There are many ways in which Christianity may be defined. But the perspective of the Gospels in particular is that being a Christian means following Jesus. The same Gospels are unanimous that Jesus’ own experience of the Spirit during “the days of his flesh” (Heb 5:7) was attended by servanthood, self-denial, suffering and a perseverance consisting in fidelity to the course set before him by his father. In short, Jesus is portrayed as the obedient man of faith par excellence. That Jesus is represented by the New Testament generally as a man of faith need not be doubted, especially in view of the burgeoning of recent scholarship devoted to this proposition. While the idea can be found throughout the New Testament, we shall concentrate on the merger of perspectives evidenced by the Letter to the Hebrews and the wilderness testing narratives of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels. Afterward we shall consider how Jesus, the man of covenant faithfulness, was vindicated for his obedience and then view the believer in his relation to Christ’s own faithful obedience.

Read the entire article: Following Jesus: Faith, Obedience And Perseverance.

Similar to the last point, the term Calvinism excites people in my church who I don’t want excited. Dr. Michael Horton, a Calvinist theologian, describes as entering the “cage phase” those who’ve recently become Calvinists and are so enthused by their new understanding that they not only can’t stop talking about it (24/7). Like fundamentalists handing out Chick tracks at Willow Creek, they unyieldingly force themselves upon others in order to “convert them to the truth.” (The truth being their brand of Calvinism). It amazes me the boldness “cage-phase’rs” possess in talking with other Christians about Calvinism but then amazingly transform into shrinking violets when it comes to talking with non-Christians about Christ. That’s not something I want to promote on either front.

Finally (and ultimately) I’d rather my people come to an understanding of the doctrines of grace from an exposure to Scripture than an exposure to a system. I will have failed if they say, “I believe in election because I’m a Calvinist,” when they should proclaim, “I believe in election because I believe the Bible.” I’m not anti-systems; on the contrary, everyone believes systemically whether we realize it or not. However, I want people to look to God’s Word as the final arbiter of whether something is true or false. If at any point a system doesn’t line up with Scripture then, at least at that point, we reject that system’s understanding. This isn’t a good practice for only Calvinism, but Arminianism, Dispensationalism, and likely every other “-ism” you might hold.

via Calvinism isn’t Helpful.

We are dealing with this subject of the unity of the covenant of grace, and we were dealing with Dispensationalism. I mentioned a few things yesterday as to what is not the issue with Dispensationalism. I want to make one further point. The point at issue is not whether modern Dispensationalism is that during the dispensation of the law any were saved by works of the law. They don’t maintain any such thing – that any during that people were actually saved by works of the law. They acknowledge that all men were saved by the blood of Christ through the grace of God. The real question here is whether the construction offered of the Mosaic economy is correct. Whether the concession made that during that period man had been saved by grace is consistent with the construction of the Mosaic dispensation.

The thesis I am going to propound is this: that the Mosaic dispensation or covenant was like the Abrahamic covenant – one of grace. And that its governing and undergirding principle was one that provided for salvation by grace through faith. So that the saints in that period were not only saved by grace, but that the very salvation they enjoyed was one in terms of the very provisions enunciated in this Mosaic covenant. You see the difference: dispensationalists say, yes, the saints were always saved by salvation through grace on the basis of the efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ. But nevertheless the principle that undergirded the Mosaic dispensation and covenant, from Calvary to Sinai, was the very antithesis of grace. Since you cannot have two exclusive operating at the same time, they enjoyed that salvation in spite of the governing principle of which the governing principle of the dispensation in which they lived. We say on the contrary, they enjoyed salvation by grace through faith in the dispensation in which they lived provided for that – the very same salvation.

Read the rest at: The Unity of the Covenant of Grace (The Mosaic Covenant).