What is the Gospel?
Tuesday, September 12th, 2006 : By Dan Miller
On Sunday, we sought to ask the most profound question any human being can consider: How does a person become right with God? We sought out our answer to this question in Romans 3:19-26. As I spoke with sincere people after the service who posed very valid questions such as,
“Couldn’t this view [that I am fully right with God when I place my trust in what Christ did on my behalf] promote sinful living?” “If I am forgiven then am I not free to live anyway I choose and if I choose a sinful life isn’t that promoting ‘easy believism?’”
Another question, veiled in the form of a statement, was:
“The Gospel simply seems too easy. Is there any definitive act on my part that I can look to that will ensure that I did get saved?”
Let me begin the discussion by stating again, and hopefully clearer than Sunday, what the Gospel (”good news”) is according to the passage at hand. After we have done this we can tackle the concerns stated above.
God requires perfection. Now, how can we achieve this since it is clear we are by our nature objects of God’s wrath due to the fact that we are “dead in sins” (Eph.2:1). God’s orientation to us is waiting for us to repent while loving us as His creation. However, a dead man cannot improve His condition through repentance since all he can do is be a professional sinner (see Romans 3:9-18). So, how do we get our sins paid for and rescued from being a debtor to God due to our lack of positive righteousness (being “right”) secure in our relationships with the God of the universe? The answer is not found in trying to achieve being good through some established standard given to Moses, i.e. the Law (see Rom. 3:19-20). Paul’s rebuttal was to level the arrogant Jews who thought that they were accepted by God since they were the “chosen people” (see Romans 3:27-4:25) and God’s Law was given as expression of His approval of them vs. His standard demanded by Him.
So, again, how do we get this righteousness we so desperately need? According to Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the answer is that the righteousness that God demands and that the “Law and the Prophets testify” (v.21) is a righteousness that God give to anyone who has faith in Jesus Christ. The act of dying in our place was to satisfy the justice that God demands due to our sins. Through belief, God takes away the sin that we inherited in Adam and gives us the righteousness of Christ, a righteousness proven by 30 years of perfect obedience. The “first Adam” (see chap. 5), sinned in the Garden of God and sin was imputed to us. However, the “second Adam” (again, chap.5) was led by the Spirit into the dessert to be tempted by the Devil (c.f. Luke 4), the very same Devil who was in Eden with Adam, and could not get Jesus to disobey God. Jesus responded on three specific occasions through trusting in God’s will completely. Therefore, Jesus merited what Adam failed to, rightousness. At the cross, the guilt of Adam was charged to Christ and punished on the cross while the righteousness of Christ is imputed to a person when they repent of their sin and believe that God has provided in this way to pay for their sin.
Therefore, we are “justified” (the act of making right, see v.24) because Jesus redeemed us (bought us back). God “presented Him (Jesus) as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in His blood” (v.25). Paul anticipates the challenge of, “Did God compromise his standard to do this?” He also anticipates the question, “How does this act relate to those who have sinned in th eOld Testament (see v.25)?” God perfectly balances the fact that God never lowered his standard and that only His Son could take away sin. The intent of the sacrificial system given in the Old Testament was put off judgment. Only the obedient life of Jesus could satisfy God’s righteous standard (Hebrews 5:7-14; 10:5-18). Therefore, the only standard God will accept is trusting in the fact that God did this through Jesus and any other hope outside of Christ is folly. God is simultaneously both the judge setting the standard (the Father) and Jesus (the Son) paying fully to satisfy the debt. Pardon from sin and freedom in Christ is only recieved through faith in the life, death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.
This is good news! This is the Gospel!
Based on the truth of the Gospel, how would you answer the first two questions stated above?
About The Author
I have been married to an amazing wife, Vicki, since 1992 and together we enjoy pouring into our six kids the greatness of our God. My favorite food is Italian. I enjoy playing 80’s metal riffs on my guitar. I love all the major sports (except soccer, but that’s not really a sport anyhow). My favorite sporting event is the Final Four tournament in March/April. I think the best season of the year is the Fall. I would love to be hiking and camping on some trail right now.
More entries by Dan Miller
26 Comments
-
“Couldn’t this view [that I am fully right with God when I place my trust in what Christ did on my behalf] promote sinful living?”
The question is really, “Couldn’t the whole thing be misunderstood?” My answer is yes.
-
“If I am forgiven then am I not free to live anyway I choose and if I choose a sinful life isn’t that promoting ‘easy believism?’”
Jesus taught that those who would follow him must consider the cost of discipleship. That cost is simply this: Christ demands all that you have and all that you are. (Fortunately, he demands no more than that!) The person who “chooses a sinful life” is choosing not to follow Jesus; that is, they are considering the costs and benefits of discipleship and deciding it costs too much. Such a person neither follows Christ nor receives forgiveness.
-
“The Gospel simply seems too easy. Is there any definitive act on my part that I can look to that will ensure that I did get saved?”
My answer: no, there’s no definitive proof. When it comes to salvation, only God knows for sure, and the Holy Spirit isn’t going to give us God-like omniscience or scientifically verifiable proof of our salvation. However, the maturity that the Holy Spirit builds in us gives us good reasons for confidence.
What does that confidence look like? Suppose you decide to get married. There is no definitive way to know with certainty that your fiancee truly loves you. But as time goes on, the evidence mounts. Fifty years later, if you’re still married and you’ve enjoyed a long, rich life together, you have more reason for confidence in your spouse’s love for you than you had on your wedding day. But you still don’t know with the same kind of omniscience that God has.
Another way to look at it is this: even if there were some kind of “test” you could apply, you’d still have reason to doubt the test itself.
