>

Martyred for the Gospel

Martyred for the Gospel
The burning of Tharchbishop of Cant. D. Tho. Cranmer in the town dich at Oxford, with his hand first thrust into the fyre, wherwith he subscribed before. [Click on the picture to see Cranmer's last words.]

Daily Bible Verse

Showing posts with label New Perspective on Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Perspective on Paul. Show all posts

Monday, March 16, 2015

Richard Gaffin, Jr.: Promoter of Faith Plus Works



For anyone willing to investigate, you can listen to Dr. Richard Gaffin, Jr.'s lectures on union with Christ for free at Monergism.com. Dr. Gaffin is a proponent of the Federal Vision within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and openly denies that sanctification is the logical result of justification. Instead, Dr. Gaffin says that justification and sanctification are united together through the doctrine of union with Christ and that no one will be saved apart from both faith and good works.  Gaffin also openly states that salvation is corporate and that no one can be saved apart from church membership. You can hear him state his heretical views clearly at the end of lecture 1 here at the Monergism.com website:

The Mystery of Union with Christ

You can read articles about Gaffin's conflation of justification with sanctification at the Trinity Foundation site here:

Richard Gaffin's New Perspective on Paul

See also:  The Gaffin Question

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Richard Gaffin, Jr., the New Perspective on Paul, and Union with Christ

Dr. Richard Gaffin, Jr.

From this perceptive, the antithesis between law and gospel is not an end in itself.  It is not a theological ultimate.  Rather, that antithesis enters not by virtue of creation but as a consequence of sin, and the gospel functions for its overcoming. The gospel is to the end of removing an absolute law-gospel antithesis in the life of the believer [emphasis Cunha].  (38)  [Direct quote from Richard Gaffin's book, By Faith, Not By Sight].



Where there is smoke there is fire. Camden Bucey and Gaffin both admit that his work has been accused of the NPP view. And Gaffin admits that he was influenced by N. T. Wright and that he wrote his book in response to the New Perspective on Paul. Further, in this discussion, both Bucey and Gaffin downplay justification by faith and emphasize union with Christ. Justification by faith, according to Gaffin, is a redundancy. They both dance all around to explain away Gaffin's errors. But also in the talk, Gaffin mentions that John Murray was his instructor and Murray was a supporter of Norman Shepherd. What Gaffin does not mention in the discussion is that Norman Shepherd was his supervisor when he did his Ph. D. at Westminster Seminary.

I got this audio from the Reformed Forum, hosted by Camden Bucey.  Click here to listen.  To see the original webpage click here.

For an opposing opinion, you can click here to read Dr. Paul Elliott's criticism of Gaffin's views on Paul:  Richard Gaffin's New Perspective on Paul.  Also, there is a book by Stephen Cunha called, The Emperor Has No Clothes:  Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.'s Doctrine of Justification.  And the God's Hammer blog has articles on Gaffin's departure from confessional orthodoxy as well:  Richard Gaffin, Jr.:  Missing the Mark.   Note also that Gaffin is an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Beware the Bible Gateway Blog: N.T. Wright on “the Whole Sweep of Scripture” | Bible Gateway Blog

I use Biblegateway.com frequently as a source for an online Bible. The site has many versions to read and compare online. Unfortunately, those who support the site are pushing the ideas of N.T. Wright by way of introduction. Once they get you hooked on to one good idea of Wright's, like reading Scripture as both whole and part (synthetically and particularly), then they can introduce Wright's heresy of the New Perspective on Paul:

Dr Tom Wright, now Bishop of Durham, following the line of thought introduced by E P Sanders in his book Paul and Palestinian Judaism has in recent years given a new meaning to the concept of justification. The emphasis in justification, says Dr Wright, falls not on God's judicial pronouncement that a sinner by faith in Christ is deemed to be righteous. It is not, as our Reformed and Protestant catechisms have always taught, that Christ's righteousness is imputed to the sinner at the moment of his believing in Christ. Rather, justification is, according to Wright and others who hold to this 'New Perspective', to be viewed as 'covenant community status'. This is more ominous than it might sound. Wright can say:

'This declaration (i.e. justification) is in turn closely correlated with baptism, in which one becomes a member of that family in its historical life'.


But while baptism brings a person into the visible church it does not necessarily make him a child of God in a spiritual sense. It is, in our view, dangerous talk to suggest that baptism has power to place anyone, in a spiritual and eternally-saving way, into the covenant community of God. This is the highway to ritualism and formalism, surely.

Other 'New Perspective' writers of prominence include Professor James Dunn and Dr Alister McGrath, the former a Presbyterian and the latter an Anglican. A justified person, according to the teaching of the 'New Perspective' writers, is re-defined as one who is in the membership of God's covenant people. Put briefly it is this: The sinner gets into God's covenant by faith; but he stays in it by his good works. The term 'righteousness' in the thinking of Wright, means something different from what our catechisms have taught us to think. A sinner, he says, is righteous when he is in the membership of the covenant. He thinks that Luther's way of putting it was in some ways 'misleading.' [The New Perspective on Paul and Other Errors, by Maurice Roberts at The Banner of Truth site.



