Scripture teaches that faith alone is required for salvation. There are no acts or ceremonies which contribute to one’s regeneration. It is by faith alone (Eph. 2:8-10; Rom. 4:1-8; Gal. 2:15-16; 3:2-3). This reality does not negate the need for repentance (2 Cor. 5:15). Repentance and faith are opposite sides of the same coin. Scripture teaches that for one to exercise saving faith he must first repent of his sin (Luke 24:47; Rom. 2:4; 2 Cor. 7:10; Heb. 6:1; Acts 17:30-31; 20:21).

In Church History, there have been groups who have erred grievously regarding this doctrine. As the Church grew in the First Century it too faced this error. As Paul and Barnabas were making disciples among the Gentiles a group of Jews began teaching that those Gentile Christians had to be circumcised to be saved (Acts 15:1). Paul and Barnabas strongly disputed this claim. The dispute led to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The apostles and elders, along with the Jerusalem church, agreed that Gentiles (and Jews for that matter) were saved by faith alone (Acts 15:8-9). Circumcision does not contribute to salvation (Acts 15:10-11).

The Church has always had to battle syncretism[1], legalism[2], and antinomianism[3]. As time went on a sacramental and sacerdotal system developed. Sacramentalists believe that a sacrament is an act or object that conveys divine grace. Harper’s Bible Dictionary comments, “Some believe the sacraments are the only means of salvation and that they have a special force that guarantees forgiveness of sins. Others think they represent God’s grace, which can be received in many ways; they are traditionally practiced but not required for salvation.”^[4] In this present article I will focus on those who believe the sacraments are the only means of salvation. The Roman Catholic Church holds to seven sacraments: Baptism, the Eucharist (i.e. the Mass), Confirmation, Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick, Marriage, and Holy Orders. The Roman Catholic Church teaches, “The sacraments are efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us, the visible rites by which the sacraments are celebrated signify and make present the graces proper to each sacrament” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1131).[5] This is foreign to New Testament Christianity. The New Testament teaches, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:8–10). The works that we do as Christians are a result of the salvation that we have received by grace through faith.

The Orthodox Church also holds to seven sacraments: Baptism, Communion, Chrismation, Penance, Anointing of the sick, Marriage, and Holy Orders. The Orthodox Church teaches, “Not only do the Sacraments disclose and reveal God to us, but also they serve to make us receptive to God. All the Sacraments affect our personal relationship to God and one another. The Holy Spirit works through the Sacraments. He leads us to Christ who unites us with the Father. By participating in the Sacraments, we grow closer to God and receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit. This process of deification, or theosis, as it is known by Orthodoxy, takes place not in isolation from others, but within the context of a believing community” (Understanding the Sacraments of the Orthodox Church).[6] Once again this is foreign to New Testament Christianity.

Sacerdotalists believe that there must be a mediator between God and man. Yet, they do not mean Christ as the only mediator between God and man (cf. 1 Tim. 2:5-6). Sacerdotalists believe that a class of priests must exist and function between God and man. Sacerdotal comes from the Latin word sacer (“sacred”) + dot (“to make”).[7] So, it has the idea, “to make sacred.” Sacerdos or sacerdot came to refer to priests or things relating to priests.[8] Such groups believe that man on his own cannot approach God, even through Christ himself. The priesthood must mediate for him. Fred Zaspel writes, “The greatest defect in the sacerdotal conception of salvation, best represented by the Church of Rome, is that it places sinners in the hands of men rather than a merciful God. Instead of being directed to God, we are ‘referred to an institution.’ According to the sacerdotal scheme, God desires the salvation of all men and has made adequate provision for the salvation of all via the church and its sacraments; but the actual distribution of grace is performed at the hands of the church, and apart from the church there can be no salvation at all.”^[9] This is contrary to the teaching of the N.T.

The Old Covenant required a Levitical Priesthood to mediate between God and Israel. Under the New Covenant Christ alone is the mediator between God and man. Paul writes, “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time” (1 Tim. 2:5–6). Jesus is our High Priest (Heb. 7:26-8:13). Under the New Covenant every genuine believer is a priest before God (1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6). All true Christians can approach God through Jesus Christ (Heb. 4:16; 10:19-25). All genuine Christians can offer spiritual sacrifices to the Lord (Heb. 13:15; 12:28-29; Phil. 4:18). The New Covenant clearly describes all born-again believers as priests. Jesus is our High Priest, no one else (Heb. 4:14-5:10).

So, the Church in being faithful to the Scriptures holds fast to Sola Fide (i.e. salvation by faith alone). The Word of God is clear on this point. Paul highlights this when he describes Israel (those remaining in unbelief) as not obtaining salvation because they pursued it on the basis of works (Rom. 9:30-33; 11:6-10).  Abraham was not justified by works (Rom. 4:1-25). No one is justified by works (Gal. 3:10-14). Salvation has always been by faith alone.

---

[1] Syncretism refers to the mixing of orthodox (sound doctrine and accompanied biblical practices) and heterodox (false doctrine and accompanied unbiblical practices).

[2] Legalism involves following the Mosaic Law or prescribed liturgical practices to earn favor (even salvation) with God.

[3] Antinomianism is the belief that believers are not required or expected by God to live in obedience to his Word. It is a hyper-grace position that is characterized by licentiousness.

^[4] Paul J. Achtemeier, Harper & Row and Society of Biblical Literature, Harper’s Bible Dictionary (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 891.

[5] https://www.gotquestions.org/sacramentalism.html

[6] https://www.goarch.org/-/the-sacraments

[7] Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).

[8] Ibid.

^[9] Fred G. Zaspel, The Theology of B. B. Warfield: A Systematic Summary (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 415–416.

