Moralism is NOT the Gospel

The following  paragraphs are the conluding remarks of Al Mohler’s artcle:

Why Moralism Is Not the Gospel — And Why So Many Christians Think It Is

[...]

Just as parents rightly teach their children to obey moral instruction, the church also bears responsibility to teach its own the moral commands of God and to bear witness to the larger society of what God has declared to be right and good for His human creatures.

But these impulses, right and necessary as they are, are not the Gospel. Indeed, one of the most insidious false gospels is a moralism that promises the favor of God and the satisfaction of God’s righteousness to sinners if they will only behave and commit themselves to moral improvement.

The moralist impulse in the church reduces the Bible to a codebook for human behavior and substitutes moral instruction for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Far too many evangelical pulpits are given over to moralistic messages rather than the preaching of the Gospel.

The corrective to moralism comes directly from the Apostle Paul when he insists that “a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus.” Salvation comes to those who are “justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.” [Gal. 2:16]

We sin against Christ and we misrepresent the Gospel when we suggest to sinners that what God demands of them is moral improvement in accordance with the Law. Moralism makes sense to sinners, for it is but an expansion of what we have been taught from our earliest days. But moralism is not the Gospel, and it will not save. The only gospel that saves is the Gospel of Christ. As Paul reminded the Galatians, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” [Gal. 4:4-5]

We are justified by faith alone, saved by grace alone, and redeemed from our sin by Christalone. Moralism produces sinners who are (potentially) better behaved. The Gospel of Christ transforms sinners into the adopted sons and daughters of God.

The Church must never evade, accommodate, revise, or hide the law of God. Indeed, it is the Law that shows us our sin and makes clear our inadequacy and our total lack of righteousness. The Law cannot impart life but, as Paul insists, it “has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.” [Gal. 3:24]

The deadly danger of moralism has been a constant temptation to the church and an ever-convenient substitute for the Gospel. Clearly, millions of our neighbors believe that moralismis our message. Nothing less than the boldest preaching of the Gospel will suffice to correct this impression and to lead sinners to salvation in Christ.

Hell will be highly populated with those who were “raised right.” The citizens of heaven will be those who, by the sheer grace and mercy of God, are there solely because of the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ.

Moralism is not the gospel.

Filed under: Al Mohler, Discipleship, Doctrine, Jesus Christ, Moralism, Salvation, Sanctification, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Gospel

Al Mohler’s New Book

Al Mohler’s latest book, “The Disappearance

of God”, can be ordered HERE

.

From the Publisher:

For centuries the church has taught and guarded the core Christian beliefs that make up the essential foundations of the faith. But in our postmodern age, sloppy teaching and outright lies create rampant confusion, and many Christians are free-falling for ‘feel-good’ theology. We need to know the truth to save ourselves from errors that will derail our faith.

As biblical scholar, author, and president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Albert Mohler, writes, “The entire structure of Christian truth is now under attack.” With wit and wisdom he tackles the most important aspects of these modern issues:

Is God changing His mind about sin?
Why is hell off limits for many pastors?
What’s good or bad about the emergent movement?
Have Christians stopped seeing God as God?
Is the social justice movement misguided?
Could the role of beauty be critical to our theology?
Is liberal faith any less destructive than atheism?
Are churches pandering to their members to survive?

In the age-old battle to preserve the foundations of faith, it’s up to a new generation to confront and disarm the contemporary shams and fight for the truth. Dr. Mohler provides the scriptural answers to show you how.

(HT: Todd Pruitt)

Filed under: Al Mohler, Attributes of God, Books, Cultural relevance, Discernment, Discipleship, Doctrine, Emerging Church, Evangelical, Liberalism, Postmodernism, Religion, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Gospel

Can a Christian Deny the Virgin Birth?

Dr. Mohler takes on this question. His answer?

“The answer to that question must be a decisive No. Those who deny the virgin birth reject the authority of Scripture, deny the supernatural birth of the Saviour, undermine the very foundations of the Gospel, and have no way of explaining the deity of Christ.”

Read the whole thing here.

(HT: Tim Challies)

Filed under: Advent, Al Mohler, Attributes of God, Deity of Christ, Doctrine, Evangelical, Jesus Christ, The Incarnation, The word of God, Truth, Virgin birth

Salvation through Christ Alone? — A Moment of Decision

Al Mohler comments:

The Church of England faces yet another theological challenge as it prepares for the meeting of its General Synod in July. This time the issue is the Gospel itself and the specific question concerns the evangelization of Muslims. In the end, the outcome of this debate may, more then anything else, determine the future viability of the Church of England.

