I will hand it to Rick Phillips. At least when he talks about good works he doesn’t try to yuck it up as certain Canadian pastors try to have a laugh while being earnestly Owenian. Even so, I’m not sure that Phillips captures the biblical motivation for good works because of an apparent need to reject gratitude as the only basis for sanctification. For instance, when he write this I get confused:
But does not Paul plainly warn that Christians will be judged for both “good or evil”? The answer is yes, but that we must set it alongside Romans 8:1, which declares, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Christians need not fear any condemnation when Jesus returns. Nor should we anticipate shaming for our failures, in which case we could hardly look forward to the Second Coming as, Paul says, “our blessed hope” (Tit. 2:13). Christ bore all the guilt and shame of our sin and failure on the cross! So where does the judgment of our “evil” come in as believers? I think the best biblical answer is found in 1 Corinthians 3:13-15: “Each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it… If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” Here we have a saved person whose life work yielded little return for eternity, and the example is given as a warning to us. The penalty for demerits here is not condemnation or shame, but rather a lamentable loss of heavenly reward.
In considering the many biblical passages that speak of a future evaluation of believers’ lives, the overwhelming emphasis lies on the side of rewards. This is not surprising, since Jesus paid the penalty for our sins in his atoning death. Since there will be no tears, mourning, or crying in heaven (Rev. 21:4), Christians may look forward to Christ’s return with an overwhelming expectation of divine approval and reward. And this anticipation is treated in the Bible as a very significant source of motivation for sanctification and Christian service. The true danger of unholy or unfaithful living among professing believers is not that they will wear tarnished crowns in heaven but that they will not be admitted to heaven at all, their ungodliness having been the death knell of a false profession and unregenerate life.
So Christians don’t have to be fear being embarrassed in glory for having fewer crowns than the really really sanctified. No one will be lamenting anything. That’s good news. But then there’s the threat that my lapses into ungodliness may actually mean that this “professing” believer will “not be admitted to heaven at all” since my sin is the evidence of a “false profession and unregenerate life.” So much for “no condemnation.”
Maybe the Lutherans can rescue the Reformed Obedience boys. Nathan Rinne not only informs us that Lutherans really do believe in the third use of the law, contrary to the Lutheran detractors among the holiness wing of Reformed Protestants. He also explains why resting in the forgiveness of Christ (which could be pretty close to gratitude) is the best motivation for genuine holiness. Here are the three levels of obedience to the law:
At the level of outward conformity:
Christians obey due to authorities who need to use coercion (parents, teachers, pastors, neighbors, etc) because they are letting their old man get a hold of their new man (hence we read later: “But *the believer* without any coercion and with a willing spirit, *in so far as he is reborn*, does what no threat of the law could ever have wrung from him”). What this means is that the believer, in so far as he is not reborn, does good only when it is wrung out of him – maybe even by using explicitly stated rewards and punishments. Again though, these coerced works are not “works of the law” per se, because they are still done by believers, and the blood of Christ covers these forced works, making them pleasing in the eyes of God.
So we need forgiveness for good works done for the wrong reasons. A better motivation is:
Christians obey willingly without coercion, due to their putting their old man in its place – by their new man (not Christ, but the new nature that wills – “not my will…” – to cooperate with Christ’s Spirit) who is eager to do so, and spontaneously does so more or less consciously (in other words, they cheerfully and joyfully make the decision, in cooperation with Christ’s Spirit, to do something in the midst of a necessary fight vs. their old man, utilizing even “teaching, admonition, force, threatening of the Law,….the club of punishments[,] and troubles” themselves against their old man – their old nature).
Even better is being in a state of unconsciously following God’s law, perhaps out of a sense of knowing that we no longer face condemnation and are grateful to have the burden of the law removed so that it becomes simply the w-w of the Christian:
Christians obey willingly without coercion either more or less unconsciously (in other words, they simply do something without needing to fight much vs. their old man). Ideally, we do these good works more and more spontaneously, as Old Adam’s strength dissipates – while never fully disappearing in this life. Here, again, we think about Luther’s famous words introducing the book of Romans…. “When [Christ, the fulfiller of the law] is present, the law loses its power. It cannot administer wrath because Christ has freed us from it. Then he brings the Holy Spirit to those who believe in him that they might delight in the law of the Lord, according to the first psalm (Ps. 1:2). In this way their souls are recreated with [the Law] in view and this Spirit gives them the will that they might do it. In the future life, however, they will have the will to do the law not only in Spirit, but also in flesh, which, as long as it lives here, strives against this delight. To render the law delightful, undefiled is therefore the office of Christ, the fulfiller of the law, whose glory and handiwork announce the heavens and the firmament, the apostles and their successors (Ps. 19:1, cf. Rom. 10:18).”
