Posts
Introduction
In 1991, an evangelical theologian and seminary professor wrote some startling statements in a devotional magazine.
If, ten years ago, you had told me that I would live to see literate evangelicals, some with doctorates and a seminary teaching record, arguing for the reality of and eternal salvation, divinely guaranteed, that may have in it no repentance, no discipleship, no behavioral change, no practical acknowledgment of Christ as Lord of one’s life, and no perseverance in faith, then I would have told you that you were out of your mind.[1]
Shock over this new trend, however, has not been the reaction of all. Some evangelicals consider this topic to be of small importance and just a disagreement over the definitions of a few words. Other Christians on both sides of this issue have realized that “the very nature of the gospel itself is at stake.”[2] What message are we to proclaim and how should we share it? One Christian has said, “To evangelize is for the whole people to present the whole gospel to the whole person. Our goal is not just decisions, but disciples and a faithful witness that glorifies God. We do all we can to avoid premature birth and deformed children, trusting God to bring his “full-term” children into the kingdom.”[3] Is such a view correct or just the position of a ‘Judaizer’? The answer to this question will be touched on in this study. However, the primary task in this study will be to explore how the different sides of the lordship controversy explain the biblical doctrine of assurance of salvation. It is this student’s contention that the Bible teaches that genuine repentance and a real faith are divine gifts exercised by a sinner before he or she is justified, and that the biblical assurance that follows has as its basis: the promises of God made alive by the Holy Spirit, the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit to his or her spirit, and the current possession of attitudes and actions that are corresponding to the fruits of the Spirit and the commands of God.
The Lordship Salvation Debate
Many in the Southern Baptist Convention are not aware of how strongly the lordship debate has raged, especially among Baptists of the more conservative ilk in the north. The author of this paper was invited as a guest to a debate in April of 1995 over Lordship Salvation at Practical Bible College in Johnson City, New York. Dr. Tony Badger, the theology professor at that institution, was debating a local pastor named Bruce Parker. Pastor Parker was a graduate of Master’s Seminary in California of which John MacArthur is president. Dr. Badger was a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary where Dr. Zane Hodges formerly taught. The debate was opened by Dr. Badger stressing how important the issue was by reading Galatians 1:6-10. He declared unequivocally and, unfortunately, without any visible remorse that John MacArthur and any in the audience or in the country who taught lordship salvation were guilty of the Galatian heresy -- of adding works to the gospel. He then read again the text, “Let them be accursed.” Later on in the debate he made the remark that “John MacArthur even reads works of Covenant theologians.” At this statement the Bible college students behind me hissed.[4] I soon realized that I was among future pastors who had been taught that those who believed as I did were heretics and accursed. On the other hand, I had been fervently preaching of the need for sinners to receive the whole Christ of the Bible as both Lord and Savior and to receive Him on His terms of repentance and faith. Therefore, I could not claim exemption from personal zeal on this issue.
Nevertheless, as I reflect on that debate, my heart is saddened that some students are graduating from that school either confused over the content of the gospel or embracing a partial gospel. Furthermore, they may produce false converts and be issuing false assurance to make-believers who are in desperate need of further evangelization. Let me be clear that I am not saying that those who hold to Dr. Badger’s view are heretics, nor should these men be hated or verbally abused. Nevertheless, if my position is correct, then the Church I love is being damaged as people receive assurance before conversion and membership before salvation.[5] This mixing of light and darkness and this progressive weakening of Christ’s bride should move our hearts with sadness to prayerful concern.[6]
Historical Considerations
As a beginning point in considering the issue at hand, it will be helpful to let some of those who represent the other side of this debate speak for themselves. This position that will be described has been known by such names or labels as Antinomian, Sandemanian, non-lordship salvation, and free grace theology. Church historians and theologians tell us that this debate surfaced long before our day in Scotland in the ministries of Archibald McLean, John Glass, and his son-in-law, Robert Sandeman, around 1800.[7] These three are very important figures in the formation of the group first known as Scotch Baptists in Scotland. The English Baptist theologian and missionary statesman, Andrew Fuller, reluctantly took up his pen against this movement (he was a pastor and president of the Particular Baptist Society for the Propagation of the Gospel among the Heathen, that sent and supported William Carey). Concerning Fuller’s article written in 1810, entitled “Strictures on Sandemainism in Twelve Letters to a Friend,”[8] one British scholar wrote, “it is generally agreed that Fuller more or less demolished Sandemainism in those twelve letters.”[9] These letters are biblical, fair, and show well-reasoned orthodox theology in its finest form. They deserve to read and studied by every Baptist.
According to Andrew Fuller, McLean and Robert Sandeman liked to use the phrases “simple truth” and “simple belief.”[10] Sandeman taught that justifying faith is “the bare belief of the bare truth; by which definition he intends, as it would seem, to exclude from it every thing pertaining to the will and the affections, except as effects produced by it.”[11]
Likewise, Sandeman had written, “Everyone who obtains a just notion of the person and work of Christ, or whose notion corresponds to what is testified of him, is justified, and finds peace with God simply by that notion.”[12] The mind in the saving transaction is totally passive and does not actively receive this new truth or embrace it in any way.[13] His position is sufficiently clear.
The denomination that Sandeman founded in England disappeared after a few short years. But, did his teachings effect American Baptists’, especially in the South? Yes, profoundly, through one of Sandeman’s students Alexander Campbell. Years ago, this author traveled in the state of Tennessee. I noticed a huge number of large Disciples of Christ or Christian church’s (Campbellites), often with a small Southern Baptist church nearby. This phenomenon exists in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri which in the 1800's were the frontier states. Baptist church historian H. Leon McBeth explains this situation:
Another influential spokesman against missions was Alexander Campbell (1788-1866). Though he was a Baptist for only seventeen years, 1813 -1830, Campbell had a great impact on the denomination . . .He attacked mission societies, Bible societies, associations, confessions of faith, use of the title reverend, and many other things he considered nonbiblical . . .Eventually the “Reformers” almost wrecked the Baptist denomination in the West, sowing seeds of discord wherever they appeared . . . Hundreds of Baptist churches left the denomination to line up with Campbell’s “Reformers,” who after 1830 formed a new denomination known as Disciples of Christ or Church of Christ. Historians estimate, for example, that fully half the Baptist churches of Kentucky switched to the new Disciples movement.[14]
Where did this former Presbyterian minister get these divisive views he so vigorously spread in the frontier states?
