the-romans-revolution-january-february-2006

ROMANS ROAD MAP ❘ NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL ❘ PIPER ON ROMANS

MODERN REFORMATION ROMANS REVOLUTION

VOLUME

15, NUMBER 1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2006, $6.00

MODERN REFORMATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS january/february

2006

|

volume

15

n u m ber

1

Editor-in-Chief Michael S. Horton Managing Editor Eric Landry Assistant Editor Brenda Jung Department Editors Diana Frazier, Reviews William Edgar, Preaching from the Choir Starr Meade, Family Matters Staff | Editors Ann Henderson Hart, Staff Writer Alyson S. Platt, Copy Editor Lori A. Cook, Layout and Design Ben Conarroe, Proofreader Contributing Scholars David Anderson Charles P. Arand S. M. Baugh Gerald Bray Jerry Bridges D. A. Carson R. Scott Clark Marva Dawn Mark Dever J. Ligon Duncan Richard Gaffin W. Robert Godfrey T. David Gordon Donald A. Hagner John D. Hannah Gillis Harp D. G. Hart Paul Helm C. E. Hill Hywel R. Jones Ken Jones Peter Jones Richard Lints Korey Maas Mickey L. Mattox Donald G. Matzat John Muether John Nunes John Piper J. A. O. Preus Paul Raabe Kim Riddlebarger Rod Rosenbladt Philip G. Ryken R. C. Sproul Rachel Stahle A. Craig Troxel David VanDrunen Gene E. Veith William Willimon Paul F. M. Zahl Modern Reformation © 2006 All rights reserved.

For more information, call or write us at: Modern Reformation 1725 Bear Valley Pkwy.

Escondido, CA 92027 (800) 890-7556 info@modernreformation.org www.modernreformation.org ISSN-1076-7169

The Romans Revolution 6

Romans Revolution Why is Romans such an important book in the canon of Scripture? This book reveals more clearly than others the message of salvation. In his epistle to the Romans, the apostle Paul gives us a systematic presentation of the gospel.

According to the author, the Book of Romans continues to serve as a reliable “road map” for the church by “drawing together the most important strands of biblical doctrine.”

by Michael Horton

11 A World View in a Few Words The first seventeen verses of the Book of Romans are important, for they provide the world view from which Paul understands the gospel. These opening words introduce the central themes in his epistle — the character of God, the condition of humanity, the identity of Jesus Christ, and the nature of salvation.

by Dean O. Wenthe

14 The Transforming Message of Romans: A Collection of Essays The Book of Romans made a lasting and profound impact on the early church fathers. This collection of essays briefly surveys how Romans transformed Saint Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Charles Spurgeon.

by Eric Landry, Rod Rosenbladt, Kim Riddlebarger, and Ken Jones Plus: The Gospel is the Power of God Unto Salvation by John Piper

S UBSCRIPTION I NFORMATION US US Student Canada Europe Other

1 YR 1 YR 1 YR 1 YR 1 YR

$29 $22 $35 $52 $59

2 YR $52 2 YR $63 2 YR $94 2 YR $107

COVER PHOTO BY CORBIS

Romans Road page 2 | Letters page 3 | Preaching from the Choir page 5 Reviews page 21 | Family Matters page 28

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 1

ROMANS ROAD i n

t hi s

is su e

Our Road Through Romans January/February: Romans 1:1-17, The Romans Revolution Introduction and overview of a year spent exploring the transforming message of the Book of Romans.

March/April: Romans 1-2, Does God Believe in Atheists?

What role does general revelation play in our witness to nonChristians? How can we use natural law to establish a place in the public square with people of other faiths? Included in this issue is a handy apologetics chart detailing the differences between different schools of thought and answers to basic apologetics questions.

May/June: Romans 2-4, What Does it Mean to be Good?

Look around you: sin is redefined as weakness and grace is merely self-help power. No one wants to believe that all of us are under God’s righteous judgment. But along with the consequences of our sin is the promise of good news: the turning away of God’s wrath and a righteousness not of our own making.

July/August: Romans 5-8, The Peace that Starts the War God’s divine pronouncement that we are righteous in Christ is not the end of the story. It is the prelude to a much larger narrative of victory and defeat in our ongoing battle against the world, the flesh, and the devil. How do we live the Christian life in the midst of a war zone?

September/October: Romans 9-11, Has God Failed? Can God be trusted? His work in history—specifically in the nation of Israel—becomes an object lesson for how we relate to God and grapple with the mysteries of his divine will.

November/December: Romans 12-16, In View of God’s Mercies Truth must make a difference in our real lives. How does knowing and believing the message of Romans actually play itself out in our daily interactions with our family, neighbors, and church?

2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

You Say You Want a Revolution

I

was surprised at the width of the wall. The newspapers and newscasts on the weekend of November 10, 1989, showed scores of dancing Germans on top of the Berlin Wall. How could so many of them fit on it? That dreaded wall which had for so long separated a people would be torn down, brick by brick over the next few weeks until only a small section was left to memorialize the national breach.

Walls of separation are being built in many quarters of the church today: distinguishing biblical from systematic theology, new from old perspectives on Paul, and traditional from missional churches, to name just a few of the divisions. What power can heal these breaches? What message can reform a church by “divisions rent asunder and heresies distressed”?

Throughout the history of the church, a rediscovery of the Book of Romans has led to reformation and personal transformation. Could such an experience be ours today? We think so, and for the entire year we’re dedicating each issue of Modern Reformation to an exposition and application of the central themes of Paul’s epistle to the Romans. In this issue, Reformed theologian and editor in chief Michael Horton starts the ball rolling with an overview article showing us how Romans can function as a sort of guide to integrating a biblical and systematic approach to our faith. Lutheran theologian and president of Concordia Theological Seminary, Dean Wenthe, introduces us to the central text of Romans’ first chapter: Paul’s declaration that he is “not ashamed” of the gospel.

We’re also featuring a series of shorter articles showing how God used the message of Romans to transform the lives of important figures in the history of the church: Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Spurgeon.

Over the next twelve months we’ll be returning to Romans to explore all the implications of this unique book. We’ve provided a map of our “Romans Road” to whet your appetite and help you track where we are in the journey. We’re glad you’ve decided to take this trip with us and our prayer is that, having spent this year in dedicated study of Romans, we would find ourselves renewed and refreshed by the gospel throughout 2006. Do you know someone who needs to walk the Romans Road this year? Send us their name and we’ll drop a trial issue in the mail to them; better yet, use the enclosed card to give them a gift subscription and work through the issue together. You may be surprised by the shape of your life at the end of the journey.

Eric Landry Managing Editor P.S. We welcome your feedback about our new look and layout. Send an email to info@modernreformation.org.

LETTERS your

I

was so pleased to find Susan Disston’s review of Believing God, by Beth Moore, in the November/December ’05 issue. The review was cogent, balanced, and a helpful tool to me.

I serve as Women’s Ministries Coordinator under the Presbyterian Church in America’s Christian Education & Publications Committee. One of the most frequently asked questions from pastors, elders, and Bible study leaders is: “What about Beth Moore studies?” We spend time trying to help them understand the theological dangers of being taught by a woman whose theology is not Reformed. Women often ‘demand’ a video format and find Beth Moore’s teaching and videos to be well-crafted and slick. Sadly, some women are not equipped to recognize the pitfalls and are sitting under false teaching. Others use the material and seek to adjust wrong teaching — this ‘readjustment’ often brings tension and discord around the Word and sets up women against women.

This review, by one of CE&P’s Regional Trainers, is a resource to send to those who are looking for answers!

Jane Patete Lawrenceville, GA

It must first be said that, to say the least, I am highly indebted to both Modern Reformation and White Horse Inn. I have been revolutionized and set straight for the last 11 years by this work after a “confused and covered up” faith that languished in Evangelicalism three years prior to that. So it is not easy to point out a disappointment in Bryan Chapell’s article, “The Promise-Driven Family” in the November/December ’05 issue First, he began much of what he

had to say via use of the “superapostle” language of a “deep, personal relationship with the Lord.”

Have I missed something? Why are we using this sort of spiritualistic language in place of “transcendent or mysterious fellowship with Christ and His Church”? Lest anyone thinks I am making too much out of language, try using those terms with folks instead of “personal relationship” and see where the conversation goes instead of acquiescing to the spiritualistic assumptions of the world that wants noth-

ing to do with mediation and wants to seek God on its own experiential, emotional, moral, and spiritualistic terms. Language is not as dispensable as many seem to assume anymore.

But beyond that, I thought we were done using the Bible as a handbook for living, a handbook on how to “raise a family” that simply comes up with conclusions anyone has access to in creation – things my secular yet upright rearing taught me and will be passed down to my own children. I thought we were to approach the Bible in a way to reveal the covenant promises of God as manifest in Christ. Too often we seem to end up with either more psychobabble or perfectly good advice we

thoughts

a n d

ou rs

can get elsewhere — or both.

I have to say that most of Chapell’s conclusions are not that profound. What he supposes only Christians can hand down to their children because of their belief seems askew; while my father saw no value or need to crack open a Bible, I’d have to say most of Chapell’s conclusions aren’t that alien from my father’s approach to child-rearing (a task he formally taught himself). Furthermore, now that I head up a Christian home myself, much of the way I rear my children is handed down from my father and my mother (for whom I am ceaselessly thankful) but also includes the specific Christian instruction I never had.

When we open the Bible, it seems to me, we do so not for practical “helps” to address our common (yet perfectly valid) needs but for a message that is radically unique and special. Both Moses and Paul were not really telling us simply how to approach our lives in order to get through our day. Something much more profound is being said. There is nothing profound on the face of ‘do not murder’ or ‘do not exasperate your children’ and ‘respect your parents.’ The profundity is what they point to.

Steve Zrimec Grandville, MI

I just wanted to take a moment and drop you a note concerning the November/December ’05 issue of Modern Reformation. In my opinion, this is one of the best issues I have read! I have been a subscriber for about five years and this is an excellent edition. All three of the featured articles are clear and precise in their apologetic concerning the scriptural reality of the covenant of grace and promise that we are through the blood of Christ

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3

Jesus, our Lord. Our faith cannot earn what Christ has already purchased for us. By embracing the truth of the covenant promises in Christ, we are liberated from legalism and freed to love and obey God in faith. Horton’s article is especially powerful. He poignantly illustrates the relationship and distinction between law and promise.

The exposition of Genesis 15 and Romans 4 is as good as it gets and is refreshing as it accomplishes what all solid interpretation should do: glorify God, who is utterly faithful to His word, and edifying to believers. Please keep up the good work and know that what you are doing is serving to revive and reform the church of the Lord Jesus.

Todd Shell Pastor, Fountain of Life Church

The Between the Times article on political issues correctly diagnoses confusion on creation issues. Most Christians underestimate the confusion, however. As a paleobiologist, I am appalled at false and illogical claims that pervade young earth and intelligent design "science", such as Philip Johnson's denial that HIV causes AIDS. More importantly, as a Christian I am appalled by the bad theology and eisegesis that typify those movements. Looking for evidence of God in the physical world instead of in Scripture and in changed lives is wrong prioritization.

To claim that a particular view on creation is necessary to salvation (whether explicitly or by slandering the faith of anyone who disagrees) or that a particular view on creation is more important than one's views on Christ (by assisting non-Christian apologetics, e.g. Jonathan Wells' role as a Moonie in the ID movement; by citing "testimonies" that tell only of a change from evolution to creation; etc.) violates Galatians 1.

Although some young earth and intelligent design advocates are more careful about theological and scien-

4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

tific issues than the popular promoters, the problems are so pervasive as to necessitate careful scrutiny rather than uncritical acceptance of anything purporting to be a Christian attack on evolution.

