We are too big in ourselves when we do well, and too little in Christ in our failings.

Maintain your liberty in Christ by refusing to look any more to the law for justification, and by refusing to fear its words of condemnation. You are to live, in respect of your practice and obedience, as men who can neither be condemned by the law nor justified by it. It is a hard lesson to live above the law, and yet to walk according to the law. But this is the lesson a Christian has to learn, to walk in the law in respect of duty, but to live above it in respect of comfort, neither expecting favour from the law in respect of his obedience nor fearing harsh treatment from the law in respect of his failings. Let the law come in to remind you of sin if you fall into sin, but you are not to suffer it to arrest you and drag you into the court to be tried and judged for your sins. This would be to make void Christ and grace. Indeed Christians too much live as though they were to expect life by works, and not by grace. We are too big in ourselves when we do well, and too little in Christ in our failings. O that we could learn to be nothing in ourselves in our strength, and to be all in Christ in our weakness! In a word, let us learn to walk in the law as a rule of sanctification, and yet to live upon Christ and the promises in respect of justification.
  - pp219–220, Samuel Bolton (1606–1654) in The True Bounds of Christian Freedom (first published 1645, Puritan Paperback edition by Banner of Truth, 1964)

Alas, we are all too apt to follow this line

It is the concurrent opinion of all Reformed Churches that Christians are subject to the rule, the direction, and the authority of the moral law, as says Chamier: ‘Believers are free from the curses, not from the obligations, of the law.’ We preach obedience to the law, but not as the Papists do. They preach obedience as a means to justification; we preach justification as a means to obedience. We cry down works in opposition to grace in justification, and we cry up obedience as the fruits of grace in sanctification. He that does not walk in obedience is a stranger yet to Christ; and he that rests in his obedience does not know Christ. Indeed, many are too much like the Jews still. God set up a law as a rule of walking, and they look for justification by it. These poor men are like oxen in the yoke; they draw and toil and spend their strength (for who do more than those who think to earn merit thereby?), and when they have performed their labour, they are fatted up for slaughter. So it is with these: when they have endeavoured hard after their own righteousness, they perish in their just condemnation. These men Luther fitly calls ‘the devil’s martyrs’: they suffer much, and take much pains to go to hell. The apostle tells them what they are to expect: ‘For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse’ (Gal. 3.10), that is, those who are under the works of the law for justification; and the apostle gives the reason, ‘for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them’. These men seek life in death, righteousness in sin. And, alas, we are all too apt to follow this line; it is hard to perform all righteousness and rest in none; hard to be in duties in respect of performance, and out of duties in respect of dependence. We are apt to weave a web of righteousness of our own, to spin a thread of our own by which we may climb up to heaven. [[...]]
    Alas, there are multitudes in the world who make a Christ of their own works, and this is their undoing. They look for righteousness and acceptance more in the precept than in the promise, in the law rather than in the Gospel, more in working than in believing; and so they miscarry. There is something of this spirit in us all; otherwise we should not be up and down so much in respect of our comforts and our faith, as is still so often the case. We become cast down with every weakness in ourselves. But we should be all in Christ in weak performance, and nothing in ourselves in strong performances.
  -- p69–70, Samuel Bolton (1606–1654) in The True Bounds of Christian Freedom (first published 1645, Puritan Paperback edition by Banner of Truth, 1964), italics original

You can get a free electronic copy of this book at Monergism.

Jesus welcomes sinners because...?

The good news of Jesus is that Jesus welcomes sinners. Sinners like you and me. But when you ask why or how Jesus welcomes sinners, distortions abound. Here are three.

Theological liberalism: Jesus welcomes sinners because no one is really a sinner.

Antinomianism: Jesus welcomes sinners because sin doesn’t really matter.

Legalism: Jesus welcomes sinners because they stopped committing big sins.

But the gospel says: Jesus welcomes sinners despite their sins to make them sin no longer.

