# Luther on Vocation



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 2, 2006)

Has anyone read _Luther on Vocation_ by Gustaf Wingren? If so, thoughts?


----------



## BobVigneault (May 2, 2006)

Didn't he like to stay at Jellystone Parks when he was on vacation? What? Oh, vocation! Sorry, nevermind.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BobVigneault_
> Didn't he like to stay at Jellystone Parks when he was on vacation? What? Oh, vocation! Sorry, nevermind.



Set myself up for that one, didn't I?


----------



## BobVigneault (May 2, 2006)

(I just didn't want you to feel like you were being ignored brother. Instead of being farcical I should have made up some double-speak about it. Ok, forget what I just said.)

Yes, Andrew, I read it and found it very engaging. In examining a work such as "Luther On Vocation" it's so important that the superficial characteristics of it's deceptively simple premise should not be allowed to blind the reader into the more substantial fabrics of it's deeper motivations. Furthermore, based upon interdisciplinary considerations the structural dynamic analysis necessitates that urgent considerations be made of the ramifications of consensus-building if not the very clarity of the sociological dimensions. That's my humble opinion. What do you think Andrew, have I misread Luther on this?


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BobVigneault_
> (I just didn't want you to feel like you were being ignored brother. Instead of being farcical I should have made up some double-speak about it. Ok, forget what I just said.)
> 
> Yes, Andrew, I read it and found it very engaging. In examining a work such as "Luther On Vocation" it's so important that the superficial characteristics of it's deceptively simple premise should not be allowed to blind the reader into the more substantial fabrics of it's deeper motivations. Furthermore, based upon interdisciplinary considerations the structural dynamic analysis necessitates that urgent considerations be made of the ramifications of consensus-building if not the very clarity of the sociological dimensions. That's my humble opinion. What do you think Andrew, have I misread Luther on this?



Methinks that the only thing you read was the cover page. What program did you use to write that review?


----------



## Arch2k (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BobVigneault_
> (I just didn't want you to feel like you were being ignored brother. Instead of being farcical I should have made up some double-speak about it. Ok, forget what I just said.)
> 
> Yes, Andrew, I read it and found it very engaging. In examining a work such as "Luther On Vocation" it's so important that the superficial characteristics of it's deceptively simple premise should not be allowed to blind the reader into the more substantial fabrics of it's deeper motivations. Furthermore, based upon interdisciplinary considerations the structural dynamic analysis necessitates that urgent considerations be made of the ramifications of consensus-building if not the very clarity of the sociological dimensions. That's my humble opinion. What do you think Andrew, have I misread Luther on this?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 2, 2006)

Existentially, and potentially, you are indeed correct, Bob. Your insights into this work are remarkably...insightful. I might take issue with your points relating to the superficial characteristics of it's deceptively simple premise (so simple that a child can understand what the author is talking about given the parameters vis-a-vis vocational vacations) and I'm not so sure that the everyone agrees on the urgency of the considerations of the ramifications of consensus-building (hence the need for consensus-building). But I appreciate your humble opinion, Bob. Perhaps you should change vocations. 

"No soup for you, Bob -- NEXT!"


----------



## Larry Hughes (May 2, 2006)

No, but Vieth's is great. Gustaf has great other articles that I've read though. Luther is quite helpful in the area of calling and getting it out of that mystical/gnostic/spiritual only realm.

I think I'll get this one and let you know as I'm familiar with the author.

Ldh


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Larry Hughes_
> No, but Vieth's is great. Gustaf has great other articles that I've read though. Luther is quite helpful in the area of calling and getting it out of that mystical/gnostic/spiritual only realm.
> 
> I think I'll get this one and let you know as I'm familiar with the author.
> ...



 Thanks, Larry, I'll be interested to hear your thoughts.


----------



## Larry Hughes (May 10, 2006)

Andrew,

I'm three chapters + in and this book is outstanding!!!

You have to get it and read it. This ties together so much of Luther's thought not just in vocation but our daily cross, what are true good works and etc...