David Campbell Tuscaloosa, Alabama I understand the desire of many to commend portions of the “Purpose-Driven” movement.

Sometimes criticism must seems to those in the movement as if we’re advocating throwing babies out with the bathwater. Let me just affirm that it is good that we tithe our mint and cumin but there are weightier matters to consider.

There are nuances that are cancerous to the health of the Church.

Biblical Theology is a healthy mix of indicative (Christ our righteousness) and imperative (He who obeys my commands is the one who loves Me…). It seems like so much picking of nits when people start beating up a guy like Rick Warren because he is giving solid advice on Biblical imperatives. Such ideas are Godly after all, are they not?

It’s the balance that’s out of whack. The see-saw is totally weighted with imperatives. It’s the reason why in modern Evangelicalism folks don’t really sense a difference between themselves and any other religion that has a set of “moral values”.

I’ve seen the fruits of “PurposeDriven Life” in many versions over the last few years. I have been universally unimpressed with the results in the lives I know very personally. Churches that do this stuff seem consistently ignorant in the indicatives of the Gospel.

To me this is far more than a theoretical objection to a formula I disagree with or being punctilious about the Regulative Principle of Worship. I have been under the effects of this form of 5 steps to holiness program before but, more importantly, I have many friends and family that are still

in Churches captivated by such shallow doctrine. I have attended or visited a Church in California where my wife’s family attends for over 11 years now. In that time, I have NEVER, not once, heard a basic explanation of the Gospel in simple terms of Atonement. Not once. I’ve heard a lot of Scripture fairly accurately represented in terms of our duty as Christians but NOT the Gospel. This is my consistent report of nearly every broadly Evangelical Church I have visited.

It breaks my heart.

Thus, I will not argue the issue of whether some of what Rick Warren says is biblical. It’s what he leaves out that I have a problem with.

Just more weight on the side of moral maxims with which to live your life divorced from the power of the Gospel that enables it to begin with. So the seesaw is ever heavier on one end.

Rich Leino LtCol, USMC

Modern Reformation Letters to the Editor 1725 Bear Valley Parkway Escondido CA 92027 760.480.0252 fax Letters@modernreformation.org Letters under 200 words are more likely to be printed than longer letters. Letters may be edited for content and length.

PREACHING FROM THE CHOIR perspectives

on

music

and

th e

ch u r c h

A Love Supreme

“I

think the main thing a musician would like to do is to give a picture to the lis-

the Half Note in New York, using it both for its tener of the many wonderful things he knows and senses in the universe. own sake and as a place to experiment on material.

That’s what music is to me—it’s just another way of saying this is a big, beautiful A growing college audience as well as an Africanuniverse we live in that’s been given to us, and here’s an American network loved the music. example of just how magnificent and encompassing it is.

Though a peaceful man, Coltrane strongly believed in “…[Music is] like having life in miniature,” so said John racial justice. Drummer Max Roach once said about his Coltrane, who defined jazz and the spiritual for the midmusic, “I heard many things in what Trane was doing. I twentieth century. In 1957, Coltrane went through someheard the cry and wail of the pain that society imposes on thing like a conversion. He called it a religious experience. people and especially black folks.” He played solos that From this time on, he had a new sense of purpose in his life could last 45 minutes. One of his most beautiful, hauntand reflected on the way music was a microcosm of life. ing arrangements is of “My Favorite Things” from the He had been a severe drug addict. So serious had been Sound of Music. It soars and soars until you think there is his craving for alcohol and heroin, with the resulting decanowhere else to go, and then it soars some more. dence, he was fired by Miles Davis from a jazz band that Much of his music was now directly religious. He had provided him a marvelous opportunity for performcomposed songs about prayer, wisdom, and praise, often ance with some of the best musicians of the day. drawing from the Negro spirituals he knew as a youth. His Strangely, although his music remained fairly steadfast, his piece “Dear Lord” is a slow-moving prayer in music, with personal life was in shambles. Broke, unshaven, staggergradually ascending notes, lifting up the listener to God’s ing around Greenwich Village, would he join heaven. “Song of Praise” is an extended medthe list of jazz heroes who had succumbed to itation on saxophone over one or two harthe revenge of Mephistopheles: Bix monies, set down by McCoy and Jimmy, with Beiderbecke, Fats Navarro, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane's a sure-footed percussive foundation by Elvin.

Billie Holiday, and so many others? No. He In reality, it is a sermon and a choir anthem all music shakes up in “came to himself” as he lay down in a room one. The powerful “Spiritual” relates callin his mother’s house. In the midst of terrible our agnosticism and-response patterns, moaning, and black withdrawal, he knew God was there. He spiritual melodies together, over a wonderful, and rationalism. swinging, knew he wanted to live, in order to serve God subtle, 3/4 time rhythm. Listening, and bring beauty to the world, the beauty of we feel ourselves back in the “praise houses” God’s own love. He had been brought up in of the enslaved Africans who worshiped God the church, and now he heard the message as an adult, in away from their oppressors. a fresh way.

Surely the most well-known of Trane’s spiritual music Soon thereafter, Trane rose to new heights. In the is A Love Supreme. The studio version known around the early 1960s, he consolidated a legendary quartet: Jimmy world was recorded in 1964, thanks to the persistence of Garrison on bass; Elvin Jones on drums; McCoy Tyner on Bob Thiele, the producer who knew the value of the piano, and he on tenor saxophone. It became known as music, and knew how to market it. This suite is in four the “classic quartet” of jazz, and had the reputation for segments: “Acknowledgement,” “Resolution,” being the hardest-working group in music. I personally “Pursuance,” and “Psalm.” It is doubtful that any jazz had the privilege of hearing this group a number of times, recording has ever matched the spiritual power of this particularly at the Jazz Workshop in Boston, during my musical gift. “This album is a humble offering to Him,” as college years. Truly, it was jazz at its spiritual best! the liner notes relate, quoting Trane.

Unlike the avant-garde artists, performers such as Two events have recently contributed to the lasting Ornette Coleman of the “new thing,” Trane’s jazz was impact of A Love Supreme. The first is the discovery of a live accessible, though certainly modern. Louis Armstrong, performance from the Antibes (France) jazz festival. generally critical of new jazz, stopped by to hear the group [continued on page 27] and loved it. He and Coltrane would work at places like

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 5

BY

MICHAEL HORTON

ROMANS REVOLUTION

T

hroughout these pages, readers will catch a glimpse of the enormous significance of Paul’s letter to the mostly Gentile Christians who were living in the capital of the world’s largest empire. Ever since new (or relatively young) believers heard these words, the good news of God’s riches in Christ for sinners has had no greater summary.

Nowhere in Romans does the apostle announce his purpose as providing a careful arrangement of the whole range of Christian teachings and their logical relationships. However, it is pretty clear that he intends to encourage these believers in Rome with the gospel. Unpacking the meaning of that message—“the gospel of [God’s] Son” (1:9), can be seen as his goal (cf. 15:15–21). “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, ‘The righteous shall live by faith’” (1:16–17).

Of course there are local issues that demand specific attention. The relationship between Jews and Gentiles is an evident concern that Paul has for these Roman Christians as others (see especially chapters 14–15).

However, instead of the context of controversy that provoked stern rebukes of the Galatians and Corinthians, gentle and general exhortations are offered to the Romans: “Watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them” (16:17). So if Romans is not a systematic theology in any modern sense, it is nevertheless a systematic presentation of the gospel. In short, Romans is God’s first-aid kit for his church in all ages. To switch metaphors, it is the map or “big picture” that draws together the most important strands of biblical doctrine.

The Big Picture ave you ever thought of an argument as a map?

Preparing for a trip, you open the road map and see the connections: If you take Interstate 5 to Highway 35, then exit on Route 102, you’ll go through Whispering Pines and Oak Hollow until you finally arrive at your campsite. Get off the map in unfamiliar territory, flying by the seat of your pants, you are more likely to end up lost, as my wife frequently reminds me with a particular relish.

Romans is like a map. It is detailed enough to engender a field called “Pauline scholarship,” yet basic enough to be understood by new Christians (Paul’s original audi-

H

ence). Wherever you are on that spectrum, Romans will be a reliable guide for the most revolutionary journey you will ever take. So let’s lay out in rough, “big picture” terms the arguments and connections that we find in this great epistle. You may want to read each section yourself before my summary.

Introduction (1:1–17) aul packs more theology into his introductions than most of us do in our sermons. Even stating his credentials as “bondservant” and “apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,” Paul cannot keep himself from summarizing that gospel itself in verses 1–6. Furthermore, although the faith of these Christians “is proclaimed in all the world” (v. 8), he is nevertheless “eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome” (v. 15).

Evidently, Paul did not think that the gospel was only for unbelievers, but was to be the regular diet of Christians as well. Although it is a scandal to unbelievers, Paul is “not ashamed” of it, “for it is the power of God for salvation…”—it is itself the instrumental cause of that faith which alone receives God’s righteousness (vv. 16–17).

P

The Bad News: The Righteousness that Condemns (1:18–3:20) here are no atheists. Everyone knows that God is righteous and because the law is written on their consciences (2:14–15), Gentiles as well as Jews are accountable. In this situation of universal human disobedience after the fall, the revelation of God in nature

T

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 7

Those who are baptized into Christ receive both justification and sanctification—new status and new life. Salvation is a lot greater than fire insurance. and history (i.e., general revelation) comes as a threat, like the peals of thunder and lightning bolts at Mount Sinai. Like Adam, we are all born running from God, spinning our own line of fig leaf apparel to cover our sin.

If we cannot cover up our unrighteousness, we will cover up the revelation of God himself. Either I’m not as bad as all that, we say, or God isn’t as righteous as all that. This is the source of idolatry. It is not in the absence of revelation that we fashion idols, but precisely because of that general revelation: “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth” (1:18).

We do not like the God who is actually there, so we invent more user-friendly deities, “exchanging the truth of God for a lie” (1:25), eventually eradicating all knowledge of God derived from this general revelation (1:28).

In this state of affairs, even the most natural affections are exchanged for unnatural ones. Never mind the existence of heaven and hell; there is no longer any perceived order even in the natural world once we have unhooked it from its connection to its Creator and Preserver (1:29–32).

That’s those pagans, right? We have “Judeo-Christian values.” Paul says that such self-righteous appeals only further our condemnation. “For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified” (2:13). It is not enough to say “We have the law”; it has to be fulfilled, and it hasn’t been fulfilled either by the Gentiles who have it inscribed on their conscience or by Israel with its stone tablets.

This does not mean that being a Jew means nothing.

After all, they were given God’s Word, special rather than simply general revelation (3:1–2). The people’s unfaithfulness to the covenant they made at Sinai will not nullify God’s faithfulness to the covenant that he swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Rather, our unrighteousness only provides the opportunity for God to show his righteousness (3:3–8). Paul concludes this part of his argument “that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin” (3:9) by appealing to various passages especially from the Psalms: “’No one is righteous, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.’ . . . Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

sin” (10–11, 19–20). Now we know what he meant in 2:13 when he said that it was not hearers but doers of the law who will be justified. Since we are all are sinners, no one will be justified by the works of the law.