Bottom line: even though we can’t know things perfectly (like God does), we can still know things truly and have confidence where there is good reason to do so.
-
I agree with Hugh that if our response to the Gospel is ‘Wow, now I can live any way I want to!’ then I’ve misunderstood and may not be in possession of saving faith.
As to assurance, I think we can have assurance. John in fact tells us in I John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may KNOW that you have eternal life.” (emhasis mine) However, that assurance should not be grounded in a single event in the past but in our life in the present as we walk with the Lord and see the affects of His grace in our lives, which I think is also basically what Hugh has said above.
-
I agree. Those who desire to have a fool-proof faith are asking for something that would never really satisfy. We would simply take that answer and make more qualifiers, e.g. “how many communions can I miss?” When Jesus tells his followers: “if you love me you will obey my commands” or when Paul tells us to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling;” it is meant to take us where we are to where we should be progressively. There are no magic pills or quick elixirs in the Christian’s walk. Our security is in how Christ has told us He will treat us, His trustworthiness. My assurance is my confidence that I am acting like a Christian based on reflecting the character and priorities of Christ. Within these two sentences it is easy to see a mounting tension. Paul’s view of this tension being directed at us in the form of an admonition to “examine ourselves” is the key to finding balance, see II Cor. 12:20-21 in comparison with 13:5-7.
-
Some confusing thoughts and feel good stuff here of how great it is to know we are saved because of how “good” we are now, and how our “natural desire” is for God.
I really don’t want to re-open a fresh can of worms from last year but the fact is there is no thermometer that can tell us we are forgiven or saved. There is no meter to tell us that since we think we are living and serving Christ that this is absolute and definitive proof that we are saved. Thinking this way will drive you nuts and you will never have the confidence that I believe we as followers and believers that name the name of Christ should demonstrate. There are too many verses that celebrate our standing with God in Christ. “joint heirs with Jesus” “more than conquerors” and so on….this is positive stuff folks but it’s not reinforced by how we feel now or how good or bad our lives are to ourselves or others. It is who we are in God’s eyes because of how Jesus lived a sinless life and died on that cross to pay for ALL sin…period.
Unbelievers can put on a good show too. The best comment in this thread is that only God knows for sure, but we still naturally judge others based on what they do or what they say, and we never know the full picture or what is going on in that person’s life. Or worse, we never care to find out.
We can’t any prove our salvation on our good works after we are saved any more than our good works beforehand saved us. If all of works are as filthy rags then they are ALL filthy.
Yes, quote James to me all day long about works showing faith, but that is talking about demonstration of my faith and testimony to others, not proof of my standing with God.
The only thing we have that is 100% unwavering is what Christ did on that cross and why He did it. Our understanding of our sinful state, the penalty of sin being death, our understanding that God’s standard is perfection, our understanding that we can NEVER measure up, and our understanding that in Christ’s sacrifice we are perfect in God’s eyes, but only when we ask for forgiveness and place our faith and trust in Christ alone for that payment alone. That faith and trust is described as a mustard seed of faith. Whether you believe that mustard seed faith can only come from God in the first place, we are chosen, or that people are capable of making that choice on their own is not the argument.
The argument is that we can look to that time in our life where we knew what Christ did for us, and accepted His free gift of forgiveness, life abundantly now, joy in serving Him, and eternal life. I base my standing with Christ on what He did for me. I need to do nothing to prove it to myself, to others, and especially not to God. I desire to live and serve out of gratitude, love, and obedience. I am not a robot for God and can and did stray for a time in my life. Had you seen me during those years you might have said my salvation was not genuine. That would have been so wrong as you did not know the internal battle going on for my heart then that rages on today in some areas. You are lying to yourself if you don’t admit that you have struggles too in areas of your lives. But that struggle should not make you question your standing with God. If you knew those people’s hearts that might not be living like you think they should, you might be surprised. We are supposed to be salt and light and not soldiers that shoot their own wounded. We just have to be better at not assuming so many are the enemy and not wounded soldiers that might have never gotten out of boot camp that need us.
Again only God knows for sure, but if someone names the name of Christ and gives me the right “lingo” I can’t just assume it is not real because of on thing they say or do. Just plain wrong. Our job is not to judge and come up with a plan of action. Our job is to love those people unconditionally and let God do His work. If that means salvation then great! If that means being God’s tool to bring them back to Him than even better!
Faith alone in Christ alone plus nothing. We say it but do we all believe it? Really?
Controversial? I sure hope not. If so, feel free to gang up on me in a big circle after worship tomorrow. I can take the heat. ;^)
-
So CA, are you saying there is no way the one can know if they have a saving relationship with Christ or not? The original thread doesn’t have to do with knowing if someone else is saved or not. Your post seems to be mixing the two ideas.
-
Dear Davo:
I am right on target here….
I was running with Dan’s comments that DID clearly hit on this subject very hard….just about this entire blog is dealing with assurance after the main title of “What is the Gospel”.
Part of that “Good News” is the assurance we have that our sins are forgiven and we have a new life in Christ. We are part of the Body.
Dan Wrote some others questions from Grace Talk to expound on…
“Couldn’t this view [that I am fully right with God when I place my trust in what Christ did on my behalf] promote sinful living?” “If I am forgiven then am I not free to live anyway I choose and if I choose a sinful life isn’t that promoting ‘easy believism?’”
and…
“The Gospel simply seems too easy. Is there any definitive act on my part that I can look to that will ENSURE that I did get saved?”