Oh man, I wish I could regurgitate a piece of it for you just to wet your whistle.

I'll try:

It begins by setting up some ideas in the two kingdoms in the doctrine. The kingdoms of heaven and earth. The former is not considered a place, up in the sky, but partially here and coming. Earth is of course this life not life after death.

Law rules in this life or kingdom of earth (koe), the Gospel rules in the kingdome of heaven (koh). Law of course in truth is God's love, the real reason we are condemned for we do not love altruistically but are inwardly bent seeking to be like God.

Vocations are callings by God. These are stations as it were to which God fills by men, calling. These stations are in and of themselves the callings and gifts of God to mankind in general for the koe, we might call it general grace on all fallen mankind considered. These vocations are not boundary driven, ie, familial ones (mother, father, son, etc...) are callings as are policeman, farmer, milkmaid, fast food cook, etc... It's crucial to grasp that it is the station itself which is God's love or law toward man. Vocation and Law are directly linked. e.g. How do I love my neighbor? Answer: If I'm a garbage collector I collect his garbage whereby he does not have to suffer the build up of such, disease and so forth. It is not the man in the calling but the station itself that is God's and His general love toward the fallen world. Man, in his calling, sins from the heart. BUT for the believer, his heart problem is taken care of in the koh by the Gospel, not by the works of the calling in the koe. Hence God's love via the law via earthly callings is exercised unto His own glory by the instrument of evil man. Though man sins in his calling and does not do it well or from the heart. (breath)

The believer's heart is taken care of in heaven by faith in the gospel, not works in the koe. The believer is to struggle with his sin is such a way that does not lead to despair! If this happens, despair, then the old man rises up and takes his works, as it where, via the conscious, into heaven as so to "offer them" to God. When this happens, in the koh, faith disappears and works begin to arise. The old man more and more vigorously than before tries to clean up and perfect the work to offer to God. God slays him, cross, by the Law. The more the old man strives the more he is slain. This is part of the putting to death of the old man, the doer. At length the old man has nothing and the new man arises or is fed by fleeing back to the cross of Christ received by faith. Faith is then again in heaven where the conscience is. 

The believer puts on Christ in baptism, His death (death of the old man in us) and ressurrection (life of the believer in us). The old man is put to death by the Law through works in the koe through vocation. The new man is raised to life by the Gospel unto faith in koh through the church.

Vocation is not some super spiritual thing, this is just the opposite, but rather the simple mundane things. Luther proves that ultimately the monk cloisters were pure sin. Since they were invalid callings just like prositution. This is why he was right against the anabaptist who sought to withdraw from society, even peacefully. Because ultimately that was great sin and of the devil. As they draw away from society, they cannot love their neighbors in legitimate callings from God. As a matter of fact to deny simple callings like milk maid and normal jobs as God's holy callings is ultimately satanic blaspheme! (breath)

At length the believer's old man is put to death in vocation, this is the daily cross to bear! Why? Because man is pulled out of himself to serve another, love of neighbor who needs our calling (God does not faith in Christ alone serves God). Only the man with empty hands, not offering his works (whatever they are) to God, explicitly or implicitly as if to gain favor or ANY kind of merit/reward from God, can receive the Gospel by naked faith. Because his hands are emptied and he has nothing, thus all he can receive and trust is the naked mercy of God...he has nothing to offer up as it were. Thus, in calling man is called to serve neighbor, in the simple things, so big, depending, but slowly all of these serve neighbor and NOT God. The man finds himself with no works before God, all given to neighbor, not looking into himself, and thus hands emptied faith arises by the Gospel given. He literally receives the mercy passively, he can do no other. For if the old man begins to raise his works done in calling to heaven, God will throw them down as filthy rags, after all the station is God's and not the man's!!! Adam dies both ways, and is naked, emptied of himself and can ONLY rely on shear mercy. Great callings are more dangerous than mundane ones since man struggles glorying in the greater the work. Keep in mind man can turn any thing into a work to offer God great or small but this shows the principle: E.g. Who would glory in raising before God in their conscience the picking up of a piece of trash from floor as worthy of heaven before God? Not very many. But MANY would be in danger of glorying in raising before God in their conscience the being a missionary as worthy of heaven before God. Do you see the dynamic going on here. Neither of these two callings are worthy of heaven and are filthy rags before God done by men, though God accomplishes good even through evil man unto His own glory. Yet, both of these callings, being God's, God's law, God's love are holy. To raise one over the other is the blaspheme from man.

