Faith then love

Listening to: Bach: Violin Concertos (Hahn)

Love can only be fruit, it cannot take the place of the tree of faith. But there is a constant attempt in the legal scheme to substitute love for faith [...]

[In] Luke's story of the woman in the house of a Pharisee who anointed Jesus' feet from an alabaster jar. The Pharisee, Simon, was found outstripped by the woman not only in faith, but also in his pride - the righteousness of the law (which is love). Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace" (Luke 7:50). Her faith came from the preached word heard earlier: "Your sins are forgiven," and this finally revealed what Jesus meant when he told Simon, "Her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love" (Luke 7:47). Love, it turns out, is either understood in relation to the law - in which case it is a work and cannot bear our trust - or it is simply what happens when Christ has forgiven a sinner.

(pp.235-236, Steven Paulson, Lutheran Theology)

So, when we preach the law, we tell people to "love the Lord your God". But when we preach the Gospel we call people to "believe the Lord your God", and out of that belief (which is receiving the seed of the promise of God himself and his forgiveness) love springs spontaneously. Love is greater because love is the eternal goal (1 Cor 13:13), but it cannot be found without faith receiving the Spirit in the promise of Christ who creates it.

Hearing is believing - at least in this age

"Faith is in something, it needs some-thing to believe; specifically it lives from an incarnate and crucified promise, who is none other than Christ, the promised Messiah." (p.199, Paulson, Lutheran Theology)

"Faith is never without a thing in which it trusts; but when faith's "thing" is a promise from God whose "yes" is Christ, then it has something that "counts" before God. Christ counts before God - not as a token of law, but quite apart from the law since the Father gives everything to the Son, and the Son gives everything back freely" (p. 122)

"Faith does not stand upon what it feels or sees; it is only an ear and the ear listens solely to Christ" (p.136)

"In faith we do not see glory; instead we see suffering, and if that were not enough, by the seventh chapter of Romans, Paul says we feel and see in our own flesh the very sin that Christ is promised to have taken and defeated. Everything promised to faith seems to be taken away immediately in experience: glory turns to suffering; seeing turns to hearing; resurrection to dying" (p.141)

"Boasting in a hope that is not yet seen is exercising a freedom of speech that the world does not know by means of suffering God's love - not being attracted to it" (p.148)

Paulson's Lutheranism is sadly an under-realised version which is clearer on death than resurrection. In that it stands in bold contrast with a contemporary Christian culture that is dominated by an over-realised eschatology. I will never forget Dick Lucas' comment that Christians today are great at speaking about faith and love, but poor at hope. We are profoundly a this-worldly church and yet simultaneously world-despising church because we do not look to the future through the past in Christ (not just for salvation but revelation).

Christ is what was promised (so we do see him) but also the promise of the future (which we hear of and do not yet see). You could say we see in a mirror dimly!

To say that we see Christ's loveliness clearly is to teach sinless perfectionism and that the resurrection has already happened (2 Tim 2:18). On the other hand to say that we only see the ugly crucified man who bids us die and not the loveliness of the resurrected Saviour that bids us live is to deny the new-birth and presence of the Spirit.

[Very rough notes... maybe I'll write a post soon... but long work-days are catching up on me]

Taking flight

Someone once said to me that faith and obedience are two wings of a bird - you need both to be saved.*

Not a good analogy.

I think it would be better to think of faith as the engine of a plane and the good works as the banner flowing behind which show the world that the plane is flying.

...perhaps you could do better though

*an interesting variation of John Stott's analogy for social action and evangelism.

Ramblings on mustard seed faith

"The apostles said to the Lord, 'Increase our faith!'

And the Lord said, 'If you had faith like a grain of mustard seed, you could say to this mulberry tree, 'Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you.'" (Luke 17:5-6)

One of the themes of New Word Alive was 'faith'. We were wonderfully taught that it is the object of your faith that matters most and not the strength of your faith.

• Mike Reeves taught us that true faith is in God, not faith in your faith.
• Steve Casey taught us that faith is confidence in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ for now and eternity, but false faith is confidence in this world for now and eternity.
• Rico Tice, in preaching on the suffering Christians of Heb 11:36ff, taught us that faith is in God, not your agenda for God.

It is who our faith is in, and not the quantity of our faith that saves us. A mustard seed is enough to move a tree or a mountain.