The Good News: The Righteousness that Saves (3:21–8:39) o we are moving along Interstate 5 (the path of law, which in our sinfulness leads us to suppress the truth in unrighteousness and to rest in self-security), but Paul tells us to take a sharp right, onto an entirely different highway. “But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe” (3:21). Paul introduces us to an important hermeneutical (i.e., interpretive) distinction in his thought: “law” as a principle (“Do this and you shall live”) distinguished from “the Law” as in the first five books of the Old Testament (the Pentateuch). Even the Law (in this second sense) witnesses to the gospel. We might even say that law in the first sense does as well, since it tells us what must be done by our representative head, Jesus Christ. The law must be fulfilled: only doers are justified (2:13). But the good news is that our elder brother has done it and has not only been justified as a private person but as a public person, a substitute and federal representative for us. This is why Paul unfolds the magnificent truths of God’s gift of Jesus Christ as our propitiatory sacrifice in whom we have justification (3:24–25).

Only in this way can God be both “just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus,” which ends all human boasting before him (3:26–30). In this way, the law is not set aside by faith but fulfilled and upheld: God has been faithful both to his own justice and to his promise to save his people from their sins (3:31).

Abraham is exhibit A. According to the common interpretation of the rabbis, Abraham’s obedience merited his (and Israel’s) election, but Paul tells a different story—one that actually fits the narratives of Genesis 12–22 (4:1–3). But justification is not by reward for services rendered but by grace in spite of utter failure.

God does not justify the righteous, but the wicked, “apart from works” (4:4–5). In this way, the promise made to Abraham—that through his seed salvation would come to the nations, can be fulfilled. Faith in Christ, not circumcision and the keeping of the law, determine whether one is a child of Abraham (4:9–12).

It comes through the promise and faith, not through the law and works (4:13–21), so that this righteousness that none of us can attain can nevertheless “be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised

S

R O M A N S

for our justification” (4:23–25).

This justification brings peace with God in the place of wrath, reconciliation in the place of hostility, and enters us into a different covenant with a different federal representative (chapter 5). Instead of being “in Adam,” dead in sins, guilty before God, corrupt in every respect, under condemnation and death, we are “in Christ.”

As a good catechist, Paul keeps directing us to the map, marking the connections in his unfolding argument, by asking questions. At this juncture, the likely question is, “Shall we then sin that grace may abound?”

(Rom. 6:1). He answers “no” because the same redemptive work that saves us from sin’s guilt and condemnation also saves us from sin’s tyranny. Those who are baptized into Christ receive both justification and sanctification—new status and new life. Salvation is a lot greater than fire insurance.

But just when this liberating announcement begins to bear fruit in us, motivating new obedience, we find ourselves falling short of the glory of God—even as those baptized into Christ. Just as Romans 6 curbs our tendency to under-value the new life that we have been given, Romans 7 challenges our drift toward triumphalism and self-righteousness. Myriad errors in understanding the Christian life proceed from our failure to pay close attention to Paul’s map here. To be sure, the road zigs and zags: Romans 6 inspires zeal; Romans 7 addresses our flagging zeal, ending on the triumphant note again by raising our eyes from ourselves to Christ (7:25). In Romans 8, then, we gain our equilibrium again, as Paul integrates the “already” of Romans 6 and the “not yet” of Romans 7 in a theology of the cross. There is no condemnation (8:1). The Spirit is given to us as a down payment on this final possession, engendering in us the filial cry, “Abba, Father!” (8:2–17). Suffering now yields to unspeakable glory in the future, a future that includes not only the soul but the body, and not only individuals but the whole creation that groans as in birth pangs even now (8:18–25). In the meantime, “the Spirit helps us in our weakness,” interceding for us, and strengthening our feeble hold on Christ, cooperating with the Father and the Son to work everything together for our good (8:26–28). The rest of the chapter (vv. 29–39) takes us to the doxological summit of Paul’s epistle. Whatever trials the believer encounters, however steep the climb, whatever assaults from without and within, he or she is predestined, called, justified, is being conformed to Christ’s image, and will be glorified one day. As he summarizes the road thus far traveled, his businesslike argumentation turns to praise, captured in the line, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (v. 31).

Election and Covenant: Is God Unfaithful? (9:1–11:36) or most of us, Paul missed a perfect ending at Romans 8:39. Yet once again Paul anticipates the understandable question that all of this confidence in God’s plan

F

R E V O L U T I O N

raises. Throughout the epistle he has explained how the blessing of Abraham has come to the nations as well as to Israel, just as promised. Yet is the church plan B and if so, what of plan A? In other words, all this talk about election, redemption, justification, and glorification is all well and good. “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect?” (8:33). But just who is “God’s elect”?

Wasn’t that Israel and if so, how can we, Gentiles, be sure that there isn’t a plan C from which we can be excluded?

Romans 9 is therefore not an abstract discussion of predestination, but a concrete argument answering a concrete and practical question. Israel “according to the flesh” is not simply reduced to a byword now that Christ has come. To be sure, the nation stands under a divine curse or anathema, for which Paul is willing to substitute himself if that were possible. The covenants given to Israel included “the covenants of promise” (Abrahamic, Davidic, new covenant), not just the covenant of law (Sinai), and led to the salvation of the world by a Jewish Messiah (9:1–5). But it is not that God’s word has failed; rather, it has been fulfilled through this redemptive history. Throughout the ages, God has always maintained

Speaking Of…

I

greatly longed to understand Paul's Epistle to the Romans, and nothing stood in the way but that one

expression, "the righteousness of God," in chapter 1:17 because I took it to mean that righteousness whereby God is righteous and deals righteously in punishing the unrighteous...At last, by the mercy of God, meditating night and day, I gave heed to the context of the words...and there I began to understand that the righteousness of God is that by which the righteous lives by a gift of God, namely by faith. Here I felt that I was altogether born again and had entered paradise itself through open gates. The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning...and whereas before the "righteousness of God" had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love. This passage of Paul became to me a gateway to paradise.

— Martin Luther, Preface to Latin Writings (1545) J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 9

the prerogative of election. Here, Israel’s national election (which is conditional) and the election of individuals to salvation (which is unconditional) must be kept distinct. Even among national Israel, God has exercised his right to elect one and reject another even before their birth, Paul says—“in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call” (9:11). God is completely free in

When we actually get on the road, we see that doctrine is practical. showing mercy (vv. 14–21), and if he were merely to be just, no one would be chosen (vv. 22–23), but as it is God has elected people not only out of Israel but from among the nations for salvation (vv. 24–29). Israel’s hardening at the moment affords opportunity for the gathering of the elect Gentiles, but this hardening is only partial (since there is a remnant, according to 11:5–7) and only temporary (vv. 25–26). Thus, God remains faithful to his covenant promises even by preserving a remnant among Israel, as from among the nations. God has always worked this way, says Paul. There has always been an elect remnant. There is no plan B or C, but one plan with its twists and turns: “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all” (vv. 25–26, 32). This leads again to a crescendo of praise in verses 33–36.

“to be a minister in Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit” (15:16). Individually (Rom. 12:1) and corporately (15:16), even Gentile believers are made “living sacrifices” through the priestly service of the apostle.

When we actually get on the road, we see that doctrine is practical. Like a good map, sound theology will direct us to our destination, where we live together in real communion in Christ’s cross and resurrection, justification and new life (chapters 3–6), even while we are simultaneously sinful and do not fully realize that communion (chapter 7). It will anchor us in what God has done, so that that which we do is always “in view of the mercies of God.” So there will be real power for godliness and genuine community, not that of our own making. Grounded in God’s sovereign grace, we will at least have our bearings for the road up ahead. ■

Michael Horton is professor of apologetics and theology at Westminster Seminary California (Escondido, California).

Speaking Of…

F

orasmuch as this epistle is the principal and most

excellent part of the New Testament, and the most

Enjoying the Trip (12:1–15:21) t is in view of all of these mercies of God in Christ that we are therefore called to be “living sacrifices” to God, transformed by the word (Rom. 12:1–2). While we all share equally in the one grace of salvation, we have differing graces or gifts in the body, so we are called to love and serve each other with humility, contributing in tangible ways to the material and spiritual needs of the communion of saints (12:3–21). Beyond that sacred fellowship, we are to submit to our secular authorities (13:1–7), owing no one anything but love (13:8–14), without passing judgment on each other and producing divisions over “things indifferent” such as food and drink. Neither legalism nor license, but love, should prevail, imitating Christ’s example of self-sacrifice (14:1–15:7). It is a highway that we travel not by ourselves nor for ourselves, as if to reach a lonely destination, but one that we share with others in love and sacrifice. Yet even in exhorting us to follow Christ’s example, Paul returns to the uniqueness of Christ’s work of service that none but he has rendered (15:8–13). In this epistle, as in his ministry, Paul has fulfilled his embassy

I

1 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

pure "evangelion," that is to say, glad tidings, and that we call gospel, and also a light and way unto the whole structure; I think it meet that every Christian man not only know it, by rote and without the book, but also exercise himself therein evermore continually, as with the daily bread of the soul. Truly, no man can read it too often, or study it too well; for the more it is studied, the easier it is; the more it is chewed, the pleasanter it is; the more goundly it is searched, the more precious things are found in it, so great is the treasure of spiritual things that lie hidden therein.

—William Tyndale, Doctrinal Treatises

ROMANS REVOLUTION

BY

DEAN O. WENTHE

A World View in a Few Words

R

eflect on the last e-mail or personal letter that you have received. To understand properly even a short communication often entails a number of factors. We read with a knowledge of the sender, an awareness of his or her social location, a sensitivity to previous interaction, and so forth. At the most foundational level, the language and culture of the sender and the recipient must coincide to some extent if clear communication is to occur. If we know little about the sender or have difficulty understanding the language in which the message is sent, clear communication is impeded or cut off completely.

These observations are especially helpful if we wish to read the epistles of the New Testament. These letters invite us to enter their world, that is, to place ourselves—insofar as possible—in the sandals of the recipient. To position ourselves for such a sympathetic reading, a significant knowledge of the sender, the culture, and other contextual details that attended its writing is most helpful.

Paul’s letter to the Romans provides a superb oppor-

tunity to explore the implicit data that enhances our understanding of his message. The opening verses of this letter (1:1–17) will serve as an entryway into Paul’s world. Indeed, a complete world view is entailed in these few words.

It is highly probable that Paul wrote this letter from Corinth at the close of his third missionary journey during the winter of 55–56 A.D. Such data locates this epistle in a rich and multifaceted context. The Roman Empire, in the first century A.D., was prosperous and flourishing economically, militarily, and artistically.

Great temples and monumental buildings exhibited both Roman religion and politics. Roman life was at the same time saturated with Greek influence as its institutions benefited from the splendor and literature of Athens.

The very form of Paul’s opening greeting follows the letter-writing customs of this era. The sender first identifies himself, secondly the recipient is identified, and then greetings are extended. What immediately impresses the reader is the manner in which Paul fills this epistolary convention with Christian content.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 11

Scriptures.” At the center of that world—from creation to the present—was “the gospel in the light of God’s action in Christ. This light shines concerning God’s Son who was descended from David on the entire world. In its radiance and warmth there is according to the flesh.”

Here we learn that Paul’s salvation. Apart from Christ, there is but darkness, understanding of the world derived from the history of deceit, and despair.

Israel. God’s Son, Jesus Christ, was the fruition and Martin Franzmann translates Romans 1:1–7 as the fulfillment of that history. He is the “second Adam” (Rom. following: 5:12–21). Not only Israel but now all of humanity is the focus of Paul’s mission, for the resurrection of Jesus has Self-Identification publicly exhibited his Sonship and Lordship. Now Jesus’ Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an aposname is to be revered “among all the nations,” and that tle, set apart for the Gospel of God which He promincludes the readers in Rome. ised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy In a few words, Paul has defined himself and his readers Scriptures, the Gospel concerning His Son, who in the light of God’s action in Christ. This light shines on the was descended from David according to the flesh entire world. In its radiance and warmth there is salvation. and designated Son of God in power according to Apart from Christ, there is but darkness, deceit, and despair. the Spirit of holiness by His resurrection from the His greeting continues to all who are in Rome who are dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we loved by God and called to be saints, “grace and peace from have received grace and apostleship to bring about God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.” Such a the obedience of faith for the sake of His name greeting entails a whole theological tapestry of God’s nature among all the nations, including yourselves who and his disposition to love and to bring grace and peace are called to belong to Jesus Christ; through the work of his Son, our Savior Jesus Christ.