Common to all three distortions is to downplay sin. (Yes, legalism above included.) It’s tempting to do so, because we don’t want to deal with the problem we cannot handle. But by downplaying sin, we make Jesus irrelevant and unnecessary. Or do we? Can we? By downplaying funnel web-spider bite, can I make the anti-venom irrelevant and unnecessary? By downplaying poverty, can I make social services and charity organisations irrelevant and unnecessary? Actually, I could, only to the detriment of the spider bite victim (in the case of funnel-web spider bite) and to the detriment of the whole society (in the case of poverty). We are not overplaying the funnel-web spider bite when we urgently apply the anti-venom to someone who’s bitten. We are not overplaying the poverty when we make social services and charity organisations available for those in need. It is simply a loving thing to do. It’s the human thing to do.

Likewise, we must not and dare not downplay sin. When we do so, it is to the detriment of human lives by making Jesus look irrelevant and unnecessary. But Jesus came to rescue us from sin. We all sin. And sin is too big a problem for all of us. We have a real problem, and we need a real solution. Or, rather, a real saviour. And his name is Jesus.

Against theological liberalism, the gospel says, Jesus welcomes sinners, and they are really sinners.

Against antinomianism, the gospel says, Jesus welcomes sinners to make them sin no longer.

Against legalism, the gospel says, Jesus welcomes sinners despite their sins, big or small.

Gospel: Jesus welcomes sinners despite their sins to make them sin no longer. 

(Photo credit: Australian Geographic)

Who are these people?

    Think of some of the greatest biblical figures who ever lived: Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Ruth, King David, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel, Mary, John the Baptist, Peter, and Paul. Or what about the great figures of church history: Augustine, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, and Charles Spurgeon? Or consider the great political and military heroes of world history: Alexander the Great, Constantine the Great, Napoleon, and Winston Churchill. Who are these people, even the greatest saints, compared with Jesus Christ? They are like grain of sand compared with Mount Everest.
    What is Samson's strength compared with that of Jesus, who was raised in power? What is Solomon's wisdom compared with that of the one in whom all the treasures of wisdom are contained? What is Methuselah's age compared with the age of the one who inhabits the places of eternity? What are Paul's visions of heaven compared with the sight of the Lord of heaven? What are Elisha's miracles compared with the incarnation and resurrection of the God-man?
  -- Mark Jones, Knowing Christ, xiii

Having the peace of God is not enough

Question: "Suppose you have the peace of God. Will not that quiet you?"
Answer: "No, I must have the God of peace; as the peace of God, so the God of peace; that is, I must enjoy that God that gives me the peace; I must have the Cause as well as the effect; I must see from whence my peace comes and enjoy the Fountain of my peace, as well as the streams of my peace."
  -- Jeremiah Burroughs as quoted in Fred Sanders, The Triune God, p33–34

The problem of antinomianism: separation of God's law from God's person

    At one level the problem is indeed rejection of God's law. But underneath lies a failure to understand grace and ultimately to understand God. True, his love for me is not based on my qualification or my preparation. But it is misleading to say that God accepts us the way we are. Rather he accepts us despite the way we are. He receives us only in Christ and for Christ's sake. Nor does he mean to leave us the way he found us, but to transform us into the likeness of his Son. Without that transformation and new conformity of life we do not have any evidence that we were ever his in the first place.
    At root then antinomianism separates God's law from God's person, and grace from the union with Christ in which the law is written in the heart. In doing so it jeopardizes not simply the Decalogue; it dismantles the truth of the gospel.
        -- Sinclair Ferguson, The Whole Christ, p154 (italics original)

Everything only through Jesus Christ

(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geerhardus_Vos)

‘Only when the believer understands how he has to receive and has received everything from the Mediator and how God in no way whatever deals with him except through Christ, only then does a picture of the glorious work that God wrought through Christ emerge in his consciousness and the magnificent idea of grace begin to dominate and form in his life. For the Reformed, therefore, the entire ordo salutis [order of salvation], beginning with regeneration as its first stage, is bound to the mystical union with Christ. There is no gift that has not been earned by Him. Neither is there a gift that is not bestowed by Him and that does not elevate God’s glory through his bestowal. Now the basis for this order lies in none other than in the covenant of salvation with Christ. In this covenant those chosen by the Father are given to Christ. In it he became the guarantor so that they would be planted into His body in the thought-world of grace through faith. As the application of salvation by Christ and by Christ’s initiative is a fundamental principle of Reformed theology, this theology has correctly viewed this application as a covenantal requirement which fell to the Mediator and for the fulfilling of which He became the guarantor. In this way Reformed theology simply showed that here too it would be content with nothing but its one all-embracing slogan: the work of grace in the sinner as a mirror for the glory of God.’