But the size of our faith does matter because, while it may not affect our salvation, it does determine how much of that salvation we know here and now. A person of little faith is just as secure and just as loved by God as the person of great faith, but they may live indistinctive lives. A person of great faith will live out of the salvation they know they have received and make a great difference to the world as they serve their neighbours and spread the Gospel, despite great personal cost.

• The size of your faith does not make a difference how much you receive from God (the vertical dimension).
• However, the size of your faith does make a difference how much you give to others (the horizontal dimension).

How does Jesus increase the faith of the disciples in Luke 17? He increases their faith by telling them they have already received all they need from him with their week faith. He takes their eyes of their faith and encourages them to live out of what they have already received.

Reasonable faith

faith...is no blind leap in the dark. Far from it. The Bible teaches that faith is an exercise of reasonable trust in a God who is really there and has proved himself to be completely trustworthy. In fact, it would be utterly unreasonable and irrational not to trust in someone who has proved himself to be infinitely dependable. The whole Bible bears witness to the reality that God has been, is now, and will always be truthful and worthy of our trust. We may not always understand what God is doing or why he is doing it, but we have no good reason to doubt him.

(p.73, Do I Know God?, Tullian Tchividjian)

Out -> inside -> out

Now, our Scholastics and papists have taught an external piety; they would command the eyes not to see, and the ears not to hear, and would put piety into our hearts from the outside. Ah, how far this is from the truth! But it comes in this way: When the heart and conscience cling to the Word in faith, they overflow in works, so that when the heart is holy, all the members become holy, and good works follow naturally.

(Easter Sunday Sermon: Of Christ's Resurrection, on Mark 16:1-8)

Martin Luther criticised an ethics which taught that by doing good things you could develop good habits that would filter down into your heart. He saw this ethics in Medieval Scholastic theology, but originating in Aristotle ("Virtually the entire Ethics of Aristotle is the worst enemy of grace. This in opposition to the scholastics" [Disputation Against Scholastic Theology, 1517]).

But that does not mean that he thought that personal change was a simple case of inside->out.

Our hearts are not changed spontaneously but in response to the external word, which could only be understood correctly by prayer, meditation and experience (Or Anfechtung, see his three rules).

Therefore, Bonhoeffer was standing in Luther's line when he explained that:

only the believers obey, and only the obedient believe.

It is really unfaithfulness to the Bible to have the first statement without the second. Only the believer obeys - we think we can understand that. Of course, obedience follows faith, the way good fruit comes from a good tree, we say. First there is faith, then obedience. If this meant only that faith alone justifies us and not deeds of obedience, then it is a firm and necessary precondition for everything else. But if it meant a chronological sequence, that faith would have to come first, to be later followed by obedience, then faith and obedience are torn apart...

space should be kept and had to be kept for that external deed required to enable faith - the step, in this case, to the church, where the word of salvation is preached... You can leave your house on Sunday and go to hear the preaching. If you do not do it, then you willfully exclude yourself from the place where faith is possible...

it is not the works which create faith. Instead, you are given a situation in which you can have faith.

(italics original, pp. 63-67, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship)

[Note that as well as this 'religious work' he also gives examples of an alcoholic giving up alcohol or a rich man giving away his money]

[Note also that Bonhoeffer is not saying that the 'first step' is a 'good work', but that is a work, which allows space for faith, which leads to good works.]

Post-mortum response to the unveiled word

the Word of God is so weak that it suffers to be despised and rejected by people...This weak Word, which suffers contradiction by sinners, is the only strong, merciful Word, that can make sinners repent from the bottom of their hearts. The Word's power is veiled in weakness. If the Word came in full unveiled power, that would be the final judgment day.

(p.173, Deitrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship)

It would be an interesting question to ask Rob Bell, whether it makes any difference that post-mortum repentance would be in response to the glorified and strong Word of Christ.

I think that when Paul says that he preached "the word of the cross" (1 Cor 1:18), he wasn't just referring to the content, but the form of Gospel he preached. It was weak and foolish, carried by jars of clay, just as Jesus seemed to so many in first century Judea.

At his second coming the Word will be much more a "word of the resurrection", and will be carried by angels blasting trumpets. Glory will be unveiled and strength exerted.

If Rob Bell sees people repenting, and trusting, in response to that Word then is there something quantitatively different to our repentance and faith?