Alexander spent a year at the University of Glasgow, where he absorbed elements of Scottish philosophy, along with the strict biblicism of men like Greville Ewing, John Glas, and Robert Sandeman. From these sources young Campbell developed rationalistic views of faith, insistence upon every Sunday communion, distaste for confessions of faith, and belief in baptismal remission of sins . . . In time, several areas of disagreement between Campbell and the Baptists came into focus. First, on the nature of saving faith, Campbell had absorbed the rationalism of Scottish realism. To him simply to believe, in the most rationalistic sense of that term, that Jesus is the Christ was sufficient for salvation. Campbell taught that “faith is only a historical belief of the facts stated in the Bible.” Thus he would settle for what some have called “head belief,” or “mental assent.” The Baptists, on the other hand, felt that biblical faith should include an element of personal trust or life surrender to Christ. This “heart faith” sometimes led to emotional expressions at conversion. Campbell once snapped his fingers and said, “I would not give that much for the conversion of a person who weeps.” He taught that “the belief of one fact, . . .is all that is requisite as far as faith goes, to salvation. The belief of one fact, and submission to one institution, expressive of it {baptism[15]}, is all that is required.” That one historical fact, said Campbell, is “that Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Messiah.”[16]
This is even a more minimized gospel than Sandeman appeared to have taught. Sandeman gospel at times included an idea of Christ’s person and work, however, he did often qualify this in his writings to seem to indicate that just a bare idea of his Messiahship was sufficient. His student Campbell reduced it to his earthly personage. We will probably not know for certain if Sandeman’s classes were narrower than his writings. Nevertheless, as is often the case, doctrinal error gets worse with each new generation rather than better.[17] It was Campbell’s spread of many doctrinal errors that caused such losses to the Baptist Churches in the South and provided such a fertile ground for Landmarkism to grow and flourish.
The Modern “Free Grace” Proponents
Another teacher, who, according to some, has arisen in the shadow of Robert Sandeman, is Zane Hodges. Dr. Hodges has written, “Repentance is not essential to the gospel message. In no sense is repentance related to saving faith.”[18] “To ‘believe’ unto salvation is to believe the facts of the gospel.”[19] “‘Trusting Jesus’ means believing the ‘saving facts’ about Him.”[20] “Those who add any suggestion of commitment [to believing the facts] have departed from the New Testament idea of salvation.”[21] “Spiritual fruit is not guaranteed in the Christian life.”[22] “If people are sure they believe, their faith must be genuine.”[23] Thus, one may see some common ideas in theses quotes from these two men from different eras of history.
Also, consider these quotations from Dr. R.T. Kendall. “One need only see the Sin Bearer once to be saved.”[24]
Whoever once truly believes that Jesus was raised from the dead, and confesses that Jesus is Lord, will go to heaven when he dies. But I will not stop there. Such a person will go to heaven when he dies no matter what work (or lack of work) may accompany such faith.[25]
Another person who holds to the free grace view is Dr. Charles Ryrie. He has written, “Repentance is a change of mind about Christ.”[26] “No turning from sin is required for salvation.”[27] “Faith might not last. A true Christian can completely cease believing.”[28] Furthermore, “saving faith is simply being convinced or giving credence to the truth of the gospel.”[29] Though Dr. Ryrie is milder than Dr. Hodges in some points, they both stand as proponents of the free grace position.[30] One last person to consider is R.B. Thieme, Jr. He has written, “Yet believers who become agnostics are still saved, they are still born again. You can even become an atheist, but if you once accepted Christ as Savior, you cannot lose your salvation, even though you deny God.”[31] Of course many other contemporary writers could also be cited.[32]
Therefore, as the careful student views the above quotations, he can see a common position emerging from these writers. If one assents with the mind to the “bare belief of the bare truth” [33] or simply “believe[s] the facts of the gospel . . . taking God at His Word,”[34] this person is saved. Furthermore, he is guaranteed 100% assurance of his salvation 100% of the time and is told that to ever doubt it would be a sin.[35] Thus, the free grace teachers offer an eternal salvation and continual assurance to those who meet the requirement of assenting to the death and resurrection of Christ at one moment in their lives. Is this position correct according to the Word of God? To evaluate these statements we will examine the free grace teachers’ preferred gospel account to see if there are elements that go beyond mere consenting to the designated facts. Does the gospel of John actually teach that saving faith is nothing more than mentally acknowledging the death and resurrection of a person named Jesus? I propose to demonstrate that the free grace gospel is correct in what it affirms, but is sadly lacking in what it omits.
New Testament Theology
In studying the gospel of John, a careful student will see the need to start at the end. This is because John gives us his purpose for writing this book in John 20:30-32. This purpose-statement can be turned into four questions. These questions should be asked and answers should be sought in each chapter of John’s gospel. The questions are: 1) Who is Jesus? 2) What does it mean to believe in Jesus? 3) What does unbelief look and act like? 4) What does it mean to have life? John masterfully uses the contrasts between belief and unbelief in almost every chapter so that his readers will receive a clear picture of what saving faith is and is NOT. If this gospel is explored observantly, it will display that the concept of “simple faith” expressed above is not the gospel according to John.