That's the two minute Larry regurgitation of a much better presented books first three chapters. It's one of those, once you begin, you will not set it down!

I'm frustrated with myself though. I left it at work tonight and can't read it at bed time. Oh well, Lost is on, perhaps I needed a break to digest it.

Larry


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 10, 2006)

This is great, Larry. Thank you so much! This book has bumped up to near the top of my wish list.


----------



## Larry Hughes (May 28, 2006)

Andrew,

Another up date. I'm near the end of the book. It's one of those books that you read a profound thought about every quarter of a chapter and just want to sit and ponder it and savor it for a while.

Without going into much detail as to the middle:

This is a great top shelf book. Definitely get it, you will find much much much help and rest and peace in your soul regarding the Gospel and calling/vocation.

Those who think Luther promoted a form of antinomianism by his high view of Law & Gospel do NOT in the least understand Luther, nor in my opinion the reformation. He actually is showing were true good works come from. I'll try to give you the best I can a slender piece of this, but get the book. It will open your eyes not only to Luther's thought but scripture itself!!!

Luther states, "œNotice now why St. John does not give his name; faith makes no sects, no differences, as works do. For that reason there is required of faith no specific work, which can be pointed out by name; for faith does all sorts of works best suited to the situation. To faith one good work is as acceptable as another. But it is the nature of Judas Iscariot to split up in works without faith"¦."

Gustaf Wingren continues, "œ"¦If a man believes in salvation by works, he focuses holiness in some outward conduct and demands (or implies "“ldh) that others imitate it. Thereby society is split up into groups, each of which follows some pattern of holiness. Their concern is neither the good of all nor the well being of the neighbor, whose life goes on under outward conditions that are completely different from those of such narrow and specific limits of holiness"¦" END QUOTE

LDH digestion/exposition (of that chapter in the book): 

Thus, we see how true faith and true good works function in opposition to false faith and false good works. For faith fixes the conscience in heaven and as it looks to God knows only the Gospel, its works come naturally to it as life naturally comes to us in our individual stations as all things become good works to this faith. 

In salvation born of Christ alone man naturally focuses on his neighbor in love and does not need direction as to particular "œgood works". In fact godly love cannot nor will not distinguish or name "œgood works" for true love cannot. When works are distinguished and named it is certainly false love and the devil´s faith for the focus is on the work toward heaven for salvation, personal holiness and/or sanctifcation (in reality active sanctification, my effort to do it for that purpose is false sanctification, all imitation of saints, Paul or otherwise is false) and not toward neighbor. But when the focus of the Christian is on his neighbor´s best needs this is the focus of true godly love issuing forth from true and living faith that is at rest in Christ alone. Yet he, the Christian, invests NO trust in such works for Christ is his focus as to being right with God and heaven; while his neighbor and earth is his focus earthward in true love. God works through both the Christian and the pagan alike to hiddenly give His goodness to ungrateful man kind in the general earthly sense. The works are the same among believers and unbelievers alike on the earthly kingdom level, it is faith that deals with man´s fallen sinful heart and conscience in heaven that makes the difference heavenward for the Christian. Thus, the least of works such as milking a cow becomes the mask of God giving His hidden goodness toward an ungrateful fallen man kind. 
Similarly the creation groans in its love and obedience. A flower cries out, as it were, "œAll day long I show forth God´s beauty to nothing but rogues and scoundrels that would smash me under foot without consideration". In the believer faith reveals this to him since he rests in Christ alone and not his work. Therefore, like the flower, true godly love gives and is lost on ungrateful receivers just as Christ was given and crucified by men and yet according to God´s predestine purpose set forth from eternity to save men from God´s wrath born upon Jesus. Love is sacrificial in this sense for it is lost and it does not even gain favor with God among the believer. It gives completely and is self emptied entirely. It is without profit for believer and unbeliever alike, faith alone in Christ alone is the difference between the Christian and the unbeliever. 