Paul Eddy, a lay theology student from Winchester who aspires to the priesthood, has entered a Private Member’s Motion and has secured the signatures necessary to force the General Synod to deal with his motion.

The text of his motion sets the issue clearly:

‘That this Synod request the House of Bishops to report to the Synod on their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in Britain’s multi-faith society, and offer examples and commendations of good practice in sharing the gospel of salvation through Christ alone with people of other faiths and of none.’

Mr. Eddy’s motion has been roundly denounced by many in the church and the Daily Mail [London] reports that liberal bishops attempted to dissuade members from signing the motion. Nevertheless, the motion is now set and the General Synod will effectively vote on whether the Church of England should seek to evangelize Muslims

As the Daily Mail reports:

[Mr. Eddy] said that the active recruitment of non-believers and adherents of other faiths had always been a Biblical injunction on Christians, commanded by Christ himself.

But he claimed that many bishops were downplaying the missionary role of the Church and official documents often glossed over the requirement to convert Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs or followers of other religions.

He warned that the central role of Christianity in Britain was being eroded, and by ‘allowing the rise of another religion in our country, all that Britain stands for is up for grabs.’

Mr. Eddy’s motion has found support among at least some bishops, including the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali. Bishop Nazir-Ali, born in Pakistan, is the only Asian-born bishop in the Church of England. In response to Mr. Eddy’s motion, the Bishop argued that the Church of England has failed in its responsibility to “welcome people of other faiths.” He suggested that the church had “gone too far” in responding to the sensitivities of British Muslims.

He also said, “Our nation is rooted in the Christian faith and that is the basis of welcoming people of other faiths. You cannot have an honest conversation on the basis of fudge.”

Just months ago, the bishop drew criticism for his warning that certain sectors of British cities had become “no-go areas” where Muslims intimidate others from entering. The Telegraph [London] reported that Bishop Nazir-Ali’s statements met with fierce opposition from another bishop:

However, his comments were condemned by senior figures within the Church. The Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, the former Bishop of Hulme and the newly appointed Bishop of Urban Life and Faith, said: “Both the Bishop of Rochester’s reported comments and the synod private members’ motion show no sensitivity to the need for good inter-faith relations. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs are learning to respect one another’s paths to God and to live in harmony. This demand for the evangelisation of people of other faiths contributes nothing to our communities.”

Bishop Lowe sets the issue clearly. He denies that the church should share the Gospel with persons of other faiths, but should instead “respect one another’s paths to God.”

This is precisely the theological compromise that motivated Paul Eddy to bring his motion in the first place. Mr. Eddy told the BBC that the Church of England has “lost its nerve” and was “not doing what the Bible says” in terms of evangelism.

His motion explicitly affirms “the uniqueness of Christ” and “the gospel of salvation through Christ alone,” and for this reason the church will be forced to face a defining issue for the integrity of the Gospel and the church.

If Bishop Lowe’s theology wins the day, as evidence suggests is already happening, the Church of England will forfeit any claim to the Gospel. The New Testament leaves absolutely no room for other “paths to God,” nor for allowing “respect” to preclude evangelism.

The Church of England is not the only church or denomination that has “lost its nerve” when it comes to the Gospel, nor is it the only church to face this test, but it will set its future course in July even if the vote on Mr. Eddy’s motion is the only vote taken.

Filed under: Al Mohler, Christian Ministry, Church, Discernment, Evangelical, Evangelism, Jesus Christ, Mission, Salvation, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Cross, The Gospel, The glory of Christ, The word of God, Truth

Biblical Authority and the Preacher

Biblical preaching is declarative not suggestive.

From Al Mohler:

The inaugural issue of Christianity Today, dated October 15, 1956, featured an article by Billy Graham entitled, “Biblical Authority in Evangelism.” The thrust of the article was clear — without an unhesitant “thus saith the Lord” authority in preaching and evangelism, the message lacks all authority. The only authority that matters, Dr. Graham insisted, was the authority of the Bible as the Word of God.

Indeed, this confidence in biblical authority was, at least in part, the reason for the establishment of Christianity Today as the flagship journal of American evangelicalism under the editorship of Carl. F. H. Henry.

Now, over a half-century after the publication of that article, Angie Ward of Leadership magazine began with Dr. Graham’s article and then asked five preachers — What, if anything, has changed?

I was pleased to answer her questions and to participate in the project. She also interviewed David Anderson, pastor of Bridgeway Community Church in Columbia, Maryland; John M. Buchanan, pastor of Fourth Presbyterian Church in downtown Chicago and editor and publisher of The Christian Century; Tullian Tchividjian is a grandson of Billy Graham and the senior pastor at New City Church in Margate, Florida; and Rick Warren, founding pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California.