How does John answer the question -- what does it means to believe in Jesus? To believe is to: receive Jesus (1:12), come to Jesus (1:39), be following Jesus (1:40, 43), be believing IN Jesus (2:11), be believing in the name [whole person of Christ in all His offices and attributes](3:18), be doing the truth (3:21), be honoring Jesus (5:23), be surrendering to Jesus’ mastery (9:37), and be worshiping Jesus (9:37) (to list just a few).[36] The study in contrast of what unbelief looks and acts like has been skillfully set forth by this apostle in almost every chapter. For example he portrays the following unbelievers alongside genuine believers: mankind as a whole (1:10), the Jewish nation (1:11), the temple leaders (2:18-20), false believers (2:23-25), the people of Galilee (4:43-55), the Jewish leaders who witnessed miraculous evidence (5:10, 16-18), scripture-reading lost men (5:38), the proud (5:44), unconverted entertainment seekers (6:24-5), a Satan-filled make-believer (6:70), and the Pharisees (7:32, 49, 52).[37] Just a casual study of John reveals that this apostle would not accept the view that “bare belief of the bare facts” or “to believe the facts of the gospel” describes the salvation transaction or saving faith. There are other excellent works available that carefully show what Jesus’ gospel was in the synoptic gospels[38] and what the gospel included that was taught by the apostles in the epistles.[39] Furthermore, John also penned these following words. “No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God” (1 John 3:9, NIV). Thus, it appears that the Apostle John is at odds with this modern view of faith and salvation.
Furthermore, even though John does not use any of the Greek words for repentance except for (strepo) in John 12:40 quoting Isa 6:10 where the main Hebrew word for repentance Shuv is used and is translated as strepo by John, it cannot be proven that the concept of repentance is missing in his gospel or that he would affirm consenting to a few facts as the essence of saving faith. Moreover, one of the reoccurring synonyms for faith is the word “receive.” What does it mean to receive the Lord Christ? Elabon, ἔλαβον (Jn. 1:12 BGT)}[aorist active indicative](1:12) is from the root word lambano, λαμβανω that is used in John 1:12; 5:43; and 13:20. This term means to “take hold of, grasp, seize, receive, get, or obtain.”[40] It is used in both the Septuagint and the New Testament for “men taking wives” (Gen. 6:2 and Luke 20:28)[41] and it can be a very intimate word.[42] Beck translates this word in 1:12 as “welcome” and Arndt says its use in this verse is to “receive someone in sense of recognizing his authority.”[43] A modern word that is close to the concept conveyed by elabon[44] is ‘embrace.’ John uses this word (elabon) in contrast with the rejection Christ received by the world and by the Jewish nation. Those to whom God gives birth embrace His Son rather than reject Him. Thus, we can understand that John would not merely be content with someone saying, “Yeah, that’s true,” to two facts about Jesus and calling that mental action salvation. John says that the people who are continually believing upon His name, the ones who are children of God, are the same ones who at one point in the past (aorist) embraced the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus is a living person, the God-Man. Therefore, please note that in John 1:12, it is not the facts about Jesus that are embraced but a person -- Jesus Himself. This event of receiving Christ is either prior to or concurrent with believing upon His name (His Person and offices, not two facts about Him). To merely believe some facts is what the demons do in James 2:18-20; and as Pastor Albert N. Martin has correctly said, “If you have a demon’s faith, then you shall go to a demon’s Hell.” Thus, part of saving faith is embracing the Jesus of the Bible Himself as Prophet, Priest, and King, and as the God-Man Who is the Lord (Sovereign Divine Master) and Christ (Acts 2:36-39).
Another key section for us to consider is the tenth chapter of John concerning the Shepherd and His sheep. Jesus tells us how to spot His sheep amidst the goats. “My sheep are continually hearing My voice [present tense] and I am knowing them, and they are continually following Me” (10:26-27).[46] The true sheep hear and follow the Shepherd’s voice because they have “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God” (1 Thes. 1:9).[46] Thus, it appears that John’s gospel does not affirm that saving faith is merely consenting to several facts about a person named Jesus.
Now that consideration has been given to the position of some of the free grace teachers and an examination of the gospel of John has been made in that light, it may be helpful to ponder if Andrew Fuller has stood alone against this movement or if other gifted orthodox Christian men have stood with him. The thirty-seven Baptist pastors who prepared the 1689 London Confession of Faith preceded Andrew Fuller in time, yet they stood with him in doctrine. The thousands of Baptist churches that adopted this confession also stand with Fuller. Both the London and Philadelphia confession states,
The grace of faith by which the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls is the work of the Spirit in their hearts. . . .The principal acts of saving faith relate in the first instance to Christ as the believer accepts, receives and rests upon Him alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life. . . .The repentance that leads on to salvation is a gospel grace by means of which a person who is caused by the Holy Spirit to feel the manifold evils of sin is also caused by faith in Christ to humble himself on account of sin.[47]
Dr. Bailey E. Smith reminds us of the position of two other men from our heritage.
The nineteenth-century Baptist theologian John Dagg said: “The blessing of forgiveness is bestowed upon all who truly repent of their sins . . . God, in the gospel, commands all men everywhere to repent . . . Repentance and faith are twin graces, proceeding from the same Holy Spirit, and wrought in the same heart; and, although they may be contemplated separately, they exist together, and the promise of forgiveness belongs to either of them.”
