Sabbath Study Guide

About a year ago, I created a Study Guide for members who were asking questions about the Sabbath and the Biblical teaching of it. I put together this study guide to walk people through the Biblical Theological basis for Sabbath by reading text and asking critical questions about what each text is saying. I provide it here for those interested or who want to use it for their own study:

Sabbath Study Guide

This guide is meant to assist one reading through relevant Scriptures dealing with the subject of the Sabbath. Some of the questions are meant to help think through the facts of the passage, other questions the deeper meaning, and finally other questions are meant to think through our practical application of the passage.

Genesis 2:1-3
1) What is significant about the Sabbath starting in Creation?

2) If God did not "need" to rest, why did He?

3) If marriage (2:18-25) and Sabbath are creation ordinances, can either one be abolished before the new creation?

Exodus 16

1. Why would it be significant to see Sabbath keeping before the law is given at Sinai?

2. What implications does this passage have about the day before the Sabbath?

3. APPLICATION: Do we have to work at resting or prepare to rest on the Sabbath like the Israelites?

Exodus 20:8-11, Deuteronomy 5:12-15

1. One account of the 10 commandments roots Sabbath in Creation, the other in redemption: how is the Sabbath significant to how we understand creation? How does it help us understand Redemption?

2. In reading though the other 9 commandments, would you see these commands as always morally binding? Are these commandments arbitrary or rooted in something deeper?
   
   
3. APPLICATION: Name the imperative verbs (commands) in the section. Then think through any contemporary applications.

Exodus 31:13-18

1. How does God fulfill his promise: “Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths, for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the LORD, sanctify you.”

2. Read Exodus 31:16 – How long was the Sabbath to remain as a part of the covenant with God’s People?

3. Read Exodus 31:18 – What is referred to by the phrase “two tablets of stone”? In light of the establishment of a “covenant forever” what implication does this have for the validity of the “two tablets of stone”?

Isaiah 58:13-14

1. What is included in "your own pleasures"? If “our pleasures” are not necessarily wrong, what does this tell us about our pleasures on the Sabbath?

2. What is the blessing attached to Sabbath keeping?

3. APPLICATION: What blessings might we be missing out on by neglecting Sabbath?

4. APPLICATION: What personal pleasures may be appropriate on other days, that are not on the Sabbath?

Nehemiah 13:15-22

1. What was the violation that upset Nehemiah?

2. What was Nehemiah’s reaction (punishment) to Sabbath breaking?
   
   
3. APPLICATION: How, today, do we violate the Sabbath like those in Nehemiah 13?

4. APPLICATION: Why, today, do we not take the Sabbath as seriously (as worthy of physical beating for breaking!)?

Matthew 12:1-14

1. Read Deuteronomy 23:25 – Was it “unlawful” for the disciples to pick grain from the field in 12:1-2?

2. Read 1 Samuel 21:1-6 – The Westminster Confession will talk about works of mercy and necessity on the Sabbath – How do we see that in action in this episode from the life of David?

3. Jesus declares Himself “Lord of the Sabbath.” Read the lead in to Matthew 12, in Matthew 11:28-30. How is this a demonstration of Him being “Lord of the Sabbath”?

4. Jesus does a work of healing on the Sabbath. How does Jesus fulfill His role as “Lord of the Sabbath” in Matthew 12:9-16?

5. APPLICATION: How do we come to Jesus like the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath?

6. APPLICATION: Mark has a parallel account, but includes the observation “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” (Mark 2:27) In what ways does the Sabbath benefit man?

7. APPLICATION: In no place does Jesus condemn the principle of Sabbath-keeping. Yet, the Pharisees are condemned for the way they “kept” the Sabbath with no regard to doing works of mercy. How should we be mindful of that in our Sabbath-keeping today?

Hebrews 4:1-11

1. How does “there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God” align with Old Testament teaching on the Sabbath?

2. Hebrews 4:8 “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on.” In what ways have we still not fully entered into that promised rest?

3. APPLICATION: Reflect for a while on Hebrew 4:10. What is God’s role on the Sabbath? What is my role on the Sabbath?

4. APPLICATION: What efforts can we “strive” to do to enter the rest that Sabbath promises?

PRACTICAL APPLICATION QUESTIONS:

1. Do you believe that today in America, we are more like the Pharisees in Matthew 12 or the Israelites in Nehemiah 13 in our problem with the Sabbath?

2. What spiritual activities do you wish you had time to do? [Are there any spiritual books to read, songs to sing, time set aside for prayer, family worship, Bible Reading, listening to sermons?]

3. Record a schedule of your Sundays.
   1. How much of the time is used in preparation [to go somewhere, to make a meal, cleaning etc]?
   2. How much time is used for recreation and entertainment [watching or participating]?
   3. How much time is used in “holy” activities?
   4. After doing this, would you say that you are using the day as set apart to God?
   5. How might you change your schedule to keep the Sabbath holy? What might you have to start doing? What might you need to stop doing [or start doing on a different day]?

Further Studies in the Biblical Theology of Sabbath

These questions are meant to investigate issues or objections to the Sabbath that arise. These deal with deeper and more difficult subjects to think through regarding the Sabbath.

Abolished Law? Read Matthew 5:17-20

Some may cite Ephesians 2:14-16, saying Christ has abolished the law. [“having abolished the law of commandments expressed in ordinances”]

1. What is Christ referring to as the “law” in Matthew 5:17-20? How is that different from Ephesians 2:14-16?
2. Matthew Henry states: “By his sufferings in the flesh, to took away the binding power of the ceremonial law (so removing that cause of enmity and distance between them), which is here called the law of commandments contained in ordinances, because it enjoined a multitude of external rites and ceremonies, and consisted of many institutions and appointments about the outward parts of divine worship.”
   1. If Jesus was not abolishing the moral law (i.e. the 10 Commandments), what significance would that have for the Fourth Commandment? How would the writer of Hebrews 4:9 respond if he was asked if the Sabbath was a part of that which was done away with in the ceremonial law?
   2. Would the Jewish and Christian Sabbath have some differences? Some similarities?

No More Sabbath? (Col 2:16-17; Romans 14:6; Gal 4:10)

When Paul mentions “Sabbaths” in Col 2:16-17, there is more than one “Sabbath” in the Old Testament.

1. Read Leviticus 25:1-7.
   1. How does land have a Sabbath?
   2. Read Leviticus 26:40-45. What was the punishment for not keeping the Sabbath Year?
   3. Read Jeremiah 25:12, Daniel 9:2 and 2 Chronicles 36:20-21 //How did God fulfill his promised punishment in the exile?

2. Read Leviticus 23:1-8. What other days other than Saturday are called “sabbaths”?

3. With the Old Testament context, what then is Paul talking about with “festivals,” “new moons,” and “sabbaths”?
   1. Might we make a distinction between “sabbaths” and THE Sabbath?
   2. APPLICATION: What applications might this teaching have for modern “sabbaths” or Holidays?

Saturday (last day) or Sunday (First Day)?

