What would Jesus do?

[rmb]

Which is the more important question. What WOULD Jesus do? Or what DID Jesus do?

 

[BobVigneault]

No debate here for the reformed. WDJD! Our justification and sanctification are hinged to his completed work.

 

[Mathetes]

I would say that you could only determine what Jesus would do based on what Jesus did do. Even then, I think it can invite some pretty shaky speculation.

There's no denying that Jesus is our ultimate role model, but we should also remember that Jesus had privledges and abilities that we do not.

 

[Pergamum]

I think "what would Jesus do" is a fine question.

I certainly am not out to shoot down a Christian fad for just being faddish. THis seems certainly one of the better ones.

If a WWJB bracelet helps people think about what God would demand on their lives, I am fine with that. Amen.



We can mock it and say we would prefer hearing about what Jesus DID...but the goal of this fad is practical application of the finished work of Christ and it appears to take the finished work of redemption as a basis. It appears to be a fad among the young who already claim Christ.

Both what Jesus DID and what he demands of us are both good things to be reminded of.

 

[Poimen]

I think "what would Jesus do" is a fine question.

I certainly am not out to shoot down a Christian fad for just being faddish. THis seems certainly one of the better ones.

If a WWJB bracelet helps people think about what God would demand on their lives, I am fine with that. Amen.



We can mock it and say we would prefer hearing about what Jesus DID...but the goal of this fad is practical application of the finished work of Christ and it appears to take the finished work of redemption as a basis. It appears to be a fad among the young who already claim Christ.

Both what Jesus DID and what he demands of us are both good things to be reminded of.

It doesn't really matter what the goal of this fad is because it gives the distinct impression that one must judge ethics by what the Lord did, whereas Christians live by His teachings (Matthew 28:19-20) One might respond and say 'we believe that too' but why not just say that instead?

After all, what Jesus did was to call certain people vipers, white washed tombs, Satan, slow. He mocked the traditions of the Pharisees, he overturned the tables in the temple, called himself the 'Son of God' and the 'Son of Man.' He came into Jerusalem while being praised as He who comes in the name of the Lord. He also allowed himself to scourged, scorned, and crucified. He performed miracles; he calmed the wind and the waves.

And our Lord lived a sinless life and calls us to perfection (Matthew 5:48) but we can never do this as our Lord did! We can claim to follow in his footsteps by pressing on to perfection at our resurrection (Philippians 3:12) but we still, at this point, are not doing as Jesus as would.

Jesus would also judge men to hell; be raised from the dead. He would also claim to come back again and judge the living and the dead. He will consign men to hell for all eternity; He will welcome His sheep to the blessed eternity prepared for them... etc. etc.

Thus it shouldn't be 'what would Jesus do' but 'what did Jesus teach.' The whole thing, intentional or not, smacks of Pelagianism and demonstrates the lack of sound biblical and Reformed teaching on law & gospel.

 

[BobVigneault]

I think "what would Jesus do" is a fine question.

I certainly am not out to shoot down a Christian fad for just being faddish. THis seems certainly one of the better ones.

If a WWJB bracelet helps people think about what God would demand on their lives, I am fine with that. Amen.

But Trevor, doesn't this muddle things. God does not demand of us what Jesus would do. That kind of thinking leads to moralism. We are to strive to live according to the revealed will of God but God demands something that we can't do. We have already failed that which God demands on our lives. Praise God that we can find our rest and comfort in what Jesus did.

We may be saying the same thing, I'm just not sure.

 

[BobVigneault]

I didn't realize that I was posting at the same time as Pastor Kok. He has expanded the point I was trying to make and did it very well.

 

[Pergamum]

When the WWJD slogan is given and people think about what Jesus would do they are often reminded of his teachings and what he did do. HIs work on the Cross was the reason for which he came, but his sinless life and example were part of it. If people want to remind themsevles of this, I have bigger battles to fight then tell the kid with the WWJD bracelet that this smacks of pelagianism. I am not sure that is directtly does so any more than any motivation to live a holy life does. Any slogan, by its very nature, is incomplete. So every slogan is subject to criticism. But as far as slogans go - this one is a pretty good one.

All Christians should strive for moral lives. As long as we don't forget the foundation, WWJD does not have to lead to moralism, any more than the fish symbol would lead us to idolatry due to its portrayal of an image of Christ.

To wear a WWJD bracelet is often a memory aid and maybe a symbol of identification. Hey, I want to remind myself to examine my life and yes, I am a Christian. As far as these purpose the WWJD slogan works just fine. The five solas or the WCF would not fit on a bracelet after all.

 

[BobVigneault]

I would not jump on anybody for wearing a WWJD bracelet. However, I won't let my kids wear one and I have given my reason why.

