The Huge Difference Between a Christian and a Christ-Follower

One of the greatest errors that I heard at the Reveal Conference was presented in the final session. The speaker was John Ortberg of Menlo Park Presbyterian Church and the name of his lecture was, "Are You Making Better Christians or More Disciples?"

This lecture is one of the best examples of the fundamental problem with American Evangelicalism. That problem is that it has wandered into a form of Neo-Pietism that openly attacks Biblical Christianity and Salvation by Grace Alone through Faith Alone by Christ's Work Alone.

If you think that the term "Christ-Follower" is synonymous with the word Christian then you are gravely mistaken and these two segments of the Fighting for the Faith radio program will be eye-opening to say the least.

Comments

[John Yeazel]

Great Blog Blogsy- I cannot say that I agree with everything you said there but we are getting close. I feel as though it was a worthwhile dialog. Let's go out and do our part in extending God's Kingdom in the world. God bless both you and Akira.

[John Yeazel]

I woke up this morning and reread these final blogs by Blogsy. We are not as close as I stated in my last comment. You are a maverick who thinks he is above dialog with the historical Church (you only depend on the Holy Spirit- just you and the Holy Spirit right?). That is a misunderstanding of Sola Scriptura by the way. You still confuse the Law and the Gospel and I have a sneaky suspician that you think you know better than almost anyone you come in contact with. You border on being obnoxious- I would tell you to get lost if you came into a Church I was attending and started spouting off the way you have on this blog site. You want to play oneupmanship not seek for the truth- oh well, I do not think we will hear any more from you on this blog site thank God.

[John Yeazel]

Come on Chris help me out with this Blogsy character- was I out of line in my last comment about him? This is your blog site I want to hear your point of view. You have taken on Rick Warren before- perhaps Blogsy is Rick Warren in cognito- even though he stated he was from the corporate world. He acts like a maverick CEO does he not? I think he is coming close to espousing the Galatian heresy- I think the Apostle Paul would have torn into him. What do you think Chris?

[John Yeazel]

Look what I found today on the Riddleblog- google Kim Riddlebarger. Michael Horton's new book Christless Christianity is hot off the presses and you can read the first chapter for free online. Listen to this quote I mined from the first chapter: "I am not questioning American Christianity at the level of zeal. The call of Christian leaders to 'deeds, not creeds' is doubtless motivated by a serious concern to be witnesses to Christ in a broken world. I do not question the sincerity of those who say that we have the correct doctrine but are not living it out. Rather, I simply do not agree with their assessment. I think our doctrine has been forgotten, assumed, ignored, and even misshaped and distorted by the habits and rituals of daily life in a narcissistic culture. We are assimilating the disrupting and disorienting news from heaven to the banality of our own immediate felt needs, which interpret God as a personal shopper for the props of our life movie: happiness as entertainment, salvation as therapeutic well-being, and mission as pragmatic success measured solely in terms of numbers.

So, in my view, we are living out our creed, but that creed is closer to the American Dream than it is to the Christian faith. The claim I am laying out is this book is that the most dominant form of Christianity today reflects 'a zeal for God' that is nevertheless without knowledge-particulary, as Paul himself specifies- the knowledge of God's justification of the wicked by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone apart from works (Rom.10:2, see verses 1-15)."

Go out and buy this book and read it. Also, David Wells has written a new book entitled The Courage to Be Protestant. Both are well worth reading. We need to stop some of our activity and drink deeply again from the deep wells of our rich theological heritage. We are never going to correct all the ills of this life- watch some of these activists fall flat on their faces in the upcoming years. Many of them have a zeal for God but without knowledge as the Apostle Paul claimed many years ago. Things have really not changed that much- the same issues keep popping up again and again.

That is all I have to say folks- I will shut up now unless someone throws up a rebuttal again.

[Blogsy]

John Y. I thought we agreed to disagree but obviously not. With Christian ‘brothers’ like you who needs enemies? As I’m new to the blog community it has been an eye opener for me. Within a couple of days and 3-4 blogs, I have been called ‘Emergent’, a ‘hypocrite’, ‘the new Messiah’, a ‘self-righteous Pharisee’, a ‘latent narcissist’, ‘obnoxious’, ‘arrogant’ a ‘maverick’, ‘I play oneupmanship’, ‘the only one who is righteous on these pages’, an ‘Arminian’, a ‘complete Pelagian' and ‘Rick Warren in disguise’ All from people who never met me and don’t know me from a bar of soap. Yet they feel divinely qualified to make categorical and definitive statements about my character and the issues of my heart. Why pray and ask the Lord to show me my heart when these folks are doing such a splendid job?

