Repentance versus Penance

In our discussion of Biblical repentance, we most recently narrowed our scope to apply specifically to Christians all the Scriptures have said about repentance. We mentioned that the intellectual, emotional and volitional components apply both to the sinner in justification and the believer's continual repentance in sanctification.

Today, I want to narrow the scope even further, and contrast the doctrine of Biblical repentance to the Roman Catholic doctrine of penance, and suggest that many Evangelical Protestants who would vehemently denounce penance unwittingly practice penance while thinking they are practicing Biblical repentance. This goes to the heart of the Gospel, because it calls into question the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.

The Doctrine of Penance

Though all Christians must heed the command of John the Baptist to “bear fruits in keeping with repentance” (Lk 3:8), there exists a tendency in every fallen human heart to conceive of such acts of obedience as currency by which we pay God back for his gift of the forgiveness of our sins. “The exhortations of the ancient prophets, of Jesus, and of the apostles show that the change of mind is the dominant idea of [repentance, and] the accompanying grief and reform of life are necessary consequences.” However, the Latin translation of metanoéō into the Vulgate emphasized the “grief over sin rather than the abandonment of sin as the primary idea of NT repentance” by translating it do penance (ISBE, 4:136). Penance, then, and not Biblical repentance, became the focus of the Roman Catholic Church through the middle ages.

The Roman Catholic sacrament of penance is the process by which the Church absolves a penitent sinner of his sin by requiring him to (1) confess that sin to a priest, (2) demonstrate adequate sorrow over that sin (usually by a prayer) and (3) endure any temporal punishments (such as repeating prayers or performing works of service) levied by the priest in order to make satisfaction for that sin before God. In a non-technical sense, penance is often spoken of as synonymous with satisfaction, which is “the voluntary enduring of the penalty imposed by the confessor in order to [a] compensate for the injury done to God and to [b] redeem or atone for the temporal punishment which is ordinarily due even after sin as been forgiven” [Adolphe Tanquerey, Manual of Dogmatic Theology. Trans. John J. Byrnes (Desclee: NY, 1959), 2:330]. Put simply, the sinner must atone for their sin by enduring the punishments assigned to them by themselves or by a priest (see the Canons of the Council of Trent, Session XIV, Chapter IX).

The Danger of Penance

The danger of this doctrine is damning. First, it makes provision for the act of repentance to quickly become mechanical. It removes the focus of the change of heart, will, and mind that is so central to Biblical repentance, and replaces it with an external, potentially mindless ritual. Confession of sin becomes a sort of quid pro quo transaction between the sinner and God in such a way that no real change of heart and abandonment of sin is required. The sinner may dispassionately recount his sins to a priest who assures him that he may have forgiveness if he recites a particular pre-written prayer a certain number of times. Such a practice, in effect, reverses the call of Yahweh in Joel 2:12-13 and instead commands, “Rend your garments, and not necessarily your hearts.”

Secondly, and perhaps much more severely, penance undermines the sufficient atonement for sin that Christ achieved by the sacrifice of Himself on the cross. This is subtle, yet extremely important. When we are convicted of sin, desire to repent, and seek God to receive the gift of forgiveness of sin (cf. 1Jn 1:9), impulses of initial sorrow followed by joy and gratitude are natural expressions of our repentance. However, requiring one to work up such sorrow or to demonstrate joy and gratitude in order to make satisfaction for his sins nullifies grace. “You would be treating [forgiveness] no longer as a gift, but a purchase. God would no longer be the free benefactor. And you would be enslaved to a new set of demands that he never dreamed of putting on you” (John Piper, Future Grace, 45). And if the believer tries to purchase his forgiveness with his deeds of repentance, he necessarily dishonors the sufficient, once-for-all purchase that Christ Himself made for sin by giving His life on the cross. Consider the following passages about the absolute sufficiency of Christ's work, with no need for supplementation:

• Hebrews 7:26-27 - For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.
• Hebrews 9:11-14 - But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
• Hebrews 9:25 - ...nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own.
• Hebrews 10:11-14 - Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

That is all simply to say: If Christ’s sacrifice truly provided forgiveness – if it truly atoned for anything – “there is no longer any offering of sin” that can be added (Heb 10:18).

