Issue 2, Fall 2002, Volume 20
SERVANT or SON?
Joseph D. McPherson
In his sermon entitled, On Faith, Mr. Wesley provides
description of "several sorts of faith." He begins with that of a materialist,
the lowest sort of faith, "if," as he says, "it be any faith at all." He then
describes the faith of a deist and continues in an ascending order to the faith
of heathens (including Muslims), Jews, Roman Catholics and Protestants. "But
what," asks Mr. Wesley, "is the faith which is properly saving? Which brings
eternal salvation to all those that keep it to the end?" In answer to his own
question, he says, "It is such a divine conviction of God and the things of God
as even in its infant state enables everyone that possesses it to 'fear God and
work righteousness.' And," says he, "whosoever in every nation believes thus far
the Apostle declares, is 'accepted of him.'" Though such a one is in a present
state of acceptance, Mr. Wesley would classify him as "a servant of God, not
properly a son. Meantime let it be well observed," says he, "that 'the wrath of
God' no longer 'abideth on him.'" Mr. Wesley then draws from past experience to
make his point.
Indeed, nearly fifty years ago, when the preachers, commonly called Methodists
began to preach that grand scriptural doctrine, salvation by faith, they were
not sufficiently apprized of the difference between a servant and a child of
God. They did not understand, that even one "who feared God, and worketh
righteousness, is accepted of him." In consequence of this they were apt to make
sad the hearts of those whom God had not made sad. For they frequently asked
those who feared God, "Do you know that your sins are forgiven?" And upon their
answering, "No," immediately replied, "Then you are a child of the devil." No;
that does not follow. It might have been said, (and it is all that can be said
with propriety,) "Hitherto you are only a servant, you are not a child of God.
You have already great reason to praise God that he has called you to his
honourable service, Fear not. Continue crying unto him, 'and you shall see
greater things than these.'"
Wesley assures the reader that "unless the servants of God halt by
the way, they will receive the adoption of sons." This will constitute their
having received the "faith of the children of God by his revealing his
only-begotten Son in their hearts." Accordingly, the "faith of a child is
properly and directly a divine conviction whereby every child of God is enabled
to testify, 'The life that I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God, who
loved me, and gave himself for me.' And whosoever hath this," says Mr. Wesley,
"the Spirit of God witnesseth with his spirit, that he is a child of God."
For scriptural support Mr. Wesley refers to Galatians 4:6-7: "And
because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts,
crying Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a
son, then an heir of God through Christ."
So it is that the faith of a son gives the believer "a childlike
confidence in him, together with a kind of affection toward him." On the basis
then of the Apostle's teaching, Mr. Wesley assures us that this "properly
constitutes the difference between a servant of God and a child of God. 'He that
believeth,' as a child of God, 'hath the witness in himself.' This the servant
hath not, Yet let no man discourage him; rather, lovingly exhort him to expect
it every moment!"
In his sermon entitled, On the Discoveries of Faith, Mr.
Wesley again defines in scriptural terms the faith of a servant in contrast to
the faith of a son. He saw this to be a point of no small importance. In that
discourse, he states that "Whoever has attained this, the faith of a servant, 'feareth
God and escheweth evil;' or, as it is expressed by St. Peter, 'feareth God and
worketh righteousness.'" The servant obeys God out of a sense of fear. This,
says Mr. Wesley, "is not in any wise to be despised; seeing 'the fear of the
Lord is the beginning of wisdom." He who has attained to the faith of a servant
is to be exhorted "to press on by all possible means, till he passes 'from faith
to faith;' from the faith of a servant to the faith of a son; from
the spirit of bondage unto fear, to the spirit of childlike love."
There may be those who are troubled with Mr. Wesley's assertions,
particularly with regard to his use of the term servant. They may have
difficulty reconciling the above teaching with Romans 6:16-18, 22, where Paul
writes: "Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his
servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto
righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye have obeyed from the heart that form
of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became
the servants of righteousness . . . But now being made free from sin, and
become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end
everlasting life."
It is evident in this passage to the Romans that Paul is using the
term servant differently than in his letter to the Galatians. Here Paul
uses the term servant to describe the state of new born believers who
have obeyed the Gospel and ceased from obeying sin. They are no more "servants
of sin" but rather "servants of righteousness" and thus "servants of God." Here
Paul focuses on the subject of obedience -obeying sin unto death or obeying
righteousness unto everlasting life. The obedience of faith first produces
repentance, then righteousness, as we keep the commandments of Christ. Thus,
Paul describes sons who serve.
