I think we are live now. And welcome. Nobody's here. That's okay. People usually watch this stuff later and people listen to it on sermon audio because I upload the sound file to sermon audio. And I did get one question sent via email. Can I earn my way to heaven? Very good question. Can I earn my way to heaven? And of course the answer to that question is a clear and emphatic no. You cannot earn your way into heaven. a library, like what are some good books? There's one person here! Yay! Watching. Now that they left. There was one person, now it's back to zero. That's okay. Can I earn my way into heaven? No, you cannot. And in fact, if you could earn your way into heaven, in fact, if you could partially earn your way into heaven, Jesus Christ didn't need to come into the world to do everything that he did to save us from our sins. And so, Galatians 2, 21 teaches that truth to us. Galatians 2, 21 says, I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain. And so, our good works, our righteousness, cannot satisfy the requirements of God. God is holy, and God's law does not allow room for failure of any kind whatsoever. And so, if a person has not conformed perfectly to the Law of God, which is summarized so well by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5, verse 48, after he kind of explains the Law, The prohibition against adultery, as including all lustful thoughts and inclinations of heart. The prohibition against murder includes all unjust hatred in your heart towards anyone. The summation of the law is, therefore, you shall be perfect, just as your Father in Heaven is perfect, also summarized in the phrase from Leviticus 18.5. do this and you will live. The main message of the Bible is that mankind is not able to do this and live. So even if someone says, well I haven't broken all the commandments, at least not today, the scripture also says in James 2.10, for whoever shall keep the whole law, yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. Because to break one commandment of God really is to break them all at the same time. And so, we cannot earn our favor with God. The favor that we have with God is solely because of Jesus Christ. In fact, the Lutheran dogmaticians in the Reformation coined the Latin phrase that Biblical grace is the favor dei proctor Christum, the favor of God on account of Christ. Why does God favor me, love me, bless me, justify me, and adopt me into his family? On account of Christ, what Jesus did. Jesus enters into the broken covenant of works and fulfills it for us. He takes its legal sanction at the cross, the punishment, the penalty is taken by Christ at the cross, 2 Corinthians 5, 21. God made him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf so that in him we would become the righteousness of God. And he also imputes to us the righteousness that we need to stand before God, Romans 4, 6, just as David speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works. So the works that we do and the shot that we take at obeying God once we're justified and born again, those are done in gratitude. Those are fruits and evidence only. They are not in any way at all organically connected to faith. Faith is simply receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, which is the sole thing that gets us past the final judgment into heaven. And so when you think about death and dying, when you think about standing before the judgment seat of God and what's going to get you into heaven, it has to be Christ and Christ alone. and Jesus is our all-in-all. When I think about how could I possibly hope to survive a judgment before the all-holy, consuming fire God of heaven and earth, it's because I'm hidden in Jesus Christ. I'm hidden in Christ and His righteousness is imputed to my legal account like my legal ledger before God in the bank has all of Christ's righteousness in it, in the books. And so the righteousness of Jesus Christ, His whole life of preceptive law-keeping is accepted by God the Father as if I had done it myself. And His whole satisfaction of divine justice at the cross is accepted by God as the full payment of all my sins. And that is the heart of Christian assurance, is knowing that And all the sins, even the sins I will commit in the future, were nailed to the cross of Christ and I bear them no more. And those sins have been removed from me as far as the East is from the West. And no legal charge of guilt can ever be brought against me for anything that I ever have done or ever will do in my life. I am fully forgiven and once and for all accounted as justified and righteous. We do not maintain our justified status by obedience. That's a lie. That's a false gospel. That's not true. We obey God, and we love God, and we seek to implement His commandments and put them into practice in our lives because we are saved, because we're already going to heaven, not in order to get ourselves there. J.C. Ryle used a wonderful illustration and it was his book Holiness. Holiness is a great book by J.C. Ryle. And he makes the argument there that let's say you had a landowner that gave a parcel of land to one person and a parcel of land to another person and encouraged them, now go and cultivate the land and grow as much food as you can on it, and I want you to take care of it, and I want it to yield as much fruit as possible, so go take care of the land." And he gives those guys, each of them, every form of legal documentation that they could possibly want to know for sure that that land is theirs. That it's theirs to cultivate, to plow, to sow, and to harvest. And so they go and get to work on it. But one of them is always doubting, is the land really mine or not? Is this land really belong to me? And he keeps coming back, he keeps leaving the field that he's supposed to be working in and going back to the courthouse. Now, there's a legal document, it really is, okay, it has my name on it and it really does belong to me. And he keeps going back there and he keeps finding out, yes, it's yours, yes, it's yours, yes, it really is yours. But the other guy believed it was his, and he just trusted that the guy was telling him the truth, and he believed the legal documentation, and he was able to yield a lot more fruit. It's God's will that his children know that they have eternal life. Not that they're constantly wondering, am I really saved? Am I really saved? Is Jesus' righteousness really gonna work? Is it really gonna avail for me? And we need to come to a place in our spiritual life where that