Reforming Soteriology in the Sixteenth Century - by Keith Mathison

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------

The author wants to explain how Catholics and Reformed believers differ on the doctrine of salvation. He doesn't manage to actually achieve this goal. This explanation is confusing and nearly impenetrable.

Although the author will quote a confessional several times, he will not quote or reference a single actual Scripture. We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.)

------------------------

The rediscovery of the biblical doctrine of salvation in the sixteenth century did not occur all at once. Initially, the early Reformers rediscovered the biblical meaning of the word justification. They realized that it meant “to declare righteous” rather than “to make righteous.” (Why is the distinction important? How does it come to bear on the the issue of salvation? Please explain.)

This led them to realize that the instrumental cause of justification was not baptism, but faith alone. (What is justification? We know what it is, but we ask because the author unjustifiably presumes we already possess a certain amount of knowledge to understand his presentation.)

In other words, the first thing the Reformers discovered was that the late medieval church had a distorted understanding of the solution to man’s great problem.

Over time, as they worked through the text of Scripture and compared its teaching with that of the Roman Catholic Church, they were able to discover that Rome had a distorted understanding of the solution because Rome had a distorted understanding of the problem. Rome’s soteriology, or doctrine of salvation (the solution), (Oh. The author finally tells us what the word "soteriology" means. But actually, "soteriology" is not the doctrine of salvation, it is the study of the doctrine of salvation.)

had developed in the way it had because of the way Rome understood the result of Adam’s sin (the problem). As we observed in the previous article, (No link... We searched around a bit and found it. )

the Roman Catholic Church taught that when Adam fell, he lost a superadded gift of justifying/sanctifying grace. In this view, Adam and his posterity needed to regain that grace in order to be re-elevated to the supernatural order of being. In their view, this is accomplished through the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church. (This doesn't make sense. What is "superadded?" The link we found has an explanation but it doesn't really help, and raises more questions. 

And, why is "justifying/sanctifying" put together when they don't mean the same thing? What is the "supernatural order of being?")

As they studied Scripture, the Reformers realized that the Roman Catholic doctrine of man’s fall did not do full justice to the text. (Which text?)

They came to understand that, in the fall, man did not merely lose a gift of superadded grace with little or no harm done to his nature. (?? What does this mean?)

Instead, as the Westminster Confession of Faith would later express, in the fall

they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body. (WCF 6.2) (Um, what does the Bible say?)

The theological term that would later come to describe this fallen state is total depravity. (The author will never mention this term again, let alone explain it.)

It is important to note again that whatever one believes to be the problem will dictate one’s understanding of the solution (soteriology). Pelagius’ doctrine of salvation is what it is because of his understanding of the problem. (Who is Pelagius? What was his understanding of the problem? Is the author going to explain anything?)

Rome’s doctrine of salvation is what it is because of its understanding of the problem. (How did the Roman Catholic church understand the problem, and how is this view problematic? Is the author going to explain anything?)

The salvation of a dead man and the salvation of a wounded man require completely different means. (Catholics believe man is wounded and not dead? What does this mean, and how does it come to bear on the subject? Is the author going to explain anything?)

The Reformed churches explained God’s solution to man’s problem in terms of the covenant that God made between Himself and man. The Westminster Confession of Faith offers one of the clearest statements of this biblical doctrine of salvation. What follows is taken largely from this confession. Readers are encouraged to find a copy containing the biblical proof texts and carefully work through all of them. (Well, at least the author recommends the Bible, even though he can't quote it. But he wants us to consider the Scriptures in context of the WCF, which seems like a rather cultish idea.)

As the Westminster Confession of Faith explains, before the fall, God made a covenant with Adam “wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience” (WCF 7.2). (Where in the Bible do we find this covenant?)