If we don’t agree with someone’s message, there has to be something sinister and dark lurking behind the messenger, so let’s start the witch hunt and make it personal. And this because I dared to suggest that after we’re saved we need to start practicing and not just talk about our faith. We’re doing plenty of talking, let’s start some practice.

So far I DID NOT attack anyone’s character, nor will I. The motives of people’s hearts are God’s job not mine. “Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts.”(1 Cor 4:5). I am criticising what people SAY PUBLICLY and what seems (in my opinion at least) a pattern of not-very-fruitful time spending. I could be wrong at the end, but that’s what online opinion forums are for, to express one’s opinion. I’m not on a moral high horse, but I put my case forward quite strongly. I use a lot of Scripture quotes because Scripture is “is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:15-17). Biblical authors’ quotes take precedence over Calvin’s and Luther’s.

By quoting Jesus’ words about being “the light of the world, the salt of the earth, and let them see your good works, and glorify your Father in heaven”, I am apparently confusing the gospel with the law. What can I say John Y? Your powers of exegesis are second to none.

I didn’t mind Heidi Sue’s swipe at me. At least it was passionately honest and more importantly I could follow her argument because it had a logical thread. But yours my dear brother…is confusing. You HAVE no thread. You’re all over the place. I am none the wiser after a series of blog exchanges what your position is. If you put all that stuff you read aside for a year and just get stuck into your Bible, it may do you the world of good.

I never suggested ‘I only depend on the Holy Spirit’. For the last 10 years or longer, I have never stopped reading books apart from the Bible. Some of them thrilled me, others left me cold and others made me yawn. I AM INTERESTED in counter arguments from people who don’t think like me. I want to hear what they have to say and tune in to see if they have any valid points. But I need to exercise a Berean discipline and test it against the Scriptures. Over the years I have refined my views and am thankful for the writings of John MacArthur, Bob DeWaay, Gary Gilley and others. My all time favourites would have to be Oswald Chambers’ ‘My Utmost for His Highness’, C.S. Lewis’ ‘Mere Christianity’ and most of AW Tozer’s writings. But as much as I enjoyed what these folks had to say, they still had blind spots in their thinking and I can’t hang my hat on EVERYTHING they say. I cannot equate them with the Apostle Paul, Peter or the Gospel writers.

Now let’s end this saga and stop making it personal for respect of others who use this as a public forum. If you remember, Paul wanted to check with the ‘pillars’ of the first church if his doctrine was in tact as he was concerned that might have been ‘running his race in vain’. So DOCTRINE IS IMPORTANT and first in the list of priorities. It’s a no-brainer. Doing things from a wrong belief system is useless and of no eternal value. But here’s the interesting response Paul received. They told him his doctrine was fine but they added…“All they asked was that WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO REMEMBER THE POOR, THE VERY THING I WAS EAGER TO DO”. (Gal 2:10)

The moral of the story? Once you get your doctrine right, start living it. Put it into use. You don’t need extravagant charitable accomplishments. There can be small things but meaningful and sincere. (How about putting your arm around someone at church who seems downcast on Sunday, and offer some words of encouragement? You don’t need to be ordained and have a PhD in Theology for that) The bigger picture… there is a labor shortage in the Lord’s harvest (Matt 9:37). If your idea of ‘harvest’ is listening to sermons, reading commentaries and blogging all your life, I would humbly submit to you that you are sincerely misguided.

In closing. John Y I know you will be itching to retort with a tirade, but I am asking you IN THE NAME OF JESUS, STOP MAKING THIS PERSONAL AND MOVE ON. I have given you more attention than is warranted in the circumstances. Think of me what you will, I don’t care. At the end I will have to give an account for my words and actions to the righteous judge. PLEASE RESPECT the other people who want to use this site for spiritual edification and clarity of truth.