Another nineteenth-century Baptist theologian, James P. Boyce, said, “Christian repentance . . . involves a change in the outward life because such change is a result of the change of inward opinions.” He goes on to note that true repentance involves an intellectual and spiritual perception of sin, a sorrow for it, a deep regret, and an earnest turning to God for help and deliverance.[48]
Dr. Herschel H. Hobbs has written in The Baptist Faith and Message:
Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God’s grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of grace. Repentance is a genuine turning from sin toward God. Faith is the acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire personality to Him as Lord and Saviour.[49]
Andrew Fuller has not stood alone. This author has many clear quotations from the writings of Charles Spurgeon, John Broadus, Basel Manley, Jr., Patrick Hues Mell, and Millard Erickson[50] that display that Fuller has a host of others[51] standing with him on the gospel of Christ and its proper appropriation.[52]
The issues that have been explored thus far lay a foundation for an inspection of two extreme views on the believer’s security. One view is that of the Antinomian. This position has been labeled by some as carnal security. The person who for one moment gives credence to the two facts about Jesus can thus after that moment believe what he wants and behave as he wills. The most he can lose are a few rewards. The phrase, “Once saved, always saved,” is often used by the antinomians to mean salvation in the terms of the free grace gospel seen above.[53] The other extreme view is Arminianism. This view is correct in what it affirms; namely, “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14) and “the soul that sins will die” (Ezek.18:4). However, this view is incorrect in what it denies; namely, the eternal security and the perseverance of those “elected unto holiness” (Eph. 1:3-11).
Each extreme view has focused on one aspect of the truth so strongly that the counterbalancing truth is ignored. However, biblical truth is often in tension or even paradoxical. Dr. Millard Erickson has accurately written, “The truth here, as in so many matters, lies somewhere between the two poles.”[54] Thus, the truth includes the strengths of both of these extremes. The Bible teaches that those who are secure are the same ones God has determined ahead of time that they will become like Christ in many areas of living while they are on this earth (Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:3-5). These will imperfectly, but actually, produce visible fruit and pursue holiness (Matt.13:8; Eph. 2:8-10; Phil. 1:6; Heb. 12:14). This view has been known historically as the perseverance view.
For this view to be correct, it must be based on the Bible. The focus of this author will again be on the writings of the Apostle John to discern if there is biblical support for this view. Just as the gospel of John was written so that we would know what saving faith was really like, I John was written so that we could know we are saved by passing a series of tests. The following verse is often quoted out of context and has not been very carefully examined by the many who use it.
These things {tauta, ταυτα} I wrote to all of you, the ones continually believing on the name of the Son of God, in order that [hina, ἵνα of purpose] you all may know with certainty that you all have everlasting life, and that you all may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God” (1 John 5:13).
To ignore the implications of the first word tauta is to most assuredly misinterpret this verse and overlook the purpose[55] and structure[56] of John’s letter.
Let us ask three questions about this verse: (1) To whom is John writing? “Unto you that believe.” (2) What is his purpose for writing? “That ye may know . . . ” (assurance). (3) How are they to know? By “these things” that he has written. Not by going back to the Gospel; he wrote that for a different reason, namely, that men might believe and have life through Christ . . . Well, what are these things that he has written in his little Epistle? We might call “these things” the birth marks of the second birth, or tests of eternal life. And they all have to do with Christian character and conduct, and are evidences of being born again.[57]
In his book, Saved Without a Doubt, John MacArthur lists eleven tests from the book of I John which refers to the “these things” of I John 5:13.[58] According to the Apostle John, if one passes these tests {tauta}, he can be sure of his salvation.[59]
Another biblical book that was written to destroy carnal security and to prevent apostasy is the book of Hebrews. This book has been seen by some scholars as a single sermon with the application being the six strong-warning passages. These warnings are designed to remove all carnal security from those who have stopped short of saving faith and to warn believers of the seriousness and the consequences of sin.
The Bible has been designed by the Holy Spirit to be able to function as a medicine chest. A student of the Bible can take a weak and struggling Christian to Romans 8 to view his eternal security and to John 10 to see that his perseverance is a sure thing because of God’s presence in the equation. Likewise, this student can take another individual who is being controlled by a sinful practice to the warnings of Hebrews and 1 John.[60] Furthermore, one who may be trapped in performance Christianity and is legalistically seeking to earn God’s love can be guided to Romans 4 and Galatians 1-3. These passages that the free grace teachers emphasize provide a wonderful balm for those ensnared in legalism. However, to seek to give assurance to a person setting his heart on deep rebellion against God and His law is like giving a mega dose of sugar pills to a diabetic. Medicine it may be, but it is applied to the wrong patient and to the wrong disease.
Conclusion
The truth lies between these the two extremes of legalism and antinomianism. It is true that one does not need to seek to earn his salvation or to be in constant fear of losing it. God will complete what He truly begins. However, only time will tell which trees were truly planted by Him and which trees belong to the enemy. It is also true that real believers produce fruit and grow in Christ’s likeness. To deny either of these truths is a serious error. Like Judas and Demas of old, make-believers over time will display themselves. The show cannot go on forever.[61] Moreover, the Bible teaches that genuine repentance[62] and a real faith are divine gifts exercised by a sinner before he is justified. The biblical assurance that follows an authentic conversion has as its basis: the promises of God made alive by the Holy Spirit, the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit to the believer’s spirit, and the current possession of attitudes and actions that are corresponding to the fruits of the Spirit and the commands of God.
