Wednesday, March 10, 2021

MidWeek Lenten Service, 2021 - Chapter 4 of Understanding Luther's Galatians



Mid-Week Lenten Vespers, 2021

 

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

 

https://video.ibm.com/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

 

Bethany Lutheran Worship, 7 PM Central StandardTime

 

TLH - Online

 

 

The Hymn #159                    Go to Dark Gethsemane        
The Order of Vespers                                             p. 41

The Psalmody   Psalm 23                                       p. 128
The Lections                            The Passion History

                                                

                                          
The Sermon Hymn #149           Come to Calvary's Holy Mountain

 

The Sermon –   Galatians 4

 
The Prayers

The Lord’s Prayer

The Collect for Grace                                            p. 45

The Hymns #552              Abide with Me

 


 

Prayers and Announcements

·        Lori (mother) and Mary Howell (daughter) for continued recovery.

·        Christina Jackson – PET results.

·        Congregation interested in Maundy Thursday Holy Communion in addition to Good Friday? Send an email pro or con.

·        DEP Trump, ongoing investigations, and military tribunals.

·        Greater knowledge of Luther’s works and faithful translations; i.e., the KJV is the English (Tyndale) version of Luther’s German Bible. They established their modern languages in England and Germany by virtue of the power of their work. Nobody ever admits this about the KJV, that it comes from Luther via Tyndale who died for translating the Scriptures from Hebrew and Greek into English.

 

Luther’s Galatians 4

 

1.         Now I say That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be Lord of all;

2.         But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

The Apostle had apparently finished his discourse on justification when this illustration of the youthful heir occurred to him. He throws it in for good measure. He knows that plain people are sooner impressed by an apt illustration than by learned discussion.

“I want to give you another illustration from everyday life,” he writes to the Galatians. “As long as an heir is underage he is treated very much like a servant. He is not permitted to order his own affairs. He is kept under constant surveillance. Such discipline is good for him, otherwise he would waste his inheritance in no time. This discipline, however, is not to last forever. It is to last only until ‘the time appointed of the father.’”

3.         Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world.

As children of the Law we were treated like servants and prisoners. We were oppressed and condemned by the Law. But the tyranny of the Law is not to last forever. It is to last only until “the time appointed of the father,” until Christ came and redeemed us.

3.         Under the elements of the world.

By the elements of the world the Apostle does not understand the physical elements, as some have thought. In calling the Law “the elements of the world” Paul means to say that the Law is something material, mundane, earthly. It may restrain evil, but it does not deliver from sin. The Law does not justify; it does not bring a person to heaven. I do not obtain eternal life because I do not kill, commit adultery, steal, etc. Such mere outward decency does not constitute Christianity. The heathen observes the same restraints to avoid punishment or to secure the advantages of a good reputation. In the last analysis such restraint is simple hypocrisy. When the Law exercises its higher function, it accuses and condemns the conscience. All these effects of the Law cannot be called divine or heavenly. These effects are elements of the world.

In calling the Law the elements of the world Paul refers to the whole Law, principally to the ceremonial law which dealt with external matters, as meat, drink, dress, places, times, feasts, cleansings, sacrifices, etc. These are mundane matters which cannot save the sinner. Ceremonial laws are like the statutes of governments dealing with purely civil matters, as commerce, inheritance, etc. As for the pope’s church laws forbidding marriage and meats, Paul calls them elsewhere the doctrines of devils. You would not call such laws elements of heaven.

The Law of Moses deals with mundane matters. It holds the mirror to the evil which is in the world. By revealing the evil that is in us it creates a longing in the heart for the better things of God. The Law forces us into the arms of Christ, “who is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.” (Romans 1:4.) Christ relieves the conscience of the Law. In so far as the Law impels us to Christ it renders excellent service.

I do not mean to give the impression that the Law should be despised. Neither does Paul intend to leave that impression. The Law ought to be honored. But when it is a matter of justification before God, Paul had to speak disparagingly of the Law, because the Law has nothing to do with justification. If it thrusts its nose into the business of justification, we must talk harshly to the Law to keep it in its place. The conscience ought not to be on speaking terms with the Law. The conscience ought to know only Christ. To say this is easy, but in times of trial, when the conscience writhes in the presence of God, it is not so easy to do. As such times we are to believe in Christ as if there were no Law or sin anywhere, but only Christ. We ought to say to the Law: “Mister Law, I do not get you. You stutter so much. I don’t think that you have anything to say to me.”

When it is not a question of salvation or justification with us, we are to think highly of the Law and call it “holy, just, and good.” (Romans 7:12) The Law is of no comfort to a stricken conscience. Therefore it should not be allowed to rule in our conscience, particularly in view of the fact that Christ paid so great a price to deliver the conscience from the tyranny of the Law. Let us understand that the Law and Christ are impossible bedfellows. The Law must leave the bed of the conscience, which is so narrow that it cannot hold two, as Isaiah says, chapter 28, verse 20.