'Evangelical Penance'

Now, though penance is a Roman Catholic doctrine, the inclination to do penance – to attempt to make some satisfaction for our sins – is present even with many conservative evangelicals. In fact, there is a natural desire in all human beings to offer some payment for our sins. Frankly, we all seek to earn our way to God. Grace is insulting to us, because it highlights our inability and our need for an alien righteousness, since we don't have our own. And so because it's our nature to be legalists, we often slip back into that mindset. Rather than receiving the gift of forgiveness with a spontaneous response of heartfelt joy, we treat our Christian walk as “an effort to pay back the debt we owe to God. … Good deeds and religious acts are the installment payments we make on the unending debt we owe God” (Piper, Future Grace, 33).

When we sin and come to God in confession, after feeling badly about what we have done we resolve to read our Bibles more, pray more, go to church more, or even do acts of service to ‘make up for’ our sin. We often wonder if we have felt badly enough for our sin and we heap scorn upon ourselves to make sure that we are sorry enough. We recognize that we do not deserve forgiveness, and so we learn from Scripture and from others what the appropriate responses of genuine, heartfelt repentance ought to be, and we seek to manufacture those responses and offer them to God in order to earn our forgiveness. Yet the grace of God was never designed to indebt us to Him. No, grace does not create debts, but pays debts. Grace does not enslave believers, it makes us free. The Lord Jesus Christ, by His perfect obedience, has earned our forgiveness and bestows it upon us freely by faith.

Such ‘functional penance’ is a common practice among those in counseling and other kinds of accountability groups. Paul Tripp tells a story about Celia who, “like many counselees, thought that being in counseling was an act of repentance” (Paul Tripp, Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands, 286). She conceived of her talking as confession and her remaining in counseling as her ‘fruits in keeping with repentance.’ However, Tripp says that Celia was treating the counseling process as penance:

She was blind to the fact that she was really participating in an act of self-atonement. I call this “Protestant absolution.” The counselee confesses, examines issues, participates in an ongoing discussion of self and the situation and, week by week, leaves the counseling time feeling atoned, cleansed, and right. Yet all of this is happening without any substantive heart or behavioral change (Tripp, Instruments, 286).

Such insights shed light on the wicked tendency of our hearts to seek our own self-righteousness through penance, even as conservative, orthodox, Protestant Evangelicals. With our feeble efforts at ‘Protestant absolution,’ we try to do enough or say enough or feel enough. But the reality is, we could never be enough. That is precisely why we needed a Savior to die on our behalf: because even our best would never have been enough. When we adopt such a mindset, we are just like Adam and Eve in the garden, who, knowing the shame of our nakedness, sew mere fig leaves together to cover the sin in our lives (Gen 3:7). Yet we refuse the better covering that God Himself provides (Gen 3:21) -- the perfect garment of Christ’s atonement (Gal 3:27; Rom 13:14).

The Antidote to Penance: Repentance Motivated by Delight in Superior Pleasures

Biblical repentance comes not as a result of our works; rather our works are the fruit that come from repentance. But if our performing deeds appropriate to repentance (Ac 26:20) does not come from a desire to earn favor or forgiveness with God, from where does it come? As Piper puts it, the fruits in keeping with our repentance come from the delightful root of faith in future grace.

With true gratitude [in repentance] there is such a delight in the worth of God’s past grace [e.g., forgiveness of a particular sin], that we are driven on to experience more and more of it in the future. But this is not done by ‘payments’ of debt in any ordinary sense. Rather, it is done by transforming gratitude into faith as it turns from contemplating the pleasures of past grace and starts contemplating the promises of the future. … True gratitude exults in the riches of God’s grace as it looks back on the benefits it has received. By cherishing past grace in this way, it inclines the heart to trust in future grace (Piper, Future Grace, 38-39).