I am going to talk with you about something that has lit up social media recently. A well-known pastor, Alistair Begg has brought a bit of controversy upon himself. Alistair has described the situation as a “tempest in a teacup.” I think it is bigger than that. As a part of a Truth for Life broadcast, Alistair shared that he had been contacted by a Truth for Life listener (that is his preaching ministry). The woman shared that her grandson[1] was planning to marry a transgender person. She asked Alistair what she should do. Alistair asked, “Does your grandson understand your belief in Jesus?”[2] The woman replied “Yes.” Alistair then asked, “Does your grandson understand that your belief in Jesus makes it such that you can’t countenance in any affirming way the choices that he has made in life?” Once more, she said, “yes.” Alistair said, “As long as he knows that, then I suggest that you do go to the ceremony. And I suggest that you buy them a gift.” “Oh,” she said, “what?” She was caught off guard. “I said, ‘Well, here’s the thing: your love for them may catch them off guard, but your absence will simply reinforce the fact that they said, ‘These people are what I always thought: judgmental, critical, unprepared to countenance anything.’” Begg added, referencing his advice, “We’re going to have to take that risk a lot more if we want to build bridges into the hearts and lives of those who don’t understand Jesus and don’t understand that he is a King.” This advice was broadcast in September of 2023.

There have been several conservative evangelicals who have responded to Alistair’s counsel.[3] American Family Radio, which has broadcast Alistair’s sermons (i.e. Truth for Life) for years, reached out to Alistair to ask him if he stands by the counsel he gave. Representatives of Alistair responded that he stands by his previous advice. So, American Family Radio has discontinued broadcasting Alistair’s sermons. American Family Association (AFA) vice president Ed Vitagliano commented, “This is the wrong advice from a pastor, and it is unbiblical.”[4] John MacArthur was in contact with Alistair Begg regarding the situation. John strongly disagreed with Alistair’s advice. As a result of the situation, there was mutual agreement that he withdraws as a speaker at the upcoming Shepherd’s Conference hosted by Grace Community Church.[5] On the other hand, Matthew Vines, a practicing homosexual recognizes Begg as non-affirming but applauds him for standing by his advice.[6] Christianity Today (which is already long down the road of theological compromise and liberalism) responded with a piece pointing out how the majority of white evangelicals do not affirm homosexuality or homosexual marriage.[7]

I would like to frame my response by saying, I believe Alistair is a brother in Christ. He has preached God’s Word faithfully for decades (he is 71 years old). I have had great respect for Alistair and have benefited from his ministry of expository preaching over the years. My family and I have attended services at Parkside Church on two occasions.

Here are some positive takeaways regarding Alistair’s advice:

• He believes homosexuality and transgenderism are sins and are not acceptable to God.
• He believes that homosexual marriage is not acceptable to God.
• He believes that this grandmother should make certain that her grandson knows that she is a Christian and cannot affirm his sinful choices.

Here are some negative takeaways from Alistair’s advice:

• What does it mean exactly to make sure the grandson knows, “you can’t countenance in any affirming way the choices” the grandson has made in life? According to Alistair the grandmother could attend and bring a gift to the event but still not be affirming in any way.
  • Do you remember the old days at weddings when Pastors would ask, “Does anyone here today have any reason why these two should not be joined together?” I must say, brothers and sisters, it is highly unlikely that such a question would be asked today, especially not at a gay or transgender wedding. There is no interest in disagreement, only affirmation. Alistair didn’t encourage attending the event with this intention in mind. When you attend a wedding (and bring a gift), you are attending as a witness and one who is celebrating the couple.
  • The Lord created the covenant union of marriage, a union of one man and one woman who become one flesh (Gen. 2:18-25). The Lord Jesus reiterated this truth, “But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (Mark 10:6–9). Thus, homosexual marriage is an act of rebellion against the Creator God. Christians cannot celebrate such a thing. It is not a marriage in the eyes of God. It is a delusion. The covenant union of marriage between one man and one woman is a picture of the covenant union between Christ and the Church (Eph. 5:22-33). So, it is an invalid marriage and ultimately a mockery of Christ.
  • Doug Wilson points out that, as Alistair acknowledged, not attending a transgender wedding means something. It means you don’t countenance in any affirming way the choices being made. Attending a transgender wedding also means something. It means you don’t countenance in any affirming way the choices being made, except in this instance.[8] But, non-attendance doesn’t seem like the loving thing to do, right? Carl Trueman challenges that notion, “To consider a declined invitation necessarily a sign of hatred is to adopt the notion of ‘hate’ as a mere refusal to affirm. That is our secular age’s understanding, and not that of the Christian faith. A refusal to attend might also offend, but to make the giving of offense itself into a moral category is to replace moral categories of right and wrong with aesthetic categories of taste. The latter should always be subordinate to the former in the realm of ethical questions.”[9] We cannot allow the values and estimation of the unbelieving world determine our stance or response. The more apt question is, what does Scripture say? For Alistair, or anyone else, to make attendance at such an event the only way to show love in this instance is a false equivalence. In fact, by doing so, he has demonstrated that he has already surrendered to the terms of the unbelieving world, caving to their manipulative tactics.
• Attending with a gift is approval.
• Marriage is between a man and a woman. Homosexuality is offensive to God. Homosexual marriage is a rebellion and a delusion.
• Alistair’s advice is wrong. It is not based upon Scripture.

As disappointed as I was over the advice, I am more troubled by his follow-up sermon. During the evening service at Parkside Church (where Alistair is the Senior Pastor) on Sunday, January 28^th, Alistair defended his previous counsel in a sermon from Luke 15 entitled, “Compassion vs. Condemnation” (i.e. Parable of the Lost Sheep, the Parable of the Lost Coin and the Parable of the Prodigal Son). Begg said, “My response to one grandmother whom I have never met was not in any way a blanket recommendation to all Christians to attend LGBTQ weddings.”^[10] He went on to say, “In that conversation with that grandmother, I was concerned about the wellbeing of their relationship more than anything else — hence, my counsel… Don’t misunderstand that in any way at all. If I was on the receiving end of another question about another situation from another person and another time, I may answer absolutely differently. But in that case, I answered in that way, and I would not answer in any other way no matter what anybody says on the Internet as of the last 10 days.” Begg went on to say, “’I’ve lived here for 40 years,’ said Begg, who was born in Scotland, ‘and those who know me best know that when we talk theology, when we talk stuff, I’ve always said [that] I am a little bit out of sync with the American evangelical world. [That’s] for this reason: that I am the product of British evangelicalism, represented by John Stott, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Eric Alexander, Sinclair Ferguson and Derek Prime. I am a product of that. I have never been a product of American fundamentalism. I come from a world in which it is possible for people to actually grasp the fact that there are nuances in things. Everything is not so categorically clear that if you put one foot out of this box, you’ve got to be removed from the box forever.’”^[11]

So, Alistair has tripled down on his advice. He acknowledged that not all the Pastors at Parkside agree with him. I have a number of issues with Alistair’s sermon and comments.