Only Paul among the apostles calls the Law “the elements of the world, weak and beggarly elements, the strength of sin, the letter that killeth,” etc. The other apostles do not speak so slightingly of the Law. Those who want to be first-class scholars in the school of Christ want to pick up the language of Paul. Christ called him a chosen vessel and equipped with a facility of expression far above that of the other apostles, that he as the chosen vessel should establish the doctrine of justification in clear-cut words.

4, 5. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.

“The fullness of the time” means when the time of the Law was fulfilled, and Christ was revealed. Note how Paul explains Christ. “Christ,” says he, “is the Son of God and the son of a woman. He submitted Himself under the Law to redeem us who were under the Law.” In these words the Apostle explains the person and office of Christ. His person is divine and human. “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” Christ therefore is true God and true man. Christ’s office the Apostle describes in the words: “Made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.”

Paul calls the Virgin Mary a woman. This has been frequently deplored even by some of the ancient fathers who felt that Paul should have written “virgin” instead of woman. But Paul is now treating of faith and Christian righteousness, of the person and office of Christ, not of the virginity of Mary. The inestimable mercy of God is sufficiently set forth by the fact that His Son was born of a woman. The more general term “woman” indicates that Christ was born a true man. Paul does not say that Christ was born of man and woman, but only of woman. That he has a virgin in mind is obvious.

This passage furthermore declares that Christ’s purpose in coming was the abolition of the Law, not with the intention of laying down new laws, but “to redeem them that were under the law.” Christ himself declared: “I judge no man.” (John 8:15.) Again, “I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” (John 12:47.) In other words: “I came not to bring more laws, or to judge men according to the existing Law. I have a higher and better office. I came to judge and to condemn the Law, so that it may no more judge and condemn the world.”

How did Christ manage to redeem us? “He was made under the law.” When Christ came, He found us all in prison. What did He do about it? Although He was the Lord of the Law, He voluntarily placed Himself under the Law and permitted it to exercise dominion over Him, indeed, to accuse and to condemn Him. When the Law takes us into judgment it has a perfect right to do so. “For we are by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” (Eph. 2:3.) Christ, however, “did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.” (I Pet. 2:22.) Hence the Law had no jurisdiction over Him. Yet the Law treated this innocent, just, and blessed Lamb of God as cruelly as it treated us. It accused Him of blasphemy and treason. It made Him guilty of the sins of the whole world. It overwhelmed him with such anguish of soul that His sweat was as blood. The Law condemned Him to the shameful death on the Cross.

It is truly amazing that the Law had the effrontery to turn upon its divine Author, and that without a show of right. For its insolence, the Law in turn was arraigned before the judgment seat of God and condemned. Christ might have overcome the Law by an exercise of His omnipotent authority over the Law. Instead, He humbled Himself under the Law for and together with them that were under the Law. He gave the Law license to accuse and condemn Him. His present mastery over the Law was obtained by virtue of His Sonship and His substitutionary victory.

Thus, Christ banished the Law from the conscience. It dare no longer banish us from God. For that matter, —the Law continues to reveal sin. It still raises its voice in condemnation. But the conscience finds quick relief in the words of the Apostle: “Christ has redeemed us from the law.” The conscience can now hold its head high and say to the Law: “You are not so holy yourself. You crucified the Son of God. That was an awful thing for you to do. You have lost your influence forever.”

The words, “Christ was made under the law,” are worth all the attention we can bestow on them. They declare that the Son of God did not only fulfill one or two easy requirements of the Law, but that He endured all the tortures of the Law. The Law brought all its fright to bear upon Christ until He experienced anguish and terror such as nobody else ever experienced. His bloody sweat. His need of angelic comfort, His tremulous prayer in the garden, His lamentation on the Cross, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” bear eloquent witness to the sting of the Law. He suffered “to redeem them that were under the law.”

The Roman conception of Christ as a mere lawgiver more stringent than Moses, is quite contrary to Paul’s teaching. Christ, according to Paul, was not an agent of the Law but a patient of the Law. He was not a law-giver, but a law-taker.

True enough, Christ also taught and expounded the Law. But it was incidental. It was a sideline with Him. He did not come into the world for the purpose of teaching the Law, as little as it was the purpose of His coming to perform miracles. Teaching the Law and performing miracles did not constitute His unique mission to the world. The prophets also taught the Law and performed miracles. In fact, according to the promise of Christ, the apostles performed greater miracles than Christ Himself. (John 14:12.) The true purpose of Christ’s coming was the abolition of the Law, of sin, and of death.

If we think of Christ as Paul here depicts Him, we shall never go wrong. We shall never be in danger of misconstruing the meaning of the Law. We shall understand that the Law does not justify. We shall understand why a Christian observes laws: For the peace of the world, out of gratitude to God, and for a good example that others may be attracted to the Gospel.

