On the two strands of theology’s utility: Happiness and Holiness

Happiness

There are two strands of theology’s utility.
First of all, theology is like all pursuits. It is a means through which you are going to find happiness (eudaimonia/summum bonum).

Money and power make most people happy, as money stands for physical comfort, and power is linked with the sense of achievement and the mark of one’s existential/relational status.
Game and competition make people happy, as they build up what is consisting of humanity from the natural perspective.
Leisure and arts make people happy.
So should theology (or Christianity).

If theology/Christianity is not bringing people happiness, we must ask why.
If our theological education is not something to enjoy for students and hence is not equipping students to be the catalyst for the happiness in this world, we must ask why.

I figure one of our major challenge now is that we ministers are not acting like messengers of joyfulness, lest we should bring this joy to fellow believers,  comforts to this troubled world like comforters, and true wisdom to this perplexed generation like counselors.

You get this? Where is your power of joy oh those of you who bury your heads in the desks of the theological academy?

And second, theology is not like all other worldly pursuits. it’s going to bring glory to God. We must preach God’s holiness. Give Him everything we owe Him.

 Malachi 1:6  A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master; if then I be a father, where is My honour? and if I be a master, where is My fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise My name. And ye say: ‘Wherein have we despised Thy name?’

Malachi 1:8 aWhen you offer blind animals in sacrifice, is that not evil? And when you offer those that are lame or sick, is that not evil? Present that to your governor; will he accept you or show you favor? says the LORD of hosts.

Malachi 1:9 And now, I pray you, entreat the favour of God that He may be gracious unto us! – This hath been of your doing. – Will He accept any of your persons? saith the LORD of hosts.

Malachi 1:10 Oh that there were even one among you that would shut the doors, that ye might not kindle fire on Mine altar in vain! I have no pleasure in you, saith the LORD of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand.

Malachi 1:11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same My name is great among the nations; and in every place offerings are presented unto My name, even pure oblations; for My name is great among the nations, saith the LORD of hosts.

And convict people of their waywardness; turn them from their old ways to God’s presence!
We must reflect God’s image as angels/messengers that sing ‘holy, holy, holy!’

With boldness and courage. Without shame and irresolution.

Phi 3:13,14 Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself to have attained this. Instead I am single-minded: Forgetting the things that are behind and reaching out for the things that are ahead,  with this goal in mind, I strive toward the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

Joh 17:24 "Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, so that they can see my glory that you gave me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

2Ti 1:12 Because of this, in fact, I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, because I know the one in whom my faith is set and I am convinced that he is able to protect what has been entrusted to me until that day.

1Co 9:24,25 Do you not know that all the runners in a stadium compete, but only one receives the prize? So run to win. Each competitor must exercise self-control in everything. They do it to receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one.

Heb 12:1,2 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, we must get rid of every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and run with endurance the race set out for us,  keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith. For the joy set out for him he endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God.

Holiness

That being said, the theological pursuit of happiness and holiness is not going to be my new year resolution. That sounds too ‘manly’ and not ‘godly’. For me, there  is only a humble prayer in my heart: God, be with me, and work this out in me, who is willing to sacrifice and burn for you.

[文摘] 別當「有神性沒人性」的基督徒！（推薦兩篇好文）

最近網上有基督徒非常有啟發性的兩篇優秀文章，風格不同。一篇舉證幽默風趣，讀來莞爾且讓人會心一笑；另一文則融會貫通教會歷史和解經神學，文筆俐落縱述十架神學在建造家庭祭壇的中心地位。

兩篇文章的共通之處，在於再次引導我們重視基督教上帝的內住性（immanence）－即「以馬內利」那慈愛、溫柔、寬厚、與人一同受苦的神人二性。這樣的神學，可以導正我們因只對上帝的主權和超越性（transcendence）片面認知，並修正我們因神學不健全而帶出的錯誤人際關係（朋友、同儕、家庭、親子）。

Image via Wikipedia

1.

