Sin in heaven...is it possible?

This was posted on In Light of the Gospel:

Is another “fall” possible in heaven?
April 30th, 2009 by JHG

In the recent “Ask Pastor John” video, someone asked Piper the following question: “If the Angels could fall, how can we know we won’t?” This is a great question, and you can watch Piper’s answer here. Piper’s answer appeals to the doctrine of perseverance. The fact that God holds us in His hand, and no one can pluck us out of His hand, applies not only to perseverance in this life, but also the life to come.

That is indeed a helpful way to look at this issue. With the doctrine of perseverance, we should also consider justification and union with Christ. We can see this clearly as we examine the different states of mankind. This structure of history that comes from St. Augustine and is adopted by the Puritans. Thomas Boston (and others) called this the “four-fold estate of man.” One of my early posts addressed this matter. You can read that post here, but here is a short summary.

The Bible teaches that the final state of things (the New Creation) is better than the “pre-fall” state. The four “states” of our existence are as follows:

* Innocence—possible to sin or not to sin
* Fall—not possible not to sin
* Grace—possible not to sin
* Glory—not possible to sin

I have a chart that explains this situation [see Fourfold State]. The first state (The Garden) is completely separated from the others. It will never be known again. The second state (The Fall) crosses over the third state (Grace or Redemption), which brings about the tension of sin and righteousness for believers. The last state, the New Heavens and New Earth, cross over redemption as well due to the work of Christ upon the cross. The cross is the point at which Heaven intrudes into redemption with a note of finality. This is often called the already/not yet structure of New Testament eschatology.

The point of this is that our union with Christ puts us beyond the possibility of a fall. That is a central meaning of justification. One of the problems with denying imputed righteousness is precisely this problem. Look at it this way: forgiveness places us back in the Garden at the state of innocence. The righteousness of Christ places us beyond the Garden in Glory. That is the importance of a positive righteousness.

Are you clear on the gospel?

This was posted at In Light of the Gospel:

Are you clear on the gospel?
April 27th, 2009 by JHG

D. A. Carson’s recent editorial for Themelios is well worth your read. In it, makes a fundamental distinction about the gospel that is being lost in our current theological climate. Carson explains:

It is this: one must distinguish between, on the one hand, the gospel as what God has done and what is the message to be announced and, on the other, what is demanded by God or effected by the gospel in assorted human responses.

This is fundamental. The gospel is about what God has done and not about what I have done. Growing up, this was confused by saying that gospel is believing on Christ. Now this is confused by saying that the gospel is life. The current situation is a reaction to the former. We (at least in evangelicalism broadly speaking) have moved from describing the gospel as conversion to describing the gospel as a way of life. Both are mistakes.

After explaining that the gospel is the “good news” about what God has done in Christ, Carson clarifies what the gospel is not:

By contrast, the first two greatest commands—to love God with heart and soul and mind and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves—do not constitute the gospel, or any part of it. We may well argue that when the gospel is faithfully declared and rightly received, it will result in human beings more closely aligned to these two commands. But they are not the gospel. Similarly, the gospel is not receiving Christ or believing in him, or being converted, or joining a church; it is not the practice of discipleship. Once again, the gospel faithfully declared and rightly received will result in people receiving Christ, believing in Christ, being converted, and joining a local church; but such steps are not the gospel.

In conclusion, Carson reminds us:

Failure to distinguish between the gospel and all the effects of the gospel tends, on the long haul, to replace the good news as to what God has done with a moralism that is finally without the power and the glory of Christ crucified, resurrected, ascended, and reigning.