In the Galatian letter, however, the terms servant and son
are mutually exclusive. Paul contrasts the faith of those under the law, a
faith which falls short of an effectual faith in Christ, with a vital faith in
Christ which brings an indwelling assurance that such believers are sons of God
and no more servants. Thus, Paul describes servants who have not received the
gift of the Holy Spirit which brings new life and adoption into the family of
God.
Three times Paul declares that the regenerate are not "under the
law" (Gal 5:18; Rom 6:14-15). They are neither under obligation to the Mosaic
law nor are they under the condemnation of God's eternal law. But while they
are free from the law of sin and death, they do not live without law. It is
through the law of the Spirit of life that they are freed from their former
condemnation from the law (Rom 8:1-2).
Joseph Benson said the son of God is no longer a servant, "in a
state of bondage, whether to the legal dispensation of Moses, or to the law of
nature, and the ceremonial institutions attached to it, by custom or divine
appointment."
In response to Paul's statement: "Thou art no more a servant" Adam
Clarke says, "Thou who has believed in Christ art no longer a slave,
either under the dominion of sin or under obligation to the Mosaic
ritual; but a son of God, adopted into the heavenly family."
Whether we are speaking in terms of the old covenant or in terms of
those whose religious experience falls short of the new birth, the phrase "under
the law" is descriptive of those in this legal dispensation who know that the
law "is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." They are awakened
to the demands of the law and the Gospel. They would not have known sin, except
for the revelation of the law. Now they are convinced of sin and are seeking
deliverance like the man described in Romans seven. Through the power of
prevenient grace given them, they are found to be fearing God and working
righteousness as were Cornelius and the Gentiles at Caesarea. It was only after
Peter began preaching Christ and the "remission of sins" that the Holy Ghost
"fell upon them," crowning the faith of these Gentiles with an assurance that
they were now made children of God.
So it is that though the term servant is used in both letters
by the same writer, they are used in different ways. The term servants,
as used in the letter to the Romans, describes those who "have been made free
from sin" and are assuredly said to "have their fruits unto holiness." There can
be no doubt that they are full-fledged children of God or "sons" who obey God
from hearts motivated by love. In contrast the term servant as used in
the letter to the Galatians describes those who are yet "under the law" and
serve God from a sense of fear. Paul makes it clear that only after receiving
"the adoption of sons" does God send forth the Spirit of his Son into believing
hearts, crying Abba Father. "This," says Wesley, "the servant [as described in
Galatians] hath not."
For a number of years prior to Mr. Wesley's evangelical conversion
at Aldersgate, he was extremely religious, even strictly so. "But," says he, "I
was still 'under the law,' not 'under grace' (the state most who are called
Christians are content to live and die in); for I was 'only striving with', not
'freed from sin.' Neither had I 'the witness of the Spirit with my spirit.'"
After returning from Georgia where he had hoped to convert the Indians in a
spirit of complete self-denial and missionary ardor, he writes: "But what have I
learned myself in the meantime? Why (what I the least of all suspected), that I
who went to America to convert others, was never myself converted to God." In
later years, Mr. Wesley would, with more experience and maturity, soften the
above judgment against himself. He would explain, "I had even then the faith of
a servant, though not that of a son." After his heart was
"strangely warmed" at Aldersgate, he found a remarkable difference. He says, "I
was striving, yea fighting with all my might under the law, as well as under
grace. But then I was sometimes, if not often, conquered; now, I was always
conqueror." Furthermore, he was now conscious of a wonderful peace and "an
assurance" that Christ had taken away all his sins [Journal, Jan 29- May
24, 1738].
"Wherefore," writes the Apostle, "thou art no more a servant, but a
son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ."
TRANSFORMING GRACE
Vic Reasoner
The Christian congregation in Rome would have been conspicuous by
its lack of sacrificial ritual. In contrast to the Old Testament sacrifices,
Paul explains in Romans 12:1-2 that we are to be a living sacrifice. Although
Old Testament sacrifices were ceremonially holy and acceptable, the Christian is
holy and acceptable at an immeasurably higher level because his is a rational
service. Ritual has been replaced by reason. The word logikos literally
means "logical." While our offerings are to be spiritual, that is not Paul's
point. He is referring to the mind. Christian worship does not bypass the
mind. God first renews the mind, then makes his appeal to that renewed mind.