The joyful gratitude for the forgiveness of sin that we experience in repentance drives us to forsake our sin and obey freely, because that gratitude is produced by the promise of future experiences of the sweet pleasures of God’s grace. Our repentant obedience, then, is driven by our faith in the promises of God. It is not the price we pay or the punishment we endure to gain acceptance, but the natural overflow of hearts that yearn to be satisfied with more of Christ. Both the alternative and antidote to penance -- even "Evangelical penance" -- is the delight and satisfaction we have in Christ.

So fight your sin that way. Battle against the faux-pleasures promised by your sin by preferring the superior pleasures of all God is for you in Christ. You are not under law, Christian, but under grace. So on the basis of Christ's death and resurrection -- the basis upon which grace was purchased for you -- consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ, and thus present your members as weapons of righteousness, not unrighteousness.

For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all;
but the life that He lives, He lives to God.
Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin,
but alive to God in Christ Jesus.
Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts,
and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin
as instruments of unrighteousness;
but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead,
and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.
For sin shall not be master over you,
for you are not under law but under grace.
- Romans 6:10-14 -

Biblical Repentance: Introduction

1. Exegesis
1.1. Nacham: Biblical Repentance Involves the Emotions
1.2. Shuv: The Heart's Obedient Turn from Sin to God
1.3. Metanoeo: A Fundamental Change of the Whole Man

2. Discussion
2.1. Summary and Discussion: Intellectual, Emotional, Volitional
2.2. Repentance for the Christian

3. Application
3.1. Repentance vs. Penance
3.2. Counsel to a Sinning Brother

3.3. Homework for Sinning Brother
3.4. The Effect on My Personal Walk with Christ

Biblical Repentance: Introduction

Few doctrines of the historic Christian faith lie closer to the heart of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the course of the Christian life than the doctrine of repentance. Indeed, when our Lord was said to first preach the Gospel of forgiveness of sins in His name, the first command He uttered was, “Repent” (Mk 1:15). Yet within Christendom – and even within Evangelicalism – there is widespread confusion and disagreement about the precise nature of repentance.

What does it mean to repent? What is the place of our feelings in repentance? Should we feel like we haven't repented unless we've felt sorry enough? Or should we confess and move on and trust that our feelings will catch up with us later? What about our works? Do we have to offer some sort of satisfaction for our sin beyond what Christ has accomplished, like feeling sorry enough or confessing to others? Or does the requirement of "obedience in keeping with repentance" undermine justification by faith alone? What is it, exactly, that God wants from us when we confess our sin and seek forgiveness? How should our walk with Christ look if we have a Biblical understanding of repentance?

Over the next couple of weeks I want to do a series on Biblical repentance. In the upcoming posts, I'll try to answer some of the questions I asked above in a number of ways. First, I'll examine three of the most common words used in the Bible to signify repentance. We'll study each word in its original Hebrew or Greek from a lexical and semantic perspective. The analysis of these words and their surrounding contexts will give us a theology of the nature of Biblical repentance. We'll see how Scripture uses these terms and look at what the authors of Scripture mean when they talk about repentance.

Once we have an idea about the nature of repentance, we'll look to apply that understanding to repentance both in justification and sanctification. In justification, we'll look at repentance as the sinner's turning from his sin as the ruling principle of his life. This takes place at conversion. Regarding sanctification, we'll look at the believer's habitual, ongoing repentance of specific sins throughout his Christian walk.