[John Yeazel]

Quit taking the moral high ground. Get off your high horse. I could give a rip what you think about me too. What are you so worried about other people having a forum to blog on for. I am sure they do not need your permission to say what they want to say and if they want me to shut they will not hesitate to tell me. You do not want to be corrected by anybody or listen to other points of view- this is not about that here anyways. This is about critical doctrinal matters that have eternal consequences for us. It is about truth not about opinion. What is more important what Christ did for us or what we do? What Christ did for us is 100 times more important. You do not agree well then go join a activist Church- I am sure you are probably already part of one.

You have judged everybody's character here- you do not know me from Adam either and you are claiming we all have to practice our faith better. Just because we put the highest priority on doctrine- trust me brother we are in the minority in the Church. We think doctrine is being neglected and ignored in the activist Church. A lot of us here think we should be reading more doctrine not less. That was the main critique of Ortberg in the first place. He is not preaching sound doctrine. It is sound doctrine that gives us life and the motivation to take our faith to the world. I have said this a million times now.

[John Yeazel]

I do read the Bible Blogsy- almost everyday in fact. I find it extremely helpful to use the best theologians to help me interpret it better though. That is part of being in constant dialog with the historical Church. These recognized theologians have made the themes of scripture and controversial passages more accessible to us. Distinguishing the difference between Law and Gospel is not a simple exegetical exercise. We do it badly all the time. You do not get that yet that is why what I write is confusing to you. This is exactly the point Chris was making and what Heidi Sue was trying to say to you and a couple of other people here. If other people want to correct me I am all ears- that is why I asked for Chris to spout off again. I am asking for his help- perhaps he can help you see more clearly. I obviously have not helped you at all. If I am in the wrong forgive me- I do not want to cause division I want to be part of unifying the Church. I can forget about all this Blogsy if you can. I do not want to rip your character either. Actually you are probably an interesting person and you love Christ so lets agree to disagree like I said before. Perhaps I should have stopped when I did the first time. No hard feelings Blogsy- God bless.

[Blogsy]

John Y. No hard feelings brother, let's move on in peace. Holding grudges and bitterness is a luxury that Christ’s death denies us. We CAN disagree WITHOUT offending each other.

[paul]

Hi

I see that you are also into the elections.
We can win the elections!
Just have a look on www.rightpeopleforthepresident.com
This powerful viral tool that can make the difference by involving voters for a reason can be in your blog by a simple copy-and-paste, as you insert any photo or text.
Your blog has the power to make the difference. Don’t miss this opportunity for this last week before the elections. Insert our candidate’s player in your blog in 1 minute.

Paul

[John Yeazel]

I have struggled with this issue of what has priority in our Christian lives- what Christ did for us (creeds) or what we do for Christ(deeds)- for many years now. What we emphasize in our belief system will determine what type of Church we will be attracted to. Churches either become hospitals where fellow strugglers in the faith come to a hear a cure for their continuing problem or a pump you up gymnasium which keeps you motivated to gain victory over the world. This is causing a deep division within the body of Christ. A major question we all have to face is how to unify the body of Christ. Christ seemed to make the unity of his Church a big issue in the Gospel of John. Do we just ignore each other and let each group go their own way or do we make unity an issue and priority in our lives? Do we try to hash this out with each other when we can during our busy lives or say to ourselves what is all this fuss about? Are we wasting our time discussing doctrinal matters when many of us believe the world is getting worse and worse?

The Reformers dealt with this issue back in the 1500's and they dealt with it quite thoroughly. The doctrine which the reformers came to the conclusion was the doctrine on which the Church stands or falls had been lost during the middle ages. We are saved from the wrath of God by grace alone through faith alone on the account of Christ alone without any works by us taken into consideration. This is what they were fighting for and what they believed the theologians of the Catholic Church and the Anabaptists had lost. This is the hinge on which all other doctrines swing on.

To show you that we often do not understand or "get" this doctrine let me give a few examples. What did the reformers mean by grace alone? Let me share with you a quote from Kim Riddlebarger while commenting on one of the objections to the Canons of Dort: "But as B.B. Warfield pointed out, when you look at this closely, the Arminians assertion of grace alone is strictly theoretical. When push comes to shove we are still left with the teaching that those who are saved, are saved not because God saved them when they were dead in sin, but because they used their free will to take advantage of God's provisional grace so as to save themselves with God's help. There is simply no way around the fact that in the Arminian system if anyone is to be saved, it is because they used their free will to co-operate with God's provision in Christ, no matter how loudly they may declare that they believe in grace alone."