Not only is this the sacrifice of rational creatures, but in light
of God's mercy, described in 11:31-32, it is only reasonable that we live for
him. While Paul speaks of "mercies," using the plural form, he probably is
reflecting the Hebrew intensive plural form which emphasized great mercy.
The wages of sin have always been death. In the Old Testament every
sacrifice, whether a bird, a sheep or goat, or cow was put to death. This
symbolized substitution. The sentence of death for human sin was transferred to
the animal. Since Jesus became our perfect sacrifice, we not longer put
anything living to death. But although God took the blood out of sacrifice, he
did not take the sacrifice out of worship. Now we are urged to offer ourselves
as living sacrifices.
In God's mercy he offered his own Son as our substitute. In view of
this act of mercy we ought to give the rest of our life to God, realizing that
without this mercy we would have no life anyway.
The believer's sanctification is described through three commands
contained in Romans:1-2:
1. Stop being conformed. This is a present active imperative. It
addresses those that are in conformity to the world system. We are to influence
the world without being squeezed into its mold. The real issue is whether our
pattern is Christ or this present age. We are not to be conformed to this age.
The word for "conform" means to shape one thing like another. A person
conformed to this age is living for today.
Joseph Benson said conformity to the world hindered Christians from
consecrating themselves to God. We must avoid that which would cause us to fail
of the grace of God, to fall from grace, or would impede our progress in grace.
Specifically, we must not be conformed to a false view of things. With the
world, the present, visible, and temporal are of far greater importance than the
future, invisible, and eternal. They view the body, its health, ease, and
accommodation, of far greater importance than the soul. We must avoid their
priority upon wealth and luxury. We must not seek happiness in sensual
pleasure. We must not be conformed to the world in their use of their
resources, especially their money and time.
2. Present yourselves. In 6:13-19 paristemi occurs three
times and a related verb twice more. It means to present, to yield, to lay
before, to deposit, to entrust, to commit to the charge of. It had not been
used previously in Romans. The call in 6:13-19 was to stop presenting our
bodies to sin and present ourselves to God. The present active imperative verb
meant that we were yielding to sin. Instead, we were to start yielding to
God. The presentation to God is in the aorist tense, describing the crisis of
the new birth. This was a transfer of ownership. What was once yielded to sin
is now to be sacrificed to God. The word for sacrifice occurs for the first
and only time in Romans. The root means "to kill in sacrifice or slay."
Therefore, the term "living sacrifice" is a paradox.
Now, Paul addresses brothers who are spiritually alive, holy, and
accepted by God. They are called upon to present a sacrifice. He urges those
who have surrendered to Christ to make a deeper commitment, to again present
themselves (aorist active imperative). He once again uses paristemi,
which was last used in 6:19. Why do it again?
We are sanctified to the level of our consciousness. This is a
deeper yielding based upon the conviction of a deeper need. But while the
believer may experience conviction, he does not experience condemnation (8:1).
Dennis Kinlaw observed that sinners turn to Christ and present themselves to
escape hell, gain eternal life, or put their shambled lives together. Their
motive is largely fear and their self-interest. However, those who have
experienced the mercies of God are now urged to present themselves to God on the
basis of their love toward him. The initial yielding of a sinner involves
repentance for evil; the advanced yielding of a believer involves a consecration
of what is good.
The surrender required of a sinner is repentance. Fear is the
motive. The consecration of a Christian involves a presentation. Love is the
motive. Those who make such a presentation are holy and pleasing to God. Old
Testament sacrifices were sanctified or set apart as holy and the odor of the
burnt sacrifice was often described as pleasing. But with the living sacrifice,
the fragrance of life is more pleasing than the stench of death (2 Cor 2:16).
They have proven God's good and acceptable will, but now enter into his perfect
will. Christian perfection is the highest experience of Christian faith.
Just as we stopped yielding to sinful habits at the moment of
regeneration, so we must now stop being conformed to this world system. As
priests we offer ourselves both as a crisis and a life of continual surrender.
The act of presenting ourselves does not sanctify us. Sanctification is the
work of the Spirit. But we must continue to yield so that God can continue his
work.