assurance really grows up to maturity. And that only comes by constant study of the word of God and looking at the gospel, looking at the work of Christ, looking at everything in scripture from the beginning to the end. and recognizing that that law is there to show us the depth of our own sinfulness and to cause us to flee to Christ that we would be justified by faith in Him. So, can we earn our way into heaven? If we could, Jesus wouldn't have needed to come. His incarnation, the conception and birth of Jesus, is the ultimate testimony to human helplessness. You and I cannot do anything. We can't do anything to save ourselves. Nothing to save ourselves. And once a person's born again by the Holy Spirit of God, they still can't do anything to save themselves. And in fact, the meager steps that we take in the direction of obedience and righteousness, those are soiled with enough sin and ill motives themselves to damn us. And so our righteousness before God is always in heaven, it's always in Christ, it's always Jesus' work. Jesus' obedience to the law, Jesus' taking the curse of the law upon himself at the cross, that is always the only hope of the Christian. good coffee. David King, how are you doing, brother? The Romanist will ask, if your sins are forgiven, why do the Reformed emphasize the need for confession of sin? Great question. Because just like in a marriage relationship, when my wife and I sin against each other, our fellowship, our closeness is hurt by that until we confess our sins to each other, forgive one another, and then are reconciled to each other in that sense. Now, that doesn't mean that we don't become divorced just because we're fighting, or because we have a disagreement, or because I've been insensitive to her, or I haven't loved her the way that she needs me to, to feel special, and to feel beautiful, and to feel loved, which is my job. That's what I'm supposed to do. That's what I promised to do when I married her. That doesn't mean that we're no longer married, but it does mean that our fellowship is somewhat broken. The same thing with God. I mean, I'm sure that David's quiet times were not that great while he was trying to cover up his adultery and committed multiple homicides while he was doing it. His walk with and his fellowship with God was severely damaged by that. But David did not cease to be a child of God because of that. And so the confession of sins that we do to one another, as 1 John says that we should confess our sins to one another so that we may be healed, we do that with God for our day in and day out ongoing fellowship and walk with Him. If I have sinned against God and I have not sought God's forgiveness, and I've kind of held that for a while, it's gonna really hurt my prayer, it's gonna hurt my ability to worship with a clear conscience when I'm at church, or to take the Lord's Supper without that sin just bearing down on me. And so we confess our sins to God for our day-in day-out fellowship with God, not in order to become justified again, or to decrease the amount of time we'll have to spend in purgatory, or if it's a serious enough sin to regain our salvation, because in the Roman Catholic system if you commit a sin that's serious enough. If it's willful, deliberate, and serious enough, it's called mortal because it kills the sanctifying grace that was infused into you at your baptism or your last penance when you got absolved of the eternal guilt by the priest. So, yeah, the Romanists will ask us that. If your sins are forgiven, why do you ask forgiveness for them? Because there's a sense in which our persons are accounted as righteous in God's sight by Christ alone, by faith alone, and Christ alone. But our day-in, day-out fellowship with God is a dynamic thing where we confess our sins to Him and He forgives us and we walk along the way. Same thing with my own children. If my children sin against me and they ask my forgiveness, I forgive them. At no point, no matter what they do, do they cease to be my children. They're still my kids. Even if they sin against me, even if I'm not overly happy with them, I would never disown them and I would never tell them to go away or get lost or no longer have them as my kids. So, very good question. Okay, let me see. I don't think I got any texts today. I did have something queued up if I don't get any more questions here. I don't see any more emails. Okay. Alright, I have a... a video queued up here. Now, with the way that live YouTube streaming here works, you can't put the video in the corner of the screen. At least, I have not figured out how to do that yet, if that is possible. But I'm going to go ahead and play it, and I think you should be able to hear it. I think it will run directly in here, but this is Doug Wilson. And I heard someone else talking about this video, about GK Chesterton and JRR Tolkien, of course. Gilbert Chesterton, G.K. Chesterton, was a Roman Catholic apologist during his lifetime, and he had been a member of the Church of England when it was dead as a doornail and going liberal, so he converted to Catholicism. and was a spokesperson for Catholicism. Now, the first time I ever heard G.K. Chesterton quoted by anyone, the first time I'd ever even heard of him, was from Ravi Zacharias. Ravi Zacharias loved to quote from Chesterton. I just assumed that Chesterton was some great Christian author, leader, or something. Found out later, he was Roman Catholic. I thought, wow, why would Ravi Zacharias be quoting him as if he's, like, great or something? Then I saw this book, which is actually a really good book. See this? Know the Heretics by Justin Holcomb. It's actually a very useful book. It's endorsed by Carl Truman and Michael Horton and a couple other people I don't recognize here. And for the most part, the content of the book is great. But on the front page of the book here, let me pull it up and make sure you can see here. On the front page, the opening quotation right there is by Chesterton. who I would look at as a heretic. And it's about heresy. The Orthodox Church never took the tame course or accepted the conventions. The Orthodox Church was never respectable. It is always easier to let the age, or to let the age have its head. The difficult thing is to keep one's own. Okay. I thought, okay. Chesterton wrote a book called Orthodoxy. I have it. I've read little bits of it. He's a very witty, clever writer, but why would I read someone like that? when I can read A.A. Hodge, or Martin Lloyd-Jones, or R.C. Sproul, or David King? Why