We only have evidence of the church worshiping as the church on the first day (Sunday) not the seventh day:

• Scripture records worship on the first day:

Act 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.

1Co 16:2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come.

Also cf. Joh 20:19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."

• The Universal Witness of the Apostles was to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ on the First Day of the Week. [Matt 26:17, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1; John 20:1.]

• The early church testified to worship of the church on the first day, such as Justin Martyr, a Christian in the Second Century AD, in his First Apology, Chapter 67 – “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.”

1. When the Apostles worshiped on the first day, and the Sabbath was referred by the Lord as “my holy day” and “the holy day of the Lord” (Isaiah 58:13-14), and when John says he was “in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day,” (Rev 1:10) What good and necessary application do we have as Christians in the Apostolic Church?

2. If the first day of the week is when creation began, what might the change of the Lord’s Day to the first day have to teach us? [cf. 2 Cor 5:17, Gal 6:15]

PCA Strategic Plan: Thoughts

[This is an opinion piece about an internal discussion in the PCA. If you are not in the PCA, you are welcome to skip it as it contains matters of an internal debate, which will in no way diminish my appreciation for the PCA and its work]

A few weeks ago, the CMC released the PCA strategic plan. This plan looks into the future and attempts to make changes to plan for the future and how the PCA will see its own role in the future in American Christian mission and religious life. I wanted to take some time to read the plan and reflect on it. I do this not as a voting member of Presbytery, but merely as a person under care of a Presbytery looking toward ordination in the PCA. Thus, my thoughts are tempered and are only suggestive to those who might be voting members.

The plan, spearheaded by President Bryan Chapell of Covenant Seminary, has a few general themes, some BCO change recommendations and some suggestions on changing the affiliations of the denomination. As I comment, I would also like to say I have benefited greatly from Chapell’s work especially on preaching and respect him as a minister in good standing. I would like to briefly comment on the proposed themes and changes.

1. Require contribution to the PCA Administrative Committee for participation in GA.

Many prominent PCA ministers, including Lig Duncan, have supported this part of the plan as a step in the right direction towards a more Presbyterian church government. After all, even the Southern Baptist Convention, a looser confederation than the Presbyterian form of government, requires contribution to vote at their convention. Over half of the churches in the PCA contribute nothing to the PCA and have voting rights.

Generally, I would agree that this perhaps is the historical structure of a Presbyterian governed church. That half of the churches contribute nothing is embarrassing. The requested amount is less than 1% of a church's budget, hardly a bank breaker.

However, we must recognize where the PCA comes from. The PCUSA had a strong denominational structure that still hamstrings some individual churches in regards to property ownership. PCA churches are, and should be, weary of a strong denominational government, not due to the current ethos of the denomination, but the possible future status of the denomination. If a church becomes concerned with the use of its resources in the future, if they protest by withholding contribution that would deny that church a vote at GA. Such a move empowers the denomination over the local church. Although more churches should contribute, and be petitioned to contribute, none should be required to.

That leads to a second objection. Might I quote a Baptist who may have a point where he is more Reformed that the PCA strategic plan: "The local church is the focal point of God's plan for displaying his glory to the nations." This is the motto of 9 Marks, Mark Dever's organization for reforming churches according to Scripture. This perhaps should be the dominant philosophy of the PCA in the future. This leads to our next theme:

2. Redirecting the mission focus of the PCA away from NAPARC

NAPARC is the North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council. This Council consists of confessional Reformed and Presbyterian Churches like the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the United Reformed Church. This organization is dedicated to confessional expression of the Reformed tradition and presenting a unified front on in this endeavor of advancing confessional Reformed churches in North America.

Page 26 of the Strategic plan recommends withdraw from this organization. The reasoning is given in Bryan Chapell's video that this organization consists of "micro-denominations" that have fewer members than the PCA but have equal vote. This organization is said to be draining our time and energy since it "shares our doctrinal identity, but not our ministry focus." This statement is never clarified, however, from the rest of the plan this seems to mean a new focus to work with organizations, outside of our confessional identity, that do not share our doctrinal distinctives but give the PCA more "influence," presumably as a Reformed voice among non-Reformed Christians in missions organizations.

This proposal, I believe, is the most telling of the vision of the strategic plan. The plan introduces various "means" towards achieving the goal of a larger "influence" in American Christianity. This is misguided on a number of fronts, but this is chief:

If we do not share the ministry focus of NAPARC, then we are do not truly share their doctrinal identity.

Confessional Reformed doctrine believes the means of achieving the mission of God in the world are the means God has ordained. These are not parachurch organization, though they may have some role, but the "ordinary means" as outlined in the Westminster Larger Catechism Questions 154-160. These means are the Word, read and preached, the sacraments and prayer. In other words, the means of accomplishing the mission of God is the church performing its ordinances given to it by God, by which He has promised to bring fruit. When the Word is preached, that is the means by which people are converted (Romans 10:14-17, 1 Cor 1:21). Baptism and the Lord's Supper are visible words, proclaiming that gospel alongside the Word (Ephesians 5:26; 1 Cor 11:26) and prayer is the means of advancing the kingdom (Mathew 6:9-13, See Matthew 6:10 NET). A focus away from the local church towards the denomination, denominational programs and parachurch organizations due to a leveling off of church membership displays an approach driven by numbers and a desire to manipulate those numbers by means other than the ones we are commanded to be faithful to perform. (Tim 4:13)

The concern of the PCA should be our faithfulness to what God has called us to and leave the numbers to God. If we see numbers declining, our recourse is repentance, and renewed vows to faithful to preach and administer the sacraments, the duty given to us in the Great Commission. (Matt 28:19) The means given was not certain programs and parachurch affiliations but the ordinances of the church. The advancement of the Great Commission then is the duty of the church and that is where the PCA should focus its energies (along with the other denominations in NAPARC)

What has attracted me to the PCA is the churchly spirituality of the Reformed faith as expressed in the PCA. I believe the PCA is well positioned to offer a biblical churchly spirituality to a culture that is greatly lacking true spirituality instead chasing fleeting experience, psychological comfort and charismatic mirages. I would like to see the PCA continue to do so rather than become more generically evangelical.

Alternatively, the PCA as a denomination certainly could establish structures and programs that would help advance the mission of the church, but these must be with a focus to the local church, not programs or parachurch associations.

Here are a few alternative suggestions:

1. Establish an internship fund of the PCA.

The OPC has a general fund to pay those seeking ordination in the OPC to work within a local church for up to a year. This allows a future minister to focus on learning the craft of ministering from a local minister, whose church may not be large enough to support that intern alone. This also allows the ministerial candidate to focus on the craft of ministry solely for the year of preparation rather than also maintain a full time job, thereby shortchanging his internship experience.

2. Fully fund RUF ministers and Missionaries through the PCA.

Either we consider RUF minister to actually be ministers or we do not. Currently, most RUF ministers are only half-supported by the church and half-supported by individuals. A minister is one who is supported by the church, as Paul tells us, "Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages." " (1 Tim 5:17-18) Only half supporting missionaries in MTW and MTNA and RUF ministers, if we truly consider them ministers, reduces them to half a minister and, though popular in American mission structure, a skirting of Scripture's command for the church to support their ministers.

