The Gospel alone is our Mother

 Galatians 4:23 talks about the wives of Abraham. The one was a slave, the other was a free woman.

Then in v. 24 and 25, Paul says that these women were allegorical to the realities they represented, for they represented two covenants. Agar represented Mt. Sinai, and it's bondage of the law.

In v. 26, Jerusalem which above is free, which is the mother of us all. This is the covenant of grace. In other words, this is the gospel that has begotten us. God in Christ is our Father, who alone teaches us all things necessary for our salvation, and the gospel alone is our mother who makes us alive with Christ, and sits us with him in the heavenly realms.

Why is Justification by Faith alone so Important?

 I bought Schreiners book Faith alone. In it he says, "How important is 'Faith alone' - the doctrine of justification? I am not arguing that sola fide is the gospel, though I believe it is one element ot entailment of the gospel. Those who reject the motto aren't necessarily proclaiming a different gospel."

Well Mr. Schreiner the Apostle Paul would say that if Righteousness came by works of the law then Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21) and to place one's trust in something other than Christ alone which is Faith alone is to believe in vain.

Lordship salvation teaches that the Gospel is Christ in us

 When I was duped in the Lordship salvation camp several years ago, the idiom was something to the effect that Christ is not about fire insurance but about savoring Christ more and more; by which the idiom meant believing in Christ alone entails more than being saved from the wrath to come. However much this idiom is spoken by people it is a confused idiom. It confuses the Law and Gospel. It mingles the Christ for us with the Christ in us. The Christ for us made himself a curse that we might be the righteousness of God by imputation (Galatians 3:13), the Christ for us died to deliver us from the curse (Galatians 1:4), and so was made sin for us (2 Cor 5:15);

However, the christ in us who walks in our midst (2 Cor 6:16), who reveals his son in us (Galatians 1:16) - imperfectly, who lives in us (Galatians 2:20), who helps us in our weaknesses- Romans 8:26, dwelling richly in us and not by measure - 1 John 4:12, works in us to will and do Phil 2:13.

However we need first the Christ who laid down his life for us (1 John 3:16) before we can get the Christ who works in us.

The one Christ for us died for our sins so that by faith passively we are justified and declared righteous, the Christ in us is to show our thankfulness and to love our neighbors as ourselves.

Looking within only brings doubt and not assurance

 So I sent a youtube video over to one of the elders at Paradox of Macarthur telling a woman who doubted of her salvation because she doesn't know if she has basically done enough. Macarthur of course puts her back into introspection.

This elder defends Macarthurs way of doing it through out and yet has the audacity to claim he is against Lordship Salvation. Of course, when you confuse law and gospel and you are for Van Tillian logic you will say irrational things.

First, he asked me about Macarthur's distinction between security and assurance. My response to him was that the Bible treats these as the same thing. The elect have a sure foundation by Christ. The elect because of the work of Christ alone are assured of salvation.
Macarthur in the video said to the woman that one of the surest signs that she was saved was that she desired to be saved. Yet the Bible no where says this is where assurance lies. Esau also desired the promises of God but found no place of repentance from his father even though Esau sought it with tears.

So the elder asked me what would my answer be to this woman?

Either she believes in Christ alone for assurance or she is not. That should have ben clear from what I said. Macarthur doesn't. 

Its interesting how these guys want to add something that we do to the mix of salvation.

Again this elder tells me that she is looking for assurance but her security is unwavering in Christ.

My question is do we know this? No. Macarthur is pushing this woman to look inside. Typical Lordship salvation guys do this. They want to look for 'evidences' of ones salvation in what the Spirit does inside them. The elder assumes that she desires the lord and it is good but does she desire it from knowledge? You could also interchange desire with having a zeal. The Jews sought the righteousness of God but didn't attain it because they sought it not rightly through Christ Jesus alone.

The elder wants more room for Progressive Sanctification. 

I understand what he is trying to do. He wants to send this woman away from the true Christ of Scripture, which wouldn't be optimal. The Bible never grounds our salvation in anything else other than what Christ accomplished on the cross. Either one is saved by the power of what Christ got done or they are not. Either a man looks to Christ or they do not. Can't change a leopard.

Jesus is referred to as the Hope of the elects salvation in Scripture. The elect are said to believe upon him, to believe upon his word.