3. Be transformed. Joseph Benson said transformation meant to be
regenerated and created anew. He connected this transformation with Ephesians
4:22-25, where "the new man is described as renewed in the spirit of his mind;
that is in all his faculties; in his affections and will, as well as in his
understanding: in consequence whereof his whole conduct becomes holy and
virtuous."
The renewal of the mind refers to the new birth, the new mind, and
the new man. The word "renewal,"as a noun is found only here and in Titus 3:5,
where the Holy Spirit is specified as the agent of renewal. This describes the
gradual restoration of the divine image, which is ever going forward in the
believer who, through the new birth, has come under the transforming powers of
the world to come. It is the renewal of the Holy Spirit because he is
the efficient cause, by whom alone this putting on of the new man, and putting
off the old, is brought about.
Yet H. Orton Wiley observed that while the renewing in Titus 3:5 is
connected to regeneration, its use in Romans 12:2 "can refer only to the
transformation effected by the Holy Spirit in entire sanctification." Wiley can
make such a statement only because the renewal, which began in regeneration was
not completed at that point in time
The transformation process begins at regeneration. However, it is
an overstatement to contend that the act of regeneration creates a mature
Christian. Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, are exhorted to stop being
conformed to this world. While they are no longer committing willful acts of
rebellion, their mind has not been so completely renewed that they have ceased
thinking like the world. Those who are spiritually alive and at least partially
holy have already presented themselves to Christ at the moment when they trusted
in him as Savior are now urged to make a deeper presentation of themselves. As
they yield themselves more fully and intelligently, they experience the goal or
completion of God's will, his perfecting grace.
Francis Asbury preached that Paul did not address those who lived in
conformity to the world. Instead he addressed Christian believers who were not
of the world. Paul had in mind the devotion of the whole man, body and soul, to
God. Without abstaining from the practice of all sin and the unlawful use of
lawful things, we cannot be a perfect and entire Christian. We ought to make
the faculties of our bodies subservient to the worship and service of God; our
eyes to see for God; our ears to hear; our hands to be liberal, our feet to move
for God. This is our reasonable service. If we are properly excited over the
mercies of God, we will not be conformed to this world. The renewal of our
minds implies that all the power of the soul be given in love and service to the
Lord, in conviction over indwelling sin, as believers repenting of that sin, in
sanctification, persevering grace, perfect love, and its fruit - perfect and
eternal glory. We prove the will of God to be good, to be acceptable to our
own souls, and to be perfect in our Christian perfection.
The phrase "good, well-pleasing, and perfect" indicates a
progressive realization of God's will. While pagans may seek "the good," only
through faith are we acceptable to God. We are either conforming to the world
or being transformed by the Spirit. Those who are being transformed are to
consecrate or present themselves again to God that they might realize his
highest will, their perfection. Joseph Benson said that the will of God was
perfect in itself and perfective of our nature. Adam Clarke
observed that the perfect will of God was the foundation on which all the
preceding exhortation rests. The will of God is essentially good. What is not
essentially good cannot therefore be its object. Nor can that which is
inconsistent with the dignity, justice, holiness, and truth of God be the object
of his will. The object and end of his acceptable will is to complete and
perfect man. Whatever is in accord with the will of God must partake of these
three principles, "it must be good in itself, well-pleasing to the perfection of
the divine mind, and accomplish or perfect the thing on which it is employed."
The verb "transform" is not only in the present tense, indicating an
ongoing work, but it is in the passive voice, which indicates that we cannot
make ourselves like Christ. God does the work. Our responsibility is to
present ourselves. His grace transforms us. While the work of transforming
grace begins at the new birth, it does not end there. God has predestined that
all who believe will be conformed to the image of his Son (Rom 8:29). Do not
thwart the purpose of God, but continue to yield to his perfect will for you.
Editorial Note: This material was drawn from the new Fundamental
Wesleyan Commentary on Romans which is advertized on the back page of this
issue.
RECEIVING THE SPIRIT: Counsel from the Word
Gordon Cary
In formulating our beliefs on receiving the Spirit, it is important
that we rely, not simply on a few "proof texts," but on the whole tenor and
teaching of Scripture - especially Luke, John, Acts, Romans. John 14-16 are
all about Jesus' predictions of the Holy Spirit's coming and what He will do.