After this, I will spend some time contrasting Biblical repentance to the Roman Catholic doctrine of penance. That might seem a bit random, but I assure you that I'm not just going out of my way to pick on Catholics. The reality is, many Evangelical Protestants who would vehemently denounce the Roman Catholic doctrine of penance -- a sort of paying God back for your sins -- unwittingly practice penance while thinking they are practicing Biblical repentance. This is something that so many of us are prone to, because it is a natural human inclination to try to earn one's own righteousness before God. This goes to the heart of the Gospel, and calls into question the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.

Then, after all of those theoretical considerations, I'll do my best to specifically apply these principles to a practical counseling situation in which a church member has confessed to an immoral affair. I'll try to show how a Christian should come along side his brother and lead him to Biblical repentance while leading him away from the dangers of penance. This way, we can see what it would look like for us to practically live out these Biblical principles in the context of the body of Christ. Examining this hypothetical case study will also demonstrate how church leaders might evaluate the genuineness of a sinning member's repentance.

Finally, I'll conclude the series by presenting how my own study of the doctrine of repentance has affected me personally in my walk with Christ, and how I hope it will have affected you who undertake to study it with me. May God grant that this be a fruitful and beneficial endeavor, and that it serve to raise our affections high toward Him as we look into the wonderful things He's revealed in His glorious Word.

Satisfy us with Yourself, O God, as we carefully study the Word you have given us in order to see the beauty of Your manifold perfections with ever-increasing precision and clarity! And as we behold that glory, grant that we would become transformed into the very image of Your Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren and come to have the preeminence in everything, and that You might be honored above all things!

Amen.

Biblical Repentance: Introduction

1. Exegesis
1.1. Nacham: Biblical Repentance Involves the Emotions
1.2. Shuv: The Heart's Obedient Turn from Sin to God
1.3. Metanoeo: A Fundamental Change of the Whole Man

2. Discussion
2.1. Summary and Discussion: Intellectual, Emotional, Volitional
2.2. Repentance for the Christian

3. Application
3.1. Repentance vs. Penance
3.2. Counsel to a Sinning Brother
3.3. Homework for Sinning Brother
3.4. The Effect on My Personal Walk with Christ

The Patristic Consensus: Sola Fide

I mentioned on Tuesday that in my study of early church history I'm finding myself very encouraged by the fact that the historic core evangelical principles of sola Scriptura and sola fide are taught not only in Scripture, but also in the writings of the Church Fathers. I mentioned that evangelicals shouldn't feel like when the Apostle John died the Church was hijacked by Roman Catholics. Rather, from the close of the Apostolic age through the medieval period and up through the Reformation, God has preserved a faithful remnant of His people teaching His Word even in the most faithless of times.

We mentioned that if there was any sort of "patristic consensus," the Fathers agreed on the core evangelical doctrines of sola Scriptura and sola fide. Tuesday we looked at sola Scriptura, and today we look to their testimony regarding sola fide: the doctrine that we are justified by faith alone, and receive absolutely no merit for our works as regards our justification.

And remember, the Fathers' writings do not establish sola fide, or any other doctrine. We don't look to them as our authority, but -- as even they themselves have counseled us -- to Scripture alone. Nevertheless, their writings do indeed affirm sola fide, and there is a great deal of encouragement that we can receive from that.

Clement of Rome (c. 30-100): “And we [Christians], too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen” (Epistle to the Corinthians).

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–c. 110): “His cross, and his death, and his resurrection, and the faith which is through him, are my unpolluted muniments [legal titles]; and in these, through your prayers, I am willing to be justified” (Epistle to Philadelphians).

Polycarp (c. 69–160): “I know that through grace you are saved, not of works, but by the will of God, through Jesus Christ” (The Epistle of Philippians).

Justin Martyr (d. 165) in his Dialogue with Trypho: “No longer by the blood of goats and of sheep, or by the ashes of a heifer . . . are sins purged, but by faith, through the blood of Christ and his death, who died on this very account.”

Athanasius (c. 296–373): “For naturally, since the Logos of God was above all, when He offered His own temple and bodily instrument as a substitute for the life of all, He fulfilled by death all that was required.” (On the Incarnation of the Logos, 6-7, 9.)

