Check out my other Seven Minute Seminary on why the doctrine of the Trinity matters.
Here’s my latest contribution to the Seven Minute Seminary project at Seedbed.com. This one is on the pastoral importance of the doctrine of justification by faith. The video starts with the meaning of justification language in scripture before turning to a couple of ways that justification by faith is good news for people who struggle with experiences of inadequacy, shame, guilt, condemnation, and brokenness – sexual brokenness not least. Check it out below. And you may want to look at the small group discussion guide that Seedbed has produced to accompany the video.
I used to spend time wrestling with the different formulations proposed through Church history for how we should understand the nature of Christ’s Presence in Holy Communion. There was a time when I found it helpful to compare and contrast the competing concepts of Thomistic Transubstantiation, Lutheran Consubstantiation, and Calvinism’s Spiritual Presence. To some extent, I still think those sorts of formulations have their place, though I put less stock in them now. Instead, I’ve come to embrace the mystery of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This attitude is captured well by Charles Wesley in his hymn, “O the Depth of Love Divine”. He writes:
O the depth of love divine,
Who shall say how bread and wine
God into man conveys!
How the bread his flesh imparts,
How the wine transmits his blood,
Fills his faithful people’s hearts
With all the life of God!
How is Christ present in bread and wine? I don’t know. And at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is that Christ is present, really present. He said that the bread is his body and the wine is his blood. That’s all. He didn’t explain it. He didn’t fill in the details. And now, finally, that’s enough for me. If we are going to say something about Christ’s Eucharistic Presence, we should learn from Wesley that sometimes it’s better to sing a hymn than write a treatise.
There has been one particularly pleasant surprise on this journey of embracing in faith the Real Presence of Christ. I have found that I am more free to simply worship and adore him, and to receive that which he offers, namely himself, his own physical presence. This freedom to worship has resulted in the discovery that Christ’s gift of himself at the Table is not a matter of magic, not about saying the right words as if we could manipulate Christ to manifest his Presence. To the contrary, the gift of himself is an expression of Christ’s sovereign pleasure to minister to us physical creatures in just the way we need, with his own tangible, touchable, taste-able presence. And it is his joy to offer himself in this way – O the depth of love divine! And because it is his joy to make me the object of his self-giving love by filling my belly and quenching my thirst with his very life, I have found increasing joy when I go to the Lord’s table. Indeed, in embracing the mystery I have found joy like never before. Thanks be to God.
Yesterday, I pointed to the role of unbelief in Romans 11 as it relates to a person’s being cut off from the people of God. But that chapter is not the only place the language of unbelief shows up in a discussion of falling away. The book of Hebrews contains an important passage as well, and it’s not the one you might expect. Arguments from Hebrews that believers may fall away are often based on the so-called warning passage in 6:4-6. However, the presence of the language of unbelief in 3:12-19 is relevant as well:
“Take care, brothers, that none of you may have an evil, unbelieving (Gk. apistia) heart that turns away from the living God (3:12)…So we see that they [the Hebrews] were unable to enter [into rest] because of unbelief (Gk. apistia, 3:19).”
Several features of this text are relevant to the role of unbelief and its relationship to falling away.
As in Romans 11, the unbelief of the Hebrew people is the basis of the exhortation to the Christian community to persevere in faith. This means that multiple New Testament authors saw Israel’s unbelief as analogous to the potential situation in which Christians might fall into unbelief. It may also suggest continuity between the Old Testament people of God and the New Testament people of God, since the new are liable to the same danger as the old.
The passage is directly addressed to the Christian community and presupposes belief in the God revealed in Jesus. The explicit addressees are “brothers”, a common descriptor for members of the visible community of believers in the early Christian movement. In 3:1, the term “brothers” is qualified by the phrase “holy partners in a heavenly calling”, which emphasizes the author’s understanding that they are true believers. The addressees are warned not to turn away from God, which suggests that they are presently oriented toward God in contrast to those who are rebellious.
Turning away from God is directly correlated with an unbelieving heart (apistia). This suggests that the author saw it as a real possibility that believing Christians might return to unbelief and turn from God, thus falling away from membership in the people of God and falling away from participation in the saving work of God; thus jeopardizing their entrance into God’s rest.
You no longer have to go to church to hear about faith. We are constantly surrounded with talk of faith and belief. From Hollywood to popular music; professional sports to political campaigns; the language of faith is everywhere. And in each context, it seems to take on a new meaning. The problem, though, is that a word that can mean anything usually ends up meaning nothing. More importantly, when that happens to a word that comes to us from the heart of the gospel, it is of the greatest importance for the church to reclaim her language by recapturing and defining her words. So, in light of the cultural watering-down of the language of faith, I’d like to offer four reflections on the nature of faith: what it is and what it isn’t.