I was trying to counter many of the answers to these questions that I really do disagree with. Such as have we really “counted the cost” or “are we choosing to live a sinful life” or “are we truly following Jesus”. Other comments said that we should not look to a single point in our life but where we have come so far as a whole, and even Dan mentioned that if there was such a thing as a “fool proof” faith that it somehow would not satisfy.
A bunch of doubt and little assurance in what I am reading and is a bummer to read.
Hugh had an entire entry about if there was a test you would even have reason to doubt the test.
That’s all sad to me since we should all be 100% sure because of what Christ did and our acceptance of that payment, and how God see us and why. That could be from a sincere prayer we prayed, or something that happened in our hearts on particular day. A realization of the Gospel. Different for different people, but we don’t lose our salvation so once we are sealed it is finished. Whenever it first happened it happened.
When we are sure that means confidence and that means shining the light to the rest of the world with that same confidence.
I am 100% sure and because of nothing I did but what He did. That’s not foolish.
I will say to Dan’s comment (Fool proof Faith) that we were the fools in our sin and Jesus was the proof we needed that saved us once and for all!
These somewhat generic comments of proving our faith based on how we live afterwards are dangerous in my mind because there is no yardstick to measure how faithful of a servant, how long is too long to backslide, what sentence or word could a person utter and not way they are a believer, and so on. Just a mess.
There is absolutely nothing I can do after I am born again to be good or faithful enough to prove it. That should not be our motivation anyway. The yardstick was perfection before our salvation and it remains that afterward too! We fail miserably at both ends folks. God sees Jesus when He sees us because we trusted in the payment made on the Cross and his blood covers our sin. We are so undeserving but God sees us as perfect in our standing with Him. Amazing love!
II Tim 2:13-14
13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful. He can’t deny himself.”
14 Remind them of these things, charging them in the sight of the Lord, that they don’t argue about words, to no profit, to the subverting of those who hear.
So how good do I have to be so I can be fully assured, and how bad do I have to be so you can tell me I am not assured?
There’s a good question.
-
I was just pointing out that the topic has to do with personal introspection, not judging others.
-
I’m a little confused what the controversy is… I have a sense it has something to do with “certainty.”
Does anybody disagree with any of these statements?
1. We can never have complete knowledge of the truth the way God does.
2. We can still have a valid knowledge of the truth, even though our knowledge is not exhaustive.
3. Therefore, there will always be a gap between our knowledge of the truth and the truth as it is.
I think that pretty much eliminates “certainty” or a fool-proof anything. However, we can still have good reasons to trust our knowledge of things, however limited we are.
-
One the best discussions on this topic in my humble opinion is MacArthur’s “The Gospel According to Jesus”.
In it he says:
“We must remember above all that salvation is a sovereign work of God. Biblically it is defined by what it produces, not by what one does to get it.” Commenting on Matthew 7:17 he goes on to say “Works are NOT necessary to earn salvation. But true salvation wrought by God will not fail to produce the good works that are its fruit.”
In other words, if it’s truly a work of God it will lead to what God intends for it to lead to - a changed life bent on pleasing the Lord. Not a perfect life or a sinless life but one bent in God’s direction and not in the direction of the world.
I believe it was Luther who said “we’re saved by faith alone but saving faith is never alone” Faith and repentance are two sides of the same coin and are both gifts of God. He does not give one without the other. Faith without repentance is “easy believe-ism” and repentance without faith is works based religion, neither of which is Biblical conversion.
I don’t think its about proving anything but it is about examining myself to see if I’m ‘in the faith’ (II Corinthians 13:5). That verse says there is something I can do to determine if I’m ‘in the faith’ and that something is to ‘examine’ myself (present tense) not to ‘remember your decision at church camp’.
I do think making that examination where another person is concerned is a somewhat different topic and one that should be approached very carefully. However, Paul does admonish us not to be ‘unequally yoked’ with unbelievers so there must be some way to gauge if another person is a believer else we could not obey that command. Another topic for another day perhaps!
-
I agree with you Larry if we try to apply these things to our own lives in some regard. I am not easy-belivism, but I am definitely not full on lordship salvation either. I believe that the mustard seed is just that. I seperate the “initial saving faith” from the “commitment to serve and follow Christ”. I believe one should follow the other and is a natural urge with the new nature, but the first does not require the second at the same time. That might make you cringe and say there is no way you can have one without the other, and I just say “mustard seed faith”, Phillip and the Eunuch, and the thief on the cross.
“a changed life bent on pleasing the Lord” Again this is a good statement in itself, but this is again going into our level of works after we are saved. Where is the personal measuring stick or scale that lets me know these things are truly enough to assure me that I am in the fold? The answer is there is none so we can only be assured with the work Jesus did for us.
I believe that all believers have a new nature and new conscience as we are made alive, but that does not make it impossible for a believer to do certain things. To sin. Even some nasty stuff. Sin for a season. I think that person would be riddled with guilt, but if you saw him based on this discussion you would say there is no way a saved person could say that or do that.
That is where my problem lies. That is just me.
For Hugh’s comments, I am just more bummed my brutha.
The truth of the Gospel is beautiful, perfect, easy to understand, and crystal clear. We should be 100% confident that we know exactly what the Gospel is and what is means to us. There are many mysteries in the Bible that we cannot comprehend, but the Gospel was directly for us so I believe that God made it so we could understand completely and fully.
The only thing I will never comprehend is why He loved us so much to go through what He did.
-
C.A., I think we’re saying essentially the same thing, but emphasizing different sides of the coin…
I’m indebted to D.A. Carson for my take on this stuff… in a talk he gave (see euroleadershipresources.org; I admit it’s some heavy-duty stuff), he poses a situation that goes something like this (I’m not actually quoting here):
Consider Billy, a five-year-old boy growing up in a good, Christian home. You ask Billy, “Does God love you?”