 

[crhoades]

To say that wwjd leads to moralism or pelagianism is to confuse the various uses of the law. To say what would Jesus do is to ask, "What norm must my actions conform to?". In other words,, it is a law question. As long as a Christian is using that question to clarify what his actions must be out of gratitude with a heart full of love and to God's glory alone based on the finished work of Christ through the power of the Spirit because the good works were prepared beforehand and it is God who works in and thorugh you then I don't see a problem asking it. To say that it can't be asked is to deny one of the three uses of the law. I doubt Trevor or most people who wear the bracelets are asking the question to figure out how they must be justified.


John 14:15"If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
John 14:21Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him."

 

[Herald]

But Trevor, doesn't this muddle things. God does not demand of us what Jesus would do. That kind of thinking leads to moralism. We are to strive to live according to the revealed will of God but God demands something that we can't do. We have already failed that which God demands on our lives. Praise God that we can find our rest and comfort in what Jesus did.

We may be saying the same thing, I'm just not sure.

Nothing more to add.

 

[crhoades]

Nothing more to add.

I would add nothing else either if what everyone is saying is along these lines:

(I'm afraid there might be semantic issues, equivocation, or just plain talking past each other so far. I doubt anyone interacting here are legalists or antinomians in the strict sense of the term.)

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q. 91. What is the duty which God requireth of man?
A. The duty which God requireth of man, is obedience to his revealed will.

Q. 92. What did God at first reveal unto man as the rule of his obedience?
A. The rule of obedience revealed to Adam in the estate of innocence, and to all mankind in him, besides a special command not to eat of the fruit of the tree knowledge of good and evil, was the moral law.

Q. 93. What is the moral law?
A. The moral law is the declaration of the will of God to mankind, directing and binding every one to personal, perfect, and perpetual conformity and obedience thereunto, in the frame and disposition of the whole man, soul and body,[399] and in performance of all those duties of holiness and righteousness which he oweth to God and man:[400] promising life upon the fulfilling, and threatening death upon the breach of it.[401]

Q. 94. Is there any use of the moral law to man since the fall?
A. Although no man, since the fall, can attain to righteousness and life by the moral law:[402] yet there is great use thereof, as well common to all men, as peculiar either to the unregenerate, or the regenerate.[403]

Q. 95. Of what use is the moral law to all men?
A. The moral law is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and the will of God,[404] and of their duty, binding them to walk accordingly;[405] to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives:[406] to humble them in the sense of their sin and misery,[407] and thereby help them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ,[408] and of the perfection of his obedience.[409]

Q. 96. What particular use is there of the moral law to unregenerate men?
A. The moral law is of use to unregenerate men, to awaken their consciences to flee from wrath to come,[410] and to drive them to Christ;[411] or, upon their continuance in the estate and way of sin, to leave them inexcusable,[412] and under the curse thereof.[413]

Q. 97. What special use is there of the moral law to the regenerate?
A. Although they that are regenerate, and believe in Christ, be delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works,[414] so as thereby they are neither justified[415] nor condemned;[416] yet, besides the general uses thereof common to them with all men, it is of special use, to show them how much they are bound to Christ for his fulfilling it, and enduring the curse thereof in their stead, and for their good;[417] and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness,[418] and to express the same in their greater care to conform themselves thereunto as the rule of their obedience.[419]

Q. 98. Where is the moral law summarily comprehended?
A. The moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments, which were delivered by the voice of God upon Mount Sinai, and written by him in two tables of stone;[420] and are recorded in the twentieth chapter of Exodus. The four first commandments containing our duty to God, and the other six our duty to man.[421]

Q. 99. What rules are to be observed for the right understanding of the ten commandments?
A. For the right understanding of the ten commandments, these rules are to be observed:
1. That the law is perfect, and bindeth everyone to full conformity in the whole man unto the righteousness thereof, and unto entire obedience forever; so as to require the utmost perfection of every duty, and to forbid the least degree of every sin.[422]
2. That it is spiritual, and so reacheth the understanding, will, affections, and all other powers of the soul; as well as words, works, and gestures.[423]
3. That one and the same thing, in divers respects, is required or forbidden in several commandments.[424]
4. That as, where a duty is commanded, the contrary sin is forbidden;[425] and, where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is commanded:[426] so, where a promise is annexed, the contrary threatening is included;[427] and, where a threatening is annexed, the contrary promise is included.[428]
5. That what God forbids, is at no time to be done;[429] what he commands, is always our duty;[430] and yet every particular duty is not to be done at all times.[431]
6. That under one sin or duty, all of the same kind are forbidden or commanded; together with all the causes, means, occasions, and appearances thereof, and provocations thereunto.[432]
7. That what is forbidden or commanded to ourselves, we are bound, according to our places to endeavour that it may be avoided or performed by others, according to the duty of their places.[433]
8. That in what is commanded to others, we are bound, according to our places and callings, to be helpful to them;[434] and to take heed of partaking with others in what is forbidden them.[435]

 

[Davidius]

To say that wwjd leads to moralism or pelagianism is to confuse the various uses of the law. To say what would Jesus do is to ask, "What norm must my actions conform to?". In other words,, it is a law question. As long as a Christian is using that question to clarify what his actions must be out of gratitude with a heart full of love and to God's glory alone based on the finished work of Christ through the power of the Spirit because the good works were prepared beforehand and it is God who works in and thorugh you then I don't see a problem asking it. To say that it can't be asked is to deny one of the three uses of the law. I doubt Trevor or most people who wear the bracelets are asking the question to figure out how they must be justified.