Here are some negative takeaways:

• The title of Alistair’s message, delivered in defense of his previous advice and to answer his critics, was, “Compassion vs. Condemnation.” So, for one to disagree with Alistair, who views himself as the compassionate one, is to be condemning. Okay. We are off to a good start.
• Begg likens modern Christians who disagree with him to the Pharisees (he emphasizes them as separatists) and the prodigal son’s bitter older brother. He says they have not experienced grace and forgiveness. Wow. This is an ad hominem attack. People can disagree with your advice or stance without being a Pharisee or the bitter older brother. Alistair’s critique of the Pharisees’ separatism is used for effect. He is indicating that those who are unwilling to agree with his counsel are in effect, graceless separatists. Is Alistair saying that those who have experienced grace and forgiveness would be willing to forgive those involved in unrepentant sin? What about the Lord, whom the father in the prodigal son story represents, does he forgive those involved in unrepentant sin? Alistair knows the Lord does not forgive those who are involved in unrepentant sin. In fact, Scripture teaches us that those involved in unrepentant homosexuality will be damned for all eternity (1 Cor. 6:9-10; cf. Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5). So, how exactly does the prodigal son story justify Alistair’s takeaways? It doesn’t square with Scripture.
  • So, those who disagree with Alistair are like the Pharisees and the bitter older brother who have not experienced grace and forgiveness. Why? Well, according to Alistair because they disagree with him. This is Bulverism (more on this later). He does not show why American Christians who disagree with him have not experienced grace and forgiveness. He just says they haven’t because they disagree with him.
• Alistair used the prodigal son story to justify himself and in doing so mishandled the biblical text. If he equates the American Christians who disagreed with him with the bitter older brother, who is the prodigal? Certainly not the grandson who is involved in homosexuality and planning to marry a transgender person. The father in the story (who represents the Lord) didn’t go play in the pig slop with the prodigal son. The prodigal son had to return home in repentance. The sin of the older brother was that he was unwilling to forgive and celebrate the return of his repentant brother. This biblical account cannot be used to justify what Alistair intends here. The obvious point of the text is the Lord is willing to receive back and forgive those who repent of their sin.
• Alistair lamented the fact that his past faithfulness and stances on homosexuality didn’t seem to matter. Most are not discounting these things. Christians have a problem, on biblical grounds, with your advice to the grandma. You can be right about a lot of things, or even most things, and still be wrong at times.
• Finally, Alistair described himself as the product of British evangelicalism (John Stott, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Eric Alexander, Sinclair Ferguson, Derek Prime). Begg went on to say, “I am a product of that. I have never been a product of American fundamentalism. I come from a world in which it is possible for people to actually grasp the fact that there are nuances in things. Everything is not so categorically clear that if you put one foot out of this box, you’ve got to be removed from the box forever.” Alistair once again employs a logical fallacy known as Bulverism (“You think this because you are a man… a woman… an American… a Brit, etc…”). In this case, you disagree with me because you are an American fundamentalist, which he is painting as a negative. C.S. Lewis, the one who coined the term Bulverism, wrote, “You must show that a man is wrong before you start explaining why he is wrong. The modern method is to assume without discussion that he is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he came to be so silly.”
  • So, American fundamentalists can’t grasp the fact that there are nuances in things. Why? Well, according to Alistair because they are Americans and fundamentalists. Once again, this is Bulverism. He does not show why American Christians (who are not all fundamentalists, by the way) who disagree with him can’t grasp theological nuance. He just says they can’t because they are Americans and Fundamentalists.
• Alistair is a little too full of himself and British evangelicalism, as opposed to American Fundamentalism. We poor ignoramuses can’t possibly handle the superior wisdom of a British Evangelical. Let me say this slowly, so even American Christians can understand, that to disagree with him in this situation means we just don’t get it. Wrong. We disagree. We don’t believe your counsel is biblical and we certainly don’t agree with your application of the biblical passage. Christians, not just American ones and not just fundamentalists, disagree with you, Alistair.
  • Anne Kennedy, an Anglican pastor’s wife, writes, “Toward the end of the sermon, Begg said that he isn’t really part of this current brand of American Evangelicalism. He is of the British, John Stott variety which is more nuanced, which doesn’t get into these storms in teacups. And yet, only a moment before, he said he had been preaching in that congregation for forty years. Forty years is a biblical generation. My continued faith is one of the fruits of his faithfulness—a faithfulness that shaped the very thing now he admits he doesn’t understand. How is this so? Can Begg be a victim of American binary thinking? He has spoken at all the conferences, sat on all the stages, had his sermons listened to by everyone. And yet now, all those whom he has raised up don’t understand the difference between condemnation and compassion? I don’t believe it. I think that this wonderful, faithful preacher has made a grave error and then, when in the face of an outpouring of grief, has tried to defend his position with a misuse of Scripture—something Jesus would never approve. I hope you will join me in praying that the Holy Spirit will convict his heart, will enlighten his mind, and put better and more loving words on his tongue.”[12]
• Alistair said that he repents daily but he does not need to repent of this [advice]. This is an important reminder for us. James 3:1-2 says, “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.” Owen Strachan comments, “Begg is prone to stumble as we are. We know that Begg—like all our exemplars and heroes—is just a man. But sometimes we put men on pedestals. That’s not right, and honestly, it’s not fair to them. They stumble in many ways just as we do (James 3:2). We have to remember this when we grieve a public leader’s words as many are in this case. Begg’s error does not set him apart from the rest of us. He is called to a daily walk of confession, repentance, humility, and growth like every other believer.”[13]
  • When all is said and done, Alistair has portrayed his critics as:
    • Pharisees – who are unregenerate separatists
    • The prodigal son’s bitter older brother – who represents the unregenerate Israelites
    • American Fundamentalists – who are separatists, like the unregenerate Pharisees
    • American Evangelicals – who are unable to grasp theological nuance
  • When all is said and done, Alistair has:
    • Given poor advice to a grandmother based not upon Scripture but upon misguided sentimentality. The ones involved in unrepentant immorality will not think you are judgmental.
    • Misrepresented the biblical account of the prodigal son
    • Slandered brothers and sisters in Christ, especially American ones
  • This was all done for the purpose of justifying his initial advice.