APPENDIX #1
Dr. Tony Badger
Questions for Rev. Bruce Parker
[Removed before online upload]
APPENDIX #2
Pastor Bruce Parker
Essentials of true salvation
[Removed before online upload]
APPENDIX #3
‘Belief’ in John’s Gospel
How does John answer the question -- “What does it mean to believe in Jesus?” To believe is to: receive Jesus (1:12); come to Jesus (1:39); be following Jesus (1:40, 43); be believing IN Jesus (2:11, 3:15-16), be connected with a birth from above (1:13, 3:3-5); be believing in the name (whole person of Christ in all His offices and attributes)(3:18); be doing the truth (3:21); be coming to the light (3:21); be doing deeds for God’s glory (3:21); be inviting others to come to Jesus (4:29); be believing Jesus’ testimony (4:41-2); share the truth about Jesus with one’s family (4:53); be honoring Jesus (5:23); be coming to Jesus for everlasting life (5:40); receive Jesus (5:43); be believing the Old Testament Scriptures (5:46); be believing Jesus’ words (5:47); be doing the work of God -- believing IN Him whom God has sent (6:29); eat the flesh and drink the blood (figurative for receiving Christ -- embracing Him) (6:51-5); abiding in Jesus (6:36); know Jesus is the Messiah and that Jesus is God (6:69); be going to Jesus and drinking to quench spiritual thirst(speaks of an intimate relationship, not merely assenting to historical facts) (7:37); have rivers of living water flowing from your heart (7:38-9); be following Jesus (8:12); be abiding in Jesus’ word (8:31); know the truth (8:32); be set free from sin’s slavery (8:32-6); be loving Jesus (8:42); hear God’s word (8:47); be keeping God’s word (8:51); be rejoicing over Christ’s work (8:56); be surrendering to Jesus’ mastery and be worshiping Jesus (9:37); be seeing the truth about Jesus (9:39); be continually hearing Jesus’ voice (10:3); be continually following Jesus (10:4); refuse to follow strangers (10:5); be entering by Jesus (10:8); be hearing Jesus’ voice (10:16); by being one of Jesus’ sheep (10:26); be continually hearing Jesus’ voice (10:27); be continually following Jesus (10:27); be believing that Jesus is the Anointed One and the Son of God (11:27); be hating one’s life in the world (12:25); be serving Jesus (12:26); be following Jesus (12:26); stop abiding in darkness (12:46); be hearing and keeping Jesus’ word (12:47); receive Jesus and Jesus’ servant (13:20); love other Christians (13:34); believe that the Father and the Son are one (14:10); do Jesus’ works (14:12); be loving Jesus (14:15); be keeping Jesus’ commands (14:15); be keeping Jesus’ laws and loving Jesus (14:21); be keeping Jesus’ word (14:23); be loving and rejoicing in Jesus (14:28); be bearing fruit (15:2); be abiding in Jesus (15:4); be loving other Christians (15:12); be loving Jesus and believing that He came from God (16:27); be receiving God’s truth (17:8); be hearing Jesus’ voice (18:37); be of the truth (18:37); provide for widows (19:27); take a public stand for Jesus (19:38-9); be believing in Jesus’ resurrection (20:8); surrender to Jesus as Lord (Sovereign Master) and as God in the flesh (20:28); be believing the evidence of the sign miracles (20:31); be loving Jesus (20:15); serve (20:15-17); and be following Jesus (21:19, 22).
APPENDIX #4
Unbelief in John’s Gospel
The study in contrast of what unbelief looks and acts like has been skillfully set forth by this apostle in almost every chapter. For example, he portrays the following unbelievers and make-believers alongside genuine believers: mankind as a whole (1:10); the Jewish nation (1:11); the temple leaders (2:18-20); false believers (2:23-25); a religious unconverted man (3:1-12); the people of Galilee (4:43-55); the Jewish leaders who witnessed miraculous evidence (5:10, 16-18); some scripture-reading lost men (5:38); the proud (5:44); some unbelieving bread seekers (6:26-29); the unconverted entertainment seekers (6:22-24); the unregenerate sign seekers (6:30-36); the grumblers (6:41-3); some fake disciples (6:60-66); a Satan-filled make-believer (6:70); the half brothers of Jesus (7:3-5); the Jewish leaders (7:11); the fearful (7:13); the Pharisees (7:32, 49, 52); the Scribes and Pharisees (8:3, 6, 39, 41, 48, 52-3, 57-9); the self-righteous (9:16-18, 22-34); the spiritually blind, but religious (9:40); the people trying to bypass Jesus to get to heaven (10:1); the Jewish leaders (10:19-21); the questioning leaders (10:24-6, 31, 33, 39); the unbelieving witnesses of Lazarus’ resurrection (11:46); the Jewish leaders as the evidence grows stronger (11:47-48); the hate-filled chief priests planning Lazarus’ murder (12:10-11); unbelieving witnesses of the miracles (12:37-41); the make-believer, Judas (13:27-30); the fruitless professors (15:2,6); the world (15:18-19; 17:9, 14); the betraying make-believer (18:3-5); the Sanhedrin (18:13-14); Pilate (18:38); the chief priests and officers (19:6); the crowd (19:15); and the soldiers (19:23-4).
APPENDIX #5
How can I know I am going to heaven?