3. Fund Church planting

Most church planters also are forced to raise support from individuals rather than the church. The same applies to these evangelist ministers. Either they are an elder/minister or not. If they are, the church ought to fund them, if not, then do not call them ministers.

If the PCA would take steps towards advancing the gospel and the kingdom to an even greater degree than they thankful have done, in the manner of supporting the local church, the first measure for more funding would meet with a greater welcome by me. However, the lack of faith the strategic plan seems to have for the ordinary means and the local church forces me to recommend to any that are attending GA this year to vote to defeat the strategic plan in regards to changing the BCO to require church funding of the denomination, and to vote against withdraw from NAPARC.

The focus must be brought back to a biblical focus on the local church, the means of grace, and the proclamation of the gospel purely and simply. This is the hope of the world and the future of God's universal invisible church. May the visible church in the PCA align itself as closely and faithfully to the command of God as possible.

Spirit and Word

When we ask what "The Spirit taught me," do we ask how the Spirit taught "In the Word?" Not that all learning is head knowledge. Indeed, if all we learn stays in the head and never makes it to the heart and hands, it was not really learned. Yet, I do think we should ask if the experiential conforms to the Word. An interesting section in Calvin I came across in my thesis research:

"If Scripture is quoted against the Pope, he maintains that we ought not to confine ourselves to it, because the Spirit is come, and has carried us above Scripture by many additions. Mahomet asserts that, without his Alcoran, men always re-main children. Thus, by a false pretense of the Spirit, the world was bewitched to depart from the simple purity of Christ; for, as soon as the Spirit is separated from the word of Christ, the door is open to all kinds of delusions and impostures."

-John Calvin on John 16:14

Reformed Catholic Spirituality against the Papists

Both Reformation Christians (Reformed/Lutheran) and Roman Catholics tend to speak of spirituality with reference to the means of grace. This is seemingly a point of commonality against Anabaptist, Pentacostal or anti-ecclesial Christians who would eskew mediums or means for immediate (no medium) religious spirituality. But Catholics and Reformation Christians are not completely together on this...

now, I have not posted a lot of things pointed directly against Roman Catholics. But Andrew, a Catholic friend, is not shy to post Anti-Protestant material, so I thought I might share a piece from John Owen, where he explores why Catholics, though sacramental, err in their approach to spirituality by the means of grace:


"Now, the reasons why the Papists can never, with all their endeavours, truly mortify any one sin, amongst others, are, —

(1.) Because many of the ways and means they use and insist upon for this end were never appointed of God for that purpose. (Now, there is nothing in religion that hath any efficacy for compassing an end, but it hath it from God’s appointment of it to that purpose.) Such as these are their rough garments, their vows, penances, disciplines, their course of monastical life, and the like; concerning all which God will say, “Who hath required these things at your hand?” and, “In vain do ye worship me, teaching for doctrines the traditions of men.” Of the same nature are sundry self-vexations insisted on by others.

(2.) Because those things that are appointed of God as means are not used by them in their due place and order, — such as are praying, fasting, watching, meditation, and the like. These have their use in the business in hand; but whereas they are all to be looked on as streams, they look on them as the fountain. Whereas they effect and accomplish the end as means only, subordinate to the Spirit and faith, they look on them to do it by virtue of the work wrought. If they fast so much, and pray so much, and keep their hours and times, the work is done. As the apostle says of some in another case, “They are always learning, never coming to the knowledge of the truth;” so they are always mortifying, but never come to any sound mortification. In a word, they have sundry means to mortify the natural man, as to the natural life here we lead; none to mortify lust or corruption.

This is the general mistake of men ignorant of the gospel about this thing; and it lies at the bottom of very much of that superstition and will-worship that hath been brought into the world. What horrible self-macerations were practised by some of the ancient authors of monastical devotion! what violence did they offer to nature! what extremity of sufferings did they put themselves upon! Search their ways and principles to the bottom, and you will find that it had no other root but this mistake, namely, that attempting rigid mortification, they fell upon the natural man instead of the corrupt old man, — upon the body wherein we live instead of the body of death.

Neither will the natural Popery that is in others do it. Men are galled with the guilt of a sin that hath prevailed over them; they instantly promise to themselves and God that they will do so no more; they watch over themselves, and pray for a season, until this heat waxes cold, and the sense of sin is worn off: and so mortification goes also, and sin returns to its former dominion. Duties are excellent food for an unhealthy soul; they are no physic for a sick soul. He that turns his meat into his medicine must expect no great operation. Spiritually sick men cannot sweat out their distemper with working. But this is the way of men who deceive their own souls; as we shall see afterward.

That none of these ways are sufficient is evident from the nature of the work itself that is to be done; it is a work that requires so many concurrent actings in it as no self-endeavour can reach unto, and is of that kind that an almighty energy is necessary for its accomplishment; as shall be afterward manifested.

It is, then, the work of the Spirit ...(not man's wills)... "

-John Owen. Mortification of Sin.

Reformed Spirituality

Here I will link to my treatments of the subject of Reformed Spirituality. This started out as a short-lived class (the first three were taught), then turned into my own attempt to keep thinking and writing on the topic. My grand ending was to be on the subject of prayer and it as the continuing discipline of spiritual growth. But I am still learning. So this series is not finished, as I am still struggling with the final part of my study.

1. Introduction: What is Reformed Spirituality?

2. Theology of the Heart: Man and Sin
(Reflection on Job 14 and a Fallen world)

3. Our Mystical Salvation: Union with Christ
Part 1: Answering the Problem of Sin
Part 2: Salvation in Christ
(Reflection: Justification, Sanctification and Adoption)

4. Overcoming Sin

The context of Spiritual Formation: The Church

5. The Community of Faith

The Ordinary Means of Grace:

6. The Word, especially preached.

[Historical Guidance: Dabney on Preaching]

7. Baptism and the Word

[Issue: What does Baptism Do?]

8. The Lord's Supper and the Word

[Historical Guidance: Calvin on the Supper]

[The Means of Grace and the Church]

9. Worship as Receiving from God.

10. The Result of Churchly Spirituality: Take to the World

Continuing: Prayer...

11. The Lord's Prayer

Hymn: The content of the message of the Word

I think this hymn cries out for what we should long for in worship every week. From the prayers. From the hymns and songs. From the sermon. From communion.

If we do not hear the name of Christ from all those sources, we should leave the service despondent from the burden of a law that kills. If we are only given imperatives, and not an indicative, a truth of gospel done on our behalf, we die under the curse of the punishment of a law we will never fully keep. But as the weight of the law alone kills, the salve of the gospel of Christ revives. If we think all we need is more advice and imperatives, and that our need of the gospel is past and merely a once applied event, then we do not know our need. In word, sacrament and prayer, in all these forms we want, we mortally need one substance: Give me Christ or else I die.


