must sharpen with constant practice.
Labels: Blogging, Discernment
"Tim Challies takes us from the turbulent marketplace of ideas that is the modern western church back into the world of the Scriptures. Sadly, today many people fall into the trap of being naively blown from one wind of teaching to another. Others become so expert at straining out the gnats of what they believe to be error that they are unable to learn from anybody. Instead they believe themselves to be the guardians of "true" doctrine. Tim shows us from the Bible itself how to avoid both errors. Tim's reliance on the Bible is refreshing in an age when doctrinal pillars of our faith are being challenged by prominent preachers, and there is a constant search for novelty in parts of the Church. This book, like no other I have seen, aims to give ordinary Christians like you and me the tools we need to learn how to discern truth from error. I wholeheartedly urge you to get yourself a copy and read it, and then buy one for a friend."
Most Christians are a little fuzzy on the topic of discernment. We know that someone should apply discernment to the media, to teachings, and to important decisions. We've heard of discernment ministries, and we may have even used the phrase "the gift of discernment." The general tenor of our conversations could lead us to conclude that discernment is best left to the professionals.". . . it is always wise to have a governing structure where the highest governing offices in the church and the highest positions of influence are open to lay people as well as ordained people. The denominations where only clergy have the highest of authority seem to be the ones that are never able to be brought back once they drift into liberalism because the ordinary lay people who have common sense and are reading their Bibles every day don’t have any way to regain control of a denomination that has gone astray if it has that kind of structure."—Wayne Grudem
Labels: Blogging, Books, Church, Discernment, Leadership, Wayne Grudem
“Our only hope for living the radical demands of the Christian life is that God is totally for us now and forever.Book photo courtesy of Tony S. Reinke, The Shepherd's Scrapbook. Used by permission.Therefore, God has not ordained that living the Christian life should be the basis of our hope that God is for us. That basis is the death and righteousness of Christ, counted as ours through faith alone. On the cross Christ endured for us all the punishment required of us because of our sin. And in order that God, as our Father, might be completely for us and not against us forever, Christ has performed for us in his perfect obedience to God all that God required of us.
This punishment and this obedience are completed and past. They can never change. Our union with Christ and the enjoyment of these benefits is secure forever. Through faith alone, God establishes our union with Christ. This union will never fail, because in Christ, God is for us as an omnipotent Father who sustains our faith, and works all things together for our everlasting good. The one and only instrument through which God preserves our union with Christ is faith in Christ—the purely receiving act of the soul.” (p. 184)
Labels: Assurance, Books, Discernment, John Piper, N.T. Wright
“They appear to be thinking only in terms of hard legalism, which is the notion that either your works bribe God or that they are self-produced by your own effort. But, as you flesh it out, hard legalism does not exhaust the definition of legalism.Reading that quote, I realized that with the emphasis of people like Wright on the need for us to demonstrate that we have changed in order for God to finally justify us in the end has an interesting effect. It is ironic indeed that in trying to claim Judaism was not legalistic, it is possible to argue that the new perspective has created a new form of what Matt calls ‘soft’ legalism.
There is also soft legalism, which is the belief that your God-empowered obedience justifies you before God, or that you ‘become saved’ by faith but ‘remain saved’ by God-produced works (which includes the idea that final justification is based on obedience). In fact, Sanders acknowledged that the first century Jews believed that they got into the covenant by grace but ‘stayed in’ by works. But he failed to realize that this is legalism. The new perspective—and those taking their initial cues from it—typically conflate legalism and Pelagianism, seeming to think that because they (or the first century Jews) are not Pelagians, they therefore cannot be legalists. It needs to be made crystal-clear that these are distinct issues. You can utterly reject Pelagianism and yet be a legalist. You can be a Calvinist legalist, an Augustinian legalist, a believing-in-grace-empowered-works legalist. . . . This is perhaps the central issue of the debate and is probably a big part of the reason that they are going wrong. The essence of legalism is the belief that our right standing with God is based on, comes by means of, or is sustained by our works—regardless of whether those works are self-produced (hard legalism) or whether they are completely produced by God's grace in us (soft legalism). . . .” (Matt Perman, cited in John Piper, The Future of Justification (p. 152).
Labels: Discernment, Gospel, John Piper, N.T. Wright
"Legalism may also exist in practice, even if grace is trumpeted in theory. Religionists may easily proclaim the primacy of grace and actually live as if the determining factor was human effort. The history of the Christian church amply demonstrates that a theology of grace does not preclude legalism in practice. It would be surprising if Judaism did not suffer from the same problem. Legalism threatens even those who hold to a theology of grace since pride and self-boasting are deeply rooted in human nature. . . ."
"Theology . . . is not measured only by formal statements but also by what it stresses. Any theology that claims to stress God's grace but rarely mentions it and that elaborates human responsibility in detail inevitably becomes legalistic in practice, if not theory." (Schreiner, Law and Its Fulfillment, pp. 115–116, cited in John Piper, The Future of Justification, p. 147.)
Labels: Discernment, Gospel, John Piper, N.T. Wright
In historic Reformed exegesis, (1) a person is in union with Christ by faith alone. In this union, (2) the believer is identified with Christ in his (a) wrath absorbing death, (b) his perfect obedience to the Father, and (c) his vindication-securing resurrection. All of these are reckoned—that is, imputed—to the believer in Christ. On this basis, (3) the "dead," "righteous," "raised" believer is accepted and assured of final vindication and eternal fellowship with God.What is striking about this explanation is precisely where this puts Tom Wright. We have seen over the last few days that both Protestant and Roman Catholic theologians have agreed that there is some sort of righteousness transfer that goes on. Where Catholics argue that this is an impartation, Protestants claim it is an imputation. That difference in wording, which led to the Reformation itself, almost sounds like a minor nuance when Wright comes along and sweeps the whole concept of an alien righteousness away! To Wright neither group is right and are both, as he puts it, “ muddle-headed.”
In Wright’s exegesis, the middle element in step 2 is missing (2b), because he does not believe that the New Testament teaches that Christ’s perfect obedience is imputed to us. Thus the pattern is: (1) A person is in union with Christ by faith alone (expressed in baptism). (2) The believer is identified with Christ in his wrath-absorbing death (there is no identification with or imputation of Christ’s perfect obedience) and his vindication-securing resurrection. Both of these are reckoned—that is, imputed—to the believer in Christ. On this basis, (3) the “dead” and “raised” believer is accepted and assured of final vindication and eternal fellowship with God. (pp. 124-125)
Labels: Atonement, Discernment, John Piper, N.T. Wright
So far in this series we have looked at the following: “. . . there is a misleading ambiguity in Wright’s statement that we are saved not by believing in justification by faith but by believing in Jesus’ death and resurrection. The ambiguity is that it leaves undefined what we believe in Jesus’ death and resurrection for. It is not saving faith to believe in Jesus merely for prosperity or health or a better marriage. In Wright’s passion to liberate the gospel from mere individualism and to make it historical and global, he leaves it vague for individual sinners.
-755674.jpg){kind=link}