Faith is how we feed

Listening to: Mozart: Violin Concertos

[This is an attempt to explain why only those with faith are saved by putting it in the context of the nature the salvation itself. I'm a bit torn whether I've succeeded. Let me know your thoughts if you have any]

1. God lays on a meal for everybody, no matter who they are

In the Parable of the Great Banquet, Jesus begins by encouraging generosity to all types of people.  He says that ““when you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbours, in case they also invite you in return and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind” (Luke 14:12-13).

It is obvious why Jesus needs to say this isn’t it?

We are nice to those people that we want to be nice to us in return.  Who among us can say that we treat the shop attendant with the same attention we do someone interviewing us for a job?  We will buy a round for someone who we know has a record of buying rounds for us, but we won’t do the same for someone who never offers to get us a drink.

Or we can be prejudiced against whole classes of people who we don’t identify with.  Historically we have treated those of a different race as second class citizens, but perhaps now are more likely to express contempt towards those both above and below us on the class ladder.  Paul seems to be combating just that attitude in 1 Timothy 2 when he encourages the Christians to pray for their political leaders, because God cares for ‘them’ as much as ‘us’.  Although for them it may have been even tougher given the oppression they would have experienced from their leaders.

Like Paul, Jesus sees that how we treat other people will mirror how we believe God treats people.  Often we are tempted to feel that God loves people like ‘us’, not people like ‘them’, and we think that justifies us in our lack of love to those people.  Where we do that we need to be sorry and change because God should be our model and is not like that.  God loves “all” people, as Paul says.

Jesus illustrates how God loves all people in this Parable of the Great Banquet.  He compares “the Kingdom of God”, or as Paul would say it “salvation”, to a great banquet.  It is not a bring-your-own meal and it is not beans on toast, instead it is a lavish feast provided entirely at God’s expense.

And this feast is not just for God’s friends or those who have something to offer him.  He has “made everything ready” for “many” people, even those who we read later in the parable don’t like him very much.  

God models just what Jesus says that we should do.  Love everyone and happily share what we have with everyone.

2. The meal is Jesus and he gives life

But what is the banquet that God puts on?  The disciple in verse 15 talks about “bread”, which doesn’t sound all that lavish.  But in John 6 we learn what type of bread is on offer.

Jesus explains that he is “the bread of God” (v.33) who gives “life”.  When we eat food we are nourished and sustained in life.  The difference with this bread is that Jesus gives not just “life” but “eternal life”.  Normal bread fills us up for a little while but then we need more to keep on living, but in contrast if we eat “the bread of God” then we shall “never hunger” (v.35).

I often feel it is a bit weird and disgusting that Jesus is talking about himself as food to be eaten.  When it says that the disciples said in response that “this is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” (v. 60) I have to sympathise with them.

It is pretty offensive that a lamb is slaughtered so we can eat it, but it is even more offensive that Jesus is crucified so that we can eat him. There is no getting round that. You cannot prettify death, but Jesus’ death is the major event of the Gospels and Christianity as a whole so you cannot avoid talking about it.

But as well as an offensive image, there is a sense in which this is the most beautiful image you could imagine. It is a beautiful thing when someone empties their fridge to lay on a meal when you visit. It is an even more beautiful thing, although also more tragic, when a single mother goes out to work all the hours she can manage to put food on the table for her family. It is the most beautiful thing I have ever heard of that Jesus died so that everyone can have eternal life. That is why it is at the centre of what Christians believe.

It is interesting how Jesus defines life in John’s Gospel though. The image of food suggests that Jesus is just the source of life. However, later in the same Gospel he also says that he is “the life” itself (14:6).

Jesus explains that “eternal life” doesn’t mean just existing for a long time, living a life of leisure or having lots of stuff. Instead he defines it in terms of a relationship: “this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ” (17:3).

If Jesus stayed dead to give us life, then that would be no kind of life at all. One of the best things about life is the people, but the very best thing, and source of all other good things, is knowing God and his Son, Jesus. The reason that Christians celebrate Easter is that Jesus was raised from the dead after 3 days being dead, so that we could have a relationship with him and his Father by his Spirit.

Jesus Christ is the feast that God the Father has put on for us, and his company at the table is what makes it worth looking forward to.

3. God invites people to the meal through people speaking about it and eating bread and drinking wine

God has provided a feast which he wants every single person to come and enjoy. But how will people come and enjoy it?

In the first place they need to know that there is feast to enjoy.