The Catholic theologians and the Anabaptists during the reformation were not saying they did not believe in grace. They were adding things they had to do to get into a favorable relationship with God. This short changes the importance of Christ's redeeming work for us and why Christ had to become God incarnate. Christs work is sufficient to save us without anything having to be added by us. Do we trust in this or not is the pertinent question. How do we silence our convicting consciences when we are constantly reminded of all of our failures and sins in our lives and that we are not doing enough to prove we are truly saved? The only alternatives are to rest in the completed work of Christ, suppress the truth about ourselves and lie to ourselves that we are pulling it off, or become extreme activists to try to redeem our own failures and sins and add to Christ's finished work. This is not a minor issue and we need clarity and deep trust on this matter.

In order to make this trust go deeper into our souls we need to really understand this doctrine. We need to get what some of the following biblical words mean- imputation (Romans chapter 5), expiation, propitiation, atonement and the differing theories of the atonement, the active and passive obedience of Christ and what this actually accomplished for us, the two natures of Christ- both his divinity and humanity. Do I need to go on? If our Church's are not explaining to us these ideas and making this a priority, then this trust in Christ starts to diminish and we start asking our Church's to teach us practical matters. To teach us things we need to do to complete our faith, etc. etc. Are you beginning to really see that there is a lot that goes into this doctrine of grace alone by faith alone on the account of Christ alone. When we get a deeper understanding of this we can then take our faith to the surrounding world and be salt and light to it. We are never going to correct all the ills of the postmodern world we live in today. God will ultimately correct it all. We cannot get carried away by huge agenda's to save the world either. We can do our small part by serving and loving our neighbors in our vocations. When we all do this our collective witness is much more powerful and Christ then receives all the glory.

[Steve Mo]

Ortberg's teaching here is nothing new. I recognized it as the "Lordship Salvation" theology that was put forth by "theologians" such as John MacArthur as far back as 25 years ago at least. I suffered under this teaching for years. It basically teaches that Jesus as Savior is not enough (Easy Believe-ism) but that you must also make Him Lord of your life. What is interesting is that church bodies that adhere to this doctrine are vehemently anti-Roman Catholic, but if you listen carefully you will begin to hear a lot of Rome in this teaching.

[Kc]

Chris:

So, are you saying that once Christ has saved you through a divine act of the Holy Spirit, we just wait on Him to do good works through us? How do we cooperate if we don't have a free will? I'm a little confused here...

Kc

[Malissa]

About being a "user" of Jesus...

You seemed to take this as a personal attack, but he is really addressing a different problem. (And he has the wrong answer, which is what is driving you crazy.)

There are many people out there who really go to the opposite extreme from works salvation. They will say they believe that Jesus died for their sin, but they think that they can live any kind of life they want to and when they die they will just ask for forgiveness. They have not been born again, they have no desire to serve God, and no desire to know God. Since they do not know God, they imagine in their mind that God is all loving and there is no way He could send them to hell for the "minor, little" sins that they have done. And to top it off "Jesus loves me, and offers free forgiveness."

Now we know this is not the true gospel.

The Bible is pretty clear that Christians should live very distinctive lives from non-believers in the way we live and act and love one another. But we see, in our own culture, that the divorce rate, abortion rate and crime rates are the same (and in some areas, higher)in people who call themselves Christians as those who do not, and we have to wonder why.

I think John Ortberg is trying to address this problem, he is comming up with the wrong answer. John's answer is essentaily works based salvation. That we must obey the law, and work to set ourselves apart for God.

I believe you have the right answer: that it is the power of God that gives us faith. And as a result of that faith, we are born again, and while we still sin, our lives WILL be different, but it is not based on our own works, but the power of God. We know we will never attain perfection , and that is why we must humble ourselves before the cross and trust in Jesus.

[catransplant48]

Chris R. wrote: "Preaching 'applications' and 'life principles' is NOT Biblical preaching."