So, what should we do in light of these matters?

• Pray for Alistair Begg. Pray that God would grant Alistair repentance and humility to acknowledge his error – in his advice and his sermon.
• Pray for Parkside Church. Pray for God’s wisdom and guidance for them. Pray that the Pastors of Parkside would have wisdom in how they respond to this situation.
• Pray for all Christians, and local churches everywhere. Pray that God will give us wisdom and discernment, helping us to hold fast to the Word in all circumstances.
• I will leave you with the following astute assessment by Carl Trueman (born in Dudley, England, by the way), “In short, attending a gay wedding involves remaining silent when one should speak. It involves a concession on bodily sex that undermines any attempt to hold fast to the importance of the biological distinction between men and women. And it involves approving of a ceremony that makes a mockery of a central New Testament teaching and of Christ himself. That’s a very high price tag for avoiding hurting someone’s feelings. And if Christians still think it worth paying, the future of the Church is bleak indeed.”[14]

---

[1] Alistair described the individual as a grandson during the radio show, but during his sermon referred to the individual as a granddaughter.

[2] https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/alistair-begg-sparks-controversy-for-encouraging-grandma-to-attend-transgender-wedding.html

[3] Pastors Doug Wilson, Colin Smothers, Grant Castleberry, Professors James Wood, Owen Strachan, Carl Trueman, and Apologist James White have all written responses to Begg’s broadcasted advice.

[4] https://afn.net/church/2024/01/23/radio-ministry-awaits-explanation-from-begg-re-advice-to-a-grandmother/

[5] https://religionnews.com/2024/01/31/radio-preacher-alistair-begg-wont-back-down-from-advice-to-attend-lgbtq-wedding/

[6] https://twitter.com/VinesMatthew/status/1750980152480215452

[7] https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2024/january/alistair-begg-lgbtq-gay-wedding-advice-radio-sermon-truth.html

[8] https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/alistair-beggs-off.html

[9] https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/01/can-christians-attend-gay-weddings

[10] https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/alistair-begg-addresses-his-transgender-wedding-critics-during-sunday-evening-sermon.html

[11] https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/alistair-begg-addresses-his-transgender-wedding-critics-during-sunday-evening-sermon.html

[12] https://annekennedy.substack.com/p/alistair-begg-and-the-loving-thing

[13] https://owenstrachan.substack.com/p/unrighteous-wedding-invitations-a

[14] https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/01/can-christians-attend-gay-weddings

We have entered a new year, the year of our Lord 2024. It is another opportunity for us to bring glory to Christ (1 Cor. 10:31). It is another opportunity for us to grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ (2 Pet. 3:18). It is another opportunity for us to store up the Word of God in our hearts (Ps. 119:11). It is another opportunity for us to make disciples (Matt. 28:19-20; Col. 1:28). Brothers and sisters, let us testify of the excellencies of our God who has redeemed us (1 Pet. 1:9b). As we face another year let us do so with the mindset that each day is another opportunity for us to serve and honor our Lord Jesus Christ.

As we enter a new year we also face temptations, attacks, and pitfalls. Brothers and sisters, I am about to talk about two subjects rumored to be things you should never discuss, religion and politics. G.K. Chesterton is quoted as saying, “I never discuss anything else except politics and religion. There is nothing else to discuss.” It is an election year. Presidential debates and primaries have already been occurring. We are witnessing, for the first time in U.S. history, a presidential candidate being investigated and prosecuted by the administration of his chief political rival. Americans are divided over what they think about this reality. Some think it is just. Others think it is a miscarriage of justice, an abuse of power. The nation appears to be at a tipping point. People are angry and tense. People are afraid. The world (media, education, etc.) is fanning the flames of fear and animosity.

As Christians, we live in the world but we are not to live like it (John 17:15-16). So, we must conduct ourselves chiefly as Christians, not Republicans, Democrats, or Libertarians. Why is this? Brothers and sisters, our identity is in Christ (Rom. 6:1-14; 8:1; 1 Cor. 1:30-31; Eph. 1:3-4). This is who we are. We are Christians. The doctrine of Christ should define us (Matt. 28:19-20; 1 John 2:6; 5:1-5; Col. 2:6). Other philosophies and causes are competing for our attention and allegiance. None of them should be the rudder that steers our lives. This highlights one of our problems. As sinners, we are too frequently drawn to philosophies and causes that seem to run parallel to our Christian commitments, but can be competitors for our allegiance. In the end, before we realize it, we end up championing causes that are detached from our commitment to Christ. This does not mean we should have no convictions regarding politics. We should. Our political convictions and actions should be informed by Scripture, by the doctrine of Christ. Scripture is sufficient and authoritative in all matters, including politics.

The enemy of our souls, Satan, is a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44c). He specializes in deception and falsehood. The demon Screwtape taught, “Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping [the believer] from the Church… It is jargon, not reason, you must rely on.”[1] Carl Trueman writes the following about our day, “The modern self is not simply one that sees inner feelings as authoritative; the modern self also largely rejects the idea that human nature has any intrinsic moral structure or significance… The idea that merely being a human carries an intrinsic morality and moral purpose is seen as a fiction, and often regarded as one confected in order to justify the exploitation of one group by another.”^[2] The enemy seeks to divide (2 Cor. 2:11; Eph. 4:26-27; cf. Rom. 12:17-21; Eph. 4:31-32). He hates God, the redeemed, and mankind in general. The Lord Jesus described Satan as a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44b). The enemy divides people through anger, fear, and hatred. He divides people via politics. He divides people via Cultural Marxism (i.e. Critical Theory). Al Mohler observes the following about the founder of Marxism, “Karl Marx declared that the modern age would sweep all conventional morality and political structures aside in a complete transformation of values. In his memorable words, ‘All that is solid melts into air.’ We are in the age of the advanced meltdown of those values. What Marx promised is now happening before our eyes.”^[3] Trueman details Marx’s thoughts on religion here, “Marx regards religion as a human creation with no transcendent status and no necessarily abiding significance… Religion is a sign of intellectual weakness in its adherents and a means of social oppression for its proponents.”^[4] The intellectual elites, cultural power brokers, and the media have heralded the message of Cultural Marxism. It is the belief that in every situation there is an oppressor and a person who is oppressed. It is a worldview of victimhood. Unsurprisingly, according to the power brokers of Western Civilization, the group that is oppressing others happens to be conservative and Christian. Why are they considered oppressors? Conservative Christians hold to the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. As a result, they hold to a biblically defined morality. So, Christians who call out sin and do not approve of it are labeled as hateful and oppressive. This should not surprise us when we consider Marx’s thoughts and goals, the eradication of religion.