TOP 5 不要從你口中說出來的聖經名言

作者：劉曉亭（愛加倍靈修中心）

摘：

• 某基督徒妻對被他惹火的老公說『不可含怒到日落』…
• 某牧師在追思禮拜對家屬說，『神知道你們做生意很忙，沒辦法好好照顧你們的孩子，所以把他接走。神有祂的美意，凡事感謝，你們不要難過…』…
• 某位弟兄在金融風暴中損失慘重，另一位『屬靈』的弟兄說：『別難過了，其實上帝早就知道會發生這種事，他也早就知道你會有錯誤投資，這件事就是他要教導你「賞賜的是耶和華，收取的也是耶和華」…』
• 某人在車禍中失去愛女，當事人已經傷心自責，你冷血的說：『站在真理的立場，我知道這樣講你會難過，但是我必須要說，「你就是不夠孝順，上帝管教你…」，「你一定要省察自己的罪」…』
• 禱告會中，某人提出為他跟同事相處禱告，也提到對方某些惡劣行逕。當場就有善心人士提出「要愛你的仇敵」…(full article)
  

2.

“十字架討厭的地方”——引導子女認識神

作者：曾劭愷（英國牛津大學哲學博士進修中，主攻基督教神學。）

摘：

• 許多愛主的家長，從不給幼年子女懷疑神、討厭神的空間。孩子與神起衝突時，屬靈長輩總是替神辯護。他們從小就學會否認自己對神的種種懷疑，儘管教會奪去了他們的快樂，卻不敢去碰心裡討厭神的那塊地方。..他們所受的教育，就是要靠敬虔來肯定自己的價值。家長更以為替神辯護，就可守住孩子的信仰。但當他們漸漸長大，不願再虛偽地否認內心的慾望時，他們就離開教會。
• 基督為何說，“凡婦人所生的，沒有一個興起來大過施洗約翰的”？是因為約翰的信心堅定、永不軟弱嗎？不，耶穌說這話時，約翰正在監裡，懷疑耶穌是否就是先知所應許的彌賽亞。但約翰懂得定睛仰望基督。他懷疑耶穌時，不用邏輯推理、經驗歸納，也不靠宗教情感，直接打發門徒去找耶穌，訴說他的疑惑（參《太》11：2-11）。
• 我們怎樣引導孩子學習信心？答案就是：定睛仰望基督十架討厭的地方，坦然認識自己的罪。神知道我們是罪人，對祂充滿質疑，所以祂邀請我們：“你們來，我們彼此辯論。”我們準備了萬卷辯詞，一面控告神，一面準備在神面前自稱為義。但神並未替自己辯護，反而用十字架稱我們為義：“你們的罪雖像硃紅，必變成雪白﹔雖紅如丹顏，必白如羊毛。”（參《賽》1：18） (full article)

.

aspiration

[省思] Steve Jobs and Christianity

In the starting pages of the recently-released biography of Steve Jobs, there is an intriguing (yet saddening) passage on Jobs’ early interaction with Christianity:

Even though they were not fervent about their faith, Jobs’s parents wanted him to have a religious upbringing, so they took him to the Lutheran church most Sundays. That came to an end when he was thirteen. In July 1968 Life magazine published a shocking cover showing a pair of starving children in Biafra. Jobs took it to Sunday school and confronted the church’s pastor. “If I raise my finger, will God know which one I’m going to raise even before I do it?” The pastor answered, “Yes, God knows everything.” Jobs then pulled out the Life cover and asked, “Well, does God know about this…

I wonder if the situation would change had the Sunday school teacher been trained to think through God’s middle knowledge. But IMO, the biggest issue about the Sunday school teacher is the lack of empathy.

聖經寫作密碼 電腦演算法解玄機

Torah

Source Link:

• Bible’s authors decoded by computer  ; 
• Computer used to hunt for Bible ‘authors’ – UPI.com ; 
• Mystery of Bible authors deciphered by computer program |
• Computer Algorithm Identifies Bible’s Authors, Say Israeli …
• Israeli Software Resurrects Debate About the Bible’s Authors …

撰寫《聖經》的作者究竟有多少人？據英國《每日郵報》報導，有以色列科學家最近發明了一種電腦算式，可以準確地辨識出那些聖經的段落是由不同人所有。他們用算式分析聖經各個章節的寫作風格、歸類模式，證明聖經作者絕對不止一個人。

現今大家所熟知的聖經，是由《舊約》和《新約》2部分所組成的。過去大多數人認為，舊約聖經的首五卷，是由西元前13世紀時猶太人的民族領袖－摩西一個人所獨撰，但有多名宗教學家認為這部份應該是眾人合力著作，對此一直沒有定論。

對於這群研究希伯來舊約聖經的以色列人研究員來說，能將摩西五經（猶太人所認定的權威法典）作者身份和風格更進一步確認具有重大的宗教和歷史意義。自從18世紀懷疑摩西五經作者傳統的說法開始在聖經學界被提出後，爭論就不曾停歇。法國的天主教學者Jean Astruc (1684-1766) 是第一個指出摩西五經中「創世記」並非完全出自摩西手筆的人。 Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752-1827) 也接著認定「創世記」至少反應了兩種不同的來源及風格。Karl David Ilgen (1763-1834) 更進一步指出，創世記包含了十七個彼此獨立的文獻記載，並且有三位作者。

