Piper Sermon on Justification

-
I found a great sermon on justification by John Piper over at Desiring God. He takes a clear statement of Jesus on how a person is justified before God and expounds on it beautifully. It was great to be reminded that Jesus Himself taught on this subject in Luke 18:9-14. I keep finding people on the web who want me to think that only Paul taught justification by faith (see those sites or references to these people here, here, here, here, here, here, and here). The idea that Paul and Jesus contradict each other is wrong.

Even if they were right, they have in a sense excluded Paul’s writings from consideration. These are among the earliest writings of the New Testament. Paul was a contemporary of, and even personally acquainted with, the other Apostles, and he would have shared their common theology and approach.

It seems that many people, from many perspectives, want to showcase their own moral achievements instead of embracing a gospel that is outside of them.

Comments

LPC said…
Dear JK,

The Lutheran hermeneutic of Law/Gospel will show that Jesus and Paul preached the same thing - Justification by Faith Alone or Sola Gratia. This was the method of the Fathers like Ambrose.

Law & Gospel has been always a core doctrine of the Lutherans for the last 500 years which was the method of the Christians from 0-600AD.

Lito
August 02, 2007
J. K. Jones said…
LP,
The law / gospel hermeneutic certainly does explain that. I would claim that method of interpretation as a Baptist as well, but I freely admit that I do not understand it yet. I seem to recall that Luther said once you understand the law /. Gospel distinction, you should be given your doctor’s in theology immediately, and I have certainly not earned my doctor’s, or even my bachelor’s for that matter.

I am working on a series on the traditional arguments and the failures of some of their formulations. I am trying out some of it over at http://thatatheistguysblog.blogspot.com/
if you are interested.
August 03, 2007
LPC said…
Dear JK,

I am forced to write some reasons why I demure from Dr. Piper due to a blog interaction I had in another puritan blog and I hope you do not take offense of my up coming post.

LP
August 09, 2007
J. K. Jones said…
I'll read your post with interest.

The pursuit of truth in a Christian context is not to be taken personally.

J. K.
August 10, 2007
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr
Read more