The Difference between a Theologian of the Cross and a Theologian of Glory Carl Trueman: One of the things that is so striking about the current revival of interest in Reformation theology, broadly conceived, is the absence of perhaps the most glorious contribution of Martin Luther to theological discourse: the notion of the theologian of the cross. At a meeting of the Saxon Chapter of the Augustinian Order in the city of Heidelberg in 1518, a monk called Leonhard Beier presented a series of theses which Luther had prepared, whilst Dr Martin himself presided over the proceedings. The Heidelberg Disputation was to go down in history as the moment when Luther showcased his radical new theology for the first time. At the heart of this new theology was the notion that God reveals himself under his opposite; or, to express this another way, God achieves his intended purposes by doing the exact opposite of that which humans might expect. The
Carl Trueman
Navigating Worlds
James Eglinton: In the West today, many of the great questions faced by Christians deal with our place in a culture that was molded by Christianity, but that has now rejected it—not merely in a passive sort of indifference, but in an active effort to undo the faith’s historic formative influence on our world. This is the context in which a constellation of homegrown “cultural Christians” has gained such influence. In The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self, Carl Trueman helps us understand their rise to prominence. He does so by bringing the work of Philip Rieff, the outstanding Jewish sociologist, to the table. Rieff argued that the history of the West is the history of three worlds. The first was a supernaturally charged, pre-Christian pagan world in which life and death were governed by fate. This gave way to a second world reshaped by Jewish and Christian thought, able to advance scientific knowledge and social order, looking to expand on the basis of
Luther, and the Creative Power of the Word
. Carl Trueman: . The importance of Luther to the Christian faith cannot be overstated. For many today, he is probably a figure who looks larger as a symbol of defiance or a heroic rebel against a corrupt church and decadent theology.There is much truth in such images. His stand at the Diet of Worms was a remarkable act of courageous defiance. And his theology represented nothing less than a self-conscious attempt to overthrow the medieval thought which he had been taught and replace it with a comprehensive understanding of God and the gospel as refracted the incarnate and crucified Christ. . Yet there is more to Luther. Indeed, perhaps his greatest contribution to the faith, and one that we can still learn from today, is his understanding of God’s Word. When we hear this term, our modern evangelical minds typically go to the contemporary debates about inerrancy, infallibility, interpretation and the like. Certainly such questions are legitimate. But for
The Difference between a Theologian of the Cross and a Theologian of [Power] Glory
Justin Taylor posts: Carl Trueman on “the most glorious contribution of Martin Luther to theological discourse,” first revealed in Heidelberg during a meeting in 1518: At the heart of this new theology was the notion that God reveals himself under his opposite; or, to express this another way, God achieves his intended purposes by doing the exact opposite of that which humans might expect. The supreme example of this is the cross itself: God triumphs over sin and evil by allowing sin and evil to triumph (apparently) over him. His real strength is demonstrated through apparent weakness. This was the way a theologian of the cross thought about God. The opposite to this was the theologian of glory. In simple terms, the theologian of glory assumed that there was basic continuity between the way the world is and the way God is: if strength is demonstrated through raw power on earth, then God’s strength must be the same, only extended to
read more The Difference between a Theologian of the Cross and a Theologian of [Power] Glory
Why Do We Draw the Line?
By Carl Trueman: In recent years, talk of uniting around the center has been very popular in conservative evangelical quarters. One obvious reason for this is that many regard such a center as reflecting the fact that there is a solid core of key doctrines on which evangelicals agree, even though there are areas of disagreement. Thus, many consider Trinitarianism, penal substitution, and justification by grace alone through faith alone to be central points of agreement. At the same time, these same people would regard the subjects and mode of baptism or the details of church polity to be areas of disagreement. Yet, by seeing the former as more important, they regard diversity on the latter as not of truly fundamental significance. A second reason for emphasizing talk about the center is, perhaps, more problematic. Frequently, those who talk of the center as all-important contrast themselves favorably with those they see as emphasizing boundaries. Boundaries are much more problematic in our
Carl Trueman Interviews JI Packer
(HT: Justin Taylor)
The Reformation Isn’t Over
Thabiti Anyabwile reflects upon Cal Trueman’s breakout session at Together for the Gospel 2012 entitled “Why the Reformation Is Not Over.” Trueman reminded us that the Reformation was at its heart a pastoral protest. Luther reacted against the buying and selling of God’s grace in a way that minimized the gospel. Zwingli sought to reglate church life by the word of God. Calvin likewise sought to regulate the life of the church by the word but also to free the church’s liturgy and discipline from state control. This was a good reminder for our day, when men innovate with the church like children manipulate play dough, when a light grasp of polity and ecclesiology has harmful effects on theology and the gospel. Focusing primarily on Luther, Trueman unpacked ways the Reformation makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the church and ministry. The Reformation established: 1. The centrality of the cross: The cross means reality is not what it seems
Doctrine and Doxology: Why we must fire boring teachers and preachers
Carl Trueman writes: Preaching on 1 Timothy 1:16-17 on Sunday, I was struck by a number of things. First, doctrine and worship go together. Doctrine may often seem a dry word but in fact it is simply the description of who God is and how he has acted. As Paul reflects in 1 Tim. 1 upon how God has dealt with him, his language becomes exuberant and he speaks of God’s grace `overflowing’ towards him. Then, able to contain himself no more, he bursts into a doxology. This is hardly surprising. The description of God’s actions should naturally call forth worship; and here Paul offers a paradigm of a worshipful response in which he ascribes to God glory and honour, i.e., that to which God’s person and actions entitle him. Paul’s praise is doctrinal in origin and doctrinal in content. To state what should be obvious, praise and worship that is neither is simply not praise and worship as the Bible would
read more Doctrine and Doxology: Why we must fire boring teachers and preachers
Already Not Yet 