Give me Christ or Else I Die
A hymn by William Hammond.
(From Gadsby's Hymnal)

Gracious Lord, incline thy ear;
My requests vouchsafe to hear;
Hear my never-ceasing cry;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Wealth and honor I disdain,
Earthly comforts, Lord are vain;
These can never satisfy:
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Thou dost freely save the lost;
In thy grace alone I trust.
With my earnest suit comply;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Thou dost promise to forgive
All who in thy Son believe;
Lord, I know thou canst not lie;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Calvin on "This is my body"

"Hence the bread is Christ’s body, because it assuredly testifies, that the body which it represents is held forth to us, or because the Lord, by holding out to us that symbol, gives us at the same time his own body; for Christ is not a deceiver, to mock us with empty representations. — (To think that he would feed us with shadows and empty representations.) Hence it is regarded by me as beyond all controversy, that the reality is here conjoined with the sign; or, in other words, that we do not less truly become participants in Christ’s body in respect of spiritual efficacy, than we partake of the bread....


There now remains but one difficulty — how is it possible that his body, which is in heaven, is given to us here upon earth? Some imagine that Christ’s body is infinite, and is not confined to any one space, but fills heaven and earth, (Jeremiah 23:24) like his Divine essence. This fancy is too absurd to require refutation. The Schoolmen dispute with more refinement as to his glorious body. Their whole doctrine, however, reduces itself to this — that Christ is to be sought after in the bread, as if he were included in it. Hence it comes, that the minds of men behold the bread with wonderment, and adore it in place of Christ. Should any one ask them whether they adore the bread, or the appearance of it, they will confidently agree that they do not, but, in the mean time, when about to adore Christ, they turn to the bread. They turn, I say, not merely with their eyes, and their whole body, but even with the thoughts of the heart. Now what is this but unmixed idolatry? But that participation in the body of Christ, which, I affirm, is presented to us in the Supper, does not require a local presence, nor the descent of Christ, nor an infinite extension of his body, nor anything of that nature, for the Supper being a heavenly action, there is no absurdity in saying, that Christ, while remaining in heaven, is received by us. For as to his communicating himself to us, that is effected through the secret virtue of his Holy Spirit, which can not merely bring together, but join in one, things that are separated by distance of place, and far remote.

But, in order that we may be capable of this participation, we must rise heavenward. Here, therefore, faith must be our resource, when all the bodily senses have failed. When I speak of faith, I do not mean any sort of opinion, resting on human contrivances, as many, boasting of faith on all occasions, run grievously wild on this point. What then? You see bread — nothing more — but you learn that it is a symbol (A sign and evidence) of Christ’s body. Do not doubt that the Lord accomplishes what his words intimate — that the body, which thou dost not at all behold, is given to thee, as a spiritual repast. It seems incredible, that we should be nourished by Christ’s flesh, which is at so great a distance from us. Let us bear in mind, that it is a secret and wonderful work of the Holy Spirit, which it were criminal to measure by the standard of our understanding...

These few things will satisfy those that are sound and modest. As for the curious, I would have them look somewhere else for the means of satisfying their appetite."

-John Calvin. Commentary on 1 Corinthians 11:26

The Ordinary Means: The Word and the Supper

On the night before his death, Jesus held a final supper with his disciples.

Luke 22:19-20 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.

Two elements were used: Bread and Wine. The institution was short and poignant. But what did it mean? Why do we do we continue to do it? Mere ritualism? Because we have to (we are commanded to)?

To ask how this Sacrament accompanies the word in Christian worship, and thus Christian spirituality, Paul in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 is very helpful. There are 3 important points Paul makes that we need to explore:

1)Word and Sacrament.

As we saw, the word and baptism are intricately associated, symbioticly linked, so that without the word, baptism is a mere wet action. In the Lord's Supper, we again given a similar description:

1Cor 11:26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

In baptism, we were "washed in water by the word." (Ephesians 5:26) Here, a similar concept emerges. In the Supper, Christ's death is "proclaimed." It doesn't take much of a word study before one sees the close relation between word and proclaim. The usual content of proclaiming in Scripture is the word.

The Lord's supper is a "visible word" as Augustine calls it. John in his first epistle declares the word as "that which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life." (1 John 1:1) The problem for believers now is that though we have the word in our ears, we lack the word present to our other senses. Christ walked with, could be seen and touched by the disciples. To engage more than our sense of hearing, God condescends to our infirmity and proclivity to doubt by declaring Christ, and him crucified, also to our tongues and to our fingers. The message of Christ appears visibly before us.

2)It is to be done in remembrance

“Do this in remembrance of me”

The meal is also a vehicle of memory. We may know the story, but remembrance is an important necessity after the fall. Throughout the Old Testament, the narrative pauses to instruct the reader to do something (a meal or ritual) to remember an instance of God's salvation, either the Passover or the parting of the Sea (either the Sea of reeds or Jordan) and to use it to declare the salvation of God. Jesus, exercising his station as Lord, does the same with the disciples. We are forgetful creatures, so we require repetition for memory.


3) It is a communion with Christ.

1Cor 10:16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation (κοινωνια) in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation (κοινωνια) in the body of Christ?

The word "κοινωνια" can be translated as "communion" or as in the ESV "participation." The word denotes a communication, a transaction or intercourse between two things. Paul here gives further interpretation to the words "This is my body/blood" spoken by Christ. Paul instructs us that these words cannot be construed as we may wish to construe them. Typically, these words are understood as "This represents my body" or "This signifies my blood." Yet a "κοινωνια" with the blood of Christ denotes much more than a symbol or sign.

Certainly, the bread signifies the body. The bread does not carry the atoms of Christ's physical body. Yet in the Lord's Supper, more happens between Christ and the faithful. With the bread and wine, the believer also communes/participates with the very flesh and blood of Christ.

Should this surprise and offend us? The disciples certainly were offended when Christ talked of it:

⁵²Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" ⁵³Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. ⁵⁴Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁵⁵For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. ⁵⁶Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him." (John 6:52-56)

Jesus was very specific with his words. What he meant to communicate was more than mere belief:


⁶¹Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, "Does this offend you? ⁶²What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! ⁶³The Spirit gives life" (John 6:61-63)

We should not think that Jesus backs away from pointing to His flesh and blood which stood before them, but he does give more meaning to His words. The disciples are still offended after the explanation, but admitted they stayed not because he explained to their satisfaction that Jesus merely meant believing, but because they had no one else to go to (John 6:68-69). When Jesus explains that the Spirit gives life, He gives the agency of the communion between Jesus and His disciples. The Incarnation, Jesus as God taking on Humanity, has deeper layers of meaning and spiritual consequence than we typically think.