A man, as a Christian, is called to various godly vocations/callings exactly where he already is. Thus, Paul said if you be a slave remain one and serve well, if a master remain one and serve well. If you can advance for the love of neighbor then fine, if not then fine, for all is the same under Christ and none are considered. In heaven all men are laid bare naked and equal where no works or position are received by God except Christ alone in whom the believer rests passively. God does not need nor receive your works, but your neighbor, whoever he is closest at hand, Christian or pagan, does!

Imitators as opposed to those in vocation (God´s calling) either in false religion or false concepts of Christianity are those who call this or that a good work or better work or more pleasing work to God. Thus, they invent "œcallings" from God and invent that a particular work is a calling from God so as to please Him in some way or sanctify themselves before God. They explicitly or implicitly set up "œholy orders" and explicitly or implicitly foist them onto others, even with so called "œgood intensions". But in reality they are holding up their own selfish works to God and trying to make others do the same. It is crucial to understand that holy orders are not so much what we think of just historically like "œmonasteries" or "œfastings" or "œprayer" but rather anything that may be set up in order to gain God´s attention either as a pagan or as a professing Christian toward God and personal piety, holiness or sanctification. It need not be unto "œsalvation" directly but a false form of post "œgrace" holiness. Holy orders can consist in for example making much of missions and evangelism, yes we can and do make idols of these, but ignoring or thinking less of all the other callings of God to His people such as a truck driver or garbage man who is also God´s instrument fulfilling a holy calling and loving neighbor. 

The apostle Paul´s analogy of the body is helpful here as he links it to the body of Christ, the church; E.g., the foot is a part of the body that is necessary for the function of a healthy body. The foot should not set up "œholy orders" that all should be in the work of "œfootness" in order to please God (analogous to any kind of holy order) or sanctify one´s self. If the foot does this the rest of the body which tries to please God or "œgrow in so called godliness" by being a foot "“ it - eventually fails and dies and of course none please God, not only because of failure but being a foot, holy orders of any kind, do not please God AT ALL. If the tongue tries to be a foot the body will not function. Likewise if all men are missionaries for example the church will die for not all are called to this duty. Secondly, the foot would not separate itself like sectarians and cults do from the body so that the foot could set up a "œfoot denomination" as if to emphasize the holiness of "œfootness". Thirdly, the foot, or any other body part by analogy, does not SEEK to be a part of the body, for the foot is already a part of the body (the Gospel). Seeking to be part of the body by "œfootness" (i.e. holy orders or sanctification) is works and works are thrown down from heaven by God, thus God says, "œALL your righteousness is but filthy rags and fruitless death to Me." Likewise the Christian does not seek a work or holy order in order to be part of the body of Christ, prove his faith to be real, Prove his "œregeneration, or by any other visibility make his faith known to himself, he is so, a Christian, by his bare naked faith alone in Christ alone! Faith here is not just believing the facts but trust for me (pro me, Lat.)