In a few words, Paul has defined himself and his readers

Identification of Addressee To all God’s beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints: Greeting Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Martin Franzmann, Romans, p. 21) Paul defines himself with a threefold designation: “servant of Jesus Christ,” “called to be an apostle,” and “set apart for the gospel.” Each of these reveals Paul’s self-understanding and prepares the reader for the content of his message. Far from entitlement or prideful status, “servant of Jesus Christ” locates Paul among those who were called to herald the good news of Jesus.

Paul further understands he is “an apostle.” This designation means that Paul comes as the representative of his Lord, authorized to bear his master’s message. As one “set apart for the gospel,” Paul knows that his calling is congruent with Jeremiah (Jer. 1) and the prophets whom God appointed as his spokesmen.

In a few words, Paul has brought us into his world.

At the same time, he wishes to inform us that his world is our world; in other words, Paul’s self-understanding is not a private view but an expression of reality—a reality that each reader is to consider.

Paul unfolds and describes this real and truthful world.

It is the world described “through His prophets in the Holy 1 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world. For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the Gospel of His Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God’s will I may at last succeed in coming to you. For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you, that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine. I want you to know, brethren, that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles. I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish: so I am eager to preach the Gospel to you also who are in Rome.

(Translation, Martin Franzmann, Romans, p. 28) Verses 8 through 15 of Romans chapter one continue this effort of Paul to draw close to his readers by expounding his pastoral longing to fulfill the vocation that our Lord had given him. He begins by rejoicing in the faith that his readers have already exhibited. This is followed by the personal involvement of Paul. His prayer and longing to be with the people and to remember them in his mission at all times (v. 10) is a very personal note. His longing for the people further solidifies their relationship.

A

This deeply personal longing of the apostle is amplified in verses 11 through 13. Indeed, it is important to highlight the apostle’s character as being more than simply the bearer of propositional truth. He was not only to bear but to embody the compassion and character of Christ as his life and other letters indicate.

The underlying missiological content of his selfunderstanding is highlighted in verses 14 and 15 where as an apostle he indicates that he is obligated both to Greeks and to non-Greeks, to wise and foolish; that is, the entire human race is the object of God’s compassion and mercy in Christ. Again, his personal indication of being defined by the gospel is highlighted in verses 15 and 16 where his eagerness to preach is repeated and his confidence in the gospel that brings the power of God for salvation to all who believe.

For I am not ashamed of the Gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, “He who through faith is righteous shall live.” (Translation, Martin Franzmann, Romans, p. 32) The world we have entered in these opening verses of Romans comes into sharp focus in the thesis of the entire epistle: verses 16–17. Righteousness from God is revealed, righteousness that is by faith from first to last—just as it is written, “the righteous will live by faith.” Here one can see how the stage is set for the next portion of Paul’s letter—1:18 through 3:20. Romans 3, verse 20 summarizes the unrighteousness of humanity when they are before the living and righteous God. Chapter 1, verses 18–32 describes the human condition when it is captive to idolatry. This state of unrighteousness is then contrasted in 3:21 through 5:21 by an exposition of the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ. This righteousness is received by faith and then is manifested in the life of every Christian.

Chapters 6 through 8 of Romans further expound this emphasis on the concrete manifestation of Christ’s righteousness by describing the way in which the believer’s life is transformed through the power of the Holy Spirit.

This frees the person from the law’s condemnation.

A superb summary of Paul’s view of human behavior is that of Stephen Westerholm: From Paul’s perspective, the notion that people should be free to do as they please is wildly out of touch with reality. Human beings are but a part of a larger whole whose meaning, purposeful order, and goodness are not their creation. To bulldoze whatever obstructs their convenience is a most illconsidered way to make their presence felt in the cosmos as God created it: partly because their own well-being depends on the integrity of the whole;

W O R L D

V I E W

I N

A

F E W

W O R D S

partly because the goodness inherent in the whole and in each of its parts merits human esteem, and people show themselves stupid, insensitive, or mean when they disregard or destroy it. Conversely, humans thrive as they embrace, celebrate, and pattern their lives according to the goodness of creation and the benevolent will of their Maker. (Stephen Westerholm, Understanding Paul, p. 100) The epistle continues to pivot on this theme of righteousness by addressing the problem of Israel’s rejection in chapters 9 through 11. The mystery of Israel and its status before God require Paul’s profound engagement: God is free, and Israel is guilty. This should suffice “to justify the ways of God to man.” Chapters 9 and 10 would by themselves provide a neat theodicy, a vindication of God. If Paul were a religious philosopher, he might well stop here. But Paul is not a philosopher; he is an apostle of Jesus Christ. Jesus knew of no limits to the creative possibilities of God; He knew that all things are possible with God (Matt.

19:26). He saw in the hopeless spectacle of the harassed and helpless lost sheep of Israel the harvest-field of God (Matt. 9:36–37). Paul serves Him, for Paul has the mind of Christ.

(Martin Franzmann, Romans, p. 194) Romans 12 to 15 express concretely how this righteousness given to faith by God is to be practiced in the church and in the world. The theme of the righteousness of God concludes in the last portion of chapter 15 (15:14–33). Chapter 16 offers Paul’s commendations and greetings as a final pastoral note.

It is clear that the opening verses of Romans are threads in a tapestry that Paul unfolds throughout his epistle to the Romans. The character of God, the condition of humanity, the identity of Jesus Christ, the nature of salvation: all of these foundational claims about the world are woven into the opening words of this letter.

Indeed, these few words of greeting (Rom. 1:1–17) entail a whole world. For Paul, for the Romans, for every Christian, and for us, the world is beautiful because at its center is Jesus Christ. In him and through him we are now righteous, innocent, and holy. ■

Dean O. Wenthe is president of Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

Further exposition of Romans for the interested reader: Martin Franzmann, Romans (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1968); E. Randolph Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2004); Stephen Westerholm, Understanding Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2004).

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 13

ROMANS REVOLUTION

The Transforming Message of Romans A COLLECTION

OF

ESSAYS

The Transforming Message of Romans…To Augustine

by Eric Landry Augustine of Hippo, the fourth century North African Christian bishop, was familiar with the Book of Romans even prior to his conversion. Before becoming a Christian, Augustine read Paul’s epistle as a Platonist, seeing Paul as an exegete of the “spiritual ascent” because of his contrasting images of the renewing inner man and the decaying outer man. But such a reading didn’t assuage the fear and doubts that continued to plague Augustine through his young adult life.

After years of personal turmoil, including two mistresses, broken engagements, and the serious study of Manicheanism and Neo-Platonism, Augustine found himself in a walled garden in Milan where he wrestled with doubt and despair. Having flung himself under a tree and crying out for cleansing from God, Augustine heard the voice of a child singing “Tolle lege” (or “pick it up, read it”). Augustine rushed back to the house where he had a copy of the Epistle to the Romans and his eyes fell upon Romans 13:13-14, “Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.” Upon reading the sentence, a light of certainty dawned in Augustine’s heart and the gloom of doubt faded away.

Augustine would return to Romans again and again in his theological and pastoral career. From Romans he would develop his influential ideas about original sin; argue against his former Manichean colleagues whom, Augustine believed, misread and twisted Paul’s writings to suit their own distorted view of Christianity; and prepare his assault against his primary theological opponent, Pelagius, on the decisive questions of man’s nature, free will, and God’s predestination.

1 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

T H E

As contemporaries, Augustine and Pelagius presented lectures on Romans at nearly the same time. Augustine gave his to a circle of friends in Carthage while Pelagius delivered his in Rome. Pelagius’s disciples took his ideas and scattered them throughout the empire. One disciple, Caelestius, arrived in Carthage and expounded on the problems with the federal headship of Adam and the necessity of infant baptism. Augustine responded by linking Caelestius’s radicalism to Pelagius’s teaching.

What followed was the most famous and distant disputation between the two brilliant theologians, ending with the condemnation of Pelagius by Pope Innocent I in 417.

Augustine’s dependence upon the Book of Romans is proven over and over again by the numerous citations to Paul’s epistle in his theological disputations and sermons.

He regretted later in life that he had never completed a commentary on Romans, but the transforming effect of the epistle was written large on every aspect of his life.

Sources: Peter Brown’s Augustine of Hippo (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969) and Augustine’s Confessions.

Eric Landry is pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church in Murrieta, California, and managing editor of Modern Reformation.

The Transforming Message of Romans…To Luther

by Rod Rosenbladt Should I go buy Luther’s commentary on Romans?

Sure sounds like a winner to me—that author and that epistle? Wow! What a combo!

Well, perhaps. Just know beforehand that you might be disappointed in what you find. There could be a great disparity between what you are expecting and what you actually discover in Luther’s notes. (What you are probably looking for is better found in Luther’s pastoral, conversational, and utterly grace-drenched Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians.) Let me explain.

First, Luther, though he was completely conversant with the categories of “salvation” as these were argued in the medieval church, was first and foremost a teacher of the Bible. His mind was saturated with the text of Scripture. But also, at the time he was preparing these lecture notes (and that is really what the book is), he was a thinker in process. Scholars argue about how much of the gospel Luther “got” at this time. Wilhelm Pauck argues mightily in his preface to Luther’s lectures, that Luther had “gotten it.” Others argue (and well) that the Luther of Romans is still no more than a faithful Augustinian son of the church, but is doubtless on his way to “getting it.”

Luther’s choice to teach the Romans pushed him into

T R A N S F O R M I N G

M E S S A G E

O F

R O M A N S

the letter that contained all of the themes which would, over time, be his constant themes as a reformer.

Romans forced to the fore of his thinking the “big” themes of the Bible, its central themes—the same salvific ones hammered later on in the Reformation.

Will you find in Luther’s Romans exposition of the radical depth of human sin, of the nature of human “concupiscence,” of our utter lack of ability to live up to even the least of God’s demands upon us? Will you find the pathetic insufficiency of human [so-called] good works for a righteousness coram Deo? Will you find God’s “justness” in condemning all of us sinners? Will you find the relation between God’s eternal predestination and men bound of will toward him and his Christ?

Will you find God’s complete and sufficient answer to our self-caused problem of sin in Jesus our Savior/Lamb given vicariously into death for our sin? Will you find the nature of “saving faith”? Will you find the righteousness of Christ freely imputed to your account? Will you find “mercy all”? Will you find “simul justus et peccator”? Will you find how the Christian should (and should not) understand Christian “growth”? Yes, yes, yes—sort of. But about the time you are cheering about the external, “alien” righteousness that is in Christ and that saves you, Luther will revert and start talking (in an Augustinian way) about the effects of grace inside you.

And your confidence that Christ will be enough to save you will tumble. And if it does, you just might be reading aright what Luther is saying.

If those scholars are right who argue that it was not until several years after Romans that Luther finally “got it” (and I think they are right), then the answer to the question, “How did the Epistle to the Romans affect Martin Luther?” is: The book began to sharpen in his mind—in a precise and utterly textual way—the details of all of the Bible themes above, and how God in Jesus’ blood, cross, and death (plus nothing!) saves us sinners freely. (And if not freely, then not at all.)

Rod Rosenbladt is professor of theology at Concordia University in Irvine, California, and serves as co-host of the White Horse Inn radio broadcast.