Billy: Yes.
You: How do you know?
Billy: “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.”
You: Really? Where does the Bible say, “God loves Billy?”
Billy: The Bible says, “God so loved the world that he sent his son,” and I’m in the world, so God loves me.
The question Carson asks is this: does Billy understand John 3:16?
He doesn’t understand what the Greek word “agape” means, nor that “world” is the Greek word “cosmos” and means more than just “planet Earth,” nor does he understand the significance of the exchange between Jesus and Nicodemus.
He doesn’t understand it completely. No matter how much he learns — and he may well learn a lot — he will never understand it completely. But he does understand it truly.
So it is with the salvation question: we can never have complete or perfect assurance[1], but by God’s grace, we can still have confidence in proportion to the evidence available.
[1] Kevin Schultz once noted: if there was some sure-fire, fool-proof way to test our salvation, then why doesn’t the scripture give it to us? Why does it simply tell us to work out our faith with fear and trembling?
-
Thanks Hugh:
I really like the phrase you listed “understanding it truly” but maybe not “completely”. That sums it up nicely since we might not fully understand all of the nuances and why God would love us so much, but we can have a “true” understanding of God’s plan of salvation, the Gospel, and I think we must truly understand.
Salvation can be looked at as a one time big event (justification) that lasts the rest of our lives (sanctification). But that does not mean that we are graded over time to see how well we did, and if we were consistent and endured to the end good enough (remember that only perfection is good enough) He will let us in. I tend to have a clear separation of the two in my mind.
The “working out our salvation” seems to be more on the side of the ongoing process of the Spirit working in our lives to make us more like Jesus as we submit and are obedient (after justification), and less the actual event or moment in time that brought us into His family forever.
I could get into semantics not based on the context or original meaning of that verse and just state from my own opinions that there is no need for us to “work out” anything ourselves since God worked out everything for us perfectly by sending His son to die in our place, but I would never say such a thing……oops I just did.
Here comes the hard stuff…..
When we are born again I believe we have a second choice afterward to follow or not to follow. To serve or not to serve. Many/most at GF believe that the original “choice” to put our faith in Christ was based on a faith that had to be given to us by God since we were 100% dead before that. I still struggle a bit with that concept, but it is not at all a foundational truth for me that would cause me to stumble or care to debate. However I am open to changing my mind as I understand this concept better over time.
I believe that the urge of a true believer to follow would almost be irresistible and very natural with the Sprit now living inside us, but again everyone is different and everyone might not have a “glorious salvation” experience like I did where I could not even say a curse word just a day after talking like a sailor on shore leave. Not to say I never utter some of those words now, but I believe God knew that is what I needed then to get through some potentially tough times, and the 100% assurance that this was not a feeling or a fad. This was the real deal! But that can’t be the same for everyone and we cannot put a checklist out there to judge genuine conversion.
God does not make us robots and it is our choice to follow our not to follow. It is also our choice to be miserable in life as that choice to do what we want would result in both mental, physical, and spiritual turmoil. I think we would quickly realize that many of our previous activities are no longer “compatible” since that still small voice is there now! Taking the “being totally dead” concept we are “totally alive” once we are born again and are capable of making decisions that are the wrong ones too.
Now back to one of the questions Dan listed at the top about a person professing Christ and then being able to do anything they wanted afterwards. Nothing more than “Fire insurance”. For me that would be impossible for someone to be truly born again and go right back to ALL of the things they did before with NO remorse or guilt long term. But that is me judging as everyone is different and some might think they can go back to their old lifestyle but once they get there it is no longer a desire, or the guilt is too much to bear. They are a new creature, but again our job is the love those people unconditionally and instead of judging to be the example and tool God can use to do His work. Either to bring genuine salvation or bring them back to Christ after falling away for a time.
Just to alleviate anyone thinking I am going all easy believism here I do think it is dead wrong and not the clear gospel to tell people beforehand that they can do anything they want afterwards if they will just pray the prayer so they are going to heaven when they die. It is not the prayer and not magic words. It is the faith that saves right? You also MUST understand what you are being saved from and what Christ did. It grates my cheese to hear Joel Osteen on the tube asking people to pray a prayer for “Jesus to come into my life” with no explanation at all of our sinful state and what Jesus had to do for pay for that sin. That kind of prayer is 100% worthless.
There must be a realization of sin, that all have sinned, that the penalty is death and separation from God, the payment required, and the gift of God of that payment in the form of Christ. The mustard seed of saving faith can be anytime during that realization IMO. The repentance or changing of the mind, the asking for forgiveness and acceptance of Christ’s payment is all there is after that for genuine justification. It must always be followed up with an explanation of God’s desire for you to live and serve Him with the new life you have been given and the new desires in your heart, but not to commit to live and serve for the justification to be real.
I am personally against telling someone during this process or sharing our faith that they must be willing to stop doing everything they are doing first and commit their lives to service before God will accept them. This might rile up some of you but please hear my side.
This can be so confusing and I believe mixes works into the salvation picture by asking for a commitment of services and to change their lifestyle upfront instead of a desire for forgiveness and realization of their sinful state and need of a savior. I also don’t believe that people are capable of making those commitment type decisions until they are regenerated. Only that they have sinned and the particular habits or sin in their own lives is wrong and they need forgiveness. Now if they don’t realize or believe they are in sin to begin with there is no way they can obtain the free gift God offers.