Here we see that the true ethic of vocation or God´s will for the Christian is not in seeking sanctification or holy living or regeneration which is utter selfishness and demonic religion. I.e., I don´t seek to be sanctified or know my regeneration by doing "œa particular good work or series of them" for my neighbor in which the real goal is my self, my holy sanctification, which is in reality false sanctification. Even more, that is to say that the real reason I do a good work in this way for my sanctification or proof of it is really for my own "œholiness", at least as I think I may be holy or regenerate, but not in reality according to God´s word. This is the devil´s sanctification and religion and it dominates today´s American pietism found in many many churches and denominations. 
The ethic of vocation or God´s calling upon the Christian life is the neighbor, that is the neighbor nearest you (son, daughter, husband, wife, mother, father, co-worker, boss, etc"¦). Thus, true Christian sanctification is hidden and passive, it comes to you automatically as life comes at you and the action rebounding to this is natural in faith (I trust and am firmly confident in God´s grace and mercy toward me, thus I just do my called mundane tasks as God/life comes at me). True sanctification or holiness is hidden in ordinary vocation and calling. Thus, the true Christian in the end will be stunned and say, "œLord when did we do all these things for You?", while the deceived will say, "œWhen did we fail to do all these things for You?". The former, true hidden holiness, is the dying of the old Adam, the sacrifice of self, for others. For in the mundane callings (or higher callings for all are the same before God as nothing) of life one cannot trust in these works for salvation but MUST trust in Christ alone. This is true holiness of living, yet it is quite passive in how it operates toward the Christian, man receives it passively and acts only reflexively, like a poor tool or instrument in God´s hand. Thus, Paul said remain where you are when you were called.

When men imitate saints, apostles or even Jesus they seek a false religion and false sanctification. Men are not to imitate other men for each man´s station and calling (i.e. the will of God) is different as to time and space and it is given by God it need not be sought. "œSeeking the will of God" in this sense, ironically, is a sign of a man attempting, so he thinks, to work his way to heaven or to become more holy or prove his regeneration. When we "œseek" God this way we are really seeking an idol. If a man does imitate a saint, apostle or Jesus in a "œright" sense it can only be unto their diligence toward their (saint, Jesus) various callings, not imitating their (saint, Jesus) specific callings themselves. 

This, imitation and true vocation, along with a plethora of Scripture, militates entirely against the heresy of the "œregenerate church" only on this earth. For men cannot know another man´s heart, nor can vain men know a work to be a true work from faith or not, to claim this is to claim to be like God. "œRegenerate church only on earth" thinking, ALWAYS leads to prescription of holy orders and a false love that "œnames" works, but true godly love cannot name works for ITS focus is purely the neighbor "“ so focused is the heart and conscience in utter trust and faith upon Christ alone. Regenerate church only thinking cannot only lead this way because it must set up distinct parameters whereby to measure this "œregeneration", it, at length strays away from faith and Christ by necessity of living by sight and not faith. 

Thus, the Apostle´s Creed rings literally true, "œI believe in the holy universal church", that is "œI trust in its existence" or negatively put "œthough I do not see, sense or detect it here on earth as pure, I trust it is and will be in the consummation of the kingdom".

From Scripture Luther powerfully observes, "œOnly the Lord knows those who are his; and according to the Scriptures it happens very often that God´s friends and chosen ones are hidden in vocations that are ordinary and little noticed by human eyes. The Bethlehem shepherds went back to their flocks, though they had been the first of all to see the Savior; and, the Virgin Mary doubtless did her housework as usual after the annunciation, without letting her neighbors know anything about it. See how purely she bears all things in God, that she claims no works, no honor, and no fame. She acts as she did before, when she had none of this. She does not plume herself, nor vaunt herself, nor proclaim that she has become the Mother of God. She milks the cows, cooks, washes the dishes, cleans, performing the work of a housemaid or house wife in lowly and despised tasks"¦She is esteemed among other women and her neighbors no more highly than before, nor did she desire to be. She remained a poor townswoman, among the lowly crowd."

This is why the pure Law and pure Gospel must be preached and the ONLY WAY in which good works will supernaturally arise. Men attempting to produce them only show both their vanity and unbelief in the Word of God. For many Christian men will snivel, cry aloud and whimper about faith and good works and truly, truly, truly not know either one though they have lots of words and quote books of scripture!

Ldh

[Edited on 5-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]


----------



## Laura (May 28, 2006)

Thank you for taking the time to write those summaries, Larry. I have needed correction in this for some time, and Luther's words have spoken (and cut!) very deeply into my heart.


----------



## Larry Hughes (May 28, 2006)

Laura,

You are very welcome.