The flesh Jesus took on was the same as all men, a mortal flesh. Yet, in His taking on flesh, he displayed the compatibility of Immortality with flesh. Christ's life does not end, and the flesh he took on was raised and glorified. Such is the fate of the flesh we now sport. The source of vivification of that flesh is also the same, the life in the Person of Jesus, human and divine. That life Christ shares with us in union with Him. (Romans 5:15-17 ; 6:4 ; 8:11) The Spirit carries that life from Christ to the believer:

"If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you." (Romans 8:11)

Paul holds out the life in the flesh and blood of Christ to believers in the Supper. Not that the believer chews Christ, but yet with the act of eating, truly feeds on Christ, and the life in His flesh and blood, nonetheless. In it, the believer is vitally participating in the flesh and blood of Christ, received by faith, by the agency of the Spirit.

This is why we continue to come to the Supper. We come to the Supper for a similar reason we come to hear the word preached and why we pray. In each of them, we commune with the same reality, Christ, yet in different ways. They do not replace one another, as if we can go to a sermon rather than pray, or go the the Supper rather than a sermon. They each are points of communion with God, yet in different manners. We do not merely "do the Supper" because we are commanded to, but because of what we receive in the Supper, namely Christ.

The Preached Word: What is required for a sermon?

Robert L. Dabney wrote a book in the 1800s that many accepted across denominational lines as presenting what was required of all sermons preached to the church, every time a sermon was to be preached. These qualities included unity, textual fidelity, Instructiveness, Movement, Point, and Order as well as:

"The next property of the good sermon I have named evangelical tone. This is a gracious character, appropriate to the proclamation of that gospel where 'mercy and truth meet together, and righteousness and peace kiss each other.' ... We cannot better describe it than in the words of the apostles, when they so frequently speak of their work as 'preaching Christ,' or 'preaching Christ crucified.' We do not conceive that they mean to declare, the only facts they ever recited were those enacted on Calvary, or that they limited themselves exclusively to the one doctrine of vicarious satisfaction for sin. The abstracts of their sermons, recorded in the New Testament, show that this was not true. But we find that these facts and this doctrine were central to their teachings. They recurred perpetually with a prominence suitable to their importance. More than this, they were ever near at hand, as the focus to which every beam of divine truth must converge. The whole revealed system, with its doctrines and duties, was ever presented in gospel aspects. The law, when preached as a rule of conviction, led to the cross. The law, as a rule of obedience, drew its noblest sanctions from the cross. Such being the method of the inspired men, I would willingly define evangelical preaching by the term scriptural. Let the preacher present all doctrines and duties, not in the lights of philosophy or of human ethics, but of the New Testament. And for enforcement of this quality I cannot do better than refer you to the apostle's declaration, that when he came to preach among the Corinthians (1 Cor 2:2) he 'determined not to know anything among them, save Jesus Christ and him crucified.'"

-Robert Dabney. Sacred Rhetoric (renamed in reissue: Evangelical Eloquence) pg 114-115.

The Ordinary Means: The Word

What do we mean by "the Word"?

We may mean various things by the "word." John calls Christ the Word of God. (John 1:1-17) Jonah is given a word to preach to Ninevah (Jonah 1:1). The message of Paul's gospel is called the word. In the church we call the Bible the Word of God. Do these all mean the same thing?

To some degree yes, to some degree no. There are typically three categories of the word, written, preached and incarnate. Yet, these three are all related in meaning.

Looking first at Jonah, we can see the basic meaning. Jonah is given a "word" to proclaim to Ninevah. Here, we can see that Jonah is not told to proclaim the Torah or Scriptures to Ninevah, but to relay God's message. The word, or message, is God's, but God uses Jonah to deliver the message. God speaks to Ninevah mediately, not immediately. God could merely speak Himself audably to Ninevah, He had no need of Jonah. Yet, God chose to include Jonah, not for Ninevah's sake, but for Jonah's sake and Jonah's privledge (even if he didn't see it as such).

The principle we derive from Jonah's story is that the ministry of the word, the way that God has chosen to relay his message, is mediately, not immediately. God does not ordinarily speak directly to a person, with Jonah, Moses and a few others being the exceptional cases, not the ordinary cases. This is why there is a division in the way we speak between the extraordinary means and the ordinary means. In the ordinary means, there is a mediator.

This is different from what we mean by Christ being mediator, for Christ mediates from us to God in prayer and sacrifice, but the ordinary means mediate the word of God to us, now that Christ is absent. Yet do we not have the Spirit as the mediator? Does the Spirit speak directly to us immediately?

No. Today, the Spirit is found accompanying the Word. Even throughout the events of the Spirit we might find strange in Acts, the Spirit was accompanying the Word in the mouths of the Apostles. Look at Acts 4:31 or Acts 10:44:

"While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. "

Conversion was never immediate, meaning: conversion happened by the Spirit accompanying the Word. There is never a wordless Spirit. People do not convert apart from the Word. The Spirit accompanies the Word.

This is why Paul writes in Romans 10:14:

"How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? "

Paul teaches that faith is created in the event of the preaching of the word. God condescends to use the word through human agents to communicate faith to the people. Without human agents, Paul sees no faith being cultivated by the Spirit. The Spirit does not work immediately (directly, without an intermediate means), but mediately through the word, especially preached.

This is the first form of the word: The Preached Word. The other two forms are the Word written (The Scriptures) and the Word Incarnate (The Lord Jesus Christ).

They are all different, yet all work together. The guidance of the preached word is the Word written, for the messager must have the form of the Word given to him in order to faithfully communicate the Word. And the Word Incarnate, Jesus Christ, is the object, end and content of that message.

But what comes first, is there a primary Word? Temporally the question winds in circles. Christ came before the message of the church preached or written, but preaching existed before Christ came in the OT, yet also pointed to Christ. Our sake, it may be helpful to think of the order in this way. Christ is the eternal word of God, the word of creation and of redemption. From this reality, the word is given to be preached, to prophets and to apostles. From this received message, the word receives written form in Scripture.

The Word is given first to the apostles, then communicated by the preaching of the church and the book of the church. The word is found in and proclaimed in the church. The primary ground of the communication of God's word is the community of the church. This is different from what we as Americans usually think. We think firstly of an individual, having an immediate encounter with God, then freely associating with other Christians in a church body, in as much as that person can bring forward their assistance to other individuals. Conversion and spiritual growth are envisioned as individual tasks, with communal consequences. The pattern of the Christian life, however, is communal first. The message is proclaimed in the community in the church, from the church's book, of the church's Lord, and these are the means by which the word is communicated to us, that the Spirit uses to cause us to grow in grace and understanding.

The Spiritual Life is Churchly Life. It does not end in the church, and personal, private growth is essential. Yet this personal growth is feed by the corporate feeding. The Christian first encounters God in the church and then takes the Word into the world. That is why it is true that "there is no salvation apart from the church" for the church is the arena of the Word and salvation is both initial and growing, both justification and sanctification. They are indivisible, and where we go for one, we go for the other. We learn by the Church who Christ is and God's revelation from the church's book. For otherwise, "how then will they call on Him in Whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in Him of Whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? " (Romans 10:14)


[Next: so why are the sacraments talked about with the word? Why is the church not just the ministry of the word rather than word and sacrament?]