Please tell me you are kidding.

Jesus was the prime example of a life-application preacher. Read the Sermon on the Mount. Life Application 101.

When Jesus finished his teachings He often said "go and do likewise". Search the Scriptures and see how often He told people that, along with "go and sin no more".

Jesus taught people HOW TO LIVE. Slice it any way you want to. It's life application, buddy.

[catransplant48]

I posted my last post here without even having read Eugene Roberts' posted back in October. Wow, we responded nearly word for word. Shock at your notion that "Preaching 'applications' and 'life principles' is NOT Biblical preaching."

[Diana Lovegrove]

I wonder if anyone help. I have been reading this site for a few months, and have finally started to get it straight in my head that the gospel is what God has done for us, in the past, in history. As we focus on Him and what He has done for us, then our lives will change, but not because we are focusing on us, but on the great God that we worship and serve, and His grace working in our lives.

This has lifted an enormous burden from me and my life - as I focus on Him and His life I am lifted up and set free from the law, and released into grace.

I have also recently been reading through Michael Horton's Christless Christianity, and was convinced by the argument that our lives are not the gospel, and his argument against the phrase "Preach the gospel at all times, if necessary use words" - if our lives are the gospel that is not good news but bad news, because even on our best day we fall so far short of the perfection of the law that God demands.

However, last night I was reading 1 Peter and came across this verse: "Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behaviour of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives" (1 Pe 3:1-2).

This verse on a plain reading seems to be putting the focus on the way the wife lives, that her life has to be what convinces her husband of the truth of the gospel, rather than the words of the gospel. So there is some "burden" on our lives that they have to reflect the gospel we believe?

Help!

Thanks,
Diana.

[Tim the Cyanide-Gargling Faith Gladiator]

Hello Diana,

Exactly right.

Christ became sin for us, and gives His righteousness to us. That is what the Good News--the Gospel--is.

The Good News is not "serve your neighbor in love," or "go and do likewise," or "be transformed" or even, "share your faith." The Gospel makes no command. Indeed, these things are the Law. They are bad news, because we can never do them perfectly, as God requires. Indeed, this is the whole point of the Gospel! Because we cannot serve, Christ served us. Because we cannot love, Christ loved us. Because we cannot 'do likewise,' He did it for us. Because we cannot obey, Christ obeyed for us. He finished it all, for us. That is the Gospel. This news of Christ is the news we cling to, because without it, there is no hope.

However, the Gospel most certainly changes us. Through the preaching of the Word, the Holy Spirit drowns the flesh, which hates God, and raises up the new man, who seeks to please God. This is why we believe. This is why we have faith. This is why we repent. As Christ said: "Lest you be born again, you cannot enter the kingdom." And through Holy Baptism, we are born again. Our old nature is buried, drowned, and put to death--and we are raised up with Christ. This rebirth is not of our doing or our will--for hope does not reside in us. Instead, we look outside ourselves for transformation. We look to Christ. But where is Christ? Does He remain far away in heaven--merely present with us in spirit? No. He lives among us today, even now. He speaks His unchanging Word of absolution to us, through the pastor. He washes us clean in the waters of Baptism. And He feeds us with His own true Body and Blood in the Sacrament, for the forgiveness of our sins. Through these Means we obtain life and salvation. Through them, Christ is here with us--here for us. That is His promise.

===

The problem is in emphasizing obedience. The idea is that as unbelievers, we are disobedient, but as transformed Christians, we should/must now obey. Well, that's true, as far as it goes. (Which isn't very far.) The difficulty is that we are not completely transformed; our flesh has not been eradicated entirely. Because of this, when we talk about the Christian life, we should be talking about repentance. We are to repent of our sin, disown our "best works," and trust in the righteousness of Christ alone. Indeed, repentance is the Christian life. Obedience and good works must be understood in this context. When we talk about the Christian life (which we should, especially to counter the errors being propagated concerning it) we must talk about the continual battle between us and our flesh. We must continually remind Christians of their continual need to repent, and point them always back to the cross of Christ.

See, the Christian life is not victory over sin. The Christian life is the battle against sin.