Didymus the Blind (c. 313-398): “. . . a person is saved by grace, not by works but by faith. There should be no doubt but that faith saves and then lives by doing its own works, so that the works which are added to salvation by faith are not those of the law but a different kind of thing altogether.” (From his Commentary on James, 2:26b.)

Hilary of Poitiers (c 315-67) on Matthew 20:7: “Wages cannot be considered as a gift, because they are due to work, but God has given free grace to all men by the justification of faith.” (Cited in George Finch, A Sketch of the Romish Controversy, 230.)

Basil of Caesarea (329-379): “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord, that Christ has been made by God for us righteousness, wisdom, justification, redemption. This is perfect and pure boasting in God, when one is not proud on account of his own righteousness but knows that he is indeed unworthy of the true righteousness and is (or has been) justified solely by faith in Christ” (Cited in Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, 1:505).

Ambrose (c. 339-97): “Therefore let no one boast of his works, because no one can be justified by his works; but he who is just receives it as a gift, because he is justified by the washing of regeneration. It is faith, therefore, which delivers us by the blood of Christ, because blessed is he whose sins are forgiven, and to whom pardon is granted.” (Cited in Finch, A Sketch of the Romish Controversy, 220.)

Jerome (347-420) on Romans 10:3: “God justifies by faith alone.” (Deus ex sola fide justificat). (In Epistolam Ad Romanos, Caput X, v. 3, PL 30:692D.)

Jerome (347-420): “He who with all his spirit has placed his faith in Christ, even if he die in sin, shall by his faith live forever.” (Cited in Jacques Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory, 61.)

Chrysostom (349-407): For Scripture says that faith has saved us. Put better: Since God willed it, faith has saved us. Now in what case, tell me, does faith save without itself doing anything at all? Faith’s workings themselves are a gift of God, lest anyone should boast. What then is Paul saying? Not that God has forbidden works but that he has forbidden us to be justified by works. No one, Paul says, is justified by works, precisely in order that the grace and benevolence of God may become apparent. (Homily on Ephesians 4.2.9.)

Augustine (354-430): If Abraham was not justified by works, how was he justified? . . . Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness (Rom. 4:3; Gen. 15:6). Abraham, then, was justified by faith. Paul and James do not contradict each other: good works follow justification.

Augustine (354-430): “When someone believes in him who justifies the impious, that faith is reckoned as justice to the believer, as David too declares that person blessed whom God has accepted and endowed with righteousness, independently of any righteous actions (Rom 4:5-6). What righteousness is this? The righteousness of faith, preceded by no good works, but with good works as its consequence.” (Expositions of the Psalms 1-32, Exposition 2 of Psalm 31.)

Ambrosiaster (4^th century), on Rom. 3:24: “They are justified freely because they have not done anything nor given anything in return, but by faith alone they have been made holy by the gift of God.”

Ambrosiaster (4^th century), on Rom. 3:27: “Paul tells those who live under the law that they have no reason to boast basing themselves on the law and claiming to be of the race of Abraham, seeing that no one is justified before God except by faith.”

Cyril of Alexandria (412-444): For we are justified by faith, not by works of the law, as Scripture says (Gal. 2:16). By faith in whom, then, are we justified? Is it not in him who suffered death according to the flesh for our sake? Is it not in one Lord Jesus Christ? (Against Nestorius in Norman Russell, 165).

Cyril of Alexandria (412-444): “For truly the compassion from beside the Father is Christ, as he takes away the sins, dismisses the charges and justifies by faith, and recovers the lost and makes [them] stronger than death. . . . For by him and in him we have known the Father, and we have become rich in the justification by faith.” (Commentary on Hosea. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, p. 29.)

Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe (c. 467-532) commenting on Eph. 2:8: “The blessed Paul argues that we are saved by faith, which he declares to be not from us but a gift from God. Thus there cannot possibly be true salvation where there is no true faith, and, since this faith is divinely enabled, it is without doubt bestowed by his free generosity. (On the Incarnation, 1.)

For by grace you have been saved through faith;
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
- Ephesians 2:8-9 -

By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight;
... But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested.
... For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
- Romans 3:20, 21, 28 -

Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.
But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly,
his faith is credited as righteousness.
... For this reason it is by faith,
in order that it may be in accordance with grace.
- Romans 4:4-5, 16 -

...knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law
but through faith in Christ Jesus,
even we have believed in Christ Jesus,
so that we may be justified by faith in Christ
and not by the works of the Law;
since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.
- Galatians 2:16 -

The Patristic Consensus: Sola Scriptura

One of the classes I'm taking this summer is Historical Theology I. It's a church history course covering the events from Pentecost through the pre-Reformation period. One of the things that I've found mightily encouraging is that the historic core evangelical principles of sola Scriptura and sola fide are taught not only in Scripture, but also in the writings of the Church Fathers -- from the first, second, third, and fourth centuries.

See, a popular view of church history among Protestants (and even evangelicals) is that Jesus, Paul, and the Apostles believed like we do, but after the close of the canon the Church was infiltrated by Roman Catholicism and all faithfulness to Scripture was lost. Basically, the contemporary Protestant view of Church History seems to be that, aside from a few faithful followers, the Church basically "went Roman Catholic" until Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin liberated her from her Roman Catholic shackles in the 16th century.

But such a perception is far from accurate. The writings of the Church Fathers overwhelmingly support the central tenets of evangelical conviction. And a careful study of church history shows us that through the entirety of the past 2,000 years God has preserved a faithful remnant even in the most faithless of times.

Often, Roman Catholic apologists talk about there being a "Patristic Consensus," a unanimous agreement among the Church Fathers supporting the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Well, a balanced reading of the Fathers show that no such unanimity exists. The "early church" was not a homogeneous, cohesive, unified group of Christians, but rather a term that refers collectively to the disciples of the Apostles, the early apologists and polemicists, and second- and third-century theologians. And there is great variety among them. This has led Protestant apologists to call the notion of a Patristic Consensus a myth.

What's interesting, though, is that while the "early church" varied on many fine points of doctrine, if any sort of patristic consensus existed it was on the evangelical doctrines of sola Scriptura and sola fide. The following are some selections from the writings of the Fathers regarding sola Scriptura: that the Christian's authority is Scripture alone, and not the word of any pope, council, magisterium, or even church father -- even themselves!

And remember, while it's interesting and encouraging that these Fathers affirm sola Scriptura, their writings themselves do not establish sola Scriptura. As they will tell you themselves, they are not our authority; only Scripture is.

Irenaeus (c. 140–c. 202): We have received the disposition of our salvation by no others, but those by whom the Gospel came to us; which they then preached, and afterwards by God’s will delivered to us in the Scriptures, to be the pillar and ground of our faith. [And so the Apostolic oral tradition is recorded for us in the Scriptures.]

Tertullian (c. 160–235): The Scriptures . . . indeed furnish us with our Rule of faith. (Against Praxeas, 11)

Hippolytus (c. 170–c. 236): There is one God, whom we do not otherwise acknowledge, brethren, but out of the Sacred Scriptures. For as he, who would profess the wisdom of this world cannot otherwise attain it, unless he read the doctrines of the philosophers; so whosoever will exercise piety towards God, can learn it no where but from the Holy Scriptures.

Origen (c. 185–c. 254): In the two testaments every word that pertaineth unto God may be sought and discussed, and out of them all knowledge of things may be understood. And if anything remains which Holy Scripture does not determine, no other third scripture ought to be received to authorize any knowledge, but we must “commit to the fire” what remains, that is, reserve it unto God.