Her article, “Biblical Authority & Today’s Preacher,” is based on those interviews. The preachers interviewed represent something of a cross-section of American Protestantism, with John Buchanan representing liberal Protestantism and its most historic publication, The Christian Century (the very magazine to which Christianity Today was established to serve as an alternative)..

Suggesting the Old Testament prophets as models for preaching, Dr. Graham had referred to preachers as “mouthpieces for God.”  The magazine then asked if we should consider today’s preacher to be a mouthpiece for God.

I answered:

I am certainly supposed to be a mouthpiece for Scripture, a human instrument through which the Scripture is heard and received by God’s people. But the human preacher’s authority only reaches the human ear. It is only God himself who can take his word from the human ear to the human heart.

I stand by this answer, and by the large comments I made in the interview about the fact that the preacher is actually a mouthpiece for God only when the Word of God is rightly preached.  As the Reformers made clear, preaching is the means by which God speaks to His people as a gathered community.  Through the preached Word and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, God actually speaks to His people.

Dr. John Buchanan answered:

We need to be very careful about that. So many people have abused this, preachers need to be very careful before claiming they are God’s mouthpiece. I think the preacher needs to be suggestive and not declarative. There are times in history when people (like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Luther King) were called with some authority to say, “This is wrong.” But we need to be cautious. One of our central doctrines is that we all fall short of the glory of God. Sin touches all of us. Our call is to study, pray, discern the word, then convey it to people.

The key issue here is his proposal that preaching should be “suggestive and not declarative.”  While the preacher must be modest concerning himself, his own abilities, and his inherent inadequacies, the preacher must not be merely suggestive in the pulpit.  The “suggestive and not declarative” approach well defines most liberal Protestant preaching, but I think it also explains the decline of those churches and denominations.  The earlier loss of confidence in the authority of the Bible inevitably leads to a declining authority of the pulpit.

As Martin Luther remarked, “Yes, I hear the sermon; but who is speaking?  The minister?  No indeed!  You do not hear the minister.  True, the voice is his; but my God is speaking the Word which he preaches or speaks.  Therefore I should honor the Word of God that I may become a good pupil of the Word.”

Filed under: Al Mohler, Christian Ministry, Culture, Evangelical, Liberal Theology, News & Views, Preaching, Religion, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Gospel, The word of God

T4G – Here I Come!

Next week I’ll be heading out to Louisville, Kentucky, for the T4G conference. This has been made possible by some good friends. To whom I’m very grateful! Many of my favourite preacher/teachers will be speaking. It’s a mouth watering prospect indeed, but more importantly I’m expecting it to be a life changing encounter.

You can check out the titles of the sessions here.

Here’s some highlights from the last conference in 2006.

I’m also booked in for the Band of Bloggers luncheon. Should be fun!

Filed under: Al Mohler, Christian Ministry, Conferences, Jesus Christ, John Piper, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, News & Views, Preaching, RC Sproul, Reformed, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Cross, The Gospel, The word of God, Theology

Christian Marriage

Marriage and the Glory of God 

By Al Mohler

“Dearly beloved, we are gathered here in the sight of God and in the face of this congregation, to join together this man and this woman in Holy Matrimony; which is an honorable state, instituted by God in the time of man’s innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church.”

That familiar language from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, recited thousands of times each week in various forms, presents a vision of marriage as a deeply Christian institution–even a necessary portrait of the love that unites Christ and His church. As marriage signifies this “mystical union,” it points to an understanding that takes us far beyond the relationship of the husband and wife. Do most Christians have even the slightest understanding of this?

It is bad enough that the secular world has discounted marriage into a quasi-legal contract that, like other voluntary contracts, can be made or broken at will. The greater tragedy is the failure of Christians to take marriage seriously. According to the Bible, marriage is not only designed by the Creator as an arena for human happiness and the continuation of the human race–it is also the arena of God’s glory, where the delights and disciplines of marriage point to the purpose for which human beings were made.

Marriage is about our happiness, our holiness, and our wholeness–but it is supremely about the glory of God. When marriage is entered into rightly, when marriage vows are kept with purity, when all the goods of marriage are enjoyed in their proper place–God is glorified.

Our chief end is to glorify God–and marriage is a means of His greater glory. As sinners, we are all too concerned with our own pleasures, our own fulfillments, our own priorities, our own conception of marriage as a domestic arrangement. The ultimate purpose of marriage is the greater glory of God–and God is most greatly glorified when His gifts are rightly celebrated and received, and His covenants are rightly honored and pledged.