Secondly, the question was raised about whether I doubt. I am sure this elder doubts everyday for its a natural inclination for those whose eyes are taken off Christ.

His question was do I ever doubt the sincerity of my Faith? My answer is No. I don't because my Faith is not in my Faith. If it was then yes I would doubt.

Then the next question was whether I had any besetting sins that make me question my Faith. Have I ever experience any season of doubt? Like maybe I am not actually saved?

To which I responded in the negative. For I know who I have believed in and believe that he is able to keep me til that day.

Now keep in mind my response isn't that I never am tempted to look away from Christ and that I never do sin. My response is of a different nature. My response is with regards to my own work which is not perfect to that of what Christ achieved on the Cross and how his work is perfect and mine is not.

The elder then back peddles and says that he is not arguing that assurance is within ourselves - which he basically did at the beginning when he said "she is looking for evidence to that effect. The evidence is the Spirit working in her life - specifically, that she is experiencing conviction, and that her desire is for the Lord."

The question now is then have you desired enough? are you convicted enough? look to yourselves for such conclusions.

When he says have I ever sinned to which causes me to lose my assurance you are then suggesting that my sin can cause my assurance to be effected. Again this means that no one can be assured of salvation because of sin. Again when one looks within all they see is the mire of sin and guilt before a Holy God who requires perfect obedience outside of Christ. And most professing Christians, mostly false converts, have never been taught what is the basis of assurance.

Then he asked a wiggle question if I could be wrong about this. To which I responded that I am not. Methodologies matter. How one reads the Bible matters.

Again he suggest that I am misinterpreting a few minor points with some of these theologians, and missing the difference between belief and application of belief - whatever that means?

I wouldn't call Macarthur a theologian. He suggesting and trying to defend Macarthur softly will show how this guy is inconsistent when he later says that he is against Lordship Salvation, New Perspective, and Federal Vision. 

He asked if there is any room for evidence or fruit of salvation? Faith and then works? the Fruit of the Spirit?

Again the question is already answered. These 'fruits' are imperfect and cannot be the basis of our assurance. He is wanting these fruits to be the basis or part of the basis of our assurance. They are not.

The rest of the conversation is a rehash of what I have posted on here about James and 1 John.

Justification by Faith alone is to distinguishing the Law and the Gospel

 By saying that the law and gospel distinction is a secondary matter, one is leaving the door open for the idea that one is justified by faith and works or faith and the law of obedience. The gospel is not a secondary matter bit as Paul says it is a matter of first importance - "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;" 1 Corinthians 15

By knowing the law and gospel distinction believers are better equipped to understand and ground their assurance rightly by what Christ alone did.

Again, the elect are justified by faith alone. What is this faith alone if it doesn't distinguish between our sins which are many, which procures the wrath of God outside of Christ, and the only righteous thing that makes the elect acceptable before God?

If the law and gospel is merely a secondary matter then Paul would not have said did we receive the Spirit by the works of the law or did we receive the Spirit by the hearing of the word through faith?

If one gets the law and gospel distinction wrong they get God's act of justification wrong and vise versa. They two are intertwine. For by faith the elect believe the gospel and so are justified.

The Law and its usage

The law is good. It's not bad. The problem is that we are sinners and so the use of the law for salvation is unattainable. Perfection is what the law demands. The declaration of law should cause fear in them who seek to be justified. Notice that the rich young ruler in Matthew 19:13 - 21.

The result of the law preached to the rich young ruler was that it caused him to sorrow because he knew the law as the mirror of what righteousness God demanded he did not meet.

So one use of the law is that it is a school master to lead us to Christ who alone saves from sin and death and hell.

The second use is that it is used to deter further sin in society. In this use it is for the elect alone, to protect them from the actions of the reprobate. Consider for example Abraham in Genesis 12. The Pharoah, who saw Abraham's wife, wanted to take her for his own. But God caused a plague.

The third use of the law is that of a rule of Christ for those who believe in Christ alone for justification. This rule can be seen as in the Bible from Romans 13 where we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Jesus also gave his disciples a new command to love one another. The rule of life however to be clear does not save us. As Paul says, the Law is good if one uses it Lawfully. 1 Timothy 1:8

Of course, to be certain that in all three usage of the law in no sense is it said that the law is meant to save anyone. For that the gospel alone is what saves.