Origen (c. 185–254): In proof of all words which we advance in matters of doctrine, we ought to set forth the sense of the Scripture as confirming the meaning which we are proposing. . . . Therefore we should not take our own ideas for the confirmation of doctrine, unless someone shows that they are holy because they are contained in the divine Scriptures (Homily 25 on Matthew).

Athanasius (c. 296–373): For the true and pious faith in the Lord has become manifest to all, being both ‘known and read’ from the Divine Scriptures. (Letter, 60.6)

Athanasius (c. 296–373): The holy and divinely inspired writings are sufficient of themselves alone to make known the truth.

Athanasius (c. 296–373): In the Holy Scriptures alone is the instruction of religion announced—to which let no man add, from which let no man detract—which are sufficient in themselves for the enunciation of the truth.

Cyril of Jerusalem (315–386): Do not then believe me because I tell these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures. (The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.17)

Basil (c. 329–379): It is evidently a falling away from the faith, and a proof of great presumption, to neglect any part of what is written, or to introduce anything that is not written.

Chrysostom (c. 344–407): When there is a question of Divine things, would it not be a folly rashly and blindly to receive the opinions of others, when we have a rule by which we can examine everything? I mean the Divine law. It is for this reason that I conjure you all, without resting in the slightest degree on the judgment of others, to consult the Scriptures.

Chrysostom (c. 344–407): `Tis from ignorance of Scripture that all our evils arise; hence the plague of so many heresies, hence our careless lives, our fruitless labors .. . They err who look not to the bright rays of the divine Scriptures, because they walk in darkness.

Chrysostom (344–407): These then are the reasons; but it is necessary to establish them all from the Scriptures, and to show with exactness that all that has been said on this subject is not an invention of human reasoning, but the very sentence of the Scriptures. (Homilies on the Statues 1.14)

Augustine (354–430): In those things, which are plainly laid down in Scripture, all things are found, which embrace faith and morals.

Augustine (354–430): Holy Scripture fixes the rule for our doctrine, lest we dare be wiser than we ought. (De Bono Viduitatis, 2)

Augustine (354–430): Let those things be removed from our midst which we quote against each other not from divine canonical books but from elsewhere. . . . I do not want the holy church proved by human documents but by divine oracles. (The Unity of the Church, 3)

Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393–c. 466): Bring me not human reasonings and syllogisms, for I rely on the divine Scripture alone.

John of Damascus [c. 676–c. 760]: All things that are delivered to us by the Law, the Prophets, the Apostles, and the Evangelists, we receive, acknowledge, and reverence, seeking for nothing beyond these.

All Scripture is inspired by God
and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17 -

His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness,
through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
- 2 Peter 1:3 -

So we have the prophetic word made more sure,
to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place,
until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
- 2 Peter 1:19 -

The God-Centered Gospel vs. a Man-Centered Gospel

In the following video, James White interacts with a Roman Catholic and discusses how the Gospel of Roman Catholicism is man-centered. As he himself mentions, though, it's interesting (and actually extremely sad) how much the man-centered gospel of Roman Catholicism sounds like the theology of some evangelicals.

Anyway, I found the video extremely helpful. It was disappointing, in one sense, to see the similarities between Rome and evangelicalism's man-centeredness. But in another sense it was refreshing to hear the Biblical Gospel proclaimed and defended -- one in which the glory of God is the center and the goal. It's worth the 23-minute listen.

I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions
for My own sake.
- Isaiah 43:25 -

For My own sake, for My own sake, I will act;
For how can My name be profaned?
And My glory I will not give to another.
- Isaiah 48:11 -

...I am God;
I will be exalted among the nations,
I will be exalted in th earth.
- Psalm 46:10 -

I am writing to you, little children,
because your sins have been forgiven you
for His name's sake.
- 1 John 2:12 -

In love He predestined us
to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ
to Himself,
according to the kind intention of His will,
to the praise of the glory of His grace,
which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
- Ephesians 1:5-6 -