would I read Chesterton if I can read men like that, who are much more insightful and better writers anyway? But anyway, the question posed because federal vision guys tend to love In fact, one thing that blew my mind, there was a Christian school in Cincinnati, Mars Hill Academy, ostensibly reformed school, and the commons area of the school, when they built it, they called it Chesterton Commons, after G.K. Chesterton, a Roman Catholic apologist. I need some coffee. I was shocked by that. That's unbelievable. Now, J.R.R. Tolkien, another guy who's very popular. Why is he so popular? He's very popular because he's the author of The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings trilogy. My dad loved those books and I read The Hobbit when I was a kid and thought it was really interesting. My kids have read some of the Lord of the Rings books. I'd like to read them eventually, I just have too many other things to do. Been reading the Count of Monte Cristo great book by Alexander Dumas really awesome stuff on I have it on audio audible book But anyway, so like novels, but usually you'd like to read theology and stuff about culture and things like that But anyway, I wanted to play this video where it's called ask Doug and this was posted February 12 2019 so this is not that old and his answers to the question can Chesterton and Tolkien be saved are Shockingly bad and some of the comments that he makes are just are so bizarre to me How can reformed guys actually think this is okay is my question so? Let me know if you're if you're listening. Let me know if you can If you can hear that it's only three people under that's all right well, so let's see if you can hear it All right here. We go number one I find that really weird. We're not told why he said that. If they're not, I'm in a lot of trouble. Why? Is it because they were so godly and such spirit-filled men who were proponents and preachers of the true gospel? No, they weren't. So why did he say that? We're not really told why he says that. So, there's actually a very important point here. Some people, some Protestants, rock-root Protestants, think if you start allowing Catholics to be saved, you know, Chesterton and Tolkien and people like that, that you're going soft in your Protestantism. Right. No, it's not that. It's not that we're going soft on our Protestantism. It's that you're going soft on the biblical gospel. That's the issue here. Right. Because we're not saved by works. Now this is just bizarre. Now you might say, what? Because the reason I think Roman Catholics can be saved is because we're not saved by works. Now what he means is we're not saved by our doctrinal works. Now if you think about this argument, this opens the door for universalism. Everybody's going to heaven. Protestants are right. In other words, I think a lot of the die-hard Protestants who say, no, we're saved by grace through faith, not of works, lest any man should boast. Hang on, hang on. Hang on there, Doug, hang on. A lot of Protestants, a lot of Protestants will say, no, no, no, we're saved by grace through faith, not by works, lest any man should boast. That's not a lot of Protestants. That's God the Holy Spirit in Ephesians 2, verses eight and nine. A lot of Protestants will say, no, no, no, we're saved by grace through faith and not by works just anyone should boast. No, that's not a lot of Protestants. That's the Bible. Okay, listen to that again. Can be saved. die-hard Protestants who say, no, we're saved by grace through faith, not of works, lest any man should boast. Die-hard Protestants? That's just good old-fashioned Bible. That's good old-fashioned Bible, Ephesians 2, 8 and 9. It's not die-hard Protestants or rock-ribbed Protestants. That's what the Bible says. Then turn around immediately and then say, and you Catholics over there, you are saved by works. No, we're not saying you're saved by works by getting the gospel right. What we're saying is you're saved by Christ alone, and you need to believe that it's Christ alone. Because that's what the Bible teaches us. That's what the whole book of Galatians is about. It's not, well you gotta get your theology right and you're justified by theology. See, that's what these guys have been saying. It's a red herring. It was a red herring when they started saying it in 2002. It's still a red herring on February 12th, 2019. No, you're not as Protestant as you get, because you don't believe any of the Reformed confessions. Yo, yes I do! By the way, all the liberals in the mainline denomination, they all said that too. They all said that they believed those confessions too, and they didn't. are wrong about salvation being only of grace. See, what he's taking that to mean, salvation's only of grace, means you can believe a false gospel and still go to heaven. That is absurd! Because we're not saved by our doctrinal works. Listen to this. Then people who pray to pictures are in trouble. Okay, people that pray to pictures are in trouble. People that pray to pictures are in trouble. Okay? Because no Christian is going to pray to a picture. No Christian is going to pray to a picture. Or to a saint. Or to Moloch. Or Baal. Because we're worshippers of God. Through Christ. Unbelievable. We're in big trouble. It's idolatry. I think that there are a number of things that the Roman Catholics do that encourage people to stumble over essential parts of the gospel. A number of things that Roman Catholics do that cause them to stumble over essential parts of the gospel? Well, that's a really weird way of pointing out that the Roman Catholic religion teaches a false gospel and requires people, requires people to believe a false gospel and to trust in their congruent merit and all this other stuff about Mary and indulgences and purgatory and all the rest of it. And unfortunately, a bunch of Protestants stumble over the same thing. No we don't. We're not saved by works. We're not saved by doctrinal works. Wow. So he's saying, when Paul says that justification is by faith apart from works, by faith and not by obedience, faith and not by works, that includes what you believe about the gospel, so you can be saved by faith while all the while you are trusting in your own good works to get you into heaven, that is absurd. That's not what the Bible teaches, that's not what any of the Reformed confessions taught or teach, and that is not something that historic Christianity has ever thought. We've always known. It's not that you're going to take a doctrinal test when you die, but a person's confidence has to rest on Christ, because He's the only one that can save you. And if your confidence rests on something other than Christ, then Christ will be of no benefit to you. That's what the Holy Spirit says in Galatians 5, verses 1 through 4. Listen to this passage, in light of what you just heard. Galatians 5, 1. Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Indeed, I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." Now, what he is saying there, if you are relying on something in addition to Jesus Christ, Christ is going to be of no benefit to you. You're not going to be saved. 3. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised, that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law. What does the Roman Catholic Church teach? You are justified by keeping the law, with the help of infused grace. And therefore they are estranged from Christ, and Christ is of no benefit to them. What does he mean, we're not saved by our doctrinal works? Is that something the New Testament teaches us? You can be wrong on the gospel and die believing you are a good enough person because the sacraments infused enough grace into your soul to help you do enough good works, and hopefully those good works will make it so you're probably going to spend a little time in purgatory, suffering atonement for your sins, but eventually you're going to end up in heaven, that that person's still going to be saved? That's not what the scriptures teach, and that's not the gospel, and that is not acceptable for any person to believe. Chesterton, Tolkien, myself, or anyone else. Suppose I get up to the pearly gates, and God says, OK, Wilson, before we let you in... He does this all the time. You have to take your comprehensive test. Here's your justification by faith alone test. And R.C. Sproul has been pointing out since the 1990s No one is teaching that we're justified by the doctrine of justification by faith alone, or that we're justified by articulating the doctrine correctly. A person is justified before God if, in their heart of hearts, they are relying only on Christ to get them into heaven. Now, I've talked to people about the gospel before who have been like, justification? What are you talking about? How do you think you're going to get to heaven? By the blood of Christ? By what Jesus did for me? So you're not trusting in your works? No, not at all. Not at all. But you don't understand the doctrine of justification? No, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. That's fine. But that person's confidence is in Christ alone. And what he's going to say here, he's going to contradict it later, of course, because false teachers always contradict themselves. But listen to what he goes on to say here. This is really, really important stuff. We're going to sit you down and give you a justification by faith alone test. No one is teaching that, and it's a total red herring. The Federal Vision heretics, Schlissel, all of them, have said people have been teaching that justification is by the doctrine of justification. And R.C. Sproul said, If there's ever been a doctrine that would mitigate against the idea that justification is by articulating the doctrine correctly, it's justification by faith alone. Because the person's confidence is in nothing but Christ, and that's what saves them. Christ. Their reliance is on Him and nothing else. These are your comprehensives, right? And you've got to get 100% on justification by faith test administered by St. Peter here to get into heaven. Is this the PCA or is this heaven? Is this the PCA or heaven, he says. This is, I mean, you gotta understand this now. What these guys are saying, what they're making a joke out of, is the gospel. justification by faith in Jesus Christ alone. That a person that you hold the hand of on their deathbed, as I've done many times, and you talk to them, they're a family member of someone that doesn't know Christ, and you talk to them about the gospel, you talk to them about it's Christ, you need to repent, you need to believe on Jesus Christ alone, you need to trust that it's only His righteousness that's gonna save you. Oh, that's just a joke. That's funny. Is that the PCA or is that heaven? I mean, they're saying you're not going to be pulled aside at the pearly gates and have a sola fide test administered to you. Of course, nobody's saying that, but to go to heaven, you do need to be relying on Christ and nothing else. And that's what the whole Bible. is pointing out to us. The whole Bible is one giant polemic against the idea that you can get into heaven by being good enough to get there. We can't. And that's why it's Christ alone. So whether a person can articulate justification by faith alone accurately or not, they need to be relying on Christ and nothing in addition to Him or alongside of Him or other than Him to get them into heaven. And if they are trusting in something other than Christ or in addition to Christ, Scripture says, Christ will be of no benefit to you. I solemnly testify to everyone who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law, and you have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that with the help of infused grace, you're justified before God by your own law keeping, and therefore they are estranged from Christ. Oh sorry, I got confused. Hardy har har. Who is going to get a hundred percent the Celestials are by God. And of course, nobody's saying that. Total red herring. No one in our camp has ever said that. Calvin, Luther, the Reformers, Zacharias, Orsinus, and old Princeton. No one's ever said that. So who are they arguing against here? No one has ever said, before you get into heaven, you get to sit down and have a test administered to you by Celestial beings, by Saint Peter, and it's got to be 100% accurate. But we are saying, your confidence needs to be in Jesus Christ and nothing else. And they're saying, no, no, no, then you're saying that you're saved by doctrinal works. Okay, the works that Paul is excluding are works of righteousness, works of obedience to the law of God. You do need to be right about the gospel to go to heaven. You do need to cognitively understand that your confidence is in Jesus and nothing else to get into heaven. Whether you understand the doctrine of justification correctly and can articulate it correctly, you need to be relying on Jesus and nothing else to get into heaven. You know, I believe if you go through any vibrant, healthy, evangelical church where the people are manifestly saved, and