The Transforming Message of Romans…To Calvin

by Kim Riddlebarger Many of you, no doubt, have consulted Calvin’s famous biblical commentaries. You may even have consulted Calvin’s commentary on the Book of Romans, one of his first, written in 1539 while he was still in Strasbourg. It is my guess that many who have consulted Calvin on Romans have not read Calvin’s dedication of the commentary (to Simon Grynaeus), nor Calvin’s J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 15

introductory essay on the theme of Romans. In these two essays we get a fascinating glimpse of Calvin’s goal as a biblical interpreter and his estimation of the importance of grasping the central message of Paul’s great letter: the doctrine of justification by faith. We also get a sense of what Calvin believed about the transforming power of the Book of Romans.

In his dedication to Grynaeus, Calvin reminds him that “both of us felt that lucid brevity constituted the particular virtue of an interpreter.” Conversely, says Calvin, a commentator “misses his mark, or at least strays outside his limits by the extent to which he leads his readers away from the meaning of his author.” It is especially important to be brief and lucid when commenting on Romans, writes Calvin, “because if we understand this epistle we have a passage opened to us to the understanding of the whole of Scripture.”

While Calvin lauds the recent commentaries of Melanchthon, Bullinger, and Bucer, Calvin felt a lucid and brief commentary on Romans should be produced “for no other reason than the common good of the Church.” The power and importance of the Romans epistle is too great not to. Although he felt at times compelled to depart from the views of his illustrious predecessors, this stemmed not from Calvin’s desire to be an innovator, nor to slander others, nor because of personal ambition. Rather it is because of the necessity of expounding Holy Scripture for God’s people—particularly this book of the Bible in which we learn so clearly of Christ and the gospel, that Calvin attempted to set forth in brief and lucid form Paul’s gospel to the church in Rome.

In Calvin’s essay on the theme of Romans, he makes the point that in the Book of Romans, we really do have the key to understanding the whole Bible. If we understand Paul here and grasp his main point, “that we are justified by faith,” we will be able to navigate our way through much of the Old Testament, since Paul quotes over sixty passages from the Old Testament and alludes to a number of others. We will also understand the gospel as it is preached by the apostles.

Therefore, to understand the Book of Romans, says Calvin, is to understand the gospel. And the gospel is centered in Paul’s message of justification by faith alone.

Kim Riddlebarger is senior pastor of Christ Reformed Church in Anaheim, California, and serves as co-host of the White Horse Inn radio broadcast.

The Transforming Message of of Romans…To Spurgeon

by Ken Jones It should come as no surprise that the book of Romans was a significant influence for the reformers and the preachers and theologians that followed in their wake. This is because in Romans the apostle Paul articulates the gospel, in a concise yet comprehensive manner. With divine justice and grace at the core, Romans branches out to all of the corresponding components of the gospel, such as universal guilt, saving faith, justification, sanctification, assurance, imputation, the problem of remaining sin, eschatology, and the life of gratitude that stems from saving faith. It is for this reason the Book of Romans has been a favorite preaching place for Protestant preachers since the time of the sixteenth-century Reformation. This is certainly true for the great nineteenth-century British Baptist Charles Haddon Spurgeon. Spurgeon, affectionately called the “Prince of Preachers,” was not only heard by multitudes during his lifetime, but his sermons were also published in local newspapers, pamphlets, and books, and distributed throughout the world. Volumes of his sermons still line the bookshelves of preachers and ministers of all denominations to the present day.

Spurgeon was not what we would call an expository preacher; his preaching style was more topical and textual. However, as one of his many biographers Lewis Drummond has noted, he was thoroughly Christocentric in his preaching, anchoring his sermons in the person and work of Christ. Although Spurgeon was an avowed Baptist, he was also an avid Calvinist in his understanding of the gospel. A title of one of his books, All of Grace, would be an apt description of Spurgeon’s preaching.

With preaching saturated in the grace of God and the person and work of Christ, it is no wonder that among his published sermons there are more than 130 from the Book of Romans. A preacher who truly understands the gospel and its implications will be at his best when preaching from Romans, and Spurgeon is no exception.

In what follows I take the liberty to comment on one of Spurgeon’s sermons from Romans.

From the text of Romans 8:34, he preaches a sermon entitled “The Believer’s Challenge.” The thrust of the message is the confidence that Christians have in the efficacy of God’s saving grace in the person and work of Christ.

Here is an excerpt from the sermon’s introduction: We have before us, in the text, the four marvelous pillars upon which the Christian rests his hope.

Any one of them were all-sufficient. Though the sins of the whole world should press on any one of these sacred columns, it would never break nor bend. Yet for our strong consolation, that we may

1 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

T H E

never tremble nor fear. God hath been pleased to give us these four eternal rocks, these four immovable foundations, upon which our faith may rest and stand secure. But why is this? Why needeth the Christian to have such firm, such massive foundations? For this simple reason: he is himself so doubtful, so ready to mistrust, so difficult to be persuaded of his own security. Therefore, hath God, as it enlarged his arguments … Moreover, he well knew that our faith would be sternly attacked.

The world, our own sin, and the devil, he foresaw would be continually molesting us; therefore, hath he entrenched us within these four walls; he hath engarisoned us in four strong lines of circumvallation. We cannot be destroyed.

T R A N S F O R M I N G

M E S S A G E

O F

R O M A N S

1. The death of Christ 2. The resurrection of Christ 3. The position of Christ at the right hand of the Father 4. Christ’s intercession on our behalf This is truly medicine for the soul that trusts in Christ but is beset by internal doubts and external obstacles.

Such are the riches to be mined from the treasures of Romans, and such is the fruitful mining of those treasures by faithful preachers of the gospel. ■

Ken Jones is pastor of Greater Union Baptist Church in Compton, California and serves as co-host of the White Horse Inn radio broadcast.

And what are the four pillars to which Spurgeon so eloquently alludes?

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 17

THE GOSPEL IS THE POWER

by John Piper

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

(Romans 1:16)

W

hat is the salvation that Paul has in mind in Romans 1:16 when he says, “For [the gospel] is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes”?

I think he has in mind not primarily the first event of conversion, but primarily the final triumph of the gospel in bringing believers to eternal safety and joy in the presence of a holy and glorious God. There are four reasons why I think this is what he means. Looking at these reasons is the best way to unpack the meaning of the verse.

1. The power of the gospel is what frees us from being ashamed of the gospel.

The first reason is that the power of the gospel to bring about salvation is what frees us from being ashamed of the gospel. “I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation.” But if this meant only that the gospel has the power to make converts, why would that solve the shame problem? Lots of religions make converts. Lots of different religious and secular movements win people over to their faith. When Paul said that the gospel has such a powerful effect that you don’t have to be ashamed of it, did he simply mean that it does what other religions do: win converts? I don’t think so.

Jesus triumphed over shame by looking at the future joy that was set before him as he died. I think this is what Paul, as well, has in mind in Romans 1:16. You don’t have to be ashamed of the gospel because it doesn’t just make converts; it saves those converts utterly. It brings them to final safety and ever-increasing joy in the presence of a glorious and holy God forever and ever. This is what makes us bold with the gospel—not that it can make converts; any religion can do that—but that it is the only truth in the world that can really save people forever and bring them to everlasting joy with God. 2. “Salvation” is future-oriented elsewhere in Paul and the New Testament.

The second reason I think “salvation” in verse 16 refers to the final triumph of the gospel in bringing believers to eternal safety and joy in the presence of a holy and glorious God, is that the phrase “for salvation”

1 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

or “unto salvation” has this future-oriented meaning elsewhere in Paul and other New Testament writers.

For example, in 2 Thessalonians 2:13 Paul says, “God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.” Now here, salvation is not just what happens at conversion, which leads to sanctification, but salvation is what comes later “through sanctification,” and is in the future.

In other words, salvation is the future triumph that brings the saint into God’s presence with everlasting joy.

Or again, in 2 Corinthians 7:10, Paul speaks to Christians who are already converted and saved, but need fresh repentance for their sins: “The sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, unto salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.” Here again “unto salvation” refers not to conversion, but to the final, future state of safety and joy in the presence of God. (See also 2 Timothy 3:15.)

Similarly, Hebrews 9:28 says, “Christ … will appear a second time for salvation … to those who eagerly await Him.” This final, complete salvation happens at the Second Coming. 1 Peter 1:5 says, “[Believers] are protected by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” This salvation is “ready to be revealed in the last time.” It is not conversion. It is the last great work of God to rescue us and bring us to safety and joy in his presence forever.

In Romans 5:9–10, Paul talks about this future salvation as rescue from the final wrath of God: Much more then, having now been justified by His blood [that’s the present reality of salvation!], we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son [here again is the present reality of salvation!], much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

In other words, the full experience of salvation, in Paul’s thinking, is still future. Romans 13:11,

OF

GOD UNTO SALVATION

4. Paul says the gospel is for believers, not just unbelievers.

The last reason I think this is what “salvation” means in verse 16 is that the verse is given as the reason Paul wants to preach the gospel to believers (not just unbelievers). We’ve seen this, but look again. In verse 15 Paul says, “I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.” He is eager to preach the gospel to “you”— you believers—not just unbelievers. Then he gives the 3. Ongoing belief is the condition for this salvation. reason: “because I am not ashamed of it, because it is the The third reason I think “salvation” in Romans power of God unto salvation to all such believers.”

1:16 is the final triumph of the gospel in bringing So I conclude that the reason Paul is not ashamed of believers to eternal safety and joy in the presence of a the gospel is that it is the only truth in all the world that holy and glorious God is that ongoing belief is the will not let you down when you give your life to it in condition for this salvation. Notice that verse 16 does faith. It will bring you all the way through temptation not say, “The gospel … is the power of God to bring and persecution and death and judgment into eternal about faith and salvation.” It says, “The gospel is the safety and ever-increasing joy in the presence of a holy power of God for [unto] salvation to everyone who is and glorious God. All the other “gospels” in the world believing [present tense in that win so many converts Greek, signifying continu- …the reason Paul is not ashamed will fail you in the end. Only ous action].”

In other one saves from the final wrath of the gospel is because it is words, Paul’s point here is of God and leads to fullness of not that the power of the joy in his presence and pleasthe only truth in all the world gospel creates faith, but that, ures at his right hand forever. for those who have faith, Therefore, there is no need to the gospel brings about sal- that will not let you down when be ashamed of it, no matter vation. So the point is not what others say or do. And oh you give your life to it in faith. how eager we should be to that the gospel is the power for conversion to faith; the speak this gospel to believer point is that the gospel is the power to bring about and unbeliever alike! future salvation through a life of faith.

Do you feed your faith day by day with the promises of The tense of the verb “believe” here is crucial. It this triumphant gospel? Do you, as a believer, go to the signifies ongoing action, not just the first act of faith gospel day by day and savor its power in verses like Romans when you were converted: “The gospel … is the power 8:32, “He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him of God unto salvation to everyone who is believing”— over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us who goes on believing. all things?” The gospel is the good news that God gave us his It’s the same as 1 Corinthians 15:1–2 where Paul Son, so as to obtain for us everything that would be good for says, “I preached to you [the gospel], which also you us. Therefore the gospel is the power that gives us victory received, in which also you stand, by which also you over temptation to despair and to pride and to greed and to are being saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached lust. The gospel alone can triumph over every obstacle and to you, unless you believed in vain.” Faith that does not bring us to eternal joy. Whatever it costs, stand in it, hold it persevere is a vain and empty faith—what James calls fast, believe on it, feed on it, savor it, count it more precious “dead faith” (James 2:17, 26). than silver or gold. The gospel will save you. And it alone.