The sects which deny or obscure the Christian's sinful condition invariably regard repentance as a gateway between the life of the sinner and the life of the Christian, where the latter is defined chiefly by obedience. They teach that we do in fact have victory over sin. Thus the Gospel is the gateway message preached to unbelievers--those who have not achieved this victory. Thus it is not preached to Christians. Hence "Christ-less" christianity. Admittedly, this is all rather sensible if you concede the point. For example, we don't send husbands and wives to abstinence classes; they aren't supposed to be abstinent any longer. So why tell Christians about repentance and about Christ if they've already repented of their sins?

But this theology of glory is completely and utterly wrong. It is nothing less than a denial of the Gospel, of justification by grace alone through faith alone for the sake of Christ alone. How so? It denies the Gospel to Christians. This is just as bad, if not worse, as denying it to everyone, as Rome does. It is like--indeed, it is exactly like giving medicine to a man dying of disease, only to snatch the medicine away the moment his body starts to fight back. The root problem is a misdiagnosis. If we fail to recognize that Christians are still corrupted by sin, we will fail to give them the medicine they need. Indeed, sin is a chronic disease, from which we all suffer, and it will only be truly cured at the resurrection. Many will die from this disease, either by their own foolish blindness, or by the wanton negligence of Christ's doctors. All we can do is receive the medicine of Christ on a regular basis: namely, the preaching of the Gospel, His life-giving Body and Blood in the Sacrament, and His Word of absolution.

To carry through on the medicine/doctor analogy, it is worth pointing out that the church is a hospital, not a medical school. We come regularly to receive treatment for an incurable disease, not to be "cured" and then equipped to go forth and "cure" others. Naturally we should tell others about the medicine, but the point is that we need it just as much as they need it.

So to get at your question more directly. ;)

[1 Peter 3:1-2] on a plain reading seems to be putting the focus on the way the wife lives, that her life has to be what convinces her husband of the truth of the gospel, rather than the words of the gospel. So there is some "burden" on our lives that they have to reflect the gospel we believe?

As Christians, we are to reflect the Gospel with our lives. This is correct. But understand whatit means. It does not mean to live as though we were perfect, as though we were free from the effects of sin--because we are not and we cannot. It means to live in repentance. It means we should live with the knowledge of our own sinfulness, and struggle against it, always seeking forgiveness for our failures. And not just from Christ--we should also seek forgiveness from those around us. That is what best reflects the Gospel. True piety, true obedience and true Christianity always flow from a repentant and contrite heart. Not a heart that has gained "victory" over sin. Recall David, a man after God's own heart. Was David obedient? Was he a good husband or father? A good king? Hardly. But David was repentant. He knew he was a sinner and he trusted in God's forgiveness.

The bottom line is pretty simple. Whenever the Law says to you, "Do this," Christ says right back, "I've already done it. For you." Whenever the Law becomes a burden, confess your sin and remember that Christ has already borne it. Whenever the Law reminds you that you've made no spiritual progress, confess your sin and remember that Christ gives you His spiritual progress.

Nevertheless, despite appearances, the Holy Spirit does transform us and we do do good works. It is like the parable of the sheep and the goats: at the day of judgement, the sheep do not know about all their progress and good works. So why waste time worrying about it? I am sure that by worrying you cannot add even an iota of spiritual progress to your life. Therefore, when you sin, simply repent and ask for forgiveness. That's the beginning and the end of the Christian life. Obedience? Of course! But always keep it in the context of the true Christian life: repentance. It is not meant to a burden, because the whole idea is that Christ carries our burdens for us.

[Diana Lovegrove]

Tim,

Thank you so much for your post and your insight. There is so much good "meat" in here for me to reflect on.

I think I am starting to see the balance between law/gospel and obedience - I was getting to the point where anytime I heard anyone talk about obedience I would disregard it as it was not "gospel" - but this is not a biblical balance. [Incidentally, I think the issue of balance is probably the root of most, if not all, errors of teaching within the church - we get one element of the truth, but overemphasize it to the detriment of another aspect of the truth - eg dominion theology overemphasizes kingdom now to the detriment of kingdom not yet.]

I particularly liked your comment that "the Christian life is not victory over sin. The Christian life is the battle against sin." Amen to that!

And also the hospital analogy, and that we need the medicine as much as unbelievers.

God bless
Diana.