Bottom line is that we are new creatures when we are justified with a new conscience and a new nature. Old things are passed away and all things are new. Or they should be naturally, but everyone has a different place they came from and for some it might take more time. We just have to love those people and encourage them. We submit to the nature that now controls us and let Him complete the work He began at that moment. And that is the key. We must let Him, but God does still give us choices and when we are not looking to Him we will always fail. Temptation is always with us.
I like the idea of examining ourselves instead of judging others that claim the name of Christ, but they might not be living up to what our own expectations of a genuine believer should be. We must be a positive and godly influence on those people so they see Christ in our lives. We have to be real and genuine. We must be ourselves! I love Kevin Hosner as a perfect example. This guy is so energetic and friendly it took me off guard when we first started coming to GF and I thought there is no way this guy was for real. Even more extroverted than I am and that is saying a lot. After coming for a short time it was obvious that this guy is genuine and real and the same guy no matter the setting. Kevin without question has the gift of “salt and light” and makes everyone around him feel just a little more positive for having spent a minute or two taking! We should all want that for ourselves!!! That is my goal and tell people that the person you see on Sunday morning is the same guy you would see at home privately with my family or anywhere else.
Sorry for the rambling, but wanted to get it all out there as this blog seems to be coming to an end.
Just my opinions on this subject, and would be happy to talk to anyone on the phone or get together to ramble on further or have a healthy discussion/debate on the merits of lack of merits in all these things I have typed.
Maybe some might think I am believing “junk-theology”. That is your right, but I hope this does not make anyone think less of me. I can go on an on with verses to back what I believe on this. I can also come up with some that could be used to support more of a “if Jesus is not Lord of all He is not Lord at all” point of view.
I truly appreciate the forum here to type my thoughts out without fear of excommunication. It helps me to get it strait for some concepts that I have not thought through for a long time. That also means that I am not closed minded and open to change if I believe I am wrong somewhere in all this after some of your set me strait.
The Gospel truly is good news, the greatest news, and my desire is to be able to share that good news much more effectively than I have over the past 10-15 years. Both in the life I live, and by genuinely caring about others so that they can have that joy and forgiveness now, and eternal life afterwards.
Good night everyone…sleep in Jesus.
-
C.A. — I’m glad the distinction was helpful. I have several questions I’d like to ask about some of your “hard stuff,” though. Please forgive me if this seems like I’m “out to get you” or something — it’s just that, well, you said a lot, and there’s a lot to say in return… I’ll break this up and post each of my replies in a separate comment.
1. “When we are born again I believe we have a second choice afterward to follow or not to follow. To serve or not to serve.” You followed that up with “it is not at all a foundational truth for me that would cause me to stumble or care to debate. However I am open to changing my mind as I understand this concept better over time.”
My question for you is, if you believe that following Christ, Christian service, discipleship, call it what you will, is optional, what is your basis for believing that? Luke 9 and James 2 make clear statements to the contrary.
-
2. “I believe that the urge of a true believer to follow would almost be irresistible and very natural with the Sprit now living inside us, but again everyone is different and everyone might not have a ‘glorious salvation’ experience…”
Question: which would you say is more central, a “glorious salvation experience,” or the authority and power of the Holy Spirit? Would you say the experience comes first, or is it the Spirit who causes that experience?
Question: Which is more reasonable to expect: that salvation should be accompanied by a glorious experience, or that salvation ought to be accompanied by the marks of a true disciple?
-
3. “I am personally against telling someone during this process or sharing our faith that they must be willing to stop doing everything they are doing first and commit their lives to service before God will accept them… This can be so confusing and I believe mixes works into the salvation picture by asking for a commitment of services and to change their lifestyle upfront instead of a desire for forgiveness and realization of their sinful state and need of a savior. I also don’t believe that people are capable of making those commitment type decisions until they are regenerated.”
I agree with you in the sense that there’s no more point in telling a sinner to sign up for the life of a saint than there is in telling me to flap my arms and fly around the room — just as I’m unable to fly, so the sinner is unable to live in the power of the Spirit.
At the same time, though, following Christ means something specific — a life of self-denial and discipleship — and Jesus said we must consider the cost of following him, so I don’t see how it’s out of bounds to spell it out to someone in an evangelistic context. Rather I think it’s an essential part of the gospel message, closely linked to repentance: repentance is as much about what you are turning to as what you’re turning from.
Question: Would you say that a person who considers the cost of following Christ, but walks away, is repentant?
-
Last one…
4. “…[E]veryone has a different place they came from and for some [sanctification] might take more time. We just have to love those people and encourage them… I like the idea of examining ourselves instead of judging others that claim the name of Christ, but they might not be living up to what our own expectations of a genuine believer should be.”
There’s a difference between making judgments about others and judging others.
Question: how can you know who “those people” are who need “more time” so you can “encourage them?”
Question: If you love me and encourage me in my growth toward Christlikeness, should I infer that you are judging me to be “less spiritual,” and that’s why you’re loving me and encouraging me?
-
Thanks again Hugh for your time and thoughtful questions. No offence at all. I enjoy the discussion, though on some points I am open and on other set in my ways.
I want to give more of a shotgun response that will hopefully hit a very wide target to answer your questions.I have a clear wall between justification and sanctification in my mind. One should follow the other naturally, but the latter cannot be based on any scale, timetable, or yardstick set by man. Everyone is different.
You misunderstood me on this one point….
When I wrote..
“I still struggle a bit with that concept, but it is not at all a foundational truth for me that would cause me to stumble or care to debate. However I am open to changing my mind as I understand this concept better over time.”
