Archive for November 17th, 2005

17
Nov

Obedient while disobeying

   Posted by: richard   in Doctrine

Is this just whacky?

In justification we are declared righteous. In definitive sanctification, we are made righteous. It isn’t just a declaration, but a true change in the individual. Of course, it isn’t an absolute change, because throughout this life we continue to sin. We are made righteous, and we grow in our righteousness, and, on the last day, we will be made completely righteous.
Analogically, I believe when we have faith, we are obedient. We aren’t perfectly obedient… we continue to sin. But having faith makes us fundamentally obedient.

These were my comments in reply to a question about David’s eternal destination had he died right when he touched Bathsheba:

He would have gone to Heaven. Because he believed and obeyed God. ‘What’s that’, you say, ‘he obeyed God? but he was in the middle of a disobedient act!’ Yes, that’s right. I believe David was a faithful servant, even in the midst of his sin. Why? Because he had faith. And faith is more than just thoughts in our heads… it is (to quote my friend Jason) ‘fundamentally, the disposition of a person to believe and obey God in all things’. Thus, I believe David was obedient, despite his disobedience. And this fundamental obedience was made manifest in his public confession of his sin. When we confess our sins to God and others, we are obeying God.

David was saved by faith alone, and so are we. I don’t want you to go away thinking I’m saying that God looks at our good works and says, “Oh, they did what I said. That means I can let them into Heaven.”, or anything along those lines. We are brought into Heaven because of Christ alone. He takes our sins and we receive His righteousness, and if it weren’t for that transaction, no one would ever be saved.

17
Nov

Leithhart on McCormack on Justification

   Posted by: richard   in Doctrine

Bruce McCormack’s article on justification, alluded to in an earlier post, is quite good. He rightly points out that “the term ‘justification’ has its home in the judicial sphere,” but equally rightly points out that God’s judgments are different from human judgments: “God’s verdict differs in that it creates the reality it declares. God’s declaration, in other words, is itself constitutive of that which is declared. God’s word is always effective. When it goes forth, it never returns to Him void. So a judicial act for God is never merely judicial; it is itself transformative.” Faith thus does not “receive the divine verdict” but “is itself produced by that verdict. Imputation is itself regenerative.” He cites Calvin’s statement that “whomever . . . God receives into his grace, on them he at the same time bestows the gift of the spirit of adoption. . . , by whose power he remakes them in his own image,” and concludes that Calvin teaches that justification is here “logically prior to regeneration.” It is through the verdict of the divine Judge that the sinner is enabled to believe and through that verdict that the sinner is constituted as righteous.

Read his whole post

17
Nov

Covenant Faithfulness

   Posted by: richard   in Doctrine

Opponents of Federal Vision theology often criticize FV for speaking about the necessity of covenant faithfulness. They claim that it brings works righteousness into the picture.
But covenant faithfulness ought to be understood as simple believing God with a faith that saves; a faith that, by definition, has implications in an individuals life.

And I don’t think any Reformed theologian would disagree with that.