I don’t presume to know whether Mr. Rinne is right about the Lutheran confessions or Luther himself, but his posts are instructive for remembering that Lutherans really do believe in sanctification. He may also indicate that the Lutheran Obedience Boys have a much more satisfying account of the place of the law in the believers’ life. Rather than engaging in some sort of calculus about penalties, demerits, and rewards (or — uh oh — worse), the Lutherans seem to have found a way to make the law a delight.
Who knew?
Old Life 
Too many Reformed, convinced that Luther/Lutherans rejected the third use of the law, emphasize it as “The” Reformed Distinctive and as the primary engine of sanctification. Thus a drift into a legal-obedience-wrought, rather than grace-Spirit-wrought, sanctification.
LikeLike
If I want to find out about one’s true holiness at home, about 3 questions honestly answered by your children will tell me everything about a boaster’s self-control, curbing of anger, and true piety.
If a cat could talk it would be a million times more valuable…
LikeLike
Apropos of nothing (except MARK JONES, that is) “Owenian” sounds a lot like “a weenie ‘un”. You’re welcome.
LikeLike
“You must be born again” – but not all of you will be born again? We will have unborn-again sections? sheesh. That’s a travesty.
Telling me I’m really understanding the gospel if i do it “spontaneously” without even thinking about it is oppressive, since God is pleased with my coerced efforts under the blood of jesus, and you’re saying he’d be MORE pleased if I did them spontaneously.
The lutheran view of being coerced “under law” to do good works is contradicted by the reformed confession
“So as, a man’s doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourages to the one and deters from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law: and not under grace”
You can take an exception to that if you want but its still an exception.
LikeLike
“So as, a man’s doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourages to the one and deters from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law: and not under grace”
No exception to take there. Question is, why is someone doing the above? Because the reverse is also true:
<>
The “why we do” seems every bit as important as the “what we do.” And if the ‘why’ is to increase our “heavenly reward” where does Christ’s finished work of heavenly reward for the elect end and our work for heavenly reward begin? To me it seems simpler and, despite Philips reasoning, more Biblical to keep motives for obedience in the area of thankfulness and God’s glory.
LikeLike
For some reason this was left out between the
– So as, a man’s doing good, and refraining from evil… is no evidence of his being under grace: and not under law
LikeLike
p duggan, that quotation from confession could be read entirely as compatible with someone who obeyed the law spontaneously.
Why do you want to see threats?
Why did my parents prefer when I cleaned my room without their asking?
Why do you diss on Lutherans?
LikeLike
One question I have with some of these folks who wrack their brains trying to figure all this stuff out about sanctification is where they find the time to do all this sinning? Or to monitor everyone else’s level of sinning?
In my world I spend most of my time at work or at home with my wife and kids. Not a lot of time left for nonsense. Do we just have a lot of people with way too much free time on their hands (many of whom also happen to be pastors) and that is doing them (and us) more harm than good?
Who can work a Challies Checklist when you’re spending most of your time working to pay the bills, getting the kids off to school, and putting them to bed at night?
LikeLike
C’mon, E. Every square inch, every blessed second, every last pastry.
LikeLike
For me maybe the most troubling aspect of Rev. Phillips’ article is the way in which the “Gospel Reformation Network’s statement of Affirmations and Denials” is quoted and explicated like a confessional document, and used to bolster his argument. What authority does it have? Correct me if I’m mistaken, but did he not have a hand in its composition? That seems like a circular reference. I’m probably late to the party on this one.
LikeLike
>>>>Who can work a Challies Checklist when you’re spending most of your time working to pay the bills, getting the kids off to school, and putting them to bed at night?<<<<
People that are almost perfectly sanctified, make time. If you are not there yet, try harder.
LikeLike
“Gospel Reformation Network’s statement of Affirmations and Denials” To quote the Blue Beetle and Booster Gold BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Why do Presbyterians insist on acting like independent babdists? Sure, they talk a good game when it comes to plurality of elders, accountability to a presbytery and GA. But they seem to be putting a goodly amount of effort in organizations outside and independent from their own denomination.
I get it, writing for “By Faith” is never going to be cool. I get it, working through Great Commission Publishing means I can’t push my Biologos agenda. I get it, how are you going to get rich and wealthy if you don’t have a platform and a speaking schedule to sell your books. I get it, how are you going to establish non-presbyterian churches through your denomination.