sit them... What does that mean, the people are manifestly saved? Listen to what he says here. I kind of wonder, where does this guy ever go to church? And where, like, who does he talk to? Listen to this. Get them all taking a pop quiz. to come up with any number of heresies, bad heresies, or problematic ones. I could say the Trinity and you'd probably have every nice Sunday school teacher do the egg analogy, do the egg, and they'd be wrong. So, if you went to evangelical churches all over the country, pretty much everybody's teaching heresy about the Trinity. That's not true here. Because I teach on the Trinity, and make sure people understand it correctly. We do a catechism class, I have hammered that doctrine to make sure people understand it. Now listen to the rest of this. Yes, and illustrations like that are modalism, and you don't use illustrations like that for the Trinity because they all break down. Pete Wright who got teaching heresy every Sunday right now that doesn't make Wow so you can go to every church and they're preaching a false gospel everywhere where are these guys going to church that's that's there's probably some truth to that you can go to a lot of churches and you'd get a lot of false doctrine but in the churches that love the true gospel and really where ministers really love it and seek to preach it and make sure that people believe and understand it that's not true And just remember, what is the question they're answering here? They're answering the question, are G.K. Chesterton and J.R.R. Tolkien saved as believing Roman Catholics? And now we're talking about, well, there's lots of heresy taught in evangelical churches. That's true. It's red herring too. Because if a false gospel is being taught in an evangelical church or a Roman Catholic church, if it's believed, it damns people and they're lost. Yeah, it's a problem, but it doesn't damn anyone. It's not that important, but it's not the kind of thing. Yeah I'll just boil it down. I'm a protestant. We're not saved by works. We're not saved by our doctrinal works. That is a gross category error. We're not saved by works. We're not saved by doctrinal works. No no no no no no no timeout stop stop stop When scripture says, not by works with anyone should boast, it's talking about the subjective, inherent righteousness of the sinner. That person does need to hear the truth and believe the truth. We're not saved by doctrinal works. If he's right here, there's no need to do evangelism at all because everybody's going to heaven. We're not saved by doctrinal works. So, a Buddhist? They're not going to be pulled aside and, uh, here's the, here's the Sola Fide test or here's the Trinity test and he gets everything wrong. That's okay. We're not saved by our doctrinal works. We're saved by grace. You see what this is? I've never heard anyone in the reform tradition argue like this. That's why Doug Wilson's not considered to be in the reform tradition. I think it was seven reform denominations that studied the federal vision said this is outside the bounds of orthodoxy, and Wilson himself was named in all seven reports, I believe, as I recall. as being representative of a false system. So this is not reformed theology that you're hearing, this is pure falsehood that you're hearing here. And you need to be evangelizing anyone that doesn't understand the gospel, especially people who are part of a religion that formally anathematizes the gospel. We're not saved by our ethical works, we're saved by the grace of God. Does that make sense? So this is not a split the difference or sort of a creepy ecumenical. Let's just call it all good. Now, I think the issues of the Protestant Reformation were essential for powerful preaching. Now, you need to catch this. They're essential for powerful preaching. Well, are they essential to be believed? If they're essential to the gospel, Aren't they essential for people to understand and believe? You see, folks, in Scripture, all of humanity is separated into two categories, believer and unbeliever. A believer is someone who believes the truth. And the truth is, the only righteousness that can get me past the judgment into heaven is Christ's, and that my sins All of them were paid for at the cross and the whole of my confidence for getting into heaven is in Christ. Well, can you articulate the doctrine of Sola Fide correctly? Well, maybe they can, maybe they can't. But if their reliance is on something other than Christ, they're not a Christian. Now that's the biblical teaching. That's what Galatians and Romans and Ephesians and Philippians and that's what the whole Bible teaches. That's what the truth is. So yeah, you have to know and understand some things That it's Christ alone. You have to be trusting only in Him. Listen. But justification by faith does not mean believing in justification by faith. That's a red herring. Nobody says that. Nobody teaches that. R.C. Sproul pointed that out, as I said. No one is saying that justification is by the doctrine of justification. Justification by faith alone means a person dies with their hope in Jesus Christ and nothing else. Whether they understand that in the technical terms of justification is not relevant at that particular point. The main thing is, what do they think is going to get them past the judgment into heaven? If they believe that it's Jesus Christ alone, they're a Christian and they're saved. If J.R.R. Tolkien and G.K. Chesterton were believing Roman Catholics and they believed Rome's false gospel, they were not saved. It is absurd on its face to say, well, then you believe we're saved by doctrinal works. No, I believe we're saved by Christ alone. And you have to understand it's Christ alone and only be trusting in Christ alone. That's not my rock-ribbed Protestantism. That's what the Bible teaches clearly, emphatically. And that's why the Reformed churches denounced this guy and his movement, the Federal Vision Movement, as heretical. Because it is heretical. Justification by faith means that Jesus saves us. That's true. And here's how we explain what he's doing. The electrical one? It's like electricity. Justification by faith is like electricity. Any two-year-old child can turn on the lights in a room, but I wouldn't let the two-year-old wire the house. So I want men who are being examined at Presbyterian for the ministry. I want them to understand Sola Fide. If that's true, Doug, why have you published the books of Peter Lightheart? Why have you published the books and all the stuff and held the