In the Parable of the Great Banquet Jesus says that the host sends out his servant to tell everyone that the banquet is ready to be enjoyed (14:17). In a similar way at the end of every Gospel Jesus says that the invitation to him is to go to all the nations. It is not just for the Jews, because God wants everyone to come, so the disciples will have to pass on the message to people all over the world (Matt 28:18-20, Mark 16:15; Luke 24:46-48; John 20:21).

This message is passed on by preaching and by the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, all of which have a fundamental role in the life of all Christians. When Paul preached he said he aimed to preach “Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:22). Not advice, not rules on how to live and not philosophy, but an offer of a death to give us life. Jesus’ death is also prominent in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper which originates from when, the night before he died, Jesus told the disciples to regularly eat bread and wine as his body and blood given for us.

When the bread is broken in two at the front of a church meeting, or when we hear someone talk about how Jesus died so that we could live knowing him, then we are invited to come and eat at the feast. We will only get tasters now, but when Jesus comes again then we will sit down to a great feast (as many other Bible passages talk about).

It is a sobering thought that if people do not receive the invitation they will not come to the feast. If we love people like God loves them then as his servants we will carry out the task Jesus gave to his disciples at the end of each Gospel and go to every corner of the earth to tell people invite people along. And that is what thousands of Christians have done, even if like Jesus it cost them their life.

4. Eating the meal by faith

This odd concept of eating Jesus, even though it is rich and meaning-packed, begs an important question: ‘how do we eat someone who is alive but we cannot see?’

Jesus makes clear what he means by eating in John 6:35-40. To eat him is to come to him (the feast) and we do that by believing in him.

In the Parable of the Great Banquet the invitation goes out to lots of people who come up with excuses not to come. But why would someone not want to come to a free party?

You only don’t accept an invitation because you believe that the alternative is better. If you don’t think you will enjoy the company, or that the food won’t be that good you make your excuses and don’t come. That is what lots of people do in Jesus’ parable. They thought that staying at home has more to offer than Jesus.

As any host the Father is offended by this. He has been the great giver, but people refuse to receive the gift. It is irrational and morally reprehensible, but people do that to other people and they do that to God. God is angry with those who despise his beloved Son.

The offer still stands until Jesus comes again though. Jesus says that he is offered “so that one may eat of it and not die” (John 6:50). It is important to remember that the reason people will die in hell is because they have chosen to refuse the invitation to eat. This seems mad, but people do have their reasons. They refuse the gift of salvation in Jesus because they that they have a better offer of salvation somewhere else.

That people do not hear about this great feast is a terrible tragedy and the fault of the church. That people hear about this great feast and yet believe it to be a poor offer not worth taking up is also a tragedy, but it is their fault not God’s.

The truth is stark, but if you don’t believe you don’t eat and you don’t live. But if you do believe Jesus is the bread of life he promises and you do eat of him visibly at the Lord’s Supper and by invisibly by listening to the Bible taught, then you will live and feast with him when he comes again.

Faith is...

• receiving the gift
• NOT a condition for receiving the gift.

What's so hard about that?

Stop listening to yourself

I apologise in advance for the ridiculously long quotes in this post, but they are brilliant.

The main trouble in this whole matter of spiritual depression in a sense is this, that we allow our self to talk to us instead of talking to our self. Am I just trying to be deliberately paradoxical? Far from it. This is the very essence of wisdom in this matter. Have you realized that most of your unhappiness in life is due to the fact that you are listening to yourself instead of talking to yourself? Take those thoughts that come to you the moment you wake up in the morning. You have not originated them, but they start talking to you, they bring back the problem of yesterday, etc. Somebody is talking. Who is talking to you? Your self is talking to you. Now this man’s treatment [in Psalm 42] was this; instead of allowing this self to talk to him, he starts talking to himself, ‘Why art thou cast down, O my soul?’ he asks. His soul had been repressing him, crushing him. So he stands up and says: ‘Self, listen for a moment, I will speak to you’. Do you know what I mean? If you do not, you have but little experience.

(D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Spiritual Depression: Its Causes and Cures, pp. 20f)

Martin Luther knew better than most how to talk your way out of spiritual depression. However, for him the devil was real and the one to have God's promises spoken to. However, God was also close at hand in the words of those who spoke in his name.

do not dwell on your own thoughts, but listen to what other people have to say to you. For God has commanded men to comfort their brethren, and it is his will that the afflicted should receive such consolation as God's very own [...]