The NPP denies all five of the solas of the Protestant Reformation, including Sola Scriptura. Wright denies that we can read Paul and take Paul's statements about imputed righteousness at face value. Instead we have to have Wright's secret insights into the Jewish temple and the community of faith in order to properly understand Scripture. This flies in the face of the doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:15-17; 2 Timothy 2:15; 2 Peter 1:19-21) and the priesthood of believers (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6; 5:9-10; Exodus 19:6; Isaiah 61:6).

N.T. Wright's views are essentially a sell out to Anglo-Catholicism and liberalism, an attempt to undermine the Protestant Reformation and the final authority of Holy Scripture and to replace that authority with the authority of an episcopate church. Remember. You first heard it from me. Sounds vaguely analogous to the Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1888. The NPP is the inspiration for the Federal Vision heresiarchs in Presbyterian circles as well.

Any emphasis on "transformation" above "justification by faith alone" is to make salvation dependent on sanctification rather than an imputed righteousness. Justification is not infused in the heart. That would be the Papist/Roman Catholic/Anglo-Catholic view:

There are also very serious ecumenical implications attached to these new views. Alister McGrath, an expert in historical theology, and a 'New Perspective' writer, is of the opinion that the doctrine of justification should be given a wider meaning than the one found in the Bible. He would distinguish between the idea of justification as found in Paul and the doctrine of justification as taught in the church. He views justification in terms of man's relationship with God as a whole and not just as the one act by which God imputes Christ's righteousness to the believing sinner. He can say: 'In justification God offers to dwell within us as his temple.'

Such teaching however is foreign to the Reformers and is far different from Paul's teaching on justification and that of the New Testament as a whole. As Philip Eveson points out in regard to McGrath's teaching: 'McGrath's definition of justification using transformational language reminds us of Rome's position.' It is highly to be regretted that Dr McGrath's view of justification is a step towards the Roman Catholic teaching. We remind ourselves that Luther's position was that justification is the 'article of a standing or else a falling church.' To this position we must adhere with all our might.  (Ibid.).


Rather justification is a legal declaration of "not guilty" (Romans 4:4-9). Sanctification, on the other hand, is infused in the heart and is always short of perfect obedience (1 John 1:8-9; Psalm 143:2; 1 Kings 8:46; Romans 3:9-10, 23). All continue to sin in thought, word, and deed in this life. This is why the 1662 Book of Common Prayer has a general and corporate confession of sin with a Gospel absolution in the Morning and Evening Prayer services and in the Lord's Supper. Only at glorification at death do the elect become sinless. (See Articles 9-18 of the 39 Articles of Religion).

On guard!

Charlie

To read the post in question at the Biblegateway blog, click here: N.T. Wright on “the Whole Sweep of Scripture” | Bible Gateway Blog

From the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, Morning Prayer service:

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us; but if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 St. John i. 8, 9.
DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us, in sundry places, to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloak them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and mercy. And although we ought, at all times, humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul. Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure heart, and humble voice, unto the throne of the heavenly grace, saying after me;




A general Confession to be said of the whole Congregation after the Minister, all kneeling.
ALMIGHTY and most merciful Father; We have erred, and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep. We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts. We have offended against thy holy laws. We have left undone those things which we ought to have done; And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us. But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders. Spare thou them, O God, who confess their faults. Restore thou them that are penitent; According to thy promises declared unto mankind in Christ Jesu our Lord. And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake; That we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober life, To the glory of thy holy Name. Amen.




The Absolution, or Remission of sins, to be pronounced by the Priest alone, standing; the people still kneeling.
ALMIGHTY God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he may turn from his wickedness, and live; and hath given power, and commandment, to his Ministers, to declare and pronounce to his people, being penitent, the Absolution and Remission of their sins : He pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly repent, and unfeignedly believe his holy Gospel. Wherefore let us beseech him to grant us true repentance, and his Holy Spirit, that those things may please him, which we do at this present; and that the rest of our life hereafter may be pure, and holy; so that at the last we may come to his eternal joy; through Jesus Christ our Lord.




The people shall answer here, and at the end of all other prayers, Amen.


Sunday, May 16, 2010

Faith "in" Christ or the Faithfulness "of" Christ? Clement vs. The New Perspective on Paul

Click on the title to read an interesting rebuttal of the view that Galatians 3:22 and other passages are examples of the "subjective genitive" rather than the "objective gentive". Is Jesus Christ the object of our faith or is the "faithfulness of Christ" the proper translation? Clement, the church father, seems to have believed that Christ was the object of our faith.  See Clement vs. The New Perspective on Paul.

Support Reasonable Christian Ministries with your generous donation.