conferences for Wilkins, Schlissel, Lusk, and Barich, and all the rest of them, Jeff Myers? Why have you been pushing, promoting, and pushing all that stuff out there? These guys clearly deny Sola Fide, just in case my faith alone. Why are you saying that you want guys to understand Sola Fide? Really? We're not saved by our doctrinal work, so what does it matter? You can be saved. You're not saved by your doctrine. You're not saved by your theology. You want guys to understand it, why do you promote and push guys that are so flagrant in their denial of those things? Why don't you denounce them for being heretics? Why don't you denounce Rich Lusk and Steve Schlissel for being heretics, if justification by faith alone is so important to you? Upwards and downwards, backwards and forwards, because they're the electricians, right? They're the ones showing up. Well, so what's he saying? Are Chesterton and Tolkien two-year-olds? ordination. But if you stop a five-year-old and say, is the righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed or infused? I bet they'd get it right at my church. I bet the five-year-olds here know if you asked them. I bet you they would. I bet you could get a bunch of saved We're not talking about saved five-year-olds in good churches. We're talking about full-grown men who were scholars and theological writers. Chesterton believed Rome's false gospel. So always remember that. This is what these guys are arguing for. Chesterton and Tolkien were saved believing that their congruent merit would get them into heaven. That's not biblical, and someone who dies believing that stuff is not saved or justified before God. Sinning doctrinally, sinning doctrinally. So, them preaching, teaching, and dying, believing in a false gospel of works righteousness, how can you believe they were saved? Well, then you're saying that we're saved by our doctrinal works. No, if a person dies and they're trusting in something other than Christ, they're not going to heaven because that thing they're trusting in is not going to get them past the judgment. They need to trust only in Jesus Christ. Roman Catholicism is not home for true Christians. Okay. It's just, it's not home for true Christians. Especially when, whenever he edifies me and exasperates me at the same time, whenever he gets onto Calvinists, he just talks. He talks nonsense, right? Yeah. He hates Calvinism because he hates Christianity. Whatever he gets on Calvinist, he talks nonsense. So is that what we do with heretics? We have a fault? Let's say we had an elder in our church, and he stood up and said, there's initial justification by faith alone imputed to you from outside of you, and then final salvation at the final judgment, there's inspection of fruit legally, and then you're finally saved by your good works. What would, if someone came to us and said, hey, that guy's teaching a false gospel, what would you, what would you do? If I said, well, when he gets all mad, he just talks nonsense, but we're not saved by our doctrinal works. Wouldn't you look at me like I was out of my mind and you would be right to do so. That's lunacy. That is not biblical. That's not Christian. That's, that's not a Christian way of thinking about these subjects at all. This really, really makes the truth irrelevant to our lives as pastors. But the reason that's so glorious is because we're not saved by works. When the Bible says we're not saved by works, it's not talking about what you believe about God. When the Bible says you're not saved by works, it means you're not saved by the things you do. Okay? We are saved by what we believe. Believing in Jesus Christ. If you don't believe in Jesus, you're not saved. If you don't believe that it's Christ alone, you're not saved. Now, that's not Protestant rigidity. That's not me being a hardcore dyed-in-the-wool black-coffee Calvinist or something like that. That is what the apostles of Christ teach us in the Bible. Unbelievable. Listen, back that up, listen to that again. Calvinists. He just talks nonsense. He talks nonsense. He talks nonsense. He hates the gospel and rails against the gospel and hates the gospel. But he's still saved. He's still saved. Listen. But the reason that's so glorious is because we're not saved by works. So the Judaizers, the Judaizers were saved? even though Paul calls down the anathema of God upon them. Okay, I actually heard Doug Wilson and the other guy, the Sumter guy from CrossPolitik quoted the passage from Colossians where Paul speaks about the friends from the circumcision. Let's see. Yeah, Colossians 411. These are my only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are of the circumcision. They have proved to be a comfort to me. And they say, see? He's talking about Judaizers, those heretics from Galatia who taught a false gospel. No, he's not. Those of the circumcision? He's talking about Jews. Are you seriously telling me that Paul is saying, yeah, those Judaizers, when it gets to the gospel, they talk a lot of nonsense, but they're still my fellow workers in the kingdom of God. Yeah, they teach that justification is by faith in Jesus plus circumcision, which I said in Galatians 5, if you believe that, Christ will be of no benefit to you. and you're severed from Christ and you've fallen from grace and are a debtor to keep the whole law, but that's okay. They're my fellow workers. I mean, if you look hard enough, you can find a text of scripture that will support whatever you believe, no matter how flimsy or unbiblical it is. But that's just unreal to me to hear him saying that. Failing, he's sinning, he's stumbling at that point. No, he's a heretic at that point, who's a purveyor of a false gospel, which, if believed, will damn your soul to hell forever. No, he's sinning, he's stumbling. Why didn't Paul address the Judaizers this way? Because Paul doesn't think like Doug Wilson. Because Paul, the Apostle Paul, was a Christian. He doesn't think like this. Okay, why doesn't he say about the Judaizers? Yeah, when they talk about the gospel, they talk nonsense. But we're not saved by doctrinal works. And so these guys of the circumcision who are heretics, and I called down the anathema of God and said in Galatians 1, 8, 9, that may God damn them to hell right now, they're my fellow workers for the kingdom. You're kidding me. Unreal how bad that is. I don't have proof of that at all. God evident in his life? That's not how you tell if someone's a believer. Well, is the grace of God, is the spirit of God evident in someone's