I John's test (5:13-14)
1. Have you enjoyed fellowship with the body of Christ, Christ, and the Father? (I John 1:2-3)
2. Are you living by the truth? (1:5-6)
3. Do you consistently tell the truth? (1:6,10; 2:4)
4. Are you sensitive to sin? (1:7-10)
5. Do you obey God's Word? (2:3-5, 14)
6. Do you live a lifestyle that is like Christ's? (2:6)
7. Do you love other true Christians? (2:9-11; 3:10, 14-19; 4:7-11, 17)
8. Do you know for sure that your sins have been forgiven because of Christ's work? (2:12)
9. Do you personally know God the Father and God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ? (2:13-14, 22-25; 5:20)
10. Do you reject this evil world’s views, perspective, thinking, and lifestyle? (2:15)
11. Are you remaining with the people of God? (2:19)
12. Do you practice proper behavior? (2:29)
13. Do you eagerly await Christ's return? (3:2-3)
14. Do you see a decreasing pattern of sin in your life? (3:4-10; 5:18)
15. Have you experienced the ‘new birth’ being 'born again'? (2:29; 3:9; 5:1,18)
16. Have you suffered rejection because of your faith in Christ? (3:13)
17. Do you experience answered prayer? (3:22-4; 5:13-15)
18. Can you discern between spiritual truth and error? (2:14, 20-22; 4:1-3; 5:20)
19. Do you listen to, believe, and obey the Word of God? (4:6)
20. Do you experience the ministry of the Holy Spirit in your life? Have you been indwelt by the Holy Spirit? (2:20, 27; 4:4, 12-13)
21. Do you fully acknowledge that Jesus is the Savior and the Son of God? (4:14-15; 5:5)
Do you believe on Him? (2:13-14; 3:23)
22. Are you fearful that God will punish or torment you for your sins? (4:18)
23. Do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah? Do you love Jesus? (2:22-23; 5:1)
24. Do you have a recognizable faith? Do you overcome the world? (5:4-6)
25. Do you refrain from sin? (5:18)
APPENDIX #6
Repentance
The free grace proponents will often say that the word repentance means merely a change of mind about something. An example of this view would be if at twelve one loves Kraft macaroni and cheese, but at twenty-two he change my mind about this dish, this one has repented. Along with John MacArthur and Bailey Smith, I find this definition sadly lacking. Much of the debate has hinged around the meaning of only one of the Greek terms translated repent in our English Bibles. However, the Bible has more than one original word that has been translated into English as repent. To correctly understand this term all of the original words need to be studied together, both the originating Hebrew terms and their Greek counterparts and replacements. To miss the fact that the apostles were using the Septuagint (LXX) usage of the Greek terms for repentance, which were based on the Hebrew concept of repentance, is a serious error. What then is the meaning of the debated Greek term metanoein μετανοιαν (Acts 11:18 BGT)}? Dr. Robert Girdlestone has written,
In the following passages this Greek word is used in the LXX of man’s repentance: Exod. 13:7, . . . Ezek. 14:22 . . . It is evident, from a consideration of these passages, that when we approach the subject of repentance in the N.T., we must not tie down too strictly, either to one formal process, or to one set time in a man’s life, but must understand by it such a state of deep feeling as leads to a change or amendment of life. The etymology and the classical usage of the words metanoein and metamelesqai must give way before the fact that these words were used by Greek-speaking Jews, as representatives of the passive and reflexive voices of [the Hebrew term] Nacham. It is hard indeed to find one expression in any language which can adequately represent the complex emotions implied by the word. When the word is used with reference to God, there is implied and idea of change, and perhaps of sorrow, but not of conscious wrong-doing. When it is used in reference to man, sorrow arises from a sense of sin, a conviction of wrong-doing in its varied aspects fills the heart with bitterness, and change of purpose and of the outward life ensue; also an undercurrent of relief accompanies the sorrow, for the penitent draws a deep breath as the sin, which has been leading astray, shows itself to him in its true colours, and gives way before the announcement of mercy.
There is a remarkable tract on Penitence [available in Latin] written by Moses Maimonides, in which the subject is treated, not as a matter of feeling, but of practice. Penitence is described as the condition of a man who, having once fallen into a sin, now abstains from it, although the inducements to return to it are as strong as ever. The Hebrew word which the writer adopts to represent this process is a noun derived from [the Hebrew term] shuv, to turn. But the first open step in this change is confession, which is to be expressed in the following form of words: ‘O Lord, I have sinned; I have done wrong, and have transgressed before Thee, and I have done such and such things; behold, I am sorry (Nacham), and am ashamed because of my misdeeds, and I will never commit any such offenses again.’ It is neither sorrow without change, nor change without sorrow, but it is such a deep feeling of sorrow as gives rise to a determination to change, or, as the English Church Catechism has it, ‘repentance whereby we forsake sin.’[63]
Obviously, this expert Hebrew and Greek scholar would not agree with the position of the free grace teachers.[64] Dr. Ryrie writes, “In both the Old and New Testaments repentance means ‘to change one’s mind.’”[65] “Is repentance a condition for receiving eternal life? Yes, if it is repentance or changing one’s mind about Jesus Christ. No if it means to be sorry for sin or even resolve to turn from sin.”[66]
Works Consulted
Alderson, Richard. No Holiness, No Heaven! : Antinomianism Today. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1986.
Arndt, William F. and F.W. Gingrich. A Greek Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2d. ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Ascol, Thomas K. “Old Error Rediscovered.” The Founders Journal. Fall 1991.
Belcher, Joseph, ed. The Complete Works of Rev. Andrew Fuller. vol. 2, The Gospel, Its Own Witness. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1852.
Belcher, Richard P. A Layman’s Guide to the Lordship Controversy. Southbridge, MA: Crowne Publications, 1990.
The Bible. New International Version. New York, NY: International Bible Society, 1984.
Burchett, Harold E. Healing for the Church. Columbia, SC: Columbia International University, 1989.
. People Helping People. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.
. Spiritual Life Studies (Columbia, SC: Columbia International University, 1984.
Chrisope, Terry A. Jesus is Lord. Welwyn, England: Evangelical Press, 1982.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985.
A Faith to Confess: The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. Rewritten in Modern English. Sussex, England: Carey Publication, Ltd, 1982.
Girdlestone, Robert B. Synonyms of the Old Testament: Their Bearing on Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI: William Eerdmans Publ., 1897, 1983.
Good, Kenneth H. Are Baptists Calvinists? Rochester, NY: Backus Book Publishers, 1988.
Hamblin, Robert L. and William H. Stephens. The Doctrine of Lordship. Nashville: Convention Press, 1990.
Harris, R. Larid, Gleason Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol. 2. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.
Harris, Ralph W., ed. The Complete Biblical Library: The New Testament Greek English Dictionary, Lambda to Omicron. Springfield, MS: The Complete Biblical Library, 1990.
Hendriksen, William. Exposition of The Gospel According to John. New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.
Hobbs, Herschel H. The Baptist Faith and Message. Nashville: Convention Press, 1971.
Hodges, Zane. Absolutely Free! Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1989.
Kendall, R.T. Once Saved, Always Saved. Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.