  -- p248, Geerhardus Vos, The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology in Redemptive Historyand Biblical Interpretation

Calvin's Institutes. Book II, Chapter 9

This is the post #28 of the Calvin's Institutes summary series.

It is not that the Law was contrary to the Gospel. The promises of redemption was already in the Law and Israel was meant to look forward to its revelation. In the Gospel, in the appearing of Jesus, we can see so much more clearly how God forgives and saves us through the Mediator. Similarly, we, Christians who believe in the Gospel are to still have hope because the final consummation of things is yet to come, just as under the Law, the Israelites were to have hope, waiting for the Mediator. It is wrong to think that we have already "arrived at the destination" (contra Servetus). All this is to say that we must not pit the Law and the Gospel against each other to the extreme. More will be explained in the next two chapters.

Let them read John's Gospel

"Let them read John's Gospel: whether they want to or not, there they shall find a thousand sayings to arouse, at least, their dull minds–nay, I should rather say, to burn a dreadful brand upon their consciences for the restraint of their mockery."
  -- Calvin, Institutes I. viii.

Certainty of Death

When I believed cancer was a death sentence I was wrong ­— not because I’m not going to die, but because in fact I’d always lived under the shadow of death. The one thing we know for sure is that we’re going to die.
  – p33, Hope Beyond Cure by David McDonald

Ordinary? Or extraordinary? I can't decide.

It was a great privilege to do a bit of walk-up evangelism around Sydney Uni last Thursday. I went with a fellow college student, who I knew had a Jewish background. In the course of our conversations with people, someone asked what denomination he was from. My friend answered, “I’m a Jesus-man.” I’m a Christian too. So, telling people on the streets about Jesus Christ is I guess what is expected of us two. An ordinary thing to do. But I can’t stop thinking about that one hour spent together trying to talk to people about Jesus.

Below is a basic summary of what people said as we asked them what they thought about Jesus.

“Nah… not interested.”

“No, thanks.”

“I used to go to a Presbyterian church… I’m looking for a better preaching… a minister I used to know went and did something something something…, my wife has a Catholic church background, something something something… No, I don’t go to church at the moment. No, there are some difficulties with believing things about Jesus, his resurrection and oh, the virgin birth… although that’s a bit easier, maybe something happened with y-chromosome, but then, why… yeah, well, I now gotta go and teach a tutorial, so… thanks.”

“What’s your story? Nah, I’ve (you’ve? He was mumbling.) got something better to do.”

“Err… I dunno. I dunno. Something something something… I dunno. I went to a Catholic school, so I went to the mass and heard all that. No, I dunno. I dunno. I dunno. Basically if you do good, you will have a good life. I’m a Buddhist. I dunno. Ok… so what do you believe? So let me get it straight. You mean, even murderers and thieves, just by believing in Jesus can go to heaven? How is that just? What about sick children? Why didn’t God make things better than this? I dunno, I dunno. Something something something. I dunno. Nah, I haven’t read the Bible as an adult. Nah, I have a Bible at home. I went to a Catholic school. I dunno. Nah, see ya.”

“Huh. You don’t want to talk to me, ‘cause Christians hate homosexuals like me, right? No? Yeah? Fair? (walks off)”

These were people who needed to hear that Son of God came and died for us and rose back to life to be King over us. And there I was, a gentile, trying to tell people about Jesus, side-by-side with a Jesus-man who has a Jewish background. Reflecting back on it, I think I can decide. It was extraordinary.

“The Gentiles are coheirs, members of the same body, and partners of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (Ephesians 3:6)”

Not assuming the gospel

Could you have preached that sermon if Christ had not died on the cross? Could you have developed that Christian leadership principle had Christ not been crucified? I’m not saying be impractical—the Bible has much to say about being practical—but make sure that the practical is tied to the message of Jesus. Otherwise we are on the road to an assumption that will lose the gospel.
   – p. 41, Marks of the Messenger by Mack Stiles