To riff off of Martin Luther -“I am more afraid of my own pastors than of the pope and all his cardinals. In my denomination we have the great babdist pastor-popes. Presbyterian Pastors.”
LikeLike
Amish,
Ouch.
LikeLike
Paul – People that are almost perfectly sanctified, make time. If you are not there yet, try harder.
Erik – Forget Guilt, Grace, Gratitude — just try harder.
Maybe the problem is too many Presbyterians are unfamiliar with the Heidelberg Catechism.
“Try Harder” is by no means the gospel.
Part of the problem is that a lot of people appear to be trying hard but are still, well, jerks. Others just live life, worship on Sundays, and are really nice, sanctified people.
Like justification, God sanctifies who He wishes.
LikeLike
Amish, why can’t we all just get along? #unificator
LikeLike
Eric,
Handclap to that one my friend.
Maybe the fact that most these guys are in the PCA (my own denom) is indicative of the health of the PCA as a Presbytery. Why do you need to start a coalition outside of the denomination (with your own confessional documents no less) to try and reform those within your denomination (TT comes to mind for one)? It’s like a micro-denomination… As Hart has shown time and again, if its so bad, take it to the Presbytery, otherwise, take a chill pill.
It feels like a giant passive-aggressive manner to deal with denominational issues.
LikeLike
What you see here is despair. Those who despair over infinitude.
Their despair over their own imbalance is relieved only by transferring that despair to others.
It comes down to a lack of faith. God isn’t advancing infinitude at the rate they think he should.
LikeLike
@ igasx:
Offtopic, but many threads ago you asked me a really good question that I didn’t get back to and can’t find again … and can’t remember.
If you happen to remember it, re-post somewhere.
LikeLike
Jeff- we were discussing the inquisition of the Pharisees and Herodians against Jesus in which he gave the “render” interpretation. I argued that his interpretation was congruent with an Old Covenant interpretation and not a new command based on:
1)Bringing in the Heriodians was blatant attempt by the Pharisees to try and trap Jesus into a no-win situation where he would either give an interpretation that would not follow the Torah or would put him at risk with the Heriodians and thus the Romans. Because neither the Pharisees nor the Heriodians pressed against the answer implies that the answer both followed the Pharisees interpretation of Torah and the obviously did not disparage Rome.
2) In the end the only charge brought against Jesus was his claiming equality with God. My argument is that if he had been thought to had interpreted the Torah wrongly in some other area in which he had been tested by the Pharisee, I would believe that information would have been presented in the Gospels.
In Sum, I do not believe that the “Render” statement is a new command for the new covenant era.
LikeLike
Erik Charter,
“One question I have with some of these folks who wrack their brains trying to figure all this stuff out about sanctification is where they find the time to do all this sinning? Or to monitor everyone else’s level of sinning?”
Erik – I assume you are talking about the Reformed folks with this comment? In Lutheranism, this debate about the 3rd use of the law has been going on for years. Its in our history, and it came back in a big way starting in the mid-50s and really picking up steam in the 60s and 70s… I wish we didn’t have to spill so much ink on it!
In any case, I could identify with your comments about being busy – though in my day to day life it seems I find plenty of time to sin in just the way I catch myself interacting with my family… Somedays one wonders where one’s sanctification really is! But one thing Lutheranism really has going for it is that we emphasize looking to the external word for certainty of salvation. “Fruit-checking” – of ourselves or others – really is not something we tell each other to do… If D.G. doesn’t mind, I’d like to recommend this talk on the issue: http://justandsinner.com/the-tyranny-of-fruit-checking-a-lecture-from-the-pcr-conference/
Thanks D.G. for the link. Not sure what to make of the “boy” thing though. I’m 40. (though it looks to me from the post that “something- Obedience Boy” is common parlance amongst you all.
+Nathan
LikeLike
Amish nailed it. The PCA ain’t all that Presbyterian, or Churchly, but it is pretty AMERICAN (in a culturally relevant, Manhattan-Southeastern kind of way).
LikeLike
Phillips is missing the context of I Cor. 3. The wood, hay and stubble is bad doctrine not founded upon the word of God and the gospel. Paul is addressing the role of ministers, not the good works of believers. The older writers got this. See Calvin: http://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/1_corinthians/3.htm
LikeLike
“apparent need to reject gratitude as the only basis for sanctification. “…” evidence of a “false profession and unregenerate life.”
as you ask “why do you think I wrote this post”
was this one to deny, contradict,mock the Lord’s own word? His Kingdom parables, His example (Heb 12:1-3), warnings (Matt 7:21), exhortations (Heb 6:4-11; 2 Pet 2:18-20), encouragements (Jude 1:24, Rev 3:19), etc.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, Jack, and ‘College of Fellows’ Old Lifers,
When I read your perspectives, I clearly understand and get it.