Reisinger, Ernest C. Today’s Evangelism: Its Message and Methods. Phillipsburg, NJ: Craig Press, 1982.
Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publ., 1985.
Lloyd-Jones, Martyn. The Puritans, Their Origins and Successors. Edinburgh: Banner Of Truth, 1987.
MacArthur, John F. Jr. The Gospel According To Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.
. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.
________. Saved Without a Doubt: How to Be Sure of Your Salvation. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1992.
McBeth, H. Leon. The Baptist Heritage. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1987.
Metzger, Will. Tell the Truth: the Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by the Whole People. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1984.
Packer, J.I. “Understanding the Lordship Controversy.” TableTalk, May 1991.
Ryrie, Charles C. So Great Salvation. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1989.
Showers, Renald. “The Trouble with Lordship Salvation,” Word of Life 1990 Annual Report. December, 1990.
Smith, Bailey E. The Grace Escape: Jesus as Savior and Lord. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991.
Thayer, Joseph H. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977.
Thieme, R.B. Jr., Apes and Peacocks or the Pursuit of Happiness. Houston: Thieme Ministries, 1973.
END NOTES
1. J.I. Packer, “Understanding the Lordship Controversy,” TableTalk (May 1991): 7.
2. Richard P. Belcher, A Layman’s Guide to the Lordship Controversy (Southbridge, MA: Crowne Publications, 1990), 2.
3. Will Metzger, Tell the Truth: the Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by the Whole People (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1984), 149.
4. The handout from this debate is included as Appendix #1 and Appendix #2. Dr. Badger’s questions and his defense of Zane Hodges’ position as displayed in the book Absolutely Free made his view very clear. When Dr. Badger mentioned that John MacArthur had read both the Puritans and covenant theologians like James M. Boice, the students around me hissed like snakes. This was uncomfortable as I too was guilty of these high-handed crimes.
5. I realize, of course, that my heart assumes that I am right; but the Bible is the final test of truth and certainly not what personally grieves me.
6. See Harold E. Burchett, Healing for the Church (Columbia, SC: Columbia International University, 1989); People Helping People (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979); and Spiritual Life Studies (Columbia, SC: Columbia International University, 1984).
7. Thomas K. Ascol, “Old Error Rediscovered,” The Founders Journal (Fall 1991): 1.
8. The Complete Works of Rev. Andrew Fuller, ed. Joseph Belcher, vol. 2, The Gospel, Its Own Witness (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1852), 561-646.
9. Ascol, “Old Error,” 2, citing Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans, Their Origins and Successors (Edinburgh: Banner Of Truth, 1987), 173.
10. Fuller, Works, 2:565.
11. Ibid., 566.
12. Ibid., 566-567.
13. Ibid., 567, 606-614.
14. H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1987), 375-7.
15. “Second, Campbell taught that baptism by immersion completes the process of salvation. Whether Campbell taught that baptism actually washes away sins and brings salvation, as some of his writings imply, or that the only saving faith is that which leads to obedience in baptism, as others understand him, makes little difference. In either case, salvation is not complete apart from Baptism.” (McBeth, 378-9).
16. McBeth, 377-9.
17. It is not without coincidence that the man who despised creeds and first said, “No creed but Christ,” was a man who was teaching new doctrines that were false. Anyone familiar with the Baptist confession of 1689 would have charged Campbell with heresy. He had to hate this orthodox confession that exposed his error and would have made him unemployed if his teachings were examined in light of the Baptist confession of faith or the Westminster confession of faith that he claimed to subscribe to at his ordination.
18. Zane Hodges, Absolutely Free! (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1989), 144.
19. Ibid., 37.
20. Ibid., 39.
21. Ibid., 27.
22. Ibid., 73.
23. Ibid., 31.“It is possible to experience a moment of faith that guarantees heaven for eternity, . . . then to turn away permanently and live a life that is utterly barren of any spiritual fruit.” (Ibid., 107,118).
24. R.T. Kendall, Once Saved, Always Saved (Chicago: Moody Press, 1983), 23.
25. Ibid., 19. Dr. Kendall continues, “‘In other words, no matter what sin (or absence of Christian obedience) may accompany such faith.’ Prof Donald Macleod says of this ‘misguided’ statement, ‘To the theologically aware, it immediately suggests Antinomianism. To the general public it is an invitation to live as your please.’” (R.T. Kendall, Once Saved, Always Saved (Chicago: Moody Press, 1983), 52-53, quoted in Richard Alderson, No Holiness, No Heaven! : Antinomianism Today (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1986), 57).
26. Charles C. Ryrie, So Great Salvation (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1989), 96.
27. Ibid., 99.
28. Ibid., 141.
29. Ibid., 156.
30. Dr. Ryrie further wrote, “The news that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead is the complete gospel. Nothing else must be believed for salvation.” (Ibid., 40-41). “Submission to Christ’s supreme authority as Lord is not germane to the saving transaction.” (Ibid., 71). “Neither dedication nor willingness to be dedicated to Christ are issues in salvation.” (Ibid., 74). “Christians may fall into a state of lifelong carnality.” (Ibid., 31).
31. R.B. Thieme, Jr., Apes and Peacocks or the Pursuit of Happiness (Houston: Thieme Ministries, 1973), 23.
32. Dr. Renald Showers is another example of a free grace teacher. He writes,“The Gospel of the Kingdom [Matt.1-16:51] was a different gospel from that of I Cor. 15. Therefore, Christians today must be careful not to make teaching associated with the Gospel of the Kingdom part of the Gospel Paul defined in I Cor. 15, and that is to be preached today. . . . Faith in Christ is the only requirement for salvation. . . . the early Church, . . . used “kurios” to refer to absolute deity, or as a synonym for “God.” Thus, when the early Church, apostles, or New Testament declared Jesus is Lord, they meant He is God.”(Renald Showers, “The Trouble with Lordship Salvation,” Word of Life 1990 Annual Report (December 1990): 18-19).