到了19 世紀後半 ，批判理論在一人手下集了大全。一位叫做 Julius Wellhausen  (1844-1918) 的著名聖經學者，經過窮經究理的考據後地提出了「四典說」（又稱底本假說），認為摩西五經的風格至少有四種，分別來自四個以上的作者、甚至四個作者群的手筆。他以五經中稱呼「神」的方式作主要區 分方式。裡面有的地方稱「上帝」（God/ Elohim），有的說「耶和華」（Jehovah/YHWH），有的說「耶和華神」（God Jehovah），有的說「耶和華你們的神」（The Lord your God），有的是「至高神」（El）。他認為這些稱謂的差異反應了不同作者的手筆。

這個理論在舊派、新派之間發展、爭論了已有一兩百年。

然而以色列學者之前研究成果的新穎之處在於它反倒告訴我們「神」這個字的同義字串是無法幫助我們區分作者的風格的。帶頭的研究員說：

Some of the (synonyms) that do the heavy lifting on the Pentateuch had been noted before by scholars, but the most famous synset – names of God – actually didn’t help at all."

他們以2本著舊約聖經中的《耶利米書》和《以西結書》進行測試，因為傳統上學者一致認定這兩卷書是兩個不同人寫的（以西結、耶利米）。當他們把兩卷書字句段落全部打散隨機編排時混成一大卷書時，電腦演算法能夠以 99% 準確率分辨個別段落是屬於哪一份書卷及作者。

原文：To test out the algorithm, the researchers used it to analyze two well-known books of the Bible, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who scholars agree had two different authors. They cut the text up and mixed them together at random. The algorithm managed to separate the two with near 99 percent accuracy, demonstrating that the method worked.

傳統上，我們是用一些特定的詞彙出現的頻率來分解聖經。這個新的演算法則利用某些同義字的代換原則，將這些段落中的字彙分別歸類、並核對出數百個同義詞集（synsets），再利用詞彙間的微妙變化來辨識作者的寫作習慣。例如，我可能表達 “distinguish” 這個字時，我愛用「辨識」、「辨認」、「區別」這些同義詞。但另一個人習慣用「辨別」、「區分」、「分辨」、「分別」。那麼只要依據這一組關鍵字的線索，就可以鑑定 兩份匿名的書信，知道哪一份是我寫的，哪一份是他寫的。這些語言學家在建立電腦運算規則時，選定了 150 組最能區分風格的同義詞集合。

原文：University of Pennsylvania professor of linguistics Mark Liberman, who wasn’t connected with the research, noted the big innovation was the use of synsets rather than just the location of words or their frequencies. "The key to making such methods work is to hit on features (words or constructions or word-senses or whatever) that genuinely differentiate the authors," he said. "In their experiment on un-munging Jeremiah and Ezekiel, they found that word distributions did not work well; but synonym choice (as estimated in a clever way) did work."

電腦演算法雖無法辨別出誰是作者；但可得知《聖經》中的哪些段落是由不同作者撰寫的，也可確定以辨別出新作者從何處開始接手寫，電腦算式的可以直接從用字的差異來著手，而且而同時處理幾百組同義字串，降低了人為詮釋的主觀t成分，並建立了更有一致性的標準。

不過我們也要注意，它雖然聲稱以科學的方式計算，但仍然有其限制。因為理論上，我們若不能確定作者的人數以及身份，以及有多少人，真正的科學辨識只能建立「實驗組」和「對照組」兩組風格檔，例如「摩西」、「非摩西」。或是「祭司語言」、「非祭司語言」。而當我們真正開始想要定義超過兩種「風格檔」時，人為操作的主觀性就滲透進來了。

原文：That could make the algorithm useful for analyzing other historic texts. Because it uses criteria not subject to interpretation. Ignoring what the writer "meant," it can quickly zero in on what was actually written. It can also pick up more subtle changes in word use and distribution than a human can, since it can instantly check through hundreds of synonym sets.

Koppel stressed that the algorithm can’t say exactly how many authors the Bible has (or doesn’t have). But it can say where styles change. That alone can shed light on debates over authorship. But there is one big caveat: the researchers had to tell the algorithm how many stylistic "families" they wanted to split the text they analysed into. While asking for two gave a result that agreed generally with scholarly consensus, dividing the text into more than that seemed to stray from it.

