Winsome Words 8/3/15

Why doth the Lord Christ, at any time, thus hide himself in his glory from the faith of believers, that they cannot behold him? He doth it to stir us up in an eminent manner unto a diligent search and inquiry after him…He knows that those with whom he hath been graciously present–who have had views of his glory, although they have not valued the mercy and privilege of it as they ought– yet can they not bear a sense of his absence and his hiding himself from them.

… John Owen (1616-1683)

A Full-Orbed History of Calvinism

If you want a full-orbed history of Calvinism, Dr. Curt Daniels does a very good job of the ins and outs, the developments and distinctives. He is not an RC Sproul or John Piper, and the recordings aren’t so great. He moves fast, naming names and giving more info than you thought there would ever be. I’ve listened to some of his stuff and he seems to know what he is talking about. I came across his stuff when I was looking for more information on Calvinistic antinomianism, a la Liberate conferences.

Here it is.

Piper’s Six-Part Video Series on Christian Hedonism

Here is John Piper’s six-part video series on Christian Hedonism. I teach Christian Hedonism in my ethics class when we cover Aristotle. Aristotle taught what we call teleological ethics, that is, purposive ethics. All things have purpose. There are no bare existences. All existences demonstrate purpose-a chair is for sitting, a light for shining, a table for holding, a bed for sleeping, etc.

So what is the purpose for human beings? By discrete observation we understand that the unique purpose of persons is happiness, or joy. This is what we do, what we are for. We are constantly trying to be happy, even when we sacrifice our happiness for others. In that act, we find our happiness in being the kind of person who sacrifices. It is impossible to escape. The next question is how do we find this happiness that we seek? Aristotle goes on to describe his answer. Piper answers that question from the Bible, we find it in desiring God. I think it is biblically true, psychologically true and scientifically true.

A Biblical Response to Hyper-Grace

Some time ago I read “Jesus + Nothing=Everything.” I found it very troubling, even in the midst of all the good phrases, Bible verses and theological words. My conclusion was that it was antinomian in direction with the practical effect that justification by grace through faith became the whole of the Christian life and left little room for the drama of sanctification. In line with the wider Reformed theology family, much emphasis was put on the imputation of Christ’s obedience to the Christian with the result that the Christian was not only forgiven but whose responsibility for obedience was fulfilled by Christ. This is what the theologian John Murray called “definitive sanctification.”

I wrote a review of it on Amazon expressing my concern and felt the wrath of the Reformed!!

The bottom line is that Tullian Tchividjian’s view of sanctification came too close to antinomianism. The subsequent Liberate conferences left me in no doubt. The bottom line is that we do not obey the law of God as the law of God. To do so is seeking a moral improvement that ends in self-righteousness. The main spring of Christian living is gratitude for the mercy of God. This alone can lead to the life that pleases God. The way this works out in relationships is that the only way to truly help people change is to treat them with mercy, even in the midst of their evil ways. This will be to them an incitement to gratitude that will change their lives.

Is there truth here? Yes. Is this all the truth? No. It leaves little room for Godly repentance and sorrow and that obedience which arises from the exertion of the will to obey the Law of God. This by definition is works righteousness. Duty is the Devil’s playground (my phrasing). Since Christ fulfilled the Law in our place, we are looked upon as if the Law of God has been fulfilled. We can no longer appeal to the Law as a reason, the reason, for doing the will of God. As one can imagine, this can take very dangerous turns, as it has historically done.

This is one of the reasons why some theologians have taken another look at the imputation of Christ’s active obedience to see if it really squares with the Bible’s teaching. Certainly all Evangelicals believe that the passive suffering of Christ has been imputed to us that leads to forgiveness of sin. But no all Evangelicals assert that the life of Christ’s obedience has been imputed to us in a manner that leaves us free from our own active obedience, at least in terms of a life pleasing to God.

This kind of teaching is also making large inroads into the charismatic community, something Dr. Michael Brown has addressed time and again.

Here are a couple of messages with reference to the Liberate type teaching. The message are more textual than theological, so many questions are left unaddressed. But the number of texts marshaled to reject the Liberation type teaching is helpful and convincing that we have a problem here.

This teaching appears to be at a Sunday School-like class at John MacArthur’s church by Wayne De Viller. Here and here. I would differ from some of the points made but in the whole believe it addresses some of the concerns I have.