Inasmuch, then, as God desires everyone to comfort his brother, and desires that such comfort be received with a believing heart, be done with your own thoughts. Know that the devil is tormenting you with them, and that they are not your thoughts but the cursed devil's, who cannot bear to see us have joyful thoughts.

Listen, then to what we are saying to you in God's name: Rejoice in Christ, who is your gracious Lord and Redeemer [...]

If you are convinced that [your own] thoughts come from the devil you have already gained the victory.

(pp.96f, Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, ed. and trans. Theodore G. Tappert [1534])

Slightly more seriously, Luther lays down how he dealt with his own doubts about whether he was one of the elect:

I know all about this affliction. I was myself brought to the brink of eternal death by it [...] I shall show you how God helped me out of this trouble and by what means I now protect myself against it every day.

First, you must firmly fix in your mind the conviction that such thoughts as yours are assuredly the suggestions and fiery darts of the wretched devil [...]

Secondly, when such thoughts assail you, you should learn to ask yourself, "If you please, in which Commandment is it written that I should think about and deal with this matter?" When it appears that there is no such Commandment, learn to say: "Begone, wretched devil! You are trying to make me worry about myself. But God declares everywhere that I should let him care for me [...]

Thirdly, if these thoughts nevertheless continue (for the devil is reluctant to give up), you too must refuse to give up. You must always turn your mind away from them and say: "Don't you hear, devil? I will have nothing to do with such thoughts. Moreover, God has forbidden me to. Begone! I must now think of God's Commandments. Meanwhile I shall let him care for me. If you are so clever in these matters, go up to heaven and dispute with God himself [...]

Fourthly, the highest of God's commands is this, that we hold up before our eyes the image of his dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Everyday he should be our excellent mirror wherein we behold how much God loves us and how well, in his infinite goodness, he has cared for us in that he gave his dear Son for us.

In this way, I say and no other, does one learn how to deal properly with the question of predestination. It will be manifest that you believe in Christ. If you believe, then you are called. And if you are called, then you are most certainly predestinated. Do not let this mirror and throne of grace be torn away from your eyes. If such thoughts still come and bite like fiery serpents, pay no attention to the thoughts or serpents. Turn away from these notions and contemplate the brazen serpent [John 3:14], that is Christ given for us.

(pp.115ff, Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, ed. and trans. Theodore G. Tappert [1534])

Incidentally, after some thought, I think that that last paragraph gets at what Paul means when he 'the Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God' (Romans 8:16). The witness of the Spirit is not a feeling or voice in your head telling you that you are elect. It is externalised in the cry 'Abba, Father' (v.15; c.f 2 Cor 1:19-22, Luke 12:11-12). It is not subsequent to belief in the Gospel, but it is belief that the Gospel is true. That is why the Reformers (in contrast to some Puritans) made assurance inseparable from faith. For example, Calvin defines faith as 'a firm and certain knowledge of God's benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy Spirit' (Institutes, 3.2.7) and Luther describes it as 'a living, daring confidence in God's grace, so sure and certain that the believer would stake his life on it a thousand times' ("Preface to the Epistle of St Paul to the Romans" [1546] LW vol.35 p. 370)

Having said that Calvin understands the witness of the Spirit slightly differently to me (cf. his commentary on Ephesians 1:13 and on Romans 8:16 itself). He seems to see it more as unconscious change in the heart, but which is manifested in our calling upon God:

our faith has no true evidence, except we call upon God. It is not then without reason that Paul, bringing us to this test, shows that it then only appears how truly any one believes, when they who have embraced the promise of grace, exercise themselves in prayers.

However, it is notable that when Luther recommends clear 'practical' advice it is to listen to other people who speak with the Spirit's voice, and to call upon the Lord in joyful song.

When you are sad, therefore, and when melancholy threatens to get the upper hand, say "Arise, I must play a song unto the Lord on my regal [a portable organ] (be it the Te Deum laudamus or the Benedictus), for the Scriptures teach us that it pleases him to hear a joyful song and the music of stringed instruments." Then begin striking the keys and singing in accompaniment, as David and Elisha did, until your sad thoughts vanish. If the devil returns and plants worries and sad thoughts in your mind resist him manfully and say, "Begone, devil! I must now play and sing unto my Lord Christ."

(pp.96f, Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, ed. and trans. Theodore G. Tappert [1534])