Joel 2:28, John the Baptist in Matthew 3:11-12, and Jesus in Luke 24:49 and Acts
1:4-8 all pointed forward to Pentecost and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Peter in Acts 11:15 and 15:8-9 and Paul in Acts 19:2 and Galatians 3:2 both
pointed back to that experience as the norm. Nonetheless, here are some concise
statements that bear on the subject:
Before Pentecost, men experienced the forgiveness of sins, but did
not receive the Holy Spirit. Compare Mark 1:4 and John 7:39.
Even after Pentecost some men experienced the forgiveness of sins
without receiving the Holy Spirit. Compare Acts 8:5-17 and Acts 19:1-7.
Sometimes the Holy Spirit was given as the apostles (or someone
else) laid their hands on men. See Acts 8:17; 9:17; 19:6. Sometimes men
received the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands. See Acts 10:44.
Sometimes those who received the Holy Spirit spoke in tongues.
(Acts 2, 10, 19) Sometimes they did not (Acts 4:31; 8:17; 9:17-18) or, if they
did, it was not important enough to be mentioned. If the gift of tongues in 1
Corinthians is the same as what happened at Pentecost, it is given, not to EVERY
Christian, but only to those selected by the Spirit. (1 Cor 12:11.) Yet it is
to be expected that every Christian should receive the Holy Spirit. See Acts
2:38 and Romans 8:9.
It is notable how frequently the reception of the Holy Spirit is
associated with prayer - lots of prayer: Jesus' prayer, John 14:16; the
Christians' prayers, Acts 1:14; the apostles' prayers, Acts 8:15; Cornelius'
prayer, Acts10:4.
In Acts 10 and 11 several different terms are used to refer to the
event at Pentecost, as it was repeated in the house of Cornelius: "the Holy
Ghost fell" (10:44), "was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost" (10:45),
"received the Holy Ghost" (10:47), "saved" (11:14), "the Holy Ghost fell"
(11:15), "baptized with the Holy Ghost" (11:16), "gift" (11:17; see also Acts
15:9 - "giving"), "repentance unto life" (11:18).
Paul's question in Acts 19:2 implies that we can know whether or not
we have received the Holy Spirit. All of this leads to applying Paul's
question to twenty-first century converts, "Have ye received the Holy Ghost
since ye believed?" (KJV) or "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you
believed?" (NIV) The Greek text actually says, "Did you receive the Holy
Spirit believing?" This implies that the reception of the Spirit is tied to
true saving faith.
Often receiving Him involves enough of a crisis or climax that we
are aware of it at the time. However, there are other indications of His
presence. The Holy Spirit manifests His presence by bearing witness with our
spirits. See Romans 8:16. It is important to observe that this witness assures
us of our relationship to God and enables us to call Him our Father (v 15). I
believe that our ability to come to God feeling that He is our Father is closely
related to the witness of the Spirit.
The Holy Spirit also manifests His presence by bearing His fruit
(Gal 5), by directing and shaping our lives (Rom 8:14 and context), and by
bestowing His gifts (1 Cor 12). Reading 1 Corinthians 12-14 makes it plain that
Paul was NOT emphasizing gifts, and, just as plain, that he was not giving
primary emphasis to the gift of speaking in tongues.
It is also important to observe that the witness is ours AS WE
BELIEVE (not as we doubt). See 1 John 5:10. There are three texts which give
conditions having to do with the Holy Spirit's being given: "that they that
believe on Him should receive" (John 7:39), "how much more shall your heavenly
Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him (Luke 11:13), and "the Holy
Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey Him" (Acts 5:32). I think "obey"
can be taken in the most general sense, and in the most explicit and particular
sense.
Because I didn't know what to recognize as the witness of the
Spirit, I quit trusting and professing and started seeking again- and got into
horrible darkness. At last, I discovered that I couldn't expect to have the
witness of the Spirit while I was doubting, for, according to 1 John 5:10, "He
that BELIEVETH hath the witness." An interesting facet is the relationship
between "believing" and "having the witness." I doubt that the believing itself
IS the witness, but they are apparently very closely associated. Believing the
promises surely seems to secure a sense of assurance. I don't think we "believe
that we are saved," rather, we believe His promise to forgive us and to save us.
I used to sort of stare at a blank wall and try to believe it was black, and
that didn't work. "Believing I am saved" doesn't make me saved, anymore than
believing the wall is black makes it black. However, to have an inspired promise
to believe in or on, does make a difference. There is lots of difference between
"faith in our faith" and faith in God's promises.
