Monthly Archives: October 2007

What did “the Law” have to do with increasing Sin?

The common assumption seems to be that God put out the Ten Commandments and susidiary laws and gave them to Israel as a huge, millennia-long object lesson. “See, you can’t keep them no matter how hard you try.”

But that simply doesn’t do justice to all that Romans says, nor to the Gospels themselves which make the sin of Israel an essential part of the story.

A result of this mistake entails that people articulate a theology of the person and work of Christ in which Jesus could just have easily done the job if he had been born to any other culture at any other time and died in any other way.

But the Bible teaches that Jesus came in the fullness of time when sin had become utterly sinful. It was at the height of Israel’s continued apostasy that God condemned sin in the flesh so that there is now no condemnation for sinners in Christ Jesus (Romans 8.1-3).

Not every day is Judgment Day. The Law was given to a particular people to work within history to provoke Judgment Day so that Jesus could take the bullet.

Israel’s history in the Bible is essential to our salvation and the person and work of Jesus our Lord. He died for the ungodly “at the right time” (Romans 5.7).

Again with the imputation of Active Obedience

This is a great calvinist statement, but it crystalizes my questions about how we explain the so-called “imputation of the active obedience of Christ.”  I’ll insert numbers.

We believe that Christ, by his obedience and death, fully discharged the debt of all those who are justified. By his sacrifice, he bore in our stead the punishment due us for our sins, making a proper, real, and full satisfaction to God’s justice on our behalf. By his perfect obedience he satisfied the just demands of God on our behalf, since by faith alone that perfect obedience is credited to all who trust in Christ alone for their acceptance with God.

OK, I have no doubt that Christ’s faithfulness through all his earthly life, and also his faithful rule at God’s right hand, is imputed to us.  It simply seems a consequence of Jesus’ headship.

But look at the “needs” that IAO is alleged to meet.  The first sentence above is fine, but the third sentence effectively cancels out the claim that Jesus, by his sacrifice “bore in our stead the punishment due us for our sins, making a proper, real, and full satisfaction to God’s justice on our behalf.”  No, according to the last sentence Christ death on the cross did not satisfy “the just demands of God on our behalf.”  On the contrary, that was only done when, in contrast with his sacrifice, Christ’s “perfect obedience is credited to all who trust in Christ alone for their acceptance with God.”

As I said, I don’t find it possible to conceive of Christ’s obedience not being imputed to believers. Paul is clear that Jesus was raised “for our justification,” and that resurrection was a verdict that Christ lived an utterly faithful life.  The fact of imputation of His active obedience is not in doubt.

But there has to be some way of explaining it that does not dethrone the cross of Jesus.  Reading that third sentence carefully, it makes Christ’s death a mystery.  If God’s “just demands” for sinners could be met by the imputation of “perfect obedience” then what was left over for His Death to satisfy?

Jesus Christ is the savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

This is true.

John Calvin taught it.

Charles Hodge taught it.

John Murray taught it.

I was taught this in seminary.

Oh, not that this matters much to some traditionalists, but the Apostle Paul taught this as well.

Up until real recently the only “Reformed” who had a problem with this were some hypercalvinists up in Michigan and the disciples of Gordon Clark.  Times have changed, slipped sideways, and torn a hole in the space-time continuum landing us all in some sort of nightmarish bizarro world.

POSTSCRIPT: Jeff writes about this!

No interpretation; just passing on the news:

The Gospel Coalition is committed to core evangelical beliefs and wide-ranging cultural engagement.

The Gospel Coalition kicked off in late May with little fanfare, just how organizers wanted it. Any conference headlined by D. A. Carson, Tim Keller, and John Piper would likely attract more than 500 attenders with a little publicity. But Gospel Coalition leaders chose a word-of-mouth strategy and capped attendance by hosting the two-day conference in the chapel at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS). They wanted to test their ideas on a relatively small, friendly group.

Don’t let the low-key strategy fool you. This new group, spearheaded by 40 stake-holding theologians and pastors, has big goals. They want nothing less than a renewed evangelical commitment to core confessional beliefs. And they have the strategy to match their ambition.

The Gospel Coalition already boasts one hallmark achievement with its foundational documents, a confessional statement and theological call to ministry. Gospel Coalition’s diverse leadership, ranging from Presbyterian pastor Phil Ryken to emerging leader Mark Driscoll, hashed out the documents in meetings over more than two years. Carson wrote the original draft of the confessional statement, while Keller penned the theological call to ministry. The confession, dense and comprehensive, addresses current trends with a positive tone meant to attract rather than condemn. But because the confession betrays a broadly Reformed perspective and expects that men lead churches and homes, it will not appeal to every evangelical. The ministry statement, on the other hand, can help all evangelicals navigate cultural challenges such as politicized faith, consumerism, and theological and moral relativism. [read the rest]

Diet as self-destruction

Even low level weight control linked to youth suicide

A couple of quotations:

One explanation of these results could have been that depression is the real cause of suicidal behaviour and that also weight control behaviour is an outcome of depression. But even after controlling for depression, a strong link between weight control and suicide behaviours remains.

Interestingly, the body mass index did not show any link to suicide. Therefore, only feeling fat but not being fat is linked to a suicide risk in young people. And it seems that many of those feeling fat are not really fat. This is a reason for concern about public weight loss messages.

The only skepticism I have is how much a different it makes.  If 1% of non-dieting youths have suicidal thoughs, and 2% of dieting youths have suicidal thoughts, then that is a significant doubling.  But it still means there is only one chance in fifty that any dieting youth you see has been thinking about suicide.  I would like to know more about the findings.

No justice or peace, but we’ll give you digital MTV

I hate this.

Today, the Federal Communications Commission has fined a number of retailers including RadioShack, Fred Meyer Stores and Boscov’s. These retailers failed to post special labels on their analog-only televisions notifying consumers that, come next year, their TVs will stop working. [read the rest]

Government must protext life, liberty, and seamless national-corporate transitions in entertainment technology.  Just more bread and circuses.