Reformed Spirituality: The Community of Faith

The process of sanctification is inseparable from the context of the church community. Early Church Father Ignatius, on his way to martyrdom, recognized this reality. He would often speak of a desire that “my spirit be sanctified by yours”1 or “I require to be sanctified by your church of Ephesus.”2

I say this because I wish to submit that the christian life "happens" through the church, and I wish to explore those avenues. The means by which one is exposed to the word is by ministry of the word given to the church, in the preached word and the sacraments. The word cannot properly be applied outside of the church, for it was to those in the church that God through Paul commissioned those who equip the saints for service.3 The ministry of the word is not found outside of the church, therefore the church is a necessary vehicle by which Christians are sanctified, where salvation is realized.

In fact, Cyprian once wrote "there is no salvation out[side] of the Church." Catholics like to cite this quote, and with some consternation find a Protestant accepting of the concept:

"Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), ...[is] the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."

That wording is from the Westminster Confession on the Church. But how can Protestants say this? Do they mean it? They mean it because the church is the arena of the means of grace in the ministry of the word, and the means of grace do not only convert, but sanctify.

The ministry of the word can be expressed alternatively as the ministry of word and sacrament. Primary in this formulation is the word. Paul expressly teaches that God condescends to use preaching as the means by which the message is conveyed in Romans 10:13-15. In using the term “word” we mean primarily what Paul means in telling Timothy to “preach the word.”4 This is how Paul sees Timothy fulfilling his ministry to the church.5 The “word” to Paul stands in for his other phrases he uses, such as gospel, or preaching Christ crucified.6 Paul means by “word” the message of Christ, his Person and work. This gospel message is not merely for unbelievers, but as Christ said, the means by which God sanctifies his people.7

So looking at the sanctifying mission of the church, we look to word and sacrament. To look at the means of spirituality and growth, we look at the means of grace. As the Larger Catechism puts it:

Q. 154. What are the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation?

A. The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to his church the benefits of his mediation, are all his ordinances; especially the Word, sacraments, and prayer; all which are made effectual to the elect for their salvation .

Thus, I wish to take a look at the Word, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, tackling some thoughts on the main doctrine on Monday at the beginning of the week for each, then moving on to some reflections, implications and perhaps just worship thoughts through the rest of the week. This is for myself, mostly, in simply organizing doctrine in way that can be communicated for others to understand.

1 Ignatius Epistle to the Trallians. Chapter 13. (as translated in A.Cleveland Coxe. Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1, The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus. Ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.
2 Ignatius Epistle to the Ephesians. Chapter 8 (as translated Ibid.)
3 Ephesians 4:11-13
4 2 Tim 4:2 ESV
5 2 Tim 4:5
6 cf. Romans 1:15, 1 Cor 1:23
7 cf. John 17:17

Reformed Spirituality

I've covered the introduction to Reformed Spirituality, but have yet to get to the meat of the actual Spiritual approach. I will be doing so in the next month or so, contingent on my schedule. So far, the subject and problem of Spirituality have been discussed as well as the answer given in Scripture. Still to be covered is the means through which one encounters God. But as a review, here is how the series has proceeded so far:

The class: Reformed Spirituality

1. Introduction: What is Reformed Spirituality?

2. Theology of the Heart: Man and Sin
(Reflection on Job 14 and a Fallen world)

3. Our Mystical Salvation: Union with Christ
Part 1: Answering the Problem of Sin
Part 2: Salvation in Christ
(Reflection: Justification, Sanctification and Adoption)

4. Overcoming Sin


Coming up:

5. The Community of Faith

Reformed Spirituality: Overcoming Sin

The fourth session in Reformed Spirituality was to be on overcoming sin, using John Owen's works as a guide. However, the class ended prematurely and this was the class I was least prepared for, and thus with everything on my plate now, the one I will have to come back to fill in later if I wish to re-teach this.

For those interested in the subject, here are a couple of resources. One is the book "Overcoming Sin and Temptation" by John Owen, which is actually a collection of three works by Owen on the subject. The second is an audio interview with the men responsible for editing the above book with helpful footnotes, Justin Taylor and Kelly Kapic.

1. Book: "Overcoming Sin and Temptation"

2. Interview with Justin Taylor and Kelly Kapic. (itunes)

Reformed Spirituality: Reflection on Justification, Adoption and Sanctification

A Reflection on Smaller Catechism Questions 30-35.

In Question 32, we are told that our union with Christ (in Q30) results in us being made to “partake of justification, adoption, sanctification,” which are then described in Questions 33, 34, and 35 respectively. Looking at the answers in the catechism: what is similar and what is different between these three benefits of Justification, Adoption and Sanctification?

Question 33 defines justification as “an act of God’s free grace.” Reformation Christians know justification is an event, whereby we are once found in the courtroom of the Judge and once declared righteous based on Christ’s work. What might make this doctrine more precious to the believer is realizing not all Christians enjoy this Pauline perspective on justification. Roman Catholicism sees justification as a process, and so we are never out from under the glare and judgment of the righteous Judge. Our works are continually on trial, to be weighed in justification. How we view God and relate to Him in the rest of our Christian walk flows from this difference.

In our calling, we receive a new relationship between us and God. Obedience is not to appease a Judge, but in love of the Father as we are now, in an event and act, also adopted as sons and daughters (Question 34). Thus, our obedient works are not under the eyes of a Judge, but a Father and accepted as such. Our elder brother Jesus has perfectly pleased our Father, and now our poor works are accepted in that light, as a Father accepts a bad drawing of a child, so our good works are accepted by the Father. Still we grow, still our good motives are mixed with bad so that we must repent even of our good works, but seeing the Christian life as a life of repentance, as both Calvin and Luther described it, does not mean was live in fear in a process of justification, but in joy in the light of adoption.

The means of our status as children of God also informs our devotion. Paul tells us in Galatians 4:4-5, “God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.” We receive our adoption by the work of the Son. This is because, as Paul tells the Galatians earlier, of their union with Christ. “in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God”( Gal 3:26) Christ has his Sonship by nature. In Christ’s work, He allows us union with him to share in the blessings of sonship. Paul tells us the Holy Spirit applies this to us in chapter 4, “And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’”(Gal 4:6) Paul specifically describes this as adoption in his later letter to Romans where he writes, “you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Romans 8:15)

Seeing all the members of the Trinity involved in our salvation softens our hearts to our new family role. A Father we once feared has been given the title of “Abba” or “Daddy.” Close familial love replaces our alienation. Christ is looked up to as, firstly our Savior, but also our example. We learn from Jesus as we would an older brother. As an adopted member of the family, we can look to Him to see how to talk to the Father as Jesus gives us the Lord’s Prayer. We can see what actions please the Father in Jesus’ conduct. We can relate about suffering we both share in the experience of life. All these are benefits given to us by the Holy Spirit, the tie and rope that raises us up into the divine family.