(That was in direct reference to the idea of God giving us the faith to believe and to us being 100% dead. Not at all in
reference to having a choice to follow or not to follow Christ.)The passages you referred in Luke 9 and James 2 can be used to strengthen your argument and can also be interpreted as a call to service and obedience for the believer after justification. I have always been taught to look at who is being addressed in particular passages to be able to make the distinction clearer. If addressing unbelievers then it related to salvation. If to believers or to a church then it is usually related to discipleship, repentance, and service after we are born again.
You wrote…
Question: how can you know who “those people” are who need “more time” so you can “encourage them?”That’s just my point. You can’t know and should not try to. Just like we can’t save people ourselves or push them for some kind of commitment to Christ. We have a clear job to be salt and light so in those people we can only do the best we can with God’s help and let God do what He has planned for that person.
The facts are that we as Christians can sin and we are capable of doing bad things. We can commit to a life of service and then have something really bad happen or a strong temptation and fall away for a time. We don’t lose our salvation so the pad excuse is always that they “were never really saved in the first place”. Perhaps, but we don’t know that, and would rather let that person go on and be warmed and filled than finding out what is really going on in that person’s life and being God’s instrument for repentance. Whether that means a genuine conversion, or genuine repentance/return like the prodigal son.
Many argue (including myself) that repentance is not necessarily a willingness to stop doing all those things and making Jesus “Lord” to be saved, but repentance is a “change of mind” in realizing that sin is wrong, and that we need forgiveness. I believe some of the Greek translations for “repentance” in those key verses mean to “change your mind”.
There is a dramatic change on the inside when anyone is born again, but my steadfast argument is that the change on the inside does not manifest itself on the outside in the same way for everyone and in the same fervor or timeframe.
My salvation experience was for me alone. It was amazing as I trusted Christ for what He did for me, knew my sins were forgiven, and there were instant changes that would be unbelievable to explain other than by the work of the Holy Spirit. But I do not base my genuine conversion on those feelings of elation or how suddenly “righteous” I became then. Others would base it on that like by looking at me before and after and saying “Wow! Look at how C.A. has changed” Still that is great for my testimony for others and is the point of James 2.
I do not believe that our initial justification is based on any commitment to serving Jesus, any willingness to stop what we are doing first. So many verses that deal with discipleship and commitment for the believer are run together with the Gospel message because many churches want more committed believers, and others take the more “lordship” of making Jesus the “boss” or Lord of your life to be saved with no talk of what Jesus did and why. What they end up with is a group of people that are always confused, wondering if they are really saved if they do something or think a certain way, or say a certain thing.
You ask them why they are born again and they tell you that they “committed their life to Christ”. No talk of them being in sin or God’s plan of salvation in Christ for their sin. This is the opposite end of the spectrum and in my opinion just as bad as someone telling you they are saved because they “prayed a prayer for Jesus to save me” with no other understanding of God’s plan. Do you agree with me on this? If so then justification by faith alone in Christ alone must just be that with no strings attached. Genuine realization of sin and it’s penalty of death and eternal separation as God is just, realization that all have sinned and that sin is wrong, and that we must live a perfect life to be accepted. Not possible and that is why Jesus took on our sin and God sees us a perfect when we place our faith in Him and what He did for us. That is the Gospel in a nutshell. Forgiveness and newness of life afterwards. Mustard seed faith.
This might sound like easy-believism to you, but I do not deny that Christ commands us to take up our cross and follow Him, but only after we have been justified by faith and trust in the payment He made on the cross. Then and only then do we have the power to make such a commitment. We are not robots for God, and though the Spirit inside should naturally gravitate us to the things of God, we do have a choice to sin when tempted, and are perfectly capable of making those wrong choices. I also believe that this new nature would be like fingernails on a chalkboard when we are tempted to sin, and intense guilt when we succumb to it. Only my opinion and is true in my own life, but think this is the case with all believers internally too at different intensities.
I have beat this into a fine paste, but I hope my newest and hopefully final rambling will explain were I am coming from better.
Goodnight again.
-
What of the person then, who makes a profession of faith, and then proceeds to live the remainder of his/her years - without attending church, without prayer, without reading the Bible.
What does the Bible say about this person?
-
Some responses C.A.:
I want to give more of a shotgun response that will hopefully hit a very wide target to answer your questions.
Question: I recognize this is just a blog, so that’s not out of line… but don’t you think precise questions warrant precise answers?
I have a clear wall between justification and sanctification in my mind. One should follow the other naturally, but the latter cannot be based on any scale, timetable, or yardstick set by man. Everyone is different.
Question: I understand you reject man-made criteria for assessing sanctification. Are there any God-given criteria do you accept for this purpose?
Question: Would you say there are any objective standards for assessing sanctification? I’m not asking about criteria for a definitive assessment (see my earlier remarks about “knowing truly” vs. “knowing completely”), but just some kind of evidence…
The passages you referred in Luke 9 and James 2 can be used to strengthen your argument and can also be interpreted as a call to service and obedience for the believer after justification. I have always been taught to look at who is being addressed in particular passages to be able to make the distinction clearer. If addressing unbelievers then it related to salvation. If to believers or to a church then it is usually related to discipleship, repentance, and service after we are born again.
I agree, being mindful of the context is always a good rule to follow, but in this case, the distinction you are making may not be useful. These passages speak to objective truths about the gospel. The question of who is being addressed does not make the those truths any different.
In other words, the gospel is the same, no matter who hears it. What’s true about the gospel for believers is also true for unbelievers.