What is so revealing about Luther is that he really saw the relationship between true faith and works and how it is monergistic through and through, and really saw how others did not. Not that man does not act but the action is in reaction to the monergestic action of God first! That's why he always insisted upon faith above all. 

He points out that when one comes to real faith and really grasps the Gospel (for self) that for the first time the believer sees that all he did before was vain works in attempt to gain himself as religious or sanctified or pious or holy. He tries to believe, but in doing so he does not and cannot this way. This falls not just to "preconverts" but to those within the camp and profess faith. The problem is - is when a preacher or teacher begins to "name" works and imply certain ones "being better" or "yes but the spiritual man will______ or that one should "imitate" a saint of old, the hearer thinks they must "do" something likewise to be "just as holy or sanctified or pursue a similar path. Not knowing that God has called them to something altogether different.

In our time what I've found, and myself included in the past, is how many Christians want to "imitate" christians of past eras. E.g. Try to live under J. Edward's resolutions or live like the puritans or some similar imitation. These and similar become false works of false holiness because there design by the one doing them is FOR holiness, they think. The true crucifying of the old flesh comes as God brings one's vocation/calling to a man and it is pretty much mundane. For it is the mundane and scandalous, like the cross of Christ, that the old glory hog flesh flees from and says, "God cannot be here for this is mundane and scandalous not glorious and majestic!" E.g. Everyone glories in church yard piety, whatever it is, but few care about the woman laboring to care for her children. Although we can even make that a work. The thing to grasp is not the work in particular but the fleshes principle operation in giveing trust and glorying in works. It just so happens that the "great works" are more dangerous in this aspect because the "glory" man attaches to the greater over the lesser, thus the inherent danger.


The old man is literally killed when he desiring to be a great servant of the faith is held back and forced by God to say be a simple husband, father and farmer for example. The flesh doesn't want to serve neighbor in these mundane tasks but would rather have the glory and recognition of being a "great pastor or teacher or missionary". At length the flesh if forced into the mundane and thus killed for it cannot take these before heaven as it would attempt the later. Of course the reverse could happen to but men are more predisposed to danger when a calling is more "strictly" related to the faith as we perceive it. E.g. do you ever note how most men glory in Paul the Apostle and write tons of books on Paul and exhort men to "be like Paul". But few to none on say Joseph the Lord's earthly father who fed and cared for the very Lord of Glory! This shows, especially today, our tendancy toward self glorification in the "higher things".

This is why when Luther was asked once that if the Lord Jesus Christ were to return tomorrow what would he do. His reply is absolutely preposterous to the glory flesh: "I would plant a tree." I imagine it quite odd to most modern Christian ears today as well, which really makes the point.

It is important to know that in Luther's theology of cross and suffering that the seeking of suffering was not the central issue for he came from many who self inflicted suffering as many do today. Rather at the heart of it was Christ's suffering for me/you. That's key to grasp because many who latch onto Luther to support their twisted view of suffering appeal to Luther ignoring the very fact that he spoke against seeking one's own cross. Rather the cross is laid upon us and daily primarily in calling/vocation, not something we seek out as self appointed false crosses or something we avoid.

Anyway, if you want a good study this book is one.

Blessings,

Ldh

[Edited on 5-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]

[Edited on 5-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]

[Edited on 5-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]

[Edited on 5-28-2006 by Larry Hughes]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 29, 2006)

Larry,

Thank you indeed for your helpful digests on this book. I now have it and hope to begin my own studies soon. Your comments are much appreciated.

As somewhat of an aside, do you know if Martin Luther (anywhere) had an occasion to comment on _The Imitation of Christ_ by Thomas a Kempis? I've been interested to know to what extent Reformers and Puritans appreciated or warned against his conception of spiritual piety?


----------



## Larry Hughes (Jul 16, 2006)

Very eye opening quote that kind of fits here if you've read Wengren on Luther.


The spiritual/material problem

The early church went through a great many controversies trying to understand how Jesus could possibly be both God and man at the same time. In the fifth century Nestorius was accused of teaching of "œtwo Christs", one human and one divine.