What is accomplished by following the Law then? Certainly, we add nothing to Christ’s fulfillment. We do, however, share in the likeness of our Lord in our conduct. Just as Paul delighted in “filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions,” not that Christ lacked full punishment of sin, but that Paul could walk in the same path as Christ. The imitation of Christ as the Son of God allows the believer as the adopted son of God to pattern their life in the manner in which they will grow up into. This might be likened to a child following an older sibling's foot prints walking in deep snow. The future perfection will allow us to walk more fluidly and perfectly, but until then we merely have the example of our older brother to follow. We add nothing to His path, but make gains in the path due to His going ahead of us.

Sanctification is infused with new meaning in this light, for sanctification occurs in the shadow of adoption. We are in the process of being “renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin and live unto righteousness.” The application of Christ’s death and resurrection, thus, are applied to sons and daughters of God.

[If you would like to explore the aspects of Adoption as related to Obedience, listen to an interview of Peter Lillback as he discusses this theme in Calvin.]

Reformed Spirituality: Our Mystical Salvation (part 2 - what is union with Christ?)

I’ve made some broad statements about union and Paul’s emphasis of it and the centrality of it in Paul’s addressing of the problem of sin. But what is the nature of this union? How do we talk about union with Christ?

NATURE OF THE UNION

There are many pictures given of this union and what it is like. Paul employs two images in Ephesians 5. Paul calls Christians “Members of one body,” (Ephesians 4, 5:30) namely Christ’s body. Paul also interweaves that analogy with one of marriage, speaking of how the Church is Christ’s Bride and quotes Genesis about how “the two became one” picturing how Christ is united to His church. John uses organic imagery such as a vine and branches in John 15. Life flows from the vine to the branches, picturing the vital connection of believers to Christ.

The most mysterious imagery used, however, must be said to be John’s imagery in John 17. There, John records the words of Christ:

John 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

Here, John links the union of Father and Son and union with Christians. Union with Christ is seen to also be union with the Father. But also, the closeness of the Father to the Son is used as a goal for the completeness and nearness of union desired with believers.

The mysterious part of John’s image is the realization that such a reflection without qualification can lead to an idea that is counted heretical. We cannot understand Jesus to mean that believers are united in essence with the Father as Jesus is, becoming God as Christ is. However, Eastern Orthodoxy has spoken about the concept of “deification” as the final element of salvation. Reformed Christians have as their final element “glorification” meaning much of what Eastern Orthodox mean by “deification,” namely not that we become by nature God, but that we come all that Christ was in his human nature in his glorified state. Such a state, we must understand, means a nearness and abilities of perception, enjoyment of God and even becoming “partakers of the divine nature” as Peter says. The Greek word “partaking” there means partnering, companion, or communing fellow. Not becoming God, but communing on the most intimate level with God, in like manner as God the Father and God the Son commune with each other. A request at this point for more precision in definition will leave us wanting. Peter’s words are perhaps the highest thoughts and manner of putting such a reality as we are able to grasp this side of the experience.

Thus we see, the task of grasping union’s nature may be slippery due to 2 factors:

1. Union is spiritual. Paul tells us that in union, we are “made to drink of one spirit” (1 Cor 12:13). Then, in Ephesians 1 Paul tells us we are united to Christ, by being sealed by the Spirit. The Spirit is the means of union. The Holy Spirit ties one to Christ and applies the benefits of that union, thereby binding all partakers together in one body. Such a truth leads us to declare:

2. Union is Mystical, or a mystery. As Paul explores this idea of being bound together into Christ’s body he writes:

Eph 5:30 because we are members of his body.
Eph 5:31 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."
Eph 5:32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

This doctrine is mystical. It is even called that by John Calvin: “The Mystical Union.” It is frustrating preparing a lesson for, because you ask certain questions of it and you get back Paul’s answer: “This mystery is profound.” We are rationally minded, especially as Reformed believers, but here is a mystery beyond our reason. The exact nature of this union is beyond our comprehension, so all we are left with is the awe of it. Our questions on the exact nature then are passed by to ask what are the benefits of union.

HOW BLESSINGS ARE BESTOWED

When looking to the work of Christ in regards to salvation, our main concern tends to be Christ’s death. Christ died for sins, and we may call this Passive Obedience, or suffering the penalty of sin. This is what Paul was speaking of in Romans 5:10 when we learn that we are “reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” In Christ’s death, we share in this reconciliation. Yet, this is not all that Christ did. Christ declares:

Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

Christ also gains the rewards of the law merited by his obedience. We call this Active Obedience. All that might be gained by obedience to the Law is gained for believers through Christ.

In explaining how this relationship works, Reformation Christians have either refered to this as a Law and Gospel Hermeneutic (Lutherans) or in terms of a Covenant of works and a Covenant of grace. The Law or the covenant of works is given to Adam and humanity, that “if you do this, you will live.” Adam violates the covenant and the rest of humanity, marred by sin, are unwilling and unable to fulfill the covenant of works. In Paul’s language, it takes a second Adam, a new man to fulfill the Law. That man is Christ. By virtue of Christ’s obedience to the covenant of works, a covenant of Grace is given. We first see this in Gensis 3:15, a promise of a seed that will defeat sin and restore humanity to fellowship with God. On this basis is the covenant of grace given, one based on Christ’s fulfillment of the covenant of works. The rewards of Christ's fulfilling the law by works are given merely to be received by faith. Whereas the covenant of works was “obey and you will live,” (Genesis 2:16-17) the covenant of grace is “believe and you will be justified.” (Genesis 15:6)

THE BENEFITS GAINED BY CHRIST

Looking at Questions 30-36 in the Smaller Catechism, we now may see something we hadn’t noticed before:

Question 30. How does the Spirit apply to us the redemption purchased Christ?

Answer. The Spirit applies to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.

What then is applied in uniting us to Christ’s work?:

Question 32. What benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this life?

Answer. They that are effectually called do in this life partake of justification, adoption, sanctification, and the several benefits which, in this life, do either accompany or flow from them.

Though we will name more, the important three named are justification, adoption and sanctification.

Reformed Christians tend to express the benefits of salvation in the Order of Salvation (the Ordo Solutis). Unnamed in the ordo solutes is union. This is because union is not a step in the process, but the foundation from which all other benefits flow. Looking at a few of the elements we can see our regeneration being Christ’s regeneration:

regeneration, (resurrection applied to soul)

(1Co 15:21-22 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.)

We also see our justification by grace through faith being on the basis of Christ’s justification by merit through works:

Rom 4:25 - [Christ] was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification.

Christ's resurrection, then, can be seen as his justification, the basis of our justification bestowed to us.

Php 2:8-9 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Php 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,

Our sanctification is on the basis of Christ’s sanctified work:

1Co 1:2 To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours:

Our adoption is because we are united to the Son:

Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will

And our glorification awaits as Christ’s has been gained:

Rom 8:17 and if children, then heirs--heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

Such an understanding of salvation based on Christ’s passive and active obedience gives us a larger, broader picture of the accomplishment of Christ. We are not merely saved “by His death” as great and wonderful news as atonement and reconciliation is to our war-beaten souls. We are also “saved by His life.” We are saved on the basis of Christ’s fulfillment of the law in our place, applied to us by the Holy Spirit in union with us, as Christ’s life is communicated to those in covenant with God.