life? That makes discerning whether someone's a Christian really has nothing to do with what they believe. Really? It has nothing to do... So someone could come and make a profession of faith at the church here. Well, they're really, really godly. Yeah, but they believe that they're going to get into heaven by grace-infused works that they do with the help of Christ. Well, that's fine. We're not saved by doctrinal works, and they're saved because I can see the Spirit at work in their life. That's terrible. That's terrible ecclesiology. Meaner in its work and its insight. You bet. If that's not the Spirit of God, then, like I began with, we're in a lot of trouble. So Chesterton and Tolkien, they were so godly. If that's not the spirit of God, we're in a lot of trouble. Those guys were so wonderful. If they're not saved, I'm definitely not going to heaven. I mean, what does that tell you about what he believes? That's just unbelievable. There are a lot of people out there who live outwardly upright moral lives. Calvin talks about that extensively in book one of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. That men have a civic virtue. A lot of times men who are not believers give their lives over to a lot of moral causes and do a lot of good. But the motive behind it is never the glory of God, and that's the problem with it. So this I mean, I've been saying for a long time, reading Dewey Roberts' book and my own study of the Federal Vision, it's not Arminianism, it's not semi-Pelagian. This is Pelagian to the core. Pelagianism to the core. This question may require omniscience, so I apologize. If you took away Chesterton and Tolkien, for you, you would say, I can't live without them, regardless. Is there anyone else out there on that level that you could do that with? Ours really, Chesterton and Tolkien, really... You mean among the Roman Catholics? Just in the world. If I said I'm going to take away Dante from you, does that ruin your life? No. Alright, Chesterton, J.R.R. Tolkien, and C.S. Lewis, if someone listed them as near the top three, like if you asked a guy that you were examining for ordination, so who are the most influential people that you've read? Chesterton, Tolkien, and Lewis, I would not approve you as a pastor. I would vote against you. Now, if you said, Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge, B. B. Warfield, Burkoff, Robert Raymond, and Dabney, I'd say, yeah, sure. Yeah, wow, those are great guys. Read some good theologians. Read some good writers. There are other figures, but Lewis would be in that too. Right, right. So, even regardless of how you would answer the first question, in your own life, you're never going to give those three guys up. Right, their influence is over everything he's saying. Because, sadly, Wilson's not influenced by good theologians. He's not influenced by the best that our tradition has to offer. He's just not. Chesterton, Tolkien, and C.S. Lewis? That's not a very holy trinity there. I never recommend C.S. Lewis. C.S. Lewis' theology is terrible. Insightful guy? Very much so. I've read nine books by him. He's a brilliant guy. But I don't recommend him, and I certainly don't quote him without qualifying it, because Lewis' theology is a train wreck. If you want proof of that, you're welcome to borrow my copy of his book, Reflections on the Psalms. I don't know if C.S. Lewis even believed the Bible was inspired, to be honest with you. His theology is terrible. It is absolutely horrible. And the closest he ever gets to describing his own belief about heaven and how a person's saved is the book The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, which seems to promote the ransom payment to Satan theory of the atonement, but it's hard to tell. He just doesn't seem to be concerned about things like that, which is a real problem, but like Wilson said, those three guys are already baked into the cake. They're already very much a part of his thinking. My problem is all three of them are not loyal to Jesus Christ, and therefore I would never be loyal to them, because my first loyalty is to Christ, not to these guys, not even to my favorite theologians, like the Hodges, Charles Hodge and A. Hodge, said things that are wrong when it comes to creation and evolution. And they compromise on things like that. So did B.B. Warfield. And you know what? They're wrong about what they said about that. Because my first loyalty is to God and his word. And if anyone comes along later and, yeah, listen to this guy, Pat Ines, who died a hundred years ago, and you can listen to all these sermons and everything like that. If I say things that are wrong, discard them. If I say things that are unbiblical, don't believe them. Don't be loyal to me. Be loyal to Christ. If I follow Christ, and so far as I follow Christ, follow me. If I get things wrong, don't believe me and discard what I say. They've had such a profound influence on me for good. The Holy Spirit has used them in wonderful, wonderful ways. And what's done is done. One of the elders of our church just emailed me, Doug Wilson thinks that God saves a person in secret, even from that person, and that the Holy Spirit doesn't do his work and give us spiritual life and understanding. They remain in error and are not true worshipers, which God says he desires. We believe in faith alone because we are saved. We have spiritual life to understand these things because we're made alive, not to be made alive. Confusion is the fertilizer of heresy, is the manure of heresy. That's right! Well said, my dear brother, Brother Roger. Right on. Right. It's already happened. Got it. Okie dokie. Yep. The influence of those guys, it's already happened, so he can't get rid of them. Because his loyalty is to them, and he'll say even absurd and ridiculous things. We're not saved by works. We're not saved by our doctrinal works. So when Paul says, knowing that a man is justified by faith in Christ and not by works, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we will be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, meaning by our theology, we're not saved by our doctrinal works. So you can get the gospel completely upside down and backwards and still go to heaven. That's not biblical teaching. Now, in closing here, since my heart is beating faster now, and I'm starting to get sweaty, because this stuff makes my heart beat fast and really upsets me. Point number six in Robert Raymond's answers to objections to the doctrine of justification by faith alone. He