How should conservative Christians respond to these accusations? First, we must evaluate whether or not these accusations are true. The question is not about feelings or perceptions, it is about truth. What do the Scriptures say? Here is something else to consider, is there an agenda at work? The enemy of our souls and the world system under his sway have a strong interest in silencing and neutralizing conservative Christians. They want Christians to keep out of government, schools, and the political process, unless those professing Christians are willing to support a progressive, liberal trajectory. Beware when popular, influential Christians declare that you should not be so politically or civically minded. Curiously, the same popular, influential Christians happen to be very politically and civically minded themselves. Some of those same people have encouraged Christians to vote for candidates whose goals are the expansion of abortion and the LGBTQ+ agenda (including Drag Queen Story Hour at Public Schools and Libraries, Pride Parades, and “Gender Transition”). What we have found is these popular, influential Christians sound like advocates for the Political Left. According to them, political and civic engagement is fine as long as you support the platform of the Political Left. This is their message. Once again, the question we must answer is, what is true? What does the Bible have to say about these things? By what standard are these things acceptable for Christians? By whose authority are they acceptable for Christians?

As Christians, we know that political candidates are vying for our vote. They have advisors and public relations experts guiding them in how to appeal to voters. So, how do you know what the candidates believe? How will they govern? It is important to research these things. These are critical questions to answer. Frequently you can learn the answers to these questions by learning which organizations are supporting the particular candidates. If Planned Parenthood and LGBTQ+ organizations are supporting a particular candidate, you can be assured that those organizations believe the candidate will support their causes. Christians who claim that Christ is Lord and believe the Bible is the authority in all matters should find it impossible to vote for candidates who support unfettered abortion and the LGBTQ+ agenda. Do we think the Bible informs how we function outside of the church building? If we function as though the Bible is optional outside of the church building, we will also function as though the Bible is optional inside of the church building. G.K. Chesterton challenges us here, “We cannot be vague about what we believe in, what we are willing to fight for, and to die for.”[5] He goes on to write, “God Himself will not help us ignore evil, but only to defy and to defeat it.”[6]

Christians making decisions as though God’s revelation in Scripture is merely advice rather than authoritative is not merely inconsistent, it is greatly troubling. It sounds strikingly similar to the words of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 7:24-27, “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it” (Matt. 7:24–27). Scripture defines for us how we should think, speak, and live as followers of Christ. These are not standards that should be abandoned. Once again, Chesterton is helpful here. He wrote, “There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, ‘I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.’ To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: ‘If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.’”[7] Reform or change for the sake of change is unwise. The question of “why?” must be answered first. By whose authority are we doing things? Christ is the authority in all matters. By what standard are we judging things? Scripture is the standard in all matters. In the case of Scripture, we must first know what it says. May God help us to honor Christ in our convictions and conduct.

---

[1] C. S. Lewis, The C.S. Lewis Signature Classics. Mere Christianity, the Screwtape Letters, Miracles, the Great Divorce, the Problem of Pain, a Grief Observed, the Abolition of Man, the Four Loves, (San Francisco, CA: HarperOne, 2017) 185, 211.

^[2] Carl R. Trueman, Strange New World: How Thinkers and Activists Redefined Identity and Sparked the Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022), 51.

^[3] R. Albert Mohler Jr., The Gathering Storm, n.d.

^[4] Carl R. Trueman, Strange New World: How Thinkers and Activists Redefined Identity and Sparked the Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022), 58.

[5] Dale Ahlquist, Common Sense 101: Lessons from G.K. Chesterton. (United States: Ignatius Press, 2006), 22.

[6] Ibd., 167.

[7] Gilbert Keith Chesterton, The Thing. (United Kingdom: Sheed & Ward, 1929), out of print.

Traditions are a part of all of our lives. Merriam-Webster defines tradition as, “an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or a social custom).”^[1] Families have traditions. Nations have traditions. Churches have traditions. Traditions are a part of who we are. They give us an identity, a community to belong to, a heritage to enjoy. Full disclosure, some traditions are not good. But, some traditions are good. Scripture provides us with the standard to evaluate these things.

What is the value of good traditions? In the Christmas season, we sing Christmas Carols. For our present discussion, I will focus on those that are explicitly focused on Christ. The words of these songs recount the prophecies regarding the coming of Christ and their fulfillment according to God’s divine timetable. The songs remind us. They teach us. They shape us. God’s people, young and old, are shaped by the songs we sing… for good or for ill. The tradition of gathering with God’s people in local churches to sing Christmas Carols detailing Christ’s first advent continues to shape our identity. Scripture teaches that Christian fathers are to bring their “children up in the discipline and instruction (Greek paideia) of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). Paideia has the idea of training your children. It involves bringing them up in a specific culture (i.e. enculturation) that in this case is marked or defined by Christ and his Word. Traditions are a part of training and culture. Doctrinally sound, doctrinally rich songs detailing Christ’s first advent are good traditions that should be maintained from generation to generation.

In my sermon this past Sunday I mentioned one of my family’s traditions. We first learned of this tradition from John and Noel Piper.[2] The best instructions we have found for a Jesse Tree are found at the blog named, Life In Skunk Hollow. [3] It has a unique name but it details the very helpful pattern we followed. We have had a “Jesse Tree” in our home each Christmas season for about ten years. In the beginning, we went outside with our kids and found a branch (without leaves) that would hold 25 small decorations and sit inside a vase. In recent years, we have used a small (bare) artificial tree that has a base on it. Why is it called a “Jesse Tree”? It is based upon Isaiah 11:1, “There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.” So, what is a Jesse Tree? Beginning on December 1^st we select reading number one, which is from Genesis chapter one. One of our children reads the passage and then hangs the appropriate decoration (a handmade one made of felt) on the Jesse Tree. The decoration corresponding to the Genesis chapter one reading is the planet Earth. After hanging that night’s decoration on the tree, we sing a Christmas Carol from a hymnbook together as a family. We have a different Scripture reading and decoration each night from December 1^st – 25^th. The readings trace the timeline of Scripture – Creation, Fall, and Redemption. We take turns with each child taking a different night’s reading, placing the decoration, and selecting a song. Afterward, we pray as a family. If your children are younger there will have to be adjustments made based upon their unique abilities. In our household, the Jesse Tree is a Christmas tradition. It is a good tradition. By the grace of God, it is shaping our whole family. It reminds us and teaches us that Christmas is about Jesus. It reminds and teaches us that, “as for me and my house we shall serve the Lord” (Josh. 24:15b).