5.         That we might receive the adoption of sons.

Paul still has for his text Genesis 22:18, “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” In the course of his Epistle he calls this promise of the blessing righteousness, life, deliverance from the Law, the testament, etc. Now he also calls the promise of blessing “the adoption of sons,” the inheritance of everlasting life.

 


Understanding Luther's Galatians, Illustrated by Norma A. Boeckler

For Those WELS-ELS-LCMS Pastors and Executives Who Imagined Fuller Was Conservative

LCMS and WELS Church Shrinkers bragged that more of their seminary classmates went to Fuller Seminary for "graduate work" than attended their own seminaries. Maybe that was because the Fuller classes were even easier, though they cost more. 


After signing a letter expressing disappointment with the new administration, a pro-life evangelical scholar who voted for President Joe Biden said that while he would vote for Biden again if the 2020 presidential election were held today, he would not make his support public.

 
In 2020, Mouw retired from Fuller and returned to Calvin University, becoming a senior research fellow at the Paul B. Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics.[3]

In 2007, Mouw, who sees Abraham Kuyper as a personal hero,[4] was awarded the Abraham Kuyper Prize for Excellence in Reformed Theology and Public Life at Princeton Theological Seminary by the Abraham Kuyper Center for Public Theology.[5] (Wikipedia)


Richard Mouw, president emeritus of Fuller Seminary in California
and a member of Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden, spoke to The Christian Post Tuesday, days after his group issued a statement in response to the president's support for a coronavirus relief package that did not include a longstanding provision that prevents the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.

"We are very disappointed about the COVID-19 relief package's exclusion of the Hyde Amendment, a longstanding, bipartisan policy," they wrote. "We're even more upset that the Biden administration is supporting this bill."

As a result of Biden's support for the bill, the group contended that they feel "used and betrayed."

Mouw told CP that he and other members of Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden group knew that Biden had been "shifting" his position on the Hyde Amendment when they released a statement in support of Biden's candidacy last October, one month before the 2020 presidential election.

He maintained that conversations they had with campaign officials who now help the administration with faith outreach were reassuring.

"We made ... clear that we would offer support with the understanding that they would urge the White House to have serious conversations with Catholics and evangelicals who are right-to-life people," he recalled. "The problem is that we haven't had those conversations, and leaving the Hyde Amendment out of this particular package, this latest COVID package, is a signal that ... there really ... is no room for that kind of conversation."

Mouw confirmed that an official from the Biden administration reached out to him on Monday.

"We're going to have a meeting later this week," he said.

Mouw and Ronald Sider, another member of Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden, will sit down with two members of the White House faith outreach office to address their concerns.

When asked if he would vote for Biden again and issue a statement in support of his candidacy if the 2020 presidential election was still forthcoming and he knew that Biden would support a coronavirus relief bill that excluded Hyde Amendment protections, Mouw responded that he would "vote the same way" while adding, "I would not give my public support."

Mouw indicated that while he disagrees with Biden's position on abortion, there are other areas where he has found common ground with the new administration, specifically on the issues of global warming and immigration.

Acknowledging that he received "a lot of angry messages from right-to-life people," some of whom called him "naive" due to his support for Biden and subsequent feelings of betrayal, Mouw still defended the object of his previous remarks in support of Biden. He said they would be necessary to provide reassurance to the "many younger evangelicals who are not happy about ... the way in which their parents and grandparents have endorsed and defended the Trump administration."

"We ... don't want to lose them to evangelicalism because of what is perceived as a mean-spirited, highly partisan commitment on the part of the older generation of evangelicals who voted 81% ... in the presidential election before this last one for Mr. Trump," he said.

"We thought it was important to hold up the right to life position and at the same time, say it's OK to be concerned about a broader range of issues such as global warming and children at the border separated from their parents and those kinds of questions. And so, we wanted to use our own access through the Biden campaign people to at least get them to stay in conversation with people like us."

In addition to explaining that he was "less optimistic" about the possibility of Biden and the Democratic Party building a "bigger tent" to accommodate pro-lifers, Mouw expressed concern about the president's support for another major legislative initiative: The Equality Act.

According to Mouw, the legislation puts "the rights of Christian institutions to preserve commitments to traditional biblical teaching regarding sexuality without being penalized in terms of federal grants, federal loans for students" in jeopardy.

"A lot of Christian colleges and universities are well over 50% dependent in their tuition income on students getting federal loans," the Fuller Seminary president emeritus added.

Mouw warned that making "the sexuality issue" an eligibility requirement for "receiving students with federal loans" would deal a "huge blow" to faith-based schools.

Leading up to the 2020 presidential election, Biden had vowed to push for the Equality Act's passage within his first 100 days in office. Biden indicated that he would work to codify Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide, into law.

Biden's documented public support for policies widely opposed by evangelicals has led some conservatives, like former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis, to conclude that "'Evangelicals' for Biden are getting exactly what they voted for."

44 Years of Church Growth! - Don't tell Wayne Mueller.