Galatians 3:2-3 points out that the Holy Spirit is received "by the
hearing of faith." Incidentally, the text in Galatians shows that those who
have received the Spirit may still need something more. (See also 1 Cor 1:7 and
3:1-3.) Paul uses that difficult word "perfect" again in Galatians 3:2-3 and
Philippians 3:15 (KJV). The Spirit will do his perfecting work in those who
have already received him.
AND CAN IT BE?
Vic Reasoner
Charles Wesley wrote over 9000 hymns. He wrote his first hymn three
days after he was saved and averaged one hymn every two days for the rest of his
life. R. K. McGregor Wright wrote concerning "And Can It Be," that it was "a
rousing testimony to the wonder and power of God to save helpless sinners in
bondage to sin. All Calvinists sing it with gratitude to God for this brother's
wonderful gift of expression and sensitivity to the reality of God's sovereignty
in releasing us from the bondage to our sin nature."
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature's night.
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray;
I woke; the dungeon flamed with light.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed thee.
Wright concluded, "Here we have a truly regenerate Arminian
describing his own conversion in fully Calvinistic terms" [No Place for
Sovereignty, p. 118]. Yet it is also quite possible that Charles Wesley
understood Wesleyan-Arminian theology better than modern Calvinists like Wright.
The imagery of "chains" and "prison" depict the bondage of sin. We
cannot save ourselves. Nor do we have any desire for salvation. We are doubly
bound both by our personal sins and by the darkness of our natural condition.
This reference to our natural state is a reference to total depravity.
Wesleyans affirm that man's affections are alienated, man's intellect is
darkened, and that man's will is perverted. We have lost the original
righteousness in which Adam was created and we are deprived of the Holy Spirit.
The Methodist Articles of Religion state
Original sin is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is
engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original
righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually.
Thus far, Charles has stated nothing exclusive to Calvinism. Then
he describes the prevenient grace through which the natural man is awakened.
Notice that while his dungeon flamed with light, at this point in the conversion
process, he was awakened, but still imprisoned.
According to Ephesians 5:13-14 the light of the gospel reveals our
true condition. But to be awakened to our lost condition is not the same as
being delivered from it. In "The Spirit of Bondage and Adoption," John Wesley
explained that the natural man neither fears nor loves God. He commits sin,
more or less, day by day, yet is not troubled. But the awakened man fears God
and sins unwillingly.
Now he truly desires to break loose from sin, and begins to struggle with it.
But though he strive with all his might he cannot conquer; sin is mightier than
he. He would fain escape; but he is so fast in prison that he cannot get
forth. He resolves against sin, but yet sins on. . . . Such is the freedom of
his will - free only to evil. . . . Thus he toils without end, repenting and
sinning, and repenting and sinning again, till at length the poor sinful,
helpless wretch is even at his wit's end, and can barely groan, "O wretched man
that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death?"
Yet it is Calvinism which has always asserted that this description
from Romans 7:24 depicts Christianity. Calvin wrote in his Institutes of the
Christian Religion
Paul takes his example from a regenerated man, that is, himself. He therefore
says that he is held bound in miserable bondage, so that he cannot consecrate
himself wholly to obedience to the divine law. Hence, he is compelled to
exclaim with groaning: "Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this
body subject to death?" [4.15.12; See also 2.7.5; 3.9.4]
B. B. Warfield defended this view saying, "Though blessed with every
spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ, we are still in ourselves just
'miserable sinners': 'miserable sinners' saved by grace to be sure, but
'miserable sinners' still." James Montgomery Boice also concluded that Romans 7
described the mature Christian.
On the other hand, John Wesley wrote that most who were accounted
"good Christians" were contented to live and die in this awakened state,
struggling with sin. The Wesleys preached, however, that the new birth brought
deliverance from the bondage of sin. This salvation was portrayed by Charles
Wesley in the lines
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose went forth, and followed thee.
Charles returned to this theme in "O For a Thousand Tongues"
He breaks the power of canceled sin,
He sets the prisoner free.
While we agree with Calvinists that man is helplessly lost and
cannot save himself, it is this freedom from sin that makes this hymn of Charles
Wesley sound distinctly different than "fully Calvinistic terms." Although
Wright said he rejoices in this great hymn which expresses the release from
bondage to our sin nature, nothing I have ever read in Calvinistic literature
suggested any deliverance from the sin nature prior to death.