這個算式的開發能幫助我們確認「聖經有風格差異」以及「聖經作者不只一人」，更大的價值則是幫助我們確認風格差異和轉換「發生在什麼地方」。古早有些基要人士認定 聖經全部都是上帝用祂自己傳達自己的文字給人類作者意志寫的，故不應該有風格差異（稱作「機械默示論」）。針對這群人，有好事者（我可沒說是我本人）幫這係咧新聞下了個副標： "God himself may have written the Bible, but His wife helped edit it" －如果你真的不願相信聖經是由多人寫作，那至少相信聖經有一個上帝本人以外的編輯者吧！

聖經存在著一個人們通力合作的痕跡，以致於體裁風格風格都千變萬化，是今日大部分學習聖經的人都能肯定。英文的 Bible 這個字，來自於希臘文 βίβλος ，意思是「眾多書」。與世界宗教典籍相比，聖經是獨特的。

可蘭經出自穆罕默德。摩門經出自約瑟夫•史密斯，聖經卻不是由一個人編寫。66 卷的內容組成了我們認定的舊約和新約。通過1600年被40個作者所編寫，記載亞洲、非洲和歐洲2400公里間發生過的故事。這些作者的才智不同，地位有別。從尊貴的君王到卑微的販夫走卒，我們讀到帝王、統帥、宰相、省長、先知、祭司、學者，又有醫生、牧人、稅吏、農民、漁民等勞動者所記下的文字。寫作 的地點包含迦勒底王國的都城巴比倫，以色列的首都耶路撒冷、繁華的帝都羅馬、到地中海渺無人跡的拔摩海島等等；其中「有富麗的王宮、聖殿，也有簡陋的茅舍、監獄；有學校、教會，還有曠野和沙漠。這許多作者，有的寫於生氣勃勃國興時期，有的寫於威震天下 的國盛時期，有的寫於萎靡不振的國弱時期；也有的寫於國破家毀的亡國時期。論其文體，有莊嚴之歷 史，有雄偉之傳記，有秀麗之詩歌，有流暢之書信。」

鑒 於上述不同的因素和條件，所寫的書，按情理而言，勢必南轅北轍，矛盾百出。然而即使經過那麼漫長的時間，聖經卻傳達一致的基本訊息，把一個真理逐漸地展開：就是創造天地的神，為人提供可以親身來認識祂的途徑。聖經故事集中地講述神的拯救，圍繞一個要角，就是耶穌基督。聖經也包含許多的預言、僅僅舊約先知關於彌賽亞的來臨就給予了近300個具體的預言，包含「祂在那裡誕生」、「祂在那 裡長大」等等。當數百年後，這些預言一一地被耶穌基督成就。我們怎麼能說明這準確性和「統一性」？好像許多作者受支配於一位主編之下，完成一部文庫一般。

原來聖經之所以能歷經艱難險阻，而仍然屹立不動，「乃是人被聖靈感動，說出神的話來」（彼後 1：21）。靈感與啟示的能力是最主要的又是最根本的一個因素，以致於雖然記載的是很久以前的故事，卻永遠持續的給讀者感覺新鮮，到如今我們還能發現其中有神的奧秘和偉大的恩典。聖經之所以珍貴，它之所以深入人心，原因也在這個關鍵上。

駁唐崇榮「空氣說」（上）

這段七年前唐崇榮牧師香港佈道講座影片中的就是圈中俗稱的「老唐謬誤」。

承襲二十世紀改革宗護教學家 范泰爾（Cornelius Van Til） 的先驗護教學（pre-suppositional apologetics），唐牧師的邏輯思維往往能使慕道友或初信者得到一份信仰的 [假性] 確據。使他們認為，自己當掃除懷疑、相信耶穌，一切就像人需要吃飯喝水或用 1+1=2, 2+2=4 這樣的基礎數學原則運作日常生活一樣地理所當然。

然而，這一護教原則所運用的類比卻存在一種認識論的謬誤，會將具備科學頭腦和知識份子愈推愈遠。（個人常感覺，唐牧師雖是以佈道家、護教學家出名，但其實他更出眾的恩賜應該是對信徒培靈，而非打動懷疑論者。）只要是受過實證主義（positivism）和後現代思想薰陶的人都能看出，宗教信念（信耶穌才能得救）和物理及抽象原則的最大差別，在於「可證實性」（verifiability）和「可證偽性」（falsifiability）。