Marriage is not greatly respected in our postmodern culture. For many, the covenant of marriage has been discarded in favor of a contract of cohabitation. An ethic of personal autonomy has produced successive generations who think of the world as the arena of their own personal fulfillment and of marriage as an outdated relic of an outgrown culture of obligation.

Ours is an era of self-expression. Individuals express themselves through marriage, and then express themselves through divorce–as if all of life is nothing more than a succession of acts of self-expression.

A divorce culture explains away obligation and sacred promises as temporary statements of emotional disposition. I may feel married today–I may not feel married tomorrow.

Our culture is so sexually confused that the goods of sex are severed from the vows and obligations of marriage. Thanks to modern technologies, we can have sex without babies, babies without sex, and both without marriage. For many, marriage has become an irrelevancy.

For others it is worse. Some have lambasted marriage as a domestic prison, a patriarchal and oppressive institution foisted upon unsuspecting men and women in order to deny them freedom, autonomy, fulfillment, and liberation. And, for a post-Christian culture, there is that nagging problem of the essential character of marriage as sacred institution. A society that disbelieves in God will eventually disbelieve in marriage.

Christian couples who are committed to this high conception of marriage must see themselves as counter-revolutionaries. In a very real sense, they are. They are standing against the tide of public opinion, against the trend of modern morality, against the erosion of order and the deflationary market in faithfulness. Before God, they stand committed to each other–and only to each other. To live together for each other, no matter what may come.

The church has recognized three great purposes of marriage, and all three of these have been subverted by the sexual revolution and its aftermath.

The first is the procreation and nurture of children, if God should grant children to the marriage. This purpose is dishonored by many, but it is honored among believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. Children are to be welcomed as gifts to the institution of marriage, transforming husband and wife into father and mother. In our anti-natalist age, some see children as impositions–or worse. The denial of a procreative orientation for marriage–every marriage genuinely open to the gift of children–is a denial of the biblical vision of marriage itself.

The second great purpose of marriage, as the ancient language expresses it, is “as a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication . . . that [believers] might marry and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ’s body.” Marriage as a remedy for sin? This purpose is ridiculed among many, but it is honored among Christ’s disciples. This is exactly what the Apostle Paul took as his concern in writing to the church at Corinth. Confused and seduced by sexual sin, that church had compromised its own ability to represent Christ. Paul pointed to marriage as a means of channeling sexual desire into its proper context, lest believers “burn with passion” and sin against God. [1 Corinthians 7:9]

Our culture has turned “burning with passion” into a hedonistic art form. Explicit sexuality–stripped of the constraints of marriage–is the energy behind much of our economy, the material for entertainment, the substance of art, the enticement of advertising. Those who believe that sexual intercourse should be limited to marriage are dismissed as moral throw-backs, hopelessly outdated creatures who simply have no clue about the modern world.

The third great end of marriage is companionship throughout life, through good and bad, comfort and loss, sickness and health, until death parts the husband and wife. The mystery of completeness is expressed in the statement that the two shall become one. When a man and a woman exchange marriage vows, they become one solitary unit. After the exchange of these vows, we can no longer speak of the husband without the wife, or of the wife without the husband. They have become one, both in the physical union of the marital act and in the metaphysical union of the marital bond. As a married couple–husband and wife–they will live to the glory of God with each other, for each other, and to each other.

The end of marriage is its beginning–the glory of God, the mystery of Christ and the church. The exclusivity and purity of the marriage bond points to the exclusivity and purity of the relationship between Christ and His church.

How does marriage glorify God? Tertullian, one of the early church fathers, offers wisdom: “How beautiful, then, the marriage of two Christians, two who are one in home, one in desire, one in the way of life they follow, one in the religion they practice . . . Nothing divides them either in flesh or in spirit . . . They pray together, they worship together, they fast together; instructing one another, encouraging one another, strengthening one another. Side by side they visit God’s church and partake God’s banquet, side by side they face difficulties and persecution, share their consolations. They have no secrets from one another; they never shun each other’s company; they never bring sorrow to each other’s hearts . . . Seeing this Christ rejoices. To such as these He gives His peace. Where there are two together, there also He is present.”

Marriage is the source of great and unspeakable happiness. Yet because of sin it is not unmixed happiness. But marriage is not first and foremost about making us happy. It is for making us holy. And through the covenant of marriage two Christians pledge to live together so as to make each other holy before God, as a testimony to Christ.

Keep this in mind in the midst of today’s frenzied marriage debates. Marriage is first and foremost about the glory of God. All of the manifold gifts of marriage are derived from that great fact.

Filed under: Al Mohler, Attributes of God, Church, Discipleship, Evangelical, God's Glory, Jesus Christ, Marriage, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Gospel, The glory of Christ, The word of God, Truth, Union with Christ