33. Fuller, Works, 566.
34. Hodges, Free, 37.
35. In opposition to this position, see 1 Cor. 13:5-6 and 2 Peter 1:10.
36. See Appendix #3 for a fuller list of definitions, examples, and synonyms for “belief” used in the gospel of John.
37. For a more complete list of examples of unbelievers and their actions, see Appendix #4. Also notice how John places these examples strategically in each chapter -- sometimes in between two examples of saving faith.
38. John F. MacArthur, Jr., The Gospel According To Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988), 37-203. [Matthew’s gospel account receives the fullest treatment here.]
39. John F. MacArthur, Jr., Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993), 11-218. This is the least polemic of these two works. I disagree with the conclusions drawn by some of the reviewers of The Gospel According to Jesus. To present truths in tension and to qualify what is not meant by Jesus using strong statements is a valid way to communicate biblical truth. Even Jesus used this method. When asked, “Is this work overly kind to the free grace teachers?”, I must answer, “No.” Is it accurate in its exegesis and presentation of the biblical gospel? Yes, absolutely!
40. Ralph W. Harris, ed., The Complete Biblical Library (Springfield, MO: World Library Press, Inc., 1991), vol. 14, The New Testament Greek-English Dictionary: Lambda - Omicron, 25-29.
41. Ibid.
42. Joseph H. Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977), 370-371. Thayer lists the following definitions: “to take with the hand, lay hold of a person or thing in order to use it . . . i.e., He took and kissed . . . to take in order to wear . . . to take in the mouth: something to eat . . . to swallow . . . to take in order to carry away without the notion of violence . . . to take—marry a wife.”
43. William F. Arndt and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature 2d. ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 464.
44. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1985) 495-497. Kittel defines lambano as follows: “to hold or grasp something or someone . . . to take to oneself, to collect, to seize, to receive . . . accepting Jesus Himself” (John 1:12).
45. According to the Shepherd of the sheep, the ones who believe can be spotted by two activities: 1) continually listening to Jesus’ voice, and 2) continually following Jesus’ voice. In other words, they are obeying His Word, for “He became the author of everlasting salvation for all who are obeying Him”(Heb.5:9). (emphasis added).
46. They have also accepted the Shepherd’s commission “that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in His name to all the nations” (Luke 24:47 NKJV). Furthermore, they can say with Paul to those to whom they minister, “I have kept nothing from you that was helpful, but proclaimed it to you. . . . testifying to Jews and also to Greeks, repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:20-21 NKJV).
47. A Faith to Confess: The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 (Rewritten in Modern English) (Sussex, England: Carey Publication, Ltd, 1982), 36-38.
48. Smith, The Grace Escape: Jesus as Savior and Lord (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991), 59-60.
49. Herschel H. Hobbs, The Baptist Faith and Message (Nashville: Convention Press, 1971), 55. Bold print emphasis added.
50. “The call to evangelize is a command. Having accepted Jesus as Lord the disciples had brought themselves under his rule and were obligated to do whatever he asked . . . Conversion is man turning to God. It consists of a negative and a positive element: repentance, that is, abandonment of sin; and faith, that is, acceptance of the promises and the work of Christ. Jesus spoke especially of repentance, and specifically of conviction of sin, which is the prerequisite of repentance . . . As we examine this matter of repentance, we cannot avoid being impressed with its importance as a prerequisite for salvation. The large number of verses and the variety of contexts in which repentance is stressed make clear that it is not optional but indispensable . . . Repentance is an essential part of the Christian gospel . . . Repentance is godly sorrow for one’s sin together with a resolution to turn from it.”(Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 1052, 872, 937).
51. Robert L. Hamblin and William H. Stephens, The Doctrine of Lordship (Nashville: Convention Press, 1990), 45-110.
52. Terry A. Chrisope, Jesus is Lord (Welwyn, England: Evangelical Press, 1982), 6-45.
53. This phrase was probably first used to show opposition to the position of the Arminian Remonstrance which stated, “Final salvation is possible for believers, but ultimate victory rests with their continuance in faith, so that final apostasy may be possible for the once saved.”
(Kenneth H. Good, Are Baptists Calvinists? (Rochester, NY: Backus Book Publishers, 1988), 55).
54. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1042.
55. Harris, Complete Biblical Library, 9:425.
56. Simon J. Kistemaker, James and 1-3 John: New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1986), 359.
57. Ernest C. Reisinger, Today’s Evangelism: Its Message and Methods (Phillipsburg, NJ: Craig Press, 1982), 125.
58. John F. MacArthur, Jr., Saved Without a Doubt: How to Be Sure of Your Salvation (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1992), 67-91.
59. Following the exegesis of Ernie Reisinger, J.C. Ryle, Will Metzger, and John MacArthur, I have developed my own list of twenty-five “these things” tests that is included as Appendix #5.
60. One should not pretend to see another person’s heart. However, he can be brought to the verdict of the Bible based on their lifestyle and choices at this point in time. If the fruit is bad, the Word of God questions the root and so should he. If he is comfortable in his surrendering to a posture of rebellion, then the danger is even greater that he does not yet belong to Him (Heb. 12: 1-17; Psalm 32:3-7).
61. (1 John 2:19 NIV) “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.”
62. See Appendix #6 for an additional consideration on the term repentance.
63. Robert B. Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament: Their Bearing on Christian Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: William Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1897, 1983), 88-89.
64. “All these expressions of man’s penitential activity, however, are subsumed by this one verb shuv. For better than any other verb it combines in itself the two requisites of repentance: to turn from evil and to turn to the good.”{R. Larid Harris, Gleason Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 909}.
65. Ryrie, Great Salvation, 92.
66. Ibid., 99.
No comments:
Post a Comment