提出「可證實性」的，是包含邏輯實證論者維根斯坦（Ludwig Wittgenstein ）在內、活躍於上世紀20年代的維也納學派（Vienna Circle）。他們主張，一個基本命題的内容若和事實相符合，就是真的。然而，了解一個命題的意義，必須首先了解什麼才能使它為真，說明它是通過什麼被證實為真的。亦即，一個特定的命題，需要靠一個特定的經驗來證實。一個普遍的命題，則需要靠普遍的經驗證實。所以邏輯實證論又叫做經驗實證論。

但因為經驗永遠是特殊的、個人性的，使用經驗來證實理論，我們就永遠只能證明一個特殊的命題。例如張三因為拒絕呼吸窒息而死，只能證明「張三需要呼吸才能活」這一命題，而不能證明「人需要呼吸才能活」。若張三和李四都因為氧氣不足而死，還是只能證明「張三和李四需要呼吸才能活」這一命題，而不能證明「人需要呼吸才能活」。

實證論者提出的這個標準，等於為所謂的真理／真知識設定了高不可攀的門檻。普遍的真理因而不可得，所有的知識都是個人知識。以此，維根斯坦和海德格（Martin Heidegger）在上世紀聯手摧毀了傳統的西方形上學、那個過去人們以為具備普遍性邏輯的真理和知識。

在這個基礎上，科學哲學家波普（ Karl Popper ）又提出了「可證偽性」的說法。正是因為命題的表達一般為全稱命題， 而經驗的對象是個別的。所以， 他發現經驗如果用來證實理論，那麼它將是無法窮盡一般的理論的。比如，「所有烏鴉都是黑色的」這是一命題就不可能被證實。事實上﹐不論我們找來多少隻烏鴉都不能證實這命題。反而只要一隻灰烏鴉的出現就能證明所有的這個命題是錯誤的。所以，經驗的真正意義在為命題提供「可證偽性」。

「可證偽性」可以避免對錯誤理論的辯護和教條。因為這樣，所有的「全稱命題」都只能維持一種猜測和假說，它們不會被最終證實，但卻會被隨時證偽。而之所以我們能夠對這些全稱的命題放心地信任，就是因為它們不霸道，願意讓自己隨時被經驗推翻。例如堅持實證主義的人，一旦當與理論相悖的經驗出現，便會做出特例假設或特殊的限制以使得理論能滿足經驗。「可證偽性」為一切當前被宣告為真理的科學知識和定律提供了可靠性。

追隨波普的忠告，實證論者總結；雖然個別性的經驗無法為全稱命題提供「證實」，卻能夠以或然率（probability）的形式提升命題的主觀真值（subjective truth value）。用例子接續說明：當我們說「所有烏鴉都是黑色的」時，一隻黑色烏鴉或上百萬隻黑色烏鴉雖然都不足以證實它，有一百萬隻黑烏鴉當樣本卻比一隻黑烏鴉能使命題的成立來得穩固可靠得多。

就如同古今中外所有目擊者的見證，歷史和科學實驗經驗的積累卻能高度提升一個命題的可信度和實用參考價值。在實證基礎上的社會科學量化研究就是這樣來的。

「人需要呼吸空氣才能活」這個命題，在「可證實性」的角度都具備豐富「個人經驗」的支撐。由於不呼吸長達一分鐘使我有將近休克的瀕死經驗，為我相信「人要呼吸才能活」提供了個人經驗基礎。而如果我打算教導你這個真理，但你現在心中懷疑不願相信，我也可以捏著你的鼻子或將你沒入水中一分鐘、三分鐘來掃除你的懷疑。

另一方面，這個命題作為科學知識也同時滿足可證偽性的要求。例如假使某天在某克隆Ｙ行星上發現一種石頭會發出「肺光波」，每天只要照射二十分鐘就可以滿足人血液中對氧氣的要求，使人可以不需要氧氣裝置便能自由潛水或攀登高山，那麼「人需要呼吸空氣才能活」這個命題就被證偽，需要被「人需要呼吸空氣或照射肺光波才能活」的新假說給取代。

從這兩個角度而言，「信耶穌才能得救（上天堂、得永生）」此一命題完全不具備在認識論上和「空氣說」能夠等量齊觀的真值。

你無法證成它，也無法推翻它。

"Breath"- This time no more Wittgensteinian duck-rabbit, don’t be fooled [again

接續  回應：「唐崇榮：信耶穌才得救？這樣霸道！」（下）

Related articles

• Cornelius Van Til and Belief in God (lightingthedark.net)

[省思] Do we please God by merely confessing, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ”?