says, finally, the Protestant doctrine calls into question the salvation of millions of Christians throughout history. This argument made in our time even by some Protestants against a rigid application of Protestantism's doctrine of justification by faith alone contends that if God justifies only those who self-consciously renounce all reliance upon any and all works of righteousness which they have done, or will ever do, and trust in Christ's vicarious cross-work alone, then one must conclude that the vast majority of professing Christians throughout history were not and are not saved. This vast group would include, we are informed, such Church Fathers as Athanasius, Augustine, and Selman Aquinas, who as sacerdotalists, believed in baptismal regeneration, and because they confused justification and sanctification, believed also in the necessity of deeds of penance for salvation. Against this Protestant rigidity, it is urged that just as God predestinates by grace alone Arminians, who have a faulty understanding of the doctrine of election, so too he justifies by faith alone Roman Catholics, among others, whose understanding of justification differs, that is, it does not affirm justification by faith alone, from classic Protestantism's doctrine of justification. That's exactly what you just heard Doug Wilson saying. Because we're saved by grace, he justifies, by faith alone, Roman Catholics who actually are trusting in their works, like Tolkien and Chesterton. Now listen to Robert Raymond's biblical response to this, and ask yourself the question, does Doug Wilson think like the Apostle Paul, or does he think real differently from the Apostle Paul? Listen. This argument, however, is aimed not so much against Protestantism's rigidity as it is against Paul's insistence that there is no other gospel, justification by faith alone and Christ's work alone. Romans 3, 27 and 28, Romans 4, 5, Romans 10, 4, Galatians 2, 16, Galatians 3, 10 and 11 and 26, Philippians 3, 8 and 9. Two, that any other gospel is not the gospel. 3. That those who teach any other gospel stand under the anathema of God. Galatians 1, 8, and 9. 4. That those who rely to any degree on their own works for their salvation nullify the grace of God. Romans 11, 5, and 6. 5. Make void the cross work of Christ. Galatians 2, 21, and Galatians 5, 2. 6. Become debtors to keep the entire law. Galatians 5, 3. 7. And in becoming such, fall from grace. Galatians 5, 4. That is, place themselves under the curse of the law. He's right. Now, come on Paul, don't you understand? We're not saved by our doctrinal works. That is NOT the biblical way of thinking about these issues. And this opens the door for total universalism. And these guys are so committed to this absurdity that they'll even quote Colossians 4.11. They're my only fellow laborers for the kingdom of the circumcision. That what Paul means by that is, yeah, the Galatian heretics that I pronounce the anathema of God on, they're actually my fellow workers for the kingdom of God. Are you serious? That's not exegesis. That's not handling the word of God accurately or carefully. These aren't the Galatian heretics. These aren't the Judaizers. They're Jews of the circumcision. The Jews who were believers. Thank God there were believers of the Jews. There weren't very many, but there were some. There were a lot of them early on there. Listen to Raymond's conclusion. Therefore I will not speculate one way or the other about their salvation. But I will say that our attitude should with Paul ever be, let God's truth be inviolate, though every man becomes thereby a liar." Let God be true and every man a liar. Including Chesterton, Tolkien, and Lewis. And your favorite Roman Catholic papist writers. Robert Raymond says, What I mean by this in the present context is that the clear teaching of the Word of God should be upheld, and we should not look for reasons to avoid it, even if the alternative would force us to conclude that these fathers and all others like them were not saved. You're saved by Christ alone. You're not saved by the doctrine of justification. But you are saved by Christ alone, and a person to be saved has to know that. and has to understand it. And if that wasn't the case, Paul wouldn't have written what he did. The Holy Spirit would not have inspired those passages that I already read to you. Okay. My blood is hot now. Alright, time to get back to sermon writing mode here, but thank you all for watching. Leonard Tatro, I see you on there. Thank you for tuning in, my dear brother. I appreciate you and whoever else is on here and everyone else that, you know, I get emails from people. I don't get a whole lot of videos. The stuff on Sermon Audio gets downloaded. more than the YouTube channel gets watched, but I upload the same audio files to both. But I get contacted by people all over the United States and all over the world, really, who are so hungry for the gospel and so hungry for clear teaching on it. It would never have occurred to me when I first went into the ministry that I would feel as lonely as I do in my gospel emphasis. It really has been a strange, strange thing. But I love you all. I'm so thankful for the brotherhood and sisterhood here, and you guys are my my dear friends and my brothers and sisters in the Lord, and I love y'all. And I'm already jacked up to preach Sunday. Ryan Kaiser is going to be preaching the evening service, so everybody be praying for Ryan. There's four guys at church now that feel a sense of call to the ministry. I'm excited to get them opportunities. I want people to come listen to them when they preach and to encourage them and to help them grow in their abilities. I'm excited, I'm excited about the future, and I'm confident that God's gonna do great, great things through us and for us. Love y'all, y'all have a good rest of your day, and we'll be back together, Lord willing, on Sunday. This is Pastor Patrick Hines of Bridewell Heights Presbyterian Church and you've been listening to the Pulpit Supplemental Podcast. You can find us on the web at www.bridewellheightspca.org. Our sermons are streamed through sermon audio and you can listen to that on the iTunes podcast version of Bridewell Heights Presbyterian Church. Feel free to join us any Sunday morning for worship at 11 a.m. sharp at 108 Ridgewell Heights Road in Kingsport, Tennessee. And may the Lord bless you and keep you. The Lord make His face to shine upon you and be gracious unto you. The Lord lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.