Furthermore, we are doing Jesse Tree together as a family. Family relationships and family time are important. In our current culture, family relationships tend to be more distant. Family time tends to be rare or neglected. This makes it virtually impossible for fathers and mothers to make disciples of their children or grandchildren. Brothers and sisters, they are learning from us what is important. Relationships require time and effort. Don’t put off strengthening family ties. Do something about it today. Keep up the good traditions (from God’s perspective – according to Scripture). Get rid of traditions that aren’t good. Add some new ones as soon as you are able. Remember, traditions shape us. Deuteronomy 6 teaches us this very principle.

May Christ be honored in your heart and your home this Christmas.

---

^[1] Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 1996).

[2] https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/christmas-at-the-piper-home

[3] https://lifeinskunkhollow.blogspot.com/2010/09/jesse-tree-ornaments-finished.html

The concept of Christian Enculturation is at the root of Christian Paideia. Paideia is the transliteration of a Greek word (παιδεία). It is a term that is becoming more and more familiar as the Christian Classical Education movement grows. BDAG defines the word as, “The act of providing guidance for responsible living, upbringing, training, instruction, chiefly as it is attained by discipline, correction.”[1] The noun form of the word is used six times in the N.T.[2] Another noun form that is used twice in the N.T. is paideutes (παιδευτής). Bill Mounce defines it as, “a preceptor, instructor, teacher, primarily of boys.”[3] The verbal form paideuo (παιδεύω) is used 13 times in the N.T.[4] Louw and Nida define it as follows, “to provide instruction, with the intent of forming proper habits of behavior.”

The concept and practice of paideia have been significant throughout history in Hebrew, Greek, Roman, and even early American thought. David Goodwin writes, “Paideia simply defined, represents the deeply seated affections, thinking, viewpoints, and virtues embedded in children at a young age, or, more simply, the rearing, molding, and education of a child.”[5] Paideia is the underlying culture and way of life. It involves the values, morality, and desires of the people. It could be described as the culture that shapes the way of life. It begins taking hold at a very young age. Historically, parents and the Christian church provided the paideia that shaped the children as they grew up. It is this emphasis on the formation of proper habits of behavior that I would like to focus on. Paideia in a Christian setting speaks of Christian enculturation.

Deuteronomy chapter six provides us with a clear example of how O.T. Israel was supposed to enculturate their children in the things of the LORD. The people, their children, and grandchildren were to fear the LORD, by obeying his commands (Deut. 6:1-2). If they obeyed then things would go well for them (Deut. 6:3). They were to love the LORD with their whole being (Deut. 6:4-5). God’s Word was supposed to be on their hearts (Deut. 6:6). In verses 7-9 and 20-25, the LORD details for them how they were to go about enculturating their children. They were to teach their children:

• when they sit in their house (7).
• when they walk by the way (7).
• when they lie down (7).
• when they rise (7).
• by the Word of God permeating their life (8).
• by the Word of God permeating their home (9).
• by answering their children’s questions with the Word, how he redeemed them; the covenant he made with them (20-23).
• by teaching them about the covenant obligations, and to live in obedience to them (24-25).

This way of life was to shape the hearts and minds of those growing up in a believing Israelite home. It provides us with a model for how it should occur today in Christian homes.

The book of Proverbs, especially chapters 1-9, gives us more examples of the concept of shaping hearts and minds (i.e. paideia). Proverbs 1:7 reads, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.” The wisdom and instruction mentioned here provide the paideia. It is what you want shaping your children, your church, and ultimately, your nation.

Let’s take a look at Proverbs 1:8-19 for another object lesson in paideia. Whose teaching is delivered (v. 8)? The father’s instruction and mother’s teaching. What is the value of the teaching (v. 9)? It is a graceful garland on the head. It is like pendants for the neck. What is the instruction (v. 10)? Don’t consent to the enticement to sin. The godly parents are setting forth the reward of living in a way that honors God. Then they portray what it is like to be enticed to ungodly living.

The lesson is very vivid. How does the tempter make the sin seem attractive here (vv. 11-14)? He sets forth the enticement of finding all the precious goods. He urges the hearer to fill his house with plunder. He promises that we will all have one purse. What is the hook? Wealth, lots of it. Together. Why does the tempter always make the sin seem so appealing? It wouldn’t be tempting if it wasn’t appealing. But, what is the reality (vv. 15-19)? What is the true cost of succumbing to such sin? The Scriptures say those who do such things are dumber than birds. They are sabotaging their own lives. So, what is the righteous path? Work for your living. Honor the Lord in your work and your pursuit of making a living. This is the godly way to live and think. Why are these lessons so important? They are real-life situations. Get-rich-quick schemes are tempting but they are not normally wise or godly.

Proverbs 2 provides us with more material. Once again, who is teaching here (v. 1)? The father is the teacher. What is the most important pursuit in life, according to verses 2-5? It is the pursuit of wisdom. It is inclining one’s heart toward understanding. More important than pursuing money, promotion, or fame? Yes. This has been an essential part of Christian Paideia. You learn and live not just to make money. You learn and live not just to have fun. Some people make a lot of money but they are not the type of people you want to be. Don’t be greedy (Eph. 5:3; Col. 3:5). There are people who have a lot of fun but they are not the type of people you want to be. Don’t be a fool (Eph. 5:4-6; Isa. 5:22; 56:12).