Our age, too, has its problems with the relationship between heavenly and earthly things. All too often Christians practice a kind of Nestorian piety which separates the human from the divine. Only spiritual matters are considered worthy of God´s consideration. The earthly, material and physical part of human existence is looked down upon and every attempt is made to transform it into a spiritual dimension. People go to a lot of trouble to manufacture a "œChristian" environment in which to live and work. Rather than being transformed by the renewal of their own minds, these Christians attempt to transform earth into heaven. It is time to look at the ideal Christian environment being advocated today and ask whether this insulated existence is not in reality a new monastic movement.

But there is a much more serious question. Isn´t the inordinate compulsion to buy "œChristian" products, to patronize "œChristian" businesses, to watch "œChristian" television, to read "œChristian" publications, and to listen exclusively to "œChristian" music actually a denial of the incarnation? Isn´t this really a rejection of what God did when he became man, taking on the material of this physical world?

The radical alternative

There is another route. It is the alternative of a Christian piety which finds its source in the God made-flesh, Jesus Christ. He did not despise the material, but redeemed it. He did not reject the physical, but assumed it. He did not flee from the world, but rescued it. 

The New Testament speaks of a Christian life molded by faith in this God-man. Here there is no rigid division between the physical and the spiritual: "œ"¦I urge you, brothers, in view of God´s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God "“ which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1). Rather than building a wall around ourselves, we are asked to take an active role in the real world, "œmaking the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil" (Ephesians 5:16). The most ordinary and routine activity becomes a way of demonstrating our faith in God: "œSo whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God" (1 Corinthians 10:31). And even the lowliest gesture has a spiritual dimension: "œ"¦if anyone gives a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward" (Matthew 10:42).

This approach to the Christian life is radically different from the one we see in much of the Evangelical world. There is a reason it is radically different. It is built on the most radical thing in the world "“ the cross of Christ.

END QUOTE "“Senkbeil, Sanctification: Christ in action


----------



## MW (Jul 16, 2006)

God manifest in the flesh is one part of the mystery of godliness. Received up into glory is another. The Lord will not redeem the earthly without radically transforming it according to the heavenly order. Hence while there is no division between the physical and spiritual, there is between the earthly and heavenly, Col. 3:1-3. What Geerhardus Vos calls the native milieu of NT eschatology.


----------



## Larry Hughes (Jul 17, 2006)

I don't think anybody is denying that.

The main two points was against this rubbish idea of modern monkery in which every thing is "christianized", buy "christian music" which over here is horrid and these little citedals of "christian" business only and so forth. This IS monkery in a laity form.

Second, that such in fact is to deny Christ sanctifying the ordinary in and which we function in our vocations (callings) to truly serve and love our neighbor and not some kind of church yard invention of "piety". In short as Calvin said we should not disdain those things so purchased with the precious blood of Christ. And as Luther said we chiefly love our neighbor by our callings, what ever they are. Calvin also recognized this new monkery, or gnostic tendency, among the Anabaptist of his time in which their denial of serving in civil capacity was at length a denial of God's law.

The very fact that Christ came in the flesh, was ressurrected and now His body IS at the right hand of God the Father is the three fold weapon against ALL forms of gnosticism which sets up this spiritual/physical duality in the here and now. The Christian's ultimate hope, which the Apostle Paul plentiously points out, is IN the ressurrection of our bodies unto glory. AS good as being away from the body and with the Lord IS, the greatest is the final ressurrection of the glorified body and final new creation. In fact our ressurrection should not be divorced in our thinking from Christ's but considered as an organic whole. As sure as Christ the head is ressurrected and AT the right hand of God the Father, certainly IS His body the church to be ressurrected. It should be viewed organically for the greatest assurance and STRONG faith derives from this which can sustain a man in ANY suffering, even unto death for the faith.

L


----------



## MW (Jul 17, 2006)

Agreed. But we should not lose the old evangelical ideal of heavenly-mindedness and the priority of heavenly calling. Blessings!


----------