While I rejoice that Calvinists sing this great hymn, I would also
encourage them to preach what they apparently enjoy singing. Since Wright has
claimed "And Can It Be" as "fully Calvinistic," I would also encourage him to
incorporate another hymn by Charles Wesley which questions the Calvinistic
caricature of God.
Thou can not mock the sons of men,
Invite us to draw nigh,
Offer thy grace to all, and then
Thy grace to most deny!
Horror to think that God is hate!
Fury in god can dwell,
God could an helpless world create,
To thrust them into hell!
Doom them an endless death to die,
From which they could not flee-
No, Lord! Thine inmost bowels cry
Against the dire decree!
Believe who will that human pain,
Pleasing to God can prove:
Let Moloch feast him with the slain,
Our God, we know, is love.
Lord, if indeed, without a bound,
Infinite love Thou art,
The horrible decree confound,
Enlarge thy people's heart!
Ah! Who is as thy servants blind;
So to misjudge their God!
Scatter the darkness of their mind,
And shed thy love abroad.
Give them conceptions worthy thee,
Give them, in Jesus' face,
Thy merciful design to see,
Thy all-redeeming grace.
The Meaning of Eternal Life and Who Possesses It
Steve Witzki
Many people have also misunderstood the meaning of "eternal life" as
it is used in the Scriptures because they have listened to "once saved, always
saved" teachers. The OSAS proponents often argue that "eternal life" can not be
lost, or better yet forfeited, or else "eternal life" would not be "eternal."
This is a philosophical argument that is not based upon the Scriptural
understanding of how a person partakes of eternal life.
Eternal life is the life that issues from the eternal God.
Since God has and always will be eternal (Psalm 90:2), he "alone possesses
immortality" (1 Tim 6:16), and "life in himself" (John 5:26) and has "granted
the Son to possess life in himself" (John 5:26). Eternal life is eternal whether
a person does or does not trust in the eternal God. Since God is the source of
eternal life it follows that one's possession of it is only through a
faith relationship with the eternal God and his eternal Son, Jesus Christ.
Jesus said in John 5:24, "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my
word and believes him [God the Father] who sent me has eternal
life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." On this
verse NT scholar Henry Alford writes: "hath everlasting life: so 1 John
5:12,13. The believing [pisteuo], and the having [echo]
everlasting life, are commensurate:-where the faith is, the
possession of eternal life is:-and when the one remits, the other is forfeited"
(The New Testament for English Readers, p. 508, emphasis is his).
Please note that both of the verbs, believe and has,
are in the present tense. In this particular verse, the person who keeps
on trusting in God the Father, who sent his Son, continues to possess eternal
life. However, more often the Scriptures reveal that eternal life is one's
possession through faith in God's Son, Jesus Christ. The apostle John concisely
summed up this truth with these words: "He who possesses the Son has life
indeed; he who does not possess the Son of God has not that life" (1 John 5:12,
The New English Bible).
Thus, when Charles Ryrie defines eternal security as: "The work of
God which guarantees that the gift of God (salvation), once received is
possessed forever and cannot be lost" (So Great Salvation, p.
155-156, emphasis mine), he is biblically mistaken. Ryrie, like many OSAS
defenders, holds that one act of faith results in one possessing
salvation forever. However, the Scriptures reveal a decidedly different
reality. In the NT the Greek word echo is translated as "possess" in
contexts that involve personal relationships. For example, John 5:39-40 in
the NIV reads:
"You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you
possess (echo) eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify
about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have (echo) life."
In talking to these Jewish people, Jesus makes it clear that since
they stubbornly refuse to come to him in faith they do not possess life since he
is the source of eternal life. Unfortunately, the NIV does not remain consistent
in translating echo as possess in verse 40 as it did in verse 39 when the
context allows for the same English word to be used. It should be noted that in
every clear instance where the Scriptures states who possesses eternal life it
is always conditioned upon a continual trust in Christ. It also should be noted
that in each of these contexts echo is in the present tense.
Therefore, those who possess and continue to possess eternal life are only those
people who trust and continue to trust in Jesus Christ. It can also be seen that
spiritually possessing life from the Son and the Father is conditional upon a
faith that continues to remain in the teachings of Christ and/or his disciples.
This involves not denying that Jesus is the Christ, and not hating ones'
"brothers" or "sisters," [see references in 1 and 2 John below.]