How many times do you find the words understand and understanding in Proverbs 2? Do you notice the words wisdom, insight, and knowledge? We read that true wisdom and insight will lead to the fear of the LORD. Wisdom will be found by seeking it (vv. 2-5). Who is the source of true wisdom (vv. 6-11)? The Lord is. Does he appear to have a limited supply? Why or why not? What does wisdom do for those who find it (vv. 12-19)? It delivers them from evil. What does it deliver you from? It delivers you from the way of evil, from men of perverted speech (vv. 12-15), and from the forbidden woman, an adulteress (vv. 16-19). Finally, wisdom will help you to walk in the way of the good, in the paths of the righteous (vv. 20-22). Why? Because wisdom helps you to resist sin and choose obedience to the LORD. 

In my next post, I will discuss the history of Christian Paideia in the West.          

---

[1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 748.

[2] Eph. 6:4; 2 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 12:5, 7, 8, 11

[3] William D. Mounce, Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 1230.

[4] Acts 7:22; 22:3; 1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:25; Titus 2:12; 1 Cor. 11:32; 2 Cor. 6:9; Heb. 12:6, 7, 10; Rev. 3:19; Luke 23:16, 22

[5] David Goodwin and Pete Hegseth, Battle for the American Mind: Uprooting a Century of Miseducation (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2022), 44.

It was less than 50 years ago (October 1978) that the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy was written. The authors met for the purpose of composing a clear statement on the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. This was in response to the increasing theological liberalism of the day. The enemy of our souls continually seeks to undermine the authority and sufficiency of God’s Word. It is under attack in our day as well. This may not surprise you. What is my point? Andy Stanley, Lead Pastor of Northpoint Church in Georgia, and others like him are seeking to normalize LGBTQ+ behavior and desire in evangelicalism. To do so, one must reject the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. The Word of God clearly teaches that all LGBTQ+ behavior and desire is sinful. So, how do you normalize sinful behavior and desire?

First, you take advantage of people’s poor grasp of theology. The shallow understanding of doctrine that many in the evangelical church possess makes them susceptible to false doctrine. This allows Andy (and others like him) to claim he believes in a biblical sexual ethic but that adhering to such an ethic is not realistic for everyone. As a result, Andy claims his theology is biblical (in his own estimation) but his practice is different because he handles such situations in a pastoral way. So, theology is one thing but pastoral response is another? We have a problem. The pastoral practice and response should be in accordance with the teaching and standard of Scripture. The very idea that the theological and the pastoral are in conflict with each other confirms that something is fundamentally wrong. Those who fall prey to Andy’s teaching are those who think repentance and obedience are optional in Christianity. They are not optional. Repentance and sanctification are not necessary for Andy’s brand of Christianity. This is cheap grace. It is an easy believism that is foreign to N.T. Christianity.

Andy doesn’t really hold to a biblical sexual ethic or an orthodox theology, though he claims he does. Why should he? Didn’t he declare that Christianity was not based upon Scripture anyway? Well, at least not based on the N.T. Scriptures, because Andy already “unhitched” the O.T. Scriptures from his “Christianity” at an earlier time. Andy confidently asserted that Christianity was based upon the resurrection alone, not the Bible. Wait… Isn’t the Bible our primary source for the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus Christ? Yes. It is. So, what are you left with as the authority for life and practice? You are left with Andy’s extra-biblical wisdom and principles. What is the standard of truth and morality? There is no fixed standard. When you reject the authority and sufficiency of Scripture you will end up in such a place.

Secondly, Andy is a clever communicator. He presents their approach to LGBTQ+ behavior and desire as being the most loving approach. Really, it is what Jesus would have done. Interesting. Was it realistic for the woman caught in adultery to stop living in sin (John 8:11)? What about the invalid that Jesus healed in John 5:1-17? Jesus commanded him, “Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you” (John 5:14). Was it realistic to require such a thing? The Scriptures require repentance in order to come to Christ by faith (Acts 20:21). Christ cannot be Savior without him also being Lord. Andy’s clever, winsome, approach is not in line with Scripture. So, it really cannot be more loving and pastoral because it lies to the hearer. It offers an unbiblical message and an unbiblical Christianity, which is no Christianity at all. Andy’s approach and rhetoric have added to the Scriptures and also taken away from them at the same time (Deut. 4:2; Rev. 22:18-19).

Thirdly, Andy presents himself as a winsome messenger, who really just wants to draw non-believers to faith. He is on record saying that he would rather offend believers than offend non-believers. This projects a heart for the lost but in reality, it is something less. Rather, it presumes it is always right or better to offend believers and it is always wrong or worse to offend non-believers. What does Scripture have to say about such an approach? Scripture says that the gospel is offensive to the unbeliever (1 Cor. 1:18-25; 2:1-16; 2 Cor. 2:14-17). Paul and his co-workers, “refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word” (2 Cor. 4:2b). Andy’s approach demonstrates a rejection of an orthodox biblical hamartiology and soteriology. He demonstrates his rejection of other doctrines of orthodoxy elsewhere in his other teaching. This is the post-modern version of the Jeffersonian Bible. Remove or reinterpret the portions of Scripture that are not palatable to your modern sensibilities. They have made themselves out to be more loving and merciful than God. This is blasphemy with a smile and a winsome tone. Joe Rigney’s article entitled, “The Enticing Sin of Empathy” is helpful here.[1] A second helpful resource is James Woods’ article, “How I Evolved On Tim Keller.”[2]

Compromise regarding biblical truth is always dangerous. May the Lord enable local church Pastors to hold fast to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. May he empower them to faithfully exposit the whole counsel of God to the saints, grounding them in sound doctrine and equipping them for ministry week after week. May God’s people recognize and reject doctrinal error. May they hold fast to the gospel and sound doctrine. Finally, may the Lord grant repentance to Andy (and others) who have forsaken the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, which leads to perversions of Christianity.

---

[1] https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-enticing-sin-of-empathy

[2] https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2022/05/how-i-evolved-on-tim-keller

As Christians, we believe the Word of God is the sole authority in all matters. Scripture is the sold source of God’s special revelation (2 Tim. 3:16-17; cf. Prov. 30:5; Ps. 12:6; 145:13). Tradition, emotion, and preference are not divine revelation. All things must be submitted to the Word of God. Francis Schaeffer observes, “The Reformers went back to the teaching of the Bible and the early church and removed the humanistic elements which had been added.”^[1]

The Word of God reveals God to us.