Confessing Your Righteousness Pleases God

Every time you confess, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ”, God the Father is pleased. When you confess that you are the righteousness of God in Christ, it reminds Him of what His Son has done for you to become righteous.

Also, by making you righteous, God is showing Himself righteous — “to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus”. (Romans 3:26)

Each time Jesus hears you confess, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ,” it brings much pleasure to His heart too, because you are laying hold of what He suffered and died to give you.

The Holy Spirit, who now indwells you to convict you of righteousness (John 16:10), also rejoices when you confess, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ.” He is pleased when you flow with Him.

The delight of the Godhead is not the only thing you gain when you declare, “I am the righteousness of God in Christ.” The Bible tells us that when you “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness… all these things shall be added to you”. (Matthew 6:33)

Whether it is food, clothing or other necessities in life, “all these things” will be added to you. They will not just be given to you, but added to you as your inheritance when you seek first His righteousness.

You don’t need to use your faith for every single need in life. You just need to use your faith for one thing — to believe that you are the righteousness of God in Christ, and it will cause all the blessings you seek to come after you and overtake you!

Thought For The Day
Use your faith to simply believe that you are the righteousness of God in Christ, and the blessings you seek will come after you and overtake you! (read original article)

The above teaching is given by Joseph Prince, the leading pastor of New Creation Church, arguably today’s largest megachurch in Singapore. But after watching several of his sermon clips online, I have found that his teaching problematic. Not in the sense of being necessarily apostatic as we may detect at many other megachurch pulpits, but it is indeed dangerously unbalanced in the sense that it can lead to a crippled version of faith — it is not apostolic.

First of all, to say that we are the righteousness of God in Christ presumes that we are in Christ. No doubt here, the emphasis and focus here is Christ, rather than you/we/I — but the impression that Pastor Prince gave us is an unduly shift from the Christocentric emphasis to an anthropocentric one: to say "I am/we are" and "we make God happy".

To retain our focus, what does it mean to be in Christ needs to be expounded.

Since the theme of “union in Christ” is so predominant in both Johannine and Pauline theology, it should be rightly said that we are the righteousness of God when and only when we are in Christ. God is pleased only when He sees the righteousness and obedience of His beloved Son, Jesus Christ (cf. Mat 3:17), not us- unworthy sinners apart from His saving grace (per John Calvin [1]).

---

[1] See DAVID GIBSON, “A Mirror for God and for Us: Christology and Exegesis in Calvin’s Doctrine of Election”, International Journal of Systematic Theology Volume 11 Number 4 October 2009, p.452: “In his discussion of ‘as the Father has loved me, so I have loved you’ (15:9), Calvin is adamant that the Father’s love for the Son ‘must be referred to us, because Christ declares that the Father loves him as the Head of the church – a thing extremely necessary for us’. Calvin uses two images to describe what this love of the Father means: Christ is ‘the pledge (pignus) of the divine love’, and ‘in him, as in a mirror (speculo), we may behold God’s fatherly love towards us all, since he is not loved separately, or for his own private advantage, but that he may unite us along with himself to the Father’.13 Calvin’s description of this love is sharply focused on the economy – it is a love of the Son, but it is a love with benefits for us.”

 

Moreover, the Bible does not teach us that we can please God by declaring our righteousness, imputed or whatsoever. On the contrary, the Bible does say that we please God by 1) Serving Christ with an attitude of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom 14;17-18), 2) Worshiping God acceptably with reverence and awe (Heb 12:28), 3) Doing good and sharing with others (Heb 13:16), and 4) Presenting ourselves as a living sacrifice (Rom 12:1).

These are always in my sermons. To skip these important in-between steps is not preaching the whole counsel of God.

Next, to say that you are in Christ presumes that we first deny ourselves and curse our old ego to dead and that  we follow His commandments (1 Jn 2:3-4; 5:2-3). It demands true repentance and radical transformation! And this is what God demands! God holds dear our sorrowful spirit (Ps. 51:17) by giving His Holy Spirit as our Counselor. Only in this way we are freed from our guilt and are enabled to do good things.

That is to say, we please God by participating in and joining this union with Christ (that entails sacrifice and renouncing our sinful past as well as broken humanity), not by the mere declaring or confessing of it (cf. Mat 7:21).

In this way, a theology of grace will not corrupt/collapse into a theology of complacency.