When the Obedience Boys present their perspectives, I, like Master Lee, Am Confused.
LikeLike
https://harryreeder.wordpress.com/
http://www.emberstoaflame.org/
If you have time, read the Harry Reeder In Perspective Blogs on Embers To a Flame and the Gospel Reformation Network Affirmations and Denials and use your Reformed Toolkit to Review………………Brrrrrr!
Also, the next link includes a video on how to join the Embers To A Flame Mafia with Boss Reeder
LikeLike
One interesting thing to note about sanctification is that generally it plays out as we interact with others. Obedience Boys seem more interested in sitting in their prayer closets sweating bullets, however. Either that or pouring out their anxieties on their keyboards. Maybe if they just chilled out and tried to have decent interactions with others their sanctification would progress. But wait, no comments allowed — so maybe pontificating is the goal more than interacting.
LikeLike
Nathan – In any case, I could identify with your comments about being busy – though in my day to day life it seems I find plenty of time to sin in just the way I catch myself interacting with my family…
Erik – On my good days I say my swear words in my mind, on bad days I say them audibly.
LikeLike
Todd,
Along with upscale urban ministry perhaps the PCA has shifted to every-member ministry.
Hey, someone needs to bring the cheese when the church has already paid for the jazz trio.
LikeLike
The obedience boys stuff doesn’t seem remotely compelling unless one was held under a power structure that allowed the obedience boys to slap you across the face for any disagreement with their views, or worse punishment.
LikeLike
You got it Kent. Dead On. That’s why they’re fighting so hard to hold on to that ‘death grip’ they have through Small Group Discipleship, Accountability (One-way street, overbearing/overlording/ cantilevered version), and most of all, distorting the Gospel. People who are under this power structure are afraid to make a peep.
LikeLike
Half their “flock” is their children who are just biding their time till they can get the **** out of that horrible obedience boy’s life.
Accountability is a great Patsy game between the gullible and the con-men running it. Roast lamb every night under an accountability program.
LikeLike
The Mafia. Right on Ken.
LikeLike
I’m making an official proclamation.
Until Old School Presbyterians can wrest control of the PCA from both the Kellerite Urbanists and the Obedience Boys, the PCA will henceforth be called one of two names: The EPCA or the SBPCA
The EPCA stands for the Episcopal Presbyterian Church of America. Why Episcopal? Because they have allowed themselves a de-facto Bishop in Keller and because Episcopalianism is the pinnacle of effete Urban Christianity. Episcopalians are to Presbyterians what Presbyterians are to Babdists in terms of relative sophistication.
The SBPCA stands for the Southern Babdist Presbyterian Church of America. Obedience Boys take on the garb of the Southern Babdist scold preacher so they can at least give homage to the SBC by affixing the name.
Don’t refer to the PCA as the PCA until this is fixed or I’ll send Sean after you.
Rev. Jim Standridge will take on the role of honorary SBPCA President until further notice.
LikeLike
Right on, Erik.
LikeLike
Apologies on goofing up the name. I forgot the EPCA & SBPCA is “in” but not “of” America.
LikeLike
The comparative sophistication analogy is dead on.
LikeLike
Erik, if you were more spiritual you wouldn’t have to ask and the Battle Plans worksheets would flow uncoerced.
LikeLike
I would definitely go with Rinne over Philips. But I don’t see Philips saying that sin is the evidence of a “false profession and unregenerate life” but that unfaithful living is. We can certainly debate the definition of “unfaithful living” but scripture certainly makes room for a false professor.
LikeLike
The Presbyterian churches round here have been having a mission to farmers. Large crowds, even by local revivalistic standards. But lots of people know the men (and women) giving their testimonies. And they are disappointed. They come along hoping to hear about how their sanctified neighbours were or even better are really wicked. But they only get the highlights and they know the stuff that will never be shared. At least they enjoy the singing troupes. Not sure how this relates to the topic ….
LikeLike
Jack Miller– “The “why we do” seems every bit as important as the “what we do.” And if the ‘why’ is to increase our “heavenly reward” where does Christ’s finished work of heavenly reward for the elect end and our work for heavenly reward begin? To me it seems simpler and, despite Philips reasoning, more Biblical to keep motives for obedience in the area of thankfulness and God’s glory.”