J. Gresham Machen, a founder of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and Westminster Theological Seminary, was near death in the Midwest. In his last communication to John Murray, Machen communicated what doctrine gave him comfort at such a time:

“I'm so thankful for the active obedience of Christ. No hope without it."

Reformed Spirituality: Our Mystical Salvation (part 1)

[more class notes on Reformed Spirituality]

We may know, from growing up in Church what the Christian answer to the question of sin is: Christ’s work. However, we want to explore how “the Christ event,” how in Christ the problem of sin is addressed to restore man’s communion with God in its most practical doctrine, which will then take us into how we apply that doctrine to our lives in battling sin, live together, and seek God.

How does one answer the question of the problem of sin? The Reformed tradition has often seen the answer of Christ to sin paralleling the argument flow of Romans:

I. Chapter 1:1-17 - Introduction of topic

II. Chapter 1:18-2:29– The way of righteousness displayed:

Paul introduces his discussion of Salvation by talking about the Law. Paul says the Gentiles have the law manifest to them in nature and Jews by special revelation. It might seem to some a strange way to start, especially if we do not believe salvation comes by the law. Especially when Paul states in Romans 2:6:

Romans 2:6 – "He will render each according to his works"

Paul seems to be saying, bluntly, that eternal life can be merited by works. Indeed, this is not merely what Paul seems to say, but what he does say here: salvation is by works.

III. Chapter 3 – No one fulfills the requirement of righteousness, all are condemned (Romans 3:10-12, 3:23)

Paul details how no one lives up to the standard of the law. All are violators. To all that God offers life to be merited by works, none do so and are righteous, none fulfill the demands of the law. But now this next part of Romans may be hard to read in the way I will suggest, since Reformed Christians love the doctrine of justification. But I am here positing, dare I say it, that justification is not the main motif and lens by which Paul views salvation. Saying such a thing will keep me from being any kind of teacher or member in good standing in a Lutheran Church, but I hope to demonstrate to you, that the alternative is right at home in the Reformed tradition and confession and most importantly in the text of the New Testament.

Let us look at Chapter 4 as pointing further into the argument and not the final point of Paul.

In his argument, what might Jews protest against? “But Abraham is our father! (John 5)” “Abraham is our example of how to be righteous!”

IV. Chapter 4 – Abraham was justified by faith

Paul first states that not even Abraham was saved by the law, as some Jews may have been claiming, but by faith:

Rom 4:1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh?
Rom 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
Rom 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted (imputed – KJV) to him as righteousness."

Paul’s response then?: Not even Abraham was righteous based on works, not even Abraham has done Romans 2:6. Righteousness was imputed to Abraham, not bestowed due to works.

Chapter 4 is not the pinnacle of Paul’s argument, but begs the question: how can Abraham be justified by faith when the requirement was works? Where does this imputation come from and on what basis?

V. Chapter 5 – How (and why) one is justified with God through Faith

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
Rom 5:11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

2 observations: Both death and life is talked about here.

1- Paul speaks of death bringing reconciliation. Christ gives relational redemption. As 5:9 said before it:

“we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.”

No longer is the person in the relationship of defendant before a Judge, but is now reconciled to God. Justified is understood as a forensic, legal term. Yet, to say this is to risk the objection of “legal fiction.” Do we partake of salvation merely by believing we are alright? Does the act of faith somehow make God overlook our sin?

2- Paul speaks of salvation by life. What does it mean “shall we be saved by his life.”? Tuck that question away for a few minutes.

First, how does one man’s sin and one man’s obedience affect me? (as Romans 5:12 and Romans 5:15-21 says)? Why talk here about Adam and Christ?

• Federal Headship

Paul is here talking using the concept of “Federal Headship.” This term refers to the representation of one or a group by another in covenant.

For example, look at Hebrews 7:7-10.

Heb 7:7-10 It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.

The author of Hebrews is making the case that Melchizedek is greater than Levi. That Levi and Melchizedek never met is not a problem, because Levi was in Abraham. Abraham was the federal head of Levi, representing him and acting for him. Now we might see how Paul is using this concept in Romans 5 (as well as stated in 1 Corinthians 15). We see, for Paul, there are two headships:

– 1. In Adam (Rom 5:12, 1 Cor 15:22)
• 1Cor 15:22a - "For as in Adam all die,"

Through Adam all (who are in him) die and sin. Somehow, we participated in the sin of Adam. How? There are theories, but not certainties, Paul does not explain.

– 2. In Christ (Rom 5:15-21, 1 Cor 15:22)
• 1Cor 15:22b - "so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

Through Christ, all (who are in him) live, are redeemed. The works of Christ are then attributed, accounted to those with Christ’s federal headship.

In understanding how Paul is using the idea of headship, we know can see the main motif and answer to the problem of sin in Romans:

VI. Chapter 6 - Paul’s answer to the problem of sin is UNION WITH CHRIST.

In 5:12 we see our union with Adam. This is then contrasted in 5:15-17 with Union with Christ. When we get to Chapter 6, we see union declared and the implications of that union. In Romans 6, Baptism is Paul’s analogy of choice here. We will talk more about this later, but for now:

Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

The problem of sin was a problem of a DEAD MAN. The solution to DEATH is RESURRECTION. So Paul tells us we obtain the benefits of resurrection by UNION WITH CHRIST. We see now why Paul talked of both life and death in Romans 5. The means of our death to sin before God is Christ’s death, that we are vitally and really connected to Christ and die with Him. The means of our resurrected, regenerated life is our being saved by Christ’s life in a vital and real union with Christ that allows us to share in his (ζωῇ) life. The life we have in Christ is Christ’s life.

Everything we have as a spiritual blessing in salvation, then, we can see that Christ first had to merit for us, in perfect obedience. Christ has done Romans 2:6, not to mention Gen 2:16-17, Christ has done what Adam did not, and Christ has done Exodus 24:3 and Lev 18:5, Christ has done what Israel has not. Then:

In UNION we are given the benefits that Christ earned.

Sometimes benefits are spoken with the specific word “union” or “united” but we also see the Greek phrase “en Christo.” Once you start looking for it, you find this phrase all over. The New Testament depicts Union as the basis of every aspect of salvation. Union with Christ is the basis of the blessings of redemption:


• Ephesians 1:3-14
– 1:3 - blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places

• Ephesians 2:4-5
– …even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved–

• 2 Corinthians 5:21
– For he has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

Just look at Ephesians 1:

Ephesians 1
3- Every Spiritual Blessing in Christ
4 – God chose us in Christ
5 – adoption through Christ
6 – Blessed us in the Beloved.
7 – in Him we have redemption
11 – in Him we have an inheritance

Not every time the phrase “in him” or “in Christ” is used does it mean Union. But most of the time, for many of the other occurrences are “faith in Christ.” Start looking for that phrase instead of skipping over it and it will blow you away how central it is to the teachings about salvation in the Bible.


[next, the nature of the union and the nature of the merits of Christ given to us]