Some Churches Don't like the Law and Gospel Distinction

 Spoke with one of the guys at that church again. I think about what he said. But basically he said that the law and gospel distinction isn't a primary issue (I disagree). He said that someone to be saved doesn't need to know the law and gospel distinction, though it's helpful, there are other criterias to which one can read the Bible ( I would ask what does he mean?)

Overall it seems like he is wanting to keep it a secret. Some like to keep the doctrine of election a secret because ignorant is bliss and if someone doesn't know then how can they reject it?

Of course, the Bible has lots to say about how a person is saved. If a person believes they are saved by faith and works then can we say they are saved? The issue is probably muddied in the sense that when a hearer hears the gospel message for the first time or second time it is assumed that the speaker knows what is the gospel and what is the law. If the speaker or preacher doesn't know these things then as the Bible says the preacher or teacher or speaker will be judged more harshly. I think of the warnings in Ezekiel or the Parables of Jesus.

Theodore Beza says, "We must pay great attention to these things. For, with good reason, we can say that ignorance of this distinction between Law and Gospel is one of the principles sources of the abuses which corrupt and still corrupt Christianity.

The majority of men, blinded by the just judgement of God, have indeed never seriously considered what curse the Law subjects us to, nor why it has been ordained by God. And, as for the Gospel, they have nearly always thought that it was nothing other than a second Law, more perfect than the first. . . ." - The Christian Faith, Page 37

Our Confidence

 Our Confidence comes from knowing God as not only the sovereign Creator who created all things, and upholds it, but also in the fact that He sent his one and only son to die upon the cross for the sins of the elect alone.

How does providence help us?

The Heidelberg Catechism says

What advantage is it to us to know that God has created, and by his providence doth still uphold all things?

That we may be patient in adversity; thankful in prosperity; and that in all things which may herafter befal us, we place our firm trust in our faithful God and Father, that nothing shall separate us from his love; since all creatures are so in his hand, that without his will they cannot so much as move.

The purpose is so that we may be patient in suffering.

Ultimately the believers comfort lies in Knowing that their sins have been expiated and the wrath of God has been propitiated on their behalf.

It is not the law but the belief in immortality that drives us to love

"'Generally, again, I ask your permission to drop the subject,' Pyotr Alexandrovich repeated, 'and instead let me tell you another anecdote, gentlemen, about Ivan Fyodorovich himself, a most typical and interesting one. No more than five days ago, at a local gathering, predominantly of ladies, he solemnly announced in the discussion that there is decidedly nothing in the whole world that would make men love their fellow men; that there exists no law of nature that man should love mankind, and that if there is and has been any love on earth up to now, it has come not from natural law but solely from people's belief in their immortality....'" - Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, pg. 69

Simul justus et peccator

simul justus et peccator. In what sense is this true one may ask? In accordance to the law, which are commands of that which we are to do perfectly, which we fail to do perfectly as God is holy so we are to live holy the elect Christian is a sinner. Never is he accepted by God on the basis of his law keeping. Neither can he find his assurance in his law keeping for he cannot keep the law perfectly. But rather on the basis of Christ's imputed righteousness to the elect is the elect sinner justified. So the Christian's righteousness is grounded on a righteousness not their own but on an alien righteousness won by Christ alone. And on the basis of the law he is yet still a sinner never attaining that good that he ought to do. So the Christian is simultaneously just and sinner at the same time. We see how the two forms of righteousness relate to the law and gospel distinction.

Cannot Preach the Gospel Unless You Also Preach Unconditional Election

The gospel includes in it the doctrine of unconditional election. Christ tells his people that He has chosen them in John 6:70 "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"

John 15:16 "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."

You cannot preach the free gospel without the doctrine.

The Christian looks forward to a new heaven and earth

"What ails a believer to groan so oft and so deeply? It is to be in heaven with the Lord. And the more heavenly and holy a Christian be, the more frequent and earnest are these groanings. He hath the most healthy soul, who is sick of love: whose heart is sick with desires of being present with the Lord. The believer that is most assured of heaven, groans deepest." - Robert Trail, Sermons Concerning the Throne of Grace, pg. 176

The Gospel saves some and hardens others

"I shall end this postscript with observing, that when the popular preachers can find no other way of showing their contempt of the simple belief of the truth, as the sole requisite to justification, they call it the faith of devils. Yet, however keen the intended reproach be, it can have weight with none but those who are swayed by sound instead of sense. For, according to the Scripture, the same truth which saves Christ's people, torments the devils. So we find them saying, 'what have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time?' They believe, they hate, and yet they tremble at that truth which Christ's people believe, love, and find salvation in." - Robert Sandeman, Theron And Aspasio, Pg. 346