Amen and Amen! Well said Jack! Of course that just proves your Antinomian to the obedience boys.
I miss the days when the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals was run by the late James Boice and Mike Horton.
LikeLike
My browser at home is stuck in a time warp where “Lutheran Obedience Boy” is the last post I can see. I feel like Bill Murray in “Groundhog Day”.
LikeLike
ec, an interweb gremlin hiccupped or something when DGH put the FB “like” and twitter &tc buttons on OL, is my guess. We’re both stuck on groundhog day, is what I mean.
If you are a feedly user, the rss feeds are still pumping out content as excepted, comments and posts, just fyi..
LikeLike
Erik, I had the same gremlin for most of today and last night. Suddenly, he left…
Technology.
LikeLike
Thanks guys. It seems to be back to normal now.
LikeLike
On November 26, 2014 at 11:29 am Erik Charter wrote…
“I’m making an official proclamation.
Until Old School Presbyterians can wrest control of the PCA from both the Kellerite Urbanists and the Obedience Boys, the PCA will henceforth be called one of two names: The EPCA or the SBPCA.”
Well, you might be waiting a long time for the Old School Presbyterians to wrest control of the PCA. I think that the Curmudgeon is correct – there aren’t enough of them to do much of anything:
http://thechristiancurmudgeonmo.blogspot.com/2013/07/what-is-pca-new-side-new-school-church.html
LikeLike
Lints p 39—-Hodge attempted to suppress the meritorious consequences in his doctrine of sanctification by arguing that the Holy Spirit is the efficient cause of these good works. ….There is an odd asymmetry of justice in the second courtroom of sanctification. Good works are rewarded but bad works receive no condemnation…In Hodge’s doctrine, justification is through faith because good works are in sufficiently short supply s to warrant condemnation rather than reward. But in his doctrine of sanctification, there appear to be sufficient supply of good works to warrant blessing…..Faith must be distinguished from works at the very point where Hodge wants to make them analogous…..There is no reference to the Holy Spirit’s work of producing faith in (Romans 3-6) Paul’s argument against moralism nor against antinomianism.
LikeLike
Lints—-Living by Faith Alone?, in IVP, Sanctification, ed by Kapic 2014, from the Edinburg Dogmatics Conference
p 36–There is no partial righteousness sufficient to satisfy the critics of antinomianism….The error begins in the assumption that good works (in contrast to faith) are necessary to sanctification.
Calvin, “Let us not consider works to be so commanded after free justification that they afterward take over the function of justifying man or share this office with faith.” 3:17:9
LikeLike
Formula of Concord 6: 4-5 “Works are called works of the law as long as they are only extorted from man by urging the punishment and threatening of God’s wrath.
Berkouwer, Sanctification is not a process, certainly not a moral process, but is being holy in Christ.” Faith and Sanctification, p 104
LikeLike
http://theaquilareport.com/how-righteous-do-i-have-to-be-to-know-i-am-righteous-by-faith/
1) Saving Faith. … If your faith is of the saving variety, it will produce definitive effects in your life. You will find in and about yourself evidences that saving faith is at work changing you. You must examine yourself to see if your faith is transforming, and if you cannot find clear evidence of transformation then your faith may not be of the saving sort. It may be “nothing in my hand I bring” at the beginning, but some things better show up in your hand pretty soon. It may be “just as I am I come” but you better not be what “I am” long or you didn’t really come.
(2) Regeneration. Faith is impossible apart from the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Regenerating grace or the new birth precedes faith. But what does regeneration do? Does it awaken the sinner to his true peril and then enable him to trust in Christ, or does it involve a total moral renovation? If it involves moral renovation, then you must look not only for faith that rests in and on Christ, but moral differences of nature, character, and behavior….
3) Repentance. ….You cannot turn to Christ without turning from sin. But what is this repentance that goes with faith? Is it a change that means you no longer resist God, rely on yourself, and reject Christ? Or is it more? Is it being sorry for your sin, seeking mercy, and longing for the happy day when you will be free of it? Or is it more? …How much transformation and renovation must there be if you truly repent? How much ceasing from sin is involved in the repentance that is faith’s Siamese twin?
LikeLike
I just got pointed to this post, and I’m glad to see you share thoughts from my friend Nathan Rinne on these issues. I am interested though to see that I am an “Obedience Boy.”
LikeLike
Nadia the Lutheran http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/bringing-sin-back-into-church/402391/
Rick the Patriot—-Kim Davis is demonstrating the power of the grace of God in salvation. This is what the grace of Christ looks like in a true believer’s life.
LikeLike