<$BlogRSDURL$>

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 AD

Confessing the Gospel of Christ

I liked this point from a post on Josh's blog.

When defending theology is defending something other than the Gospel, your theology sucks, and it needs to change. [Equating defending theology with defending the Gospel] only makes sense if you believe in salvation by faith, by "believing what you heard." If it's all about sovereign regeneration experiences and personal relationships with Jesus then yeah, what you believe, teach, and confess is largely irrelevant.
Josh is making a very sharp point here, and it came to mind again when reading 2 Corinthians 9:13 this morning (emphasis added):

By their approval of this service, they will glorify God because of your submission flowing from your confession of the gospel of Christ, and the generosity of your contribution for them and for all others...
It's striking how important one's "confession of the gospel of Christ" is to Paul. None of this nonsense we hear today about how someone "may sit a bit loose to the teachings of the Bible as historically understood, but he's a very holy man" (a sentiment often expressed concerning Rowan Williams). The question is not, "Are you a 'holy person'?" or even, "Are you regenerate?". The question is, "Do you believe and confess the gospel of Christ?"

This also fits with the approach taken by Jonathan Edwards (that well-known Lutheran!) in The Religious Affections. Edwards puts forward the view that if you do not believe the Bible's teachings, if you cannot say the Creed with sincerity, then you are not a professing Christian, period; so the question of whether your profession is genuine does not even arise, regardless of what experiences you claim to have had. This came as quite a jolt when I first read it, having been thoroughly infected with the prevailing view that, "Just because someone doesn't believe the Gospel doesn't mean you can write them off as a Christian."