In this case, it is an objective truth that the gospel involves repentance: turning from sin and turning to Christ. In Luke 9, Jesus taught what that means, and I don’t see how the truth of his teaching changes depending on who you are.
Many argue (including myself) that repentance is not necessarily a willingness to stop doing all those things and making Jesus “Lord” to be saved, but repentance is a “change of mind” in realizing that sin is wrong, and that we need forgiveness. I believe some of the Greek translations for “repentance” in those key verses mean to “change your mind”.
Yes, repent (Greek: metanoia) literally means something like “change your mind” or “think again.” But to stop at a dictionary definition is irresponsible in light of the expansive teaching the Scriptures give us on what the word means when it is used this way.
Question: Are you saying that you think repentance is essentially intellectual? That it just boils down to smacking your forehead and saying, “now I get it?”
There is a dramatic change on the inside when anyone is born again, but my steadfast argument is that the change on the inside does not manifest itself on the outside in the same way for everyone and in the same fervor or timeframe.
I don’t disagree. But I do maintain that change will be manifested on the outside — to some degree and on some timeframe.
Question: Would you say that, if a new believer exhibits no change on the outside after a “reasonable” time, that declining to challenge them on account of their fruitlessness would be the loving thing to do? (Let’s just say a “reasonable time” is something really generous — let’s say ten years.)
I do not believe that our initial justification is based on any commitment to serving Jesus, any willingness to stop what we are doing first.
Question: I agree, our justification is based on Christ’s work alone. But what do you mean by “initial?”
So many verses that deal with discipleship and commitment for the believer are run together with the Gospel message because many churches want more committed believers, and others take the more “lordship” of making Jesus the “boss” or Lord of your life to be saved with no talk of what Jesus did and why. What they end up with is a group of people that are always confused, wondering if they are really saved if they do something or think a certain way, or say a certain thing.
I’m sorry, C.A., you can’t interpret scripture in light of what some churches do or what some people’s “take” is on what salvation means. The scripture stands on its own.
Question: Are you arguing that interpreting scripture in terms of commitment to Christ’s lordship results in confusion?
You ask them why they are born again and they tell you that they “committed their life to Christ”. No talk of them being in sin or God’s plan of salvation in Christ for their sin. This is the opposite end of the spectrum and in my opinion just as bad as someone telling you they are saved because they “prayed a prayer for Jesus to save me” with no other understanding of God’s plan. Do you agree with me on this? If so then justification by faith alone in Christ alone must just be that with no strings attached. (emphasis added)
Do I agree with you? Before I answer, I want to note that it sounds like you’re looking for objective criteria by which you can assess — even judge — somebody else’s faith.
I agree with you that a confession that is devoid of any acknowledgement of sin is no cause for confidence, but I don’t think that’s the point you’re making — I think your issue is with the “commitment” part. If the confession and commitment are genuine, great — but again, it seems like you’re suggesting a criterion for judging somebody’s faith.
This might sound like easy-believism to you, but I do not deny that Christ commands us to take up our cross and follow Him, but only after we have been justified by faith and trust in the payment He made on the cross. Then and only then do we have the power to make such a commitment.
This might sound like semantics to you, but I claim that Christ commands everyone to repent, take up his cross, and follow Him, regardless of whether they are right with God. The catch is that the only people who can do that, the only people who will do that, are the people who are made righteous in Christ: their obedience is not their own, but rather, the fruit of the Spirit.
-
Timeout
Great discussion guys. I appreciate the earnest desire to know the truth and ask probing questions on a challenging subject. However, we need to pull back on the amount of info., that is being posted. The amount of interaction is actually hurting our ability to interact. It is also making it difficult for others to follow the train-of-thought. Therefore, please post one question and discuss it until a level of satisfaction is reached. For what it is worth, the nature of faith may be the best place to start since it seems to be at the core of the discussion. Also, let’s remember we are all seeking to know THE truth, not our truth. In other words, we are all on the same team.
Play Ball
-
Dear John:
You wrote…
“What of the person then, who makes a profession of faith, and then proceeds to live the remainder of his/her years - without attending church, without prayer, without reading the Bible. What does the Bible say about this person?”
This is all theoretical…do you really know someone who professed Christ, happy they had fire insurance, and went home and you never heard from them again or they never lifted a finger for God or their spiritual growth? I say again…where is the scale or yardstick and why would we want to get bent on judging people?
There are no specifics in the Bible for people that don’t attend church enough, pray enough, or read the Bible enough. What is the scale or yardstick? This is my whole point. We can’t know, only God knows 100% for sure…
The Bible says to not forsake the assembling of ourselves together (church), to pray without ceasing (prayer), and to study to show yourself approved (read the Bible). These are commands to the Christian, and not indicators of our lack of justification.
Now if this person never does any of these things after their profession then my question is where were we, the Body of Christ for this person after their supposed profession? Did we ever encourage this person, befriend this person, offer to disciple this person, drive this person to church to worship, buy him or her a Bible? Even once? Do we expect a person to know just what to do on their own?
Now if a person professes and then gets angry and wants to have nothing to do with us, I would have to question the genuineness in my own my without being judgmental, but would still try to love and pray for that person for God to do His work as it is not my work.
If we are to leave people to the wolves and at the same time expect them to live up to a certain standard, then I would not be in a position to judge them if I did not first know that person, and the entire situation.
Personally I believe that many so believers never got started on the right track or were immediately disillusioned because the Body of Christ failed them and never took an interest in them personally once they believed. All some these churches care about is that person “multiplying” and winning others to Christ while that person still battles with sin and temptation.