Significantly, and in contrast to the teaching of Rome, Adam had the power and ability to obey the law prior to the fall (WCF 4.2; 19.1). Furthermore, original righteousness was part of his nature, created as it was in the image of God (WCF 4.2; 6.2). It was not, as the Roman Catholic Church taught, a superadded gift added to his nature. (It would sure help to know where in the Bible we find these things...)

Because of man’s fall, he is no longer able to obey the law perfectly and thus no longer able to fulfill the terms of the first covenant.(Where does the Bible tell us this? Is the author going to explain anything?)

God, therefore,

was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein he freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life his Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe. (WCF 7.3)

The only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, was ordained from all eternity to be the one Mediator between God and man (WCF 8.1). He was ordained to save His people, those whom God, out of His free grace and love, chose in Christ “before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will” (WCF 3.5). (Let's quote the Scriptures which comprise this mishmash:

Ep. 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

Ro. 8:28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

Eph. 1:11 In Him we were also chosen as God’s own, having been predestined according to the plan of Him who works out everything by the counsel of His will...

The distinctive phrasing of the author's description of the WCF statement assumes the Calvinistic doctrines of Limited Atonement [He was ordained to save His people...] and Predestination [those whom God... chose in Christ]. Under these Calvinistic doctrines, God chose those who would be saved, and Jesus died only for those who were chosen. 

Unfortunately for Calvinists, neither idea is found in these Scriptures. Regarding the two Ephesians verses, Paul directly tells his readers who he was referring to: 

Ep. 1:12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

Those who were predestined were "we," [the earliest believers]. Present-day believers cannot be the first to hope in Christ. 

The Romans verse is also not about present-day believers. Paul wrote,

Ro. 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

Present-day believers did not receive the firstfuits of the Spirit, this could only happen with the earliest believers.)

 

The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience, and sacrifice of himself, which he, through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father; and purchased, not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto him. (WCF 8.5) (Let's quote:

Jn. 17:24 Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

The careful Bible student would ask, "who are the one who were given to Jesus?" Well, Jesus tells us a couple of verses later:

Jn. 17:26 I have made you known to them...

Jesus was praying for His disciples, not us.

The greatest mistake Calvinists make is to read themselves into Scriptures that are not talking about them.)

The purchased redemption is applied by Christ to all the elect throughout history (WCF 8.8).

Because fallen man is in a state of sin and death, and not merely wounded or sick, he is unable to do anything to receive the purchased redemption on his own. (Why is man unable to "receive the purchased redemption on his own?" What does this mean, and where do we find it in the Bible?)

God, therefore, effectually calls the elect out of death just as Christ called Lazarus out of the tomb. He regenerates them, (Born again...)

giving them spiritual life (Born again...)

and drawing them to Jesus Christ (WCF 10.1). (Let's quote the Scripture: 

Jn. 6:44 No-one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him...

The author regards this Scripture as evidence of Predestination, but it isn't. "Drawing" isn't related to salvation, because the Father draws everyone: 

Jn. 12:32 But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.

Unless the author is a universalist, it ought to be clear that being drawn and being saved are two different things.)

Those whom God calls, He freely justifies. (Ro. 8:30)

They are justified, or declared righteous, not on the basis of any works of their own, (Eph. 2:9)

but on the grounds of the imputed righteousness of Christ received by faith alone (WCF 11.1; 14.2). ("Imputed righteousness" is not found in the Bible. The assertion is made based on a bad reading found in the KJV: 

Romans 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

The word "imputed" is the Greek word logizomai, to take into account, to make account of. It is used in the context of of the engagement of a thinking process. It does not mean to have a quality accredited, or ascribed, as an attribute or condition.)

Those who are effectually called and justified are also sanctified throughout their life:

The dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord. (WCF 13.1; see also16.1–7)

Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, the Reformed churches also taught that

They, whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved. (WCF 17.1)

In our next article, we will look at the way in which some Reformed theologians in the Netherlands became dissatisfied with Reformed confessional theology and began to move that theology back in the direction of Rome. We will also look at the Reformed church’s response at the Synod of Dordt.