Carefully read the following verses where possess or possesses (echo)
appears. I have consistently translated each occurrence in these particular
contexts as "possess" or "possesses" and have put them in bold type. I
have also taken the time to italize the important present tense verbs
that arise in the text that refer to linear or on going action.
"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be
lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may now possess
eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,
that whoever believes in him shall not perish but possess
eternal life" (John 3:14-16).
"He who believes in the Son possesses eternal life; but he
who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides
on him" (John 3:36, NASB).
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who
sent me possesses eternal life and will not be condemned; he has
crossed over from death to life. I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has
now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear
will live. For as the Father possesses life in himself, so he has
granted the Son to possess life in himself. And he has given him
authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. Do not be amazed at this, for
a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come
out-those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil
will rise to be condemned" (John5:24-29).
"Then Jesus declared, 'I am the bread of life. He who comes to me [in
faith] will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be
thirsty. But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
All that the Father gives me will come to me [in faith], and whoever comes
to me [in faith] I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not
to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of
him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise
them up at the last day. For my Father's will is that everyone who looks
to the Son and believes in him shall possess eternal life,
and I will raise him up at the last day'"(John 6:35-40).
"I tell you the truth, he who believes possesses
everlasting life. I am the bread of life. Your forefathers ate the manna in the
desert, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which
a man may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If
anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I
will give for the life of the world." Then the Jews began to argue sharply
among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" Jesus said to
them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and
drink his blood, you possess no life in you. Whoever eats
my flesh and drinks my blood possesses eternal life, and I
will raise him up at the last day. . . . Whoever eats my flesh and
drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living
Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on
me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your
forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live
forever." . . . From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer
followed him. "You do not want to leave too, do you?" Jesus asked the Twelve.
Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You possess
the words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are the Holy One of
God" (John 6:47-69).
"When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, 'I am the light of the world.
Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will possess
the light of life'"(John 8:12).
"I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go
out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I
have come that they may possess life, and possess it
to the full" (John 10:9-10).
"Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which
are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may
possess life in his name" (John 20:30 -31).
"Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man
is the antichrist-he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the
Son possesses the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son
possesses the Father also. See that what you have heard from the
beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son
and in the Father. And this is what he promised us-even eternal life" (1 John
2:22-25).
"We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the
brethren. He who does not love abides in death. Everyone who
hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer
possesses eternal life abiding in him" (1 John 3:14-15, NASB).
"Anyone who believes in the Son of God possesses this
testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out
to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his
Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is
in his Son. He who possesses the Son possesses
life; he who does not possess the Son of God does not
possess life. I write these things to you who believe in the
name of the Son of God so that you may know that you possess
eternal life" (1 John 5:10-13).
"Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of
Christ does not possess God; whoever continues in the
teaching possesses both the Father and the Son" (2 John 9).
From the Scriptural testimony above, one does not arrive at the
definition of eternal security that Ryrie gives. Furthermore, we must reject
the following statements that Charles Stanley makes in his book, Eternal
Security: Can You Be Sure: "God does not require a constant attitude
of faith in order to be saved [forever]-only an act of faith" (p. 80,
emphasis is his). "Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an
unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy" (p. 93, emphasis mine). These
statements are absurd in light of the Scriptural evidence. Unfortunately, many
people have arrived at these same unbiblical conclusions because they have
allowed OSAS teachers to do their thinking for them. It's time for people to
study the Bible for themselves, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, and cast off
the OSAS theological eyeglasses that prevent them from understanding the will of
God and walking in it. Life is only in the Son. Continue trusting in the Son,
and you will continue to possess eternal life, both now and more fully in the
age to come.
REVIEWS
Picirilli,
Robert, E. Grace, Faith, Free Will. Contrasting Views of Salvation: Calvinism
and Arminianism. Nashville: Randall House Publications, 2002. Reviewed by
Steve Witzki.
Dr. Robert Picirilli is a Free Will Baptist scholar and theologian.
He is a former professor of Greek and New Testament studies at Free Will Baptist
College. For over 45 years he has been teaching, preaching, and writing Arminian
theology. Picirilli stands for a very specific kind of Arminianism that he calls
"Reformation Arminianism." This type of Arminianism holds to the following
beliefs: total depravity; the sovereignty of God to control all things for the
certain accomplishment of His will; God's perfect foreknowledge of, and the
certainty of, all future events-including the free moral choices of human
beings; the penal satisfaction view of the atonement, salvation by grace through