John 14:15"If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
John 14:21Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him."

The verses you quoted support what Bob et al. have said, though. Jesus said if we love him we will follow his commandments, not try to mimick his actual life. When we try to turn narrative into didactic teaching we get into a big mess because so much of what Jesus did isn't meant to be done by us. This is one of the huge problems in the charismatic movement. They see Jesus doing certain things and therefore assume that we are supposed to be doing the same things. They base their teaching on narrative. However, as has already been aptly stated, we don't need to do that because, as you yourself quoted, Jesus meant us to follow his teaching/commandments, not his actions themselves. Of course there is no discrepancy between what Jesus taught and what he did in the sense that nothing he did was out of line with what he taught, but whereas we are supposed to do everything he taught, we are not supposed to do everything he did.

 

[BobVigneault]

I would never question brother Trevor's understanding of justification, our dear brother is rock solid and an inspiration to me. I am reacting a bit to the word 'demand'. I would choose another word or qualify the word a bit more.

 

[crhoades]

The verses you quoted support what Bob et al. have said, though. Jesus said if we love him we will follow his commandments, not try to mimick his actual life. When we try to turn narrative into didactic teaching we get into a big mess because so much of what Jesus did isn't meant to be done by us. This is one of the huge problems in the charismatic movement. They see Jesus doing certain things and therefore assume that we are supposed to be doing the same things. They base their teaching on narrative. However, as has already been aptly stated, we don't need to do that because, as you yourself quoted, Jesus meant us to follow his teaching/commandments, not his actions themselves. Of course there is no discrepancy between what Jesus taught and what he did in the sense that nothing he did was out of line with what he taught, but whereas we are supposed to do everything he taught, we are not supposed to do everything he did.

This is where I am saying that we may be talking past one another. When I hear the term what would Jesus do, I interpret it that it was the joy of our Lord to do His father's will and keep the law on our behalf. That translates into keeping the law and ultimately loving God and neighbor perfectly because love fulfills the law. I don't interpret it as finding the need to heal issues of blood, cast out demons, walk on water, rise from the dead etc. (although converting water into wine would be cool!)

But all of that being said and I completely agree with the thrust of what everyone is saying, I just don't want to say that we should in no wise imitate Christ. There should be times in His life that we should be able to look at and say that we should do likewise. In other words,, I would rather correct the abuse that imitating Christ could lead to rather than forcing a super-strict either-or situation.

The apostles exhorted believers to follow in their doctrine (teaching) and their life:

2 Thes. 3:
6Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. 7For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, 8nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you. 9It was not because we do not have that right, but to give you in ourselves an example to imitate. 10For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.

Hebrews 13
7Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith.

3 John 1
11Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God. 12Demetrius has received a good testimony from everyone, and from the truth itself. We also add our testimony, and you know that our testimony is true.

 

[Davidius]

This is where I am saying that we may be talking past one another. When I hear the term what would Jesus do, I interpret it that it was the joy of our Lord to do His father's will and keep the law on our behalf. That translates into keeping the law and ultimately loving God and neighbor perfectly because love fulfills the law. I don't interpret it as finding the need to heal issues of blood, cast out demons, walk on water, rise from the dead etc. (although converting water into wine would be cool!)

But all of that being said and I completely agree with the thrust of what everyone is saying, I just don't want to say that we should in no wise imitate Christ. There should be times in His life that we should be able to look at and say that we should do likewise. In other words,, I would rather correct the abuse that imitating Christ could lead to rather than forcing a super-strict either-or situation.

The apostles exhorted believers to follow in their doctrine (teaching) and their life

 

[Pergamum]

CHris: Yep, I think you've hit the nail on the head with your diagnosis. ANy "disagreement" (I don;'t think there is any here) is purely a matter of a preference in semantics. Bob is right and I am right..and everyone else on this thread seems right too. I haven't heard a single comment in this thread that I would dispute.

I have heard some of my friends really get upset over youths wearing WWJD bracelets and so any "reaction" that I have posted is to try to attempt any of this sort of reactionariness towards waht appears to be yet another Chrsitian fad. But, I think there is no such reaction here.