And what if that theoretical person feels convicted by the spirit starts coming a year later to church, reading the Bible, and praying then? Are they really saved now since there are indicators you and I can see? Seems like they were not really converted over the past year right? See my point? Where does it end.
-
Sorry Dan:
I read your post after my long one to John.
I will try to be more brief and address Hugk.Thanks!
-
Really good stuff Hugh and thanks! Made me think a lot! Let me try to be more brief and answer your questions then get to understand the “nature of faith” as Dan asked…
I want to respect Dan’s request for shortness going forward, but I also want to honor Hugh’s desire for answers to these questions he took a lot of time to type, so do please indulge me to directly answer each of his questions directly and as briefly as I know how, which is hard for me!!
“Question: I recognize this is just a blog, so that’s not out of line… but don’t you think precise questions warrant precise answers?”
Answer: Yes, but I hoped to keep my answers shorter with my previous shotgun approach and failed miserably as usual with excessive rambling.
“Question: I understand you reject man-made criteria for assessing sanctification. Are there any God-given criteria do you accept for this purpose?”
Answer: There are lots of verses about what happens to a new believer on the inside like being a new creation and all things are passed away. A new nature. None of this gives a measuring stick on how the outward will look so to me it is almost impossible, nor should be get bent on trying since unbeliever can fake it real good if they wanted. I think there is a witness of the spirit and we sometimes just “know” in an unexplainable way. Sometimes. We need to be there for that person to disciple them, pray for them and let God be the one to “know for sure”.
“Question: Would you say there are any objective standards for assessing sanctification? I’m not asking about criteria for a definitive assessment (see my earlier remarks about “knowing truly” vs. “knowing completely”), but just some kind of evidence…”
Answer: That witness of the spirit I spoke about before; just knowing by talking to someone. Otherwise, all I could come up with is if a person seems to care about their walk and lives a good life that this might be evidence? The only outward evidence there can be is “works” or attitude and this did not get us saved to begin with. I could also quote the fruits of the Spirit and again these are good things but each can also be labeled as works, and how much of each is enough to convince me someone is legit?
“Question: Are you saying that you think repentance is essentially intellectual? That it just boils down to smacking your forehead and saying, “now I get it?””
Answer: Absolutely not! Remember that I talked over and over about the mustard seed faith? Repentance must take place in one’s heart and soul after they have intellectually understood the message and the plan. I do believe this is a very emotional time as you picture Jesus on that cross and realizing it was for me. Still different level of emotion for everyone but that would be the basics IMO. Somewhere in there the placing your faith and trust in that payment made the eternal transaction complete. I believe some people that feel they must “pray the prayer” were more than likely converted before they bowed their heads as the faith that saved them already happened. That is if that faith was genuine and again only God can know for sure when looking at others. And we can know for sure personally because of what He did for us. I know that I can and I do, but only by His grace.
Question: Would you say that, if a new believer exhibits no change on the outside after a “reasonable” time, that declining to challenge them on account of their fruitlessness would be the loving thing to do? (Let’s just say a “reasonable time” is something really generous — let’s say ten years.)
Answer: We should challenge them, love them, and be there for them. That is what the Body is supposed to be. I never advocated just letting them be and leaving them alone. You don’t want to be totally passive, like a French soldier.
Maybe even an intervention of sorts would be in order at some point. Break down the doors. We can pray for them too, but if they don’t care for the things of God and continue to reject your loving efforts then you just have to come to a point where you leave it in God’s hands to do His work and not get bent on wondering if they are saved or not since this is God’s work and you would have done your part to try to make a difference in someone’s life. “Question: I agree, our justification is based on Christ’s work alone. But what do you mean by “initial?””
Answer: What I should have said is (that initial moment when we were justified is based on Christ’s work alone). Bad choice of words…sorry.
“Question: Are you arguing that interpreting scripture in terms of commitment to Christ’s lordship results in confusion?”
Answer: Not confusing to the Christian as we are called to His Lordship and to commitment. Yes very confusing to the unbeliever to tell them that Jesus paid, its a free gift, nothing you can do can earn it, and by the way, you must commit to a life of servitude before you can be truly born again with no talk of the plan, no talk of the Gospel. That is the confusion. Just like telling someone that Jesus loves them and to pray a prayer for Jesus to come into your heart. That leaves out the same details of the plan, the Gospel.
Finally Hugh, you wrote just before the question above….
“I’m sorry, C.A., you can’t interpret scripture in light of what some churches do or what some people’s “take” is on what salvation means. The scripture stands on its own.”
The scripture does stand on it’s own, but unfortunately most do not see it that way or interpret it the same and hence the problem.
I don’t care what any churches take on salvation means, many churches and many people have many ways of interpreting what real salvation means and most want to (add to) what is a very simple Gospel and plan of salvation. Some of these additions include….
-Works (Catholics)
-Baptism
-Going down an Isle
-Going through a class
-Life of commitment up front
-Willingness to change first
-Stop sinning first
-Giving moneyFaith alone in Christ alone in His payment alone is sufficient alone. That mustard seed of faith as a 13 year old was all it took for me to become part of God’s family, and to have a radically changed life, but that also had a long period of time on the slide, and have had a personal renewal the past two years. I am thankful for GF and people like you that are willing to discuss these things and make us all think.
Now I promise one paragraph answers to one sentence questions from this point.
YBIC.
-
I’m always fascinated by the topic and how it relates to love. Love both happens to us and it happens because of us.
I heard a quote on the Moby Show this morning that made me think of this topic…
I believe - That regardless of how hot and steamy a relationship is at first, the passion fades and there had better be something else to take its place.
Hugh Williams : September 13th, 2006 at 10:43 am