So the point of Romans 1:16 is that you don’t have to be ashamed of the gospel, because it is the only This article is excerpted from a sermon preached on truth in the world which, if you go on banking on it June 21, 1998, and has been edited for length. It is day after day, will triumph over every obstacle and reprinted here from Desiring God (1987) by permission bring you to eternal safety and joy in the presence of of Multnomah Press. a holy and glorious God. “Salvation is nearer to us than when we believed.”

So when Paul says in Romans 1:16 that “[the gospel] is the power of God unto salvation,” I take him to mean that the gospel is the only message in the world that can powerfully bring a person not just to conversion, but to everlasting safety and joy in the presence of a holy and glorious God.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 19

Recommended Commentaries on Romans (alphabetical order by author’s last name)

Romans

Romans

(4 volumes)

by James Montgomery Boice Baker Books, 2005.

From the late pastor of Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, this multi-volume work combines the best of Reformed scholarship and pastoral sensibilities.

(Crossway Classic Commentaries)

by Charles Hodge (Alister McGrath and J.I.Packer, series editors) Crossway, 1994.

Although written over a century ago, this commentary is a great example of how to integrate remarkably sensitive skills of exegesis (including the nuances of the Greek text) with systematic-theological concerns. For these reasons, it remains a solid resource.

Romans and Thessalonians (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 8)

by John Calvin (David W. Torrance and Thomas Forsyth Torrance, editors) William B. Eerdmans, 1995. Many continue to marvel at the breadth and depth of Calvin’s commentaries. Calvin considered Romans the “jewel of scripture.” New Testament scholars continue to interact with the Genevan reformer’s interpretations in this commentary.

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans: Introduction and Commentary on Romans I-VIII, Vol 1 (International Critical Commentary)

by C.E.B. Cranfield William B. Eerdmans, 1985.

Shorter abridged version also available (as pictured). In a two-volume set. Charles Cranfield provides all the relevant interpretations of a passage, lays out the best arguments for and against that interpretation, before setting forth his own conclusion.

Cranfield has the benefit of being a wise and judicious man.

Popular Commentary of the Bible: New Testament, Vol. 1

by Paul Kretzmann Concordia Publishing House, 1978. This is part of a four-volume set of commentaries (2 on the Old Testament, 2 on the New Testament). It is one of the few lay-level commentary sets that does not confuse law and Gospel as it deals with the text of the Bible.

Communes. Though the LCMS loves to hate him, and he did make some terrible blunders after Luther’s death, when he is “on,” he is really “on!”

The Epistle to the Romans (New International Commentary on the New Testament)

by Douglas Moo William B. Eerdmans, 1996. Other than the wrong-headed but increasingly popular notion that Romans 7:13-25 is speaking of an unregenerate person (in this case, Paul now regenerate looking back at his pre-conversion experience as a Jew under the law), this is simply a great commentary. Moo puts Dunn and the New Perspective on Paul folk in their place.

The Epistle to the Romans

by R.C.H. Lenski Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

This is a good commentary written by a Lutheran, though he’s not Lutheran on things like objective justification and predestination.

(New Testament Commentary)

by John Murray William B. Eerdmans, 1997. Long considered a standard Romans commentary even outside of Reformed circles, Murray analyzes Romans in painstaking detail. This long-time theology professor at Westminster Theological Seminary established a reputation as a firstrate New Testament scholar as well as systematician.

Commentary on Romans

Romans

by Philip Melanchthon Concordia Publishing House, 1992.

This commentary is from the pen of Luther’s co-worker, author of the Loci

(14 volumes)

by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones Banner of Truth, 1985.

Like his other commentaries, this commentary set reflects the many sermons on Romans that “the Doctor” gave to his congregation at Westminster Chapel in London, England.

The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans

REVIEWS what’s

b e in g

rea d

Creed Without Chaos

D

orothy Sayers was a writer of unusual clarity, wit, and perceptiveness.

in the sense of refining or improving received orthodoxy.

A book that explores her reflections on theology is welcome indeed. She is perhaps more apologist than theologian.

Certainly a strength of the book that Laura Simmons has written is the In this book we see that the primary interests of Sayers theopresence of abundant logically were the doctrines of Trinity and incarnation, quotations from Sayers which she believed ordinary church members in England herself. For example, did not seem to understand at all. It was in making these an extended quotation doctrines comprehensible and vital that she was at her from The Dogma Is the best.

Drama includes: “Q. In several areas of theology this book is somewhat frusWhat are the seven trating. We are told that Sayers was willing “to marry docChristian virtues? A. trinal orthodoxy with a relaxed acceptance of biblical critRespectability; childicism” but “was not cavalier in her use of Scripture” (46). ishness; mental timidiIs that the most specific one can be about her doctrine of ty; dullness; sentimenScripture? We are told that Jesus alone of religious leadtality; censoriousness; ers treated women without disparagement (149). Is that and depression of spiran implicit criticism of the Apostle Paul? We are told that its” (66).

Dorothy Sayers believed that the ordination of women to the Sayers spent much priesthood was “silly and inexpedient,” creating unnecesenergy as a writer sary separation from the rest of Christian practice, but also opposing such “virtues.” that she could not find “any logical or strictly theological While not a biograreason” against the ordination of women (145f.). Is there phy, Simmons’s book nothing more in her writing on this issue? She rejected does remind us that Calvinism yet insisted that she was not Pelagian. But did Creed without Chaos: Sayers was the daughshe know Augustine on nature and grace as well as she Exploring Theology in the ter of a clergyman in knew Augustine on the Trinity? There are several referWritings of Dorothy L. Sayers

by Laura K. Simmons the Church of England ences to her sacramental vision, but no reflection on how Baker Academic, 2005 and did embrace the she saw the role of preaching in the life of the Christian 224 pages (paperback), $19.99 Anglo-Catholic faith in community. It is frustrating not to know whether Sayers that church. It looks at was silent or ambiguous on these topics, or if the book just some of the key theological influences on Sayers, includdoes not discuss them. ing G. K. Chesterton, and looks at her range as a writer Simmons book cites several very negative remarks by including detective fiction, drama, and a very fine translaSayers about Puritanism (62, 80, 83). Those comments tion of Dante’s Divine Comedy into English with detailed reveal how little Sayers knew, for all her learning, about scholarly annotations. the history and character of Puritanism. As a result there The book primarily traces Sayers’s interest in, commitis no record in the book of any thoughtful reflection on the ment to, and contributions to Christian theology. Her role, part of Sayers on the implications of the Second as John Wilson put it, was to stand among “vigorous and Commandment for Christian drama. popular defenders” (18) of Christian truth. As Simmons On the whole this is a valuable book, despite some sigputs it: “It is clear from her many cautions that she did not nificant limitations. Sayers is always a delight, even where set out to revise doctrine. Instead, she sought to clarify it, one disagrees with her. to identify misunderstandings people might have about basic Christian convictions” (158).

W. Robert Godfrey Simmons frequently refers to Sayers as a “lay theoloPresident, Westminster Seminary California gian” to distinguish her from professional theologians and Escondido, California from the clergy. Her goal certainly was not to do theology

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 21

God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It

by Jim Wallis HarperSanFrancisco, 2005 384 pages (hardback), $24.95 A third of the way through God’s Politics, Jim Wallis takes aim at George W. Bush for using “religious language more than any president in U.S. history.” The problem is not the mixture of religion and politics but that the president’s quotations from the Bible are “either taken out of context or … employed in ways quite different from their original meaning” (142). The result is a “we are right and they are wrong” theology that justifies the expansion of the American empire and “confuses the identity of the nation with the church, and God’s purposes with the mission of the American empire” (149). The trouble is that the author of God’s Politics is as guilty of these errors as the president.

Wallis’s aim in this book is not entirely off. He wants to move the political debate beyond the fundamentalism of the religious right and secular left. (He also mentions a third option, libertarianism, but doesn’t devote any space to the “leave me alone and don’t spend my money option.”) The solution to the bad theology of the right is not secularism, but rather the “good” theology of prophetic politics. This position involves being “conservative” on the family, sexual integrity, and personal responsibility, and “progressive, populist, or even radical” on race, poverty, and war. This is not a crazy outlook and although the major political parties tend to split the traditional and radical pieces of Wallis’s vision for their own electoral interests, God’s Politics makes some headway in suggesting that some voters prefer not to have to choose between family values and race, or between sexual restraint and tax relief for the poor. The trouble with the book is that it does not sustain an argument. Instead, Wallis patches together various statements, talks, and letters he has authored or signed, mixes them with personal stories, and overlays these elements with assertions and foot stomping. Wallis’s position must be true. But if you are looking for persuasion, you will have to read another book.

Yet, the main problem is that Wallis’s political blend covers only two parts of the mix, and not the substantial ones at that. The significant and most dubious assertion in God’s Politics is that these political ideals are those of Jesus.

In a brief reference to the question of violence, he writes, “’What would Jesus do?’—and gets quickly to the heart of 2 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

the violence debate. “It’s always striking to me that when I listen to the Christian fundamentalist justifications for violence I don’t hear them asking the question.” Wallis adds, “Perhaps the teachings of Jesus most unpopular with Christian fundamentalists … are his statements about loving our enemies and not just seeing the ‘specks’ in your adversary’s eye, but also the ‘log’ in your own” (68).

But Wallis’s reading of Scripture is equally selective. He fails to mention the God-directed violence of Old Testament saints even while citing approvingly Israel’s prophets about the poor. Nor does he consider the sort of “violence” that may be coming on the day of judgment when the exaltation of Christ reaches its zenith. At the same time, while citing chapter and verse on poverty and nonviolence, Wallis is unusually timid in citing Scripture when addressing the topics of gay marriage and the death penalty, which suggests that his reading of Scripture may owe more to his politics than to what Jesus did or said. In fact, the “integral link” between personal ethics (conservative) and social justice (radical) is a political outlook shared not only by Protestants and Roman Catholics, but also by Jews and Muslims who are also guided by “an active faith.” When was the last time the Israelis or Saudis asked “What would Jesus do”?

In the end, Wallis’s case for the “good” theology of the religious left is no better than the “bad” theology of the religious right. Neither side seems to have heard the first lecture of Hermeneutics 101, which says that clear passages of Scripture should interpret the obscure ones. In which case, when trying to figure out what Jesus would do about politics, the careful reader of Scripture may actually go to one of the few places where our Lord actually talked about the state, such as when he advised rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. That position may not make Christ a secularist, but it is a long way from justifying either free markets or welfare on biblical teaching.

On the back of Wallis’s book is the phrase that some Americans are sporting on their bumpers—“God is not a Republican … or a Democrat.” That Wallis cannot even imagine that God’s politics may be Divine-Right Monarchist says a lot about his narrow reading, not only of American politics, but also the Bible.

D. G. Hart Intercollegiate Studies Institute Wilmington, Delaware

Methodism: Empire of the Spirit

by David Hempton Yale University Press, 2005 304 pages (hardback), $30.00 This is a superb book. One of its most outstanding features is its tight and lucid organization.

David Hempton tells his reader what he is going to do, he does it (explaining what he is doing every step of the way), and he then summarizes what he has done.

His purpose is clearly stated: “The problem before us, therefore, is the disarmingly simple one of accounting for the rise of Methodism from its unpromising origins among the flotsam and jetsam of religious societies and quirky personalities in England in the 1730s to a major international religious movement some hundred and fifty years later” (2). And Hempton even provides very specific information in support of the phrase “major international”: In England membership in Methodist societies of all stripes expanded from 55,705 in 1790 to 285,530 in 1830. In the same period Irish Methodist membership almost doubled and Scottish Methodist membership trebled. Even more dramatically, Methodist membership in Wales increased by a factor of twenty. But the most dramatic growth of all occurred in America, which had fewer than a thousand members in 1770 and more than 250,000 only fifty years later. By 1850 the Methodist share of the religious market in the United States had increased to 34 percent of the national total. (109) Shortly after announcing his overall purpose, Hempton describes his method: “What follows therefore is an attempt to write a history of Methodism as an international movement—and empire of the spirit—by concentrating on eight important themes, each one designed to get beneath the hard surface of mere institutional expansion” (6): competition and symbiosis, enlightenment and enthusiasm, the medium and the message, opposition and conflict, money and power, boundaries and margins, mapping and mission, and consolidation and decline.