God has chosen to reveal himself to us through the Bible. He declares, “All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Tim. 3:16a). Here also, “men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:21b). All of Scripture has been communicated by God through the agency of man. Even though man is involved in the process of recording Scripture, it is still God’s message. He “carries” them along to write what he desires. The Bible is God’s message. He revealed it. Since Scripture is God’s message, we can trust what is contained in them. The reliability and authority of the Bible is based upon God’s person and character. The Lord cannot lie (Heb. 6:18; Titus 1:2). Whatever God says is true. Whatever God’s Word says is true.

The barometer of truth is the Bible. The standard is not what any man or tradition says is true of God. Any description of God that contradicts the Word is not true or accurate. The doctrine of Sola Scriptura upholds and defends this standard.

The Word of God reveals God’s standards to us.

Scripture teaches us who God is and what his standards are. The Lord loves righteousness (Ps. 33:5; 11:7; 37:28; 1 Tim. 6:11). He is holy in all of his ways (1 Sam. 2:2; 1 Pet. 1:15). But, how do we know what our Creator views as righteous? We can only know such things from the Bible. God has revealed to us what he considers righteous in his Word.

God desires people to live righteously. He hates sin (Ps. 5:4; Prov. 6:16-19; Ps. 11:5; Rev. 2:6). It is contrary to his nature (Isa. 6:3; Rev. 4:8). God’s law is his standard of righteousness. It is based upon his righteous character. It pleases the Lord when people do what his Word requires (Eph. 5:17; Matt. 7:21; John 14:15; Luke 14:26-27). God wants us to do what is righteous for righteous reasons. So, not only are our actions important but also our motivations. We know these things because God has revealed them to us in the Scriptures.

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura helped recover the belief that God’s Word is the sole authority in regards to what God’s standards are. It does not matter what any man says or any tradition upholds, if they violate or contradict Scripture. In this age, the Lord does not speak outside of Scripture.

The Word of God is used by God to save and sanctify.

Romans 10:17 says, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the Word of Christ.” God uses his Word to bring conviction of sin and repentance (Heb. 4:12-13; Jer. 23:29). He uses his Word to bring salvation to those who believe (1 Pet. 1:23-25; Rom. 1:16-17; cf. Rom. 10:17). It is necessary to hear, repent, and believe the gospel to be saved. If anyone says, “Well, I have always believed. I have always been a Christian.” This does not pass muster with Scripture. We are born dead in our trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1; Rom. 3:23). If anyone says, “When I was younger, (fill in the blank with the relevant person) told me I am a Christian.” It does not matter if someone told you that you are a Christian. It matters that you are actually are a Christian. You must be born again. Each person needs to repent of his or her sin, believe the gospel, and be born again through Jesus Christ’s finished work on the cross.

The Roman Catholic Church taught that the sacraments[2] are required for salvation. Pope Benedict XVI declared that Protestants cannot have legitimate churches because they have separated themselves from the Roman Church.[3] Pope Boniface VIII declared, via a papal bull, that, “The Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. . . . It is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”[4] Scripture teaches that salvation and remission of sins is found in Christ alone, which is received by grace alone through faith alone.

The Lord uses his Word to sanctify us and make us more like Christ (Rom. 8:28-29; Acts 20:32). Lou Priolo writes, “Sanctification is a work of God whereby the Holy Spirit conforms those whom he has regenerated into the image of Christ. But unlike justification (an act of God whereby he declares sinners justified who have trusted in Christ), sanctification requires our cooperation.”^[5] Lou goes on to say, “And since the Word of God is a necessary ingredient in this process, it stands to reason that the best way to work together with the Spirit is to spend time ‘day by day’ in the Book that he wrote to help us accomplish our goal.”^[6] Listen to Ephesians 5:8-10, “for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord.” God uses his Word to grow us in obedience and practical righteousness, i.e. righteous living and motivations.

The Roman Church teaches that the sacraments, administered by the Catholic Church, are necessary for sanctification. Sanctification in Catholicism also includes an indeterminate time in Purgatory, after death, prior to entering heaven. Does Scripture teach such things? The answer is no. The Bible teaches that God sanctifies us progressively, through his ordinary means: the Word (Acts 20:32), prayer (Eph. 6:18-19; Phil. 1:3-11), mutual ministry in a local church (Eph. 4:11-16), the testing of our faith (Jas. 1:2-4, 12; 2 Cor. 1:3-7), etc.. These are the means that the Holy Spirit uses to conform us to the image of Christ (cf. Rom. 8:29). What does the Bible say happens when a born-again believer dies? He or she is transported to heaven immediately (2 Cor. 5:8; cf. Luke 23:43). There is no place or time of purification between death and entrance into heaven.

The Conclusion of the Matter
The Protestant Reformation was birthed out of the realization that the Roman Catholic Church had elevated tradition and clericalism, which includes the papacy, above the Scriptures. Martin Luther and others found, in Scripture, that salvation is by faith alone through grace alone in Christ alone. The Reformers rejected the unbiblical teaching that salvation was through the sacraments – baptism and confirmation in the Roman Church, participating in the Roman mass, and receiving absolution of sins through confession to Roman priests, frequently accompanied by some form of prescribed penance. Luther, Calvin, and others found, in Scripture, that Christ alone is the head of the Church. This contradicts The Roman Catholic view of apostolic succession and the existence of the papacy.

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura helps to protect us from false teaching. It helps to ensure that we believe and teach that salvation is by faith alone, through grace alone, in Christ alone. God’s Word is the sole standard and authority for our faith and practice.

---

[1] Francis August Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live? The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture. (Old Tappan, NJ: Crossway Books, 1983), 87.

[2] The Roman Catholic sacraments are baptism and confirmation in the Catholic Church by an ordained Priest, participating in the Roman mass, and receiving absolution of sins through confession to Roman priests, frequently accompanied by some form of prescribed penance.

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jul/11/catholicism.religion

[4] Unam Sanctum, Papal Encyclicals Online, http://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

[5] Lou Priolo. Pleasing People: How Not to Be an Approval Junkie. (United States: P & R Pub., 2007), 151.

[6] Lou Priolo. Pleasing People: How Not to Be an Approval Junkie. (United States: P & R Pub., 2007), 152.