The Same Truth That Saves Also Hardens

"I shall end this postscript with observing, that when the popular preachers can find no other way of showing their contempt of the simple belief of the truth, as the sole requisite to justification, they call it the faith of devils. Yet, however keen the intended reproach be, it can have weight with none but those who are swayed by sound instead of sense. For, according to the Scripture, the same truth which saves Christ's people, torments the devils. So we find them saying, 'what have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time?' They believe, they hate, and yet they tremble at that truth which Christ's people believe, love, and find salvation in." - Robert Sandeman, Theron And Aspasio, Pg. 346

To Have the Spirit Is to Believe the Gospel

"The Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of truth, as also the Spirit of grace. He speaks and breathes only the grace and truth that came by Jesus Christ. When a man, then, comes to know the gospel, or to receive this Spirit, he thinks of no other grace but what appeared in Christ's tasting death for men; no other truth, but what was manifest in Christ, the end of the law for righteousness. This differs not a little from what the popular doctrine leads us to think of; namely, the truth of grace in the heart. When our systems describe faith to us, as a saving grace bestowed on us, by which we make use of Christ for salvation, are we not led to think of some grace necessary to our salvation, beside what appeared when Christ, by the grace of God, tasted death for the sins of men?" - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio, pg. 308-309

Our assurance and rest is Christ alone

"And so again, when a poor soul feels a load of guilt; how is he to get rid of it? 'Oh!' say some people, 'begin to do your duty; and when you have done a little duty, then you are to take the comfort of the Bible.' I believe it is the devil's trap, to insult the Spirit of God and to deceive sinners. 'Why,' say you, 'you would not encourage them not to do their duty?' Nay, that is another thing. It becomes them to walk in the precepts of God and practice all what are called duties; but that will not do for a ground of comfort and happiness. If ever we feel guilt, and if God the Spirit does not apply the atonement and bring us to walk into the efficacy of the blood of God-man Mediator, and we get rid of guilt without it, it is the devil deceiving our souls and we have wrapped up ourselves in some sad delusion. Nothing but that can bring solid peace to the conscience and clear our sky of clouds." - William Gasdsby, Sermons, pg. 19

The Two Forms of Righteousness

"Both the law-gospel and the passive/active-righteousness distinctions are essential for the Lutheran pastor, and neither needs to be neglected in favor of the other. Law and Gospel remind us that Christians always fall short of God's will and are saved solely by God's grace. The two kinds of righteousness remind God's people that they cannot work to merit God's favor or love, but that righteousness is given freely, and that they are called to live holy lives in the world for the sake of others." - Jordon Cooper, Hands of Faith, pg. 128

What Christ gives to His elect is better than what Boaz gives

Matthew 19:29 - the point is not about forsaking house, family or lands but rather in Christ we have eternal life. Whereas Boaz Ruth 2:11 gives earthly goods Christ gives heavenly goods.

The Gospel is not about me, but what Christ accomplished for His elect alone

"The Gospel is not about me gaining membership in some institutional church, but it is about the expiation Christ made for our sins. The Gospel is about how Christ propitiated the wrath of God for us. The Gospel is about how Christ satisfied the Law of God for us. The Gospel is about our sins being laid to Christ's account, while His perfect righteousness is imputed to us!" - Monty L. Collier, Papist Whores & Their Theology, pg 142

Exhortations are to be Instructive and Doctrinal

"Exhortations should be Instructive and Doctrinal, Declaratory and Manifestative, as the Scriptures plainly show. We should find the Gospel in an exhortation, and not lose it there. An exhortation should be every way suited to the Gospel Profession in the Good News its self; and sinners are not to be told that the whole of exhortations are a practical point; for a great deal of them are Doctrinal and Instructive points; and he that never made this distinction in his very defence of exhortations, hath held forth rather his own darkness, than the Word of God hereabout, a Gospel Exhortation instructs into the objects, principles and springs of motion, agreeably with a new creature-change; and then under right discourses directs to the immediate duty of believing, repenting, &c." - Joseph Hussey, God's Operation of Grace, Pg. 386