But beyond its superb organization, this book succeeds because it does, in fact, ask the crucial questions that are necessary for understanding the history and identity of any religious organization. As a former chief executive of and fund-raiser for a religious organization, I found the chapter entitled “Money and Power” hauntingly and uncomfortably accurate. The accomplishment of a reli-

SHORT NOTICES The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology

by Kevin J. Vanhoozer Westminster John Knox Press, 2005 457 pages (paperback), $39.95 Why is doctrine seen as “dry dust” in so many churches today? The Drama of Doctrine proposes that in our cordoning off of theology to academia, we have lost the “theodrama” that God wants to live through his church. As a remedy, Kevin Vanhoozer sets forth his canonical-linguistic approach, calling the church to see itself as a company of Spirit-directed actors improvising a lived-out gospel with Scripture as their script. The church is challenged to welcome doctrine, firmly grounded in sola scriptura, into its life and practices; to perform doctrine, not just think doctrine.

Vanhoozer argues with the passion of one deeply concerned for the life and witness of Christ’s church.

Consider the Lilies: A Plea for Creational Theology

by T. M. Moore P & R Publishing, 2005 248 pages (paperback), $16.99 Most orthodox Christians recognize a role for “general revelation”—God’s revelation of himself through his created world.

In Consider the Lilies: A Plea for Creational Theology, author and pastor T. M. Moore urges us to make much more use of general revelation than we have.

Creational theology sees revelation in nature not as an add-on to the special revelation of Scripture, but rather as an essential aid and interpreter of biblical truth. If, as the psalmist says, God is “pouring forth speech” through his creation, then the people of God ought to be listening. Moore sees this as more than a call to intentional personal meditation; a developed ability to hear and see the creational message should spur us to live theology, not just think about it.

Reviews by Matthew Harmon Editor, wtsbooks.com

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 23

his chapter “Boundaries and Margins,” Hempton seeks to analyze why Methodism seemed to appeal so powerfully to “people on the social margins” (131). As one of his case studies in this chapter, Hempton discusses the dramatic growth of Methodism in Korea in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (135–137). But by failing to take account of the fact that, during this same time, Presbyterian growth in Korea was just as dramatic as Methodist growth, Hempton leaves his reader wondering if the “distinctive appeal” of Methodism was really all that Hempton claims that it was.

Nevertheless, this is an excellent book. It is, to be sure, a rigorously secular study of a profoundly religious movement (supernatural realities are neither affirmed nor specifically rejected). It is well written, it is clear, and it offers analyses of the broad sweep of the history of Methodism by raising questions that are equally applicable to most religious traditions. The reader of this volume will learn a tremendous amount about Methodism and about ways of dealing with one’s own religious heritage.

“In religious organizations money is not simply a necessary and neutral commodity for getting things done; rather, money carries with it a symbolic revelation of the values for which it was collected and appropriated.” gious mission requires resources—no question at all about that. But getting those resources biblically and relating appropriately to those who can give the resources is a very tricky business. And using collected resources in a way that is fully consistent with the organization’s mission— that can be hardest of all.

Numerous passages in this chapter made me either smile or weep—and frequently both at the same time: “Where money was concerned, Christian perfection [one of the key beliefs of early Methodism], as the Calvinists had always contended, was easier to talk about than to achieve in practice” (111). In 1816, one Methodist pastor wrote to another, “Was there ever such a begging system in existence before? Almost every other day we have our hands in the pockets of the people” (112). “As with English monarchs in the seventeenth century, Methodist preachers wanted adequate supply, but they did not wish to be placed under the authority of, or to be circumscribed by, the expectations of the suppliers” (116). “In religious organizations money is not simply a necessary and neutral commodity for getting things done; rather, money carries with it a symbolic revelation of the values for which it was collected and appropriated” (130).

All of Hempton’s discussions are as incisive as his chapter “Money and Power.” But the one that will likely be of greatest interest to the readers of this review is Hempton’s examination of “Enlightenment and Enthusiasm” because of the way in which the tension between revelation and reason in Wesley himself works its way into the very structures of Methodism. But this chapter also reveals perhaps the primary weakness of Hempton’s book. While discussing in some detail the ways in which Wesley sought to deal with the Scylla and Charybdis of enlightenment and enthusiasm, Hempton does not mention at all the work of Jonathan Edwards, who was wrestling with exactly the same two issues at exactly the same time. Some words of comparison of the different approaches taken by these two theological giants would have been most instructive and would have aided significantly in the accomplishment of Hempton’s purpose.

Further, Hempton’s nearly complete exclusion of any kind of comparison between developments in Methodism and developments in other religious traditions may actually undermine the credibility of some of his conclusions. In 2 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

Samuel T. Logan, Jr. Chancellor and Professor of Church History Westminster Theological Seminary

Christ Present in Faith: Luther’s View of Justification

by Tuomo Mannermaa (edited by Kirsi Stjerna) Fortress Press, 2005 136 pages (paperback), $18.00 This book presents, for the first time in English, Tuomo Mannermaa’s controversial publication regarding Martin Luther’s understanding of faith and its relationship to justification, as well as the Christian life.

Originally composed in Finnish as In ipsa fide Christus adest some 25 years ago, and available in German shortly thereafter, Christ Present in Faith has lost none of its value and force for contemporary Christological and soteriological discussions, especially within confessional Lutheran circles.

Indeed, there has been a mounting need for this work to appear in English due to the growing exposure and expanding influence of the so-called “Finnish School” of Luther commentators, spearheaded by Mannermaa him-

self. Regrettably, few findings by Mannermaa and his University of Helsinki colleagues and students have been translated into English, leaving many scholars, seminarians, and pastors without abilities in Finnish and/or German dependent on mediated appraisements. For such readers, and perhaps many others, this thin volume is a most welcome release.

It is also understandable that there would be some reticence from potential readers to engage this work because of its immediate association with ecumenical agendists.

Mannermaa himself discloses the modus operandi of his project as an ecumenical search to find “a mutual theological point of contact” between the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and the Russian Orthodox Church (3).

Subsequently, both within and without the Finnish School, there has been an overriding concern to establish the ecumenical significance of a new interpretation of Luther’s theology of salvation. Burgeoning theologians such as Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen and established thinkers such as Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson have joined the ranks of Mannermaa’s University of Helsinki protégés to argue the double platform that (a) the Orthodox idea of theosis (“divinization”) is one of the main images of salvation in Luther’s soteriology and, derivatively, (b) that the idea of union with God is the guiding soteriological motif in Luther; and they do so with an expressed interest to flatten the theological topography between Wittenberg and Byzantium. To be sure, this work arose out of ecumenical dialogue and its suggestive theses have been furthered largely under the auspices of ecumenical discovery, thereby raising the eyebrows of Book of Concord adherents, among others.

Still, even though In ipsa fide Christus adest owes its inception to 1977 Finnish-Russian theological discussions, its contents hold an independent and abiding merit.

Confessional readers may freely engage, grapple, and benefit. Besides, Mannermaa and the Finnish School’s arguments for ecumenism are not only tangential to the substance of his research in Christ Present in Faith, but they are also premature and somewhat contrived.

Beyond overstated issues of ecumenism (and to say nothing of efforts of the Finnish School to recast Luther as the archetypal Protestant “mystic”), Christ Present in Faith should not be confused with a work that places Luther or his ideas in historical context, neither is it concerned to explain what led (in the author’s view) the Formula of Concord (1577) to articulate a doctrine of justification in strictly forensic categories contrary to Luther’s own position, nor, indeed, why such a position other than Luther’s own became entrenched within Lutheranism. Such things have been the focus of study for Mannermaa’s students.

Instead, this is a seminal work that charges the Formula of Concord with a definition of “justification by faith” that excludes the divine indwelling (inhabitatio Dei), thereby rendering it “a separate phenomenon, logically subsequent to justification” (4). Thus, the presence of Christ in faith is not the same phenomenon as the “righteousness of faith,”

but rather a consequence of the forgiveness of sins. The Finnish School sees issues related to the loss of Christian vitality in the pursuit of holy living, if not antinomianism itself, latent implications of this governing interpretation.

However, in the theology of Luther, explains Mannermaa, the relation between justification and the divine indwelling in the believer consists of the “righteousness of faith” permeated by Christological thinking. “[Luther] does not separate the person (persona) of Christ and his work (officium) from each other. Instead, Christ himself, both his person and his work, is the Christian righteousness, that is, the ‘righteousness of faith’” (5).

According to Mannermaa, Luther is incarnational in his theology even when it comes to justification by faith.

“Christ—and therefore also his entire person and work— is really and truly present in the faith itself (In ipsa fide Christus adest)” (5). Established, mono-dimensional Melanchthonian formulations of imputation and forensic justification simply do not do justice to the entirety of Luther’s multifaceted union-with-Christ-theology of justification.

At the heart of the matter, then, is a question about faith itself: Is it created or uncreated grace? Traditionally speaking, confessional Lutheran systematicians, such as the venerable J. A. Quenstedt and Francis Pieper, have routinely understood faith as a created grace. Pieper, for instance, rightly speaks of true faith as a divine gift “altogether wrought by supernatural power” (Christian Dogmatics, II, 428), yet understands that faith to be something “created” by the Holy Spirit, whether in infants or adults (II, 448, 461, 548, 552). But Mannermaa looks to Luther who, largely on the persuasive evidence of his Lectures on Galatians (1535), unequivocally posits faith as an uncreated grace. Christ comes to us in faith through the word of the gospel. He is not merely the object of faith but is faith itself. And to possess faith is to have union with Christ or, synonymously, to be regenerated, for regeneration consists of the gift of faith (29).

Mannermaa’s launching point may be summarized by saying that, in Luther, regeneration is nothing other than the gift of the righteousness of faith or, which is to say the same thing, “participation in Christ,” God’s gift and favor, on account of whom we are justified. Thus, the sinner justified is not incidental to salvation, but the personal recipient of this windfall of grace, through a personal union with the Righteous One, Jesus Christ.

But what of imputation? Can Mannermaa’s interpretation stand up to Luther’s unmistakable statements about imputed righteousness from his commentary on Romans and sermons on Two Kinds of Righteousness? It would appear so. Mannermaa does not duck Luther’s strong statements on the imputation of Christ’s alien righteousness, but rather he embraces them as strongly complementary and necessarily tethered to the notion of Christ present in faith.

Mannermaa’s research achieves its most significant (and controversial) contribution to Luther scholarship on J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 25

struggle against the desires of the flesh, themes that are central for many evangelicals.

Yet, this commendation of Christ present in faith also comes with several concerns, some of which are more serious than others. One of greater concern is the clearly overplayed divinization aspect and its approximation with theosis in chapter 5 (“Through Faith One Becomes God”). Mannermaa is not entirely persuasive when he explains that when Christ comes to live in us and make us one with God that “we become, in a sense, gods” (8, 42, 43ff), despite this and other quotes from Luther. One is more likely to find that the reformer’s understanding of participation in God weakly stresses transformation through progressive sanctification, but strongly stresses “God’s indwelling” or “inhabitation” in his people (WA 4:280, 2–5) and, especially when it comes to the righteousness of faith in that regard, imputation. To be sure, Mannermaa’s claims on faith and justification have and will continue to prove useful in reading Luther texts, but whether theosis captures the whole of Luther’s soteriology and theory of Christian ethics is a claim that neither Mannermaa nor his Finnish School compatriots have convincingly defended.

In truth, Luther’s massive written corpus is far too complex in its theological diversity and rhetorical style to be domesticated under a single rubric. A genius of Luther’s rare stature eludes all such attempts at reductionism.

Additionally, as Kurt Marquart has indicated, Mannermaa instigates a false dichotomy between Luther’s “theosis” and forensic justification, which has resulted in the Finnish School minimizing or denying Luther’s distinction between justification and sanctification.

Consequently, it remains a highly contentious issue as to whether Luther’s own understanding of Christ present in faith—in both vocabulary and theological shape—actually fits Orthodox understandings of salvation and justification as encapsulated by the doctrine of theosis. The fact is Luther is not altogether lucid concerning the precise nature of divinization (i.e., human participation in the divine life). To his credit, Mannermaa does cite Luther’s admission that such things are beyond description (57) and that, though Luther says some kind of progress can take place in the Christian because faith means the beginning of a real transformation, progressive sanctification never leads to perfectionism and may only always be a “beginning” (67). Therefore, one must neither make spiritual growth a determining factor in justification nor a terminal point for Christian assurance. Our bodily resurrection is necessary to translate us into Christ’s Last Adam likeness. But, on the other hand, Mannermaa does his work a disservice by coordinating Luther’s preferred indistinct phraseology regarding divinization with definitive categories of theosis. Such a move appears exaggerated, even artificial, if not by Mannermaa, then certainly by editor Kirsi Stjerna, Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, and other Finnish

Mannermaa has reawakened, in a remarkable way, dual themes of the presence of Christ in the believer and the power of the Spirit of Christ to bring about holiness through good works, and, in the struggle against the desires of the flesh, themes that are central for many evangelicals. justification on these two questions: “To what extent is a Christian really made righteous in justification, and to what extent is justification merely an imputation, in which the sinner is declared righteous?”

According to Luther, “there are two factors constituting Christian Righteousness,” namely, the “faith in the heart” and the “imputation of God.” They relate to each other in the following way, to give a preliminary definition: faith is, in itself, a real righteousness (fides est iustitia formalis), even though it is, on the other hand, only initial righteousness.

Namely, because faith is “weak,” believers still have much sin in their “flesh,” in their “old Adam.” Because of these remaining sins it is necessary for justification that God “imputes” the righteousness of Christ to Christians (55).

So while acknowledging that we simultaneously are partly and totally a sinner and partly and totally righteousness in God’s sight, Mannermaa suspends “imputation” as the determining aspect of justification and begins, instead, with the “real” righteousness of faith, the faith in which Christ is present, and then follows with imputation as the necessary counterpart to justification by grace alone, through faith alone, on account of Christ alone. In other words, in conjunction with union with Christ, imputation is necessarily enjoined because of the believer’s “old Adam.”

In this view of justification, God affects not merely a change in status by way of declaration and imputation, but at the same time a whole new life, inspired by Christ and permeated with his presence.

The most immediate implication of this “new” interpretation of Luther pertains to Christian living. Mannermaa asserts, from Luther, that Christ as our sanctification is affective and suffused, that Christ acts in us to do works of righteousness, none of which we can boast of as our own, as well as transform our hearts. Lutherans need not fear to do good works or preach the value of good works to Christians justified by faith in Christ’s imputed (though present) righteousness. Thus, Mannermaa has reawakened, in a remarkable way, dual themes of the presence of Christ in the believer and the power of the Spirit of Christ to bring about holiness through good works, and, in the 2 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

School proponents. There is ambiguity and incongruity between the Western notions of divinization and Eastern ideas of theosis, between Martin Luther and, say, John of Damascus. Not enough to dismiss, let alone ignore, Mannermaa’s central thesis and many of its implications, but enough to accentuate and assert Luther’s Western distinctives, especially when it comes to sanctification. For Luther, imputation is the last word on the life of a Christian. The accent falls on the cross not divinization.

Finally, chapter 9 (“The Sighing of the Spirit”) curiously obscures the aforementioned objective justification and Mannermaa’s treatment of the second of the “two kinds of righteousness.” There the author argues that the Holy Spirit helps Christians by crying to Christ within themselves (73). His quote from Luther, however, has the Spirit crying within our hearts, but clearly to our heavenly Father “in” or “through” Christ. Later, in a final chapter that underscores the necessity of the logocentric means of grace for the life of faith, Mannermaa corrects himself but does not reconcile “The Sighing of the Spirit” with the present Christ and the objective basis and means for holiness—word and sacrament. Notwithstanding, the author’s vision concerning sanctification is not irreconcilable with established, confessional Lutheranism. “Holiness,” concludes Mannermaa, “means that in the middle of the conflict between the flesh and the Spirit Christians turn again and again—with the strength given to them by the Spirit and in prayer for forgiveness—to the objective reality that is outside them and makes them holy. This reality is Christ himself, the favor and gift of God. He is the objective but at the same time also the subjective basis for holiness (86).

Such objectivity commendably keeps the eye of faith from introspection and firmly fixed on the risen Lord who comes to us in the gospel means of grace.

If Finnish scholarship can harness their application of Luther’s concept of divinization and not allow it to be swallowed up by a rather incompatible Eastern understanding nor, indeed, pave a course to the return of pietism, then, beginning with Mannermaa, they will have performed a laudable service through their landmark presentation of the new reality in Christ which constitutes the heart of Luther’s spirituality, as well as resolved longstanding imprecision regarding the relationship between the “righteousness of faith,” justification, and regeneration.

Luther is the sixteenth-century apostle of justification by faith. Any statement directly challenging the Formula of Concord’s entrenched interpretation of Luther on the article of justification would seem to be antithetical to Lutheran orthodoxy and therefore Luther himself. But not so. In eighty-eight pages of text (plus footnotes), Mannermaa makes a compelling argument about Luther’s preferred statements on faith and justification that need to be reconciled with, if not the limitations codified by the Formula of Concord, then subsequent generations of confessional Lutheran systematicians. How this tension may be resolved is not yet certain, though perhaps further research may confirm that sixteenth-century usage of

terms like “regeneration” and “sanctification” was not fixed but mutable.

Insofar as he is correct about Luther “Concerning the Righteousness of Faith before God” (leaving aside his strained presentation of theosis), then strong consideration must be given by his English-reading audience to either verify his findings and incorporate them into Lutheran dogmatics and seminary curriculums or, alternatively, collate a massive refutation. Whichever may be the case, this book cannot be ignored by confessional Lutherans or, indeed, by anyone who looks to this reformer as a champion of justification by faith alone.

John J. Bombaro Cambridge, England

Preaching from the Choir (continued from page 5) The opening movement—not a quartet, but a sextet—is nothing short of arresting. Somehow, the live concert is, more vibrant than the studio recording. The second is a book on the phenomenon of the supreme love by Ashley Kahn: A Love Supreme: The Story of John Coltrane’s Signature Album (New York: Penguin/Viking, 2002). After near exhaustive research, marvelous insights on Trane’s life and views, and, especially his music, Kahn admits, “… as one who was a little less assured in his agnostic or rationalist beliefs, I thought of the phrase ‘opening doors.’”

Exactly! John Coltrane’s music shakes up our agnosticism and rationalism. Though his statement of fundamental beliefs is not as clear as evangelicals would wish, his conversion was clearly Christian. This shows how absurd is the Divisadero Street Church of Saint John’s African Orthodox Church in San Francisco, California, which tries to emulate John Coltrane and drag him into the role of cult leader, which he would have resolutely rejected. Trane was a wonderful example of the gospel set to jazz music.

William Edgar is professor of apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia, PA) and an accomplished musician.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 6 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 27

FAMILY MATTERS r e sou rces

fo r

homes

Inter-generational class curriculum

U

ntil now, we have had two choices. We can divide the church by age groups,

the practical implications of Scripture when they sending everyone off to age-appropriate classes for Christian education. Or we are discussing it with children who are known for can teach everyone together, trying to keep childish restlessness under control their concrete way of thinking.

Said Mrs. and hoping the children will “get something” out of a lecRoberts: “Everyone has squirmed at one point or another ture designed for adults. Typically, we choose the former, as the Holy Spirit has convicted us in new ways.” By with fairly satisfactory results. Now, however, we have a means of a game board and cards for each small group, the third choice. Have you considered what might be gained session concludes with additional opportunity to discuss by offering an intergenerational class, where children and and apply. adults learn together and encourage each other?

But that’s not all! An intergenerational class not only For one thing, we would have the opportunity to be unifies a church, it strengthens the family. Pastor Cuer the church—a body, united, not divided. This is what watched parents learn to discuss spiritual things with their Pastor Dale Cuer watched happen last summer in West children in the class—a kind of hands-on training. Parents Middlebury Baptist Church in East Bethany, New York. could then practice these developing skills at home, since Pastor Cuer led his church through a new curriculum prothe curriculum provides a book of family devotions. The duced by Desiring God Ministries and designed specifically devotions complement class material without repeating it. for mixed-age groups. As all ages met together weekly, the Each week, the devotional includes the Westminster Larger awkward barriers between adults and children, teens and Catechism examination of the commandment being studseniors, crumbled. Families got to know other families. ied. A daily Scripture passage and questions follow.

Even better, these budding relationships were based on far Supplemental material includes related activities for a fammore than small talk. Michelle Roberts helped her church ily night and lists of books on the Ten Commandments (First Evangelical Presbyterian in Renton, Washington) both for adults and for children. use the same curriculum. Mrs. Roberts says, “It has been First Evangelical Presbyterian and West Middlebury a delight to sit in groups of mixed age and discuss how Baptist used The Righteous Shall Live by Faith as a summer God’s Word applies to our lives.”

Sunday school class. That would be one solution for the The Righteous Shall Live by Faith (by Sally Michael) prosmaller Sunday school classes that result from the typical vides thirteen lessons designed to challenge people of all church’s summer slump, as well as a way to give regular ages. Presented clearly and simply, the overarching teachers a little break. But this curriculum could work themes are law and grace as seen in the Ten equally well as an innovative small group or as an engagCommandments. Like the Westminster and Heidelberg ing family camp.

Catechisms, the lessons look in detail at what each commandment requires and forbids. Thus, also like the catechisms, they expose the foolishness of our assumptions Starr Meade is author of Training Hearts, Teaching Minds: that, of course, we keep the Ten Commandments. The Family Devotions Based on the Shorter Catechism (P&P material keeps coming back to the person and work of Publishing, 2000).

Christ as God’s provision for our failure. The lessons also highlight the work of the Spirit in transforming a believer so that the Ten Commandments “[become] the expression of a redeemed heart.”

The studies begin with a concrete illustration of a key truth. The teacher explains this illustration and continues to teach using simple visuals. Small group discussion around key Bible passages alternates with the whole class instruction. Some of the discussion questions train students to carefully examine Bible texts. Others call for very pointed applications. Adults find it much harder to dodge

2 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

Are you listening?

Tune into the White Horse Inn to know what you believe and why you believe it.

FUTURE BROADCASTS: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Christ in All of Scripture Understanding American Evangelicalism A Sentimental Journey The State of the Church Self-Help Salvation

Now airing on over fifty stations nationwide, go to www.whitehorseinn.org to find a station near you or to listen anytime online!

FEATURING

Michael Horton | Kim Riddlebarger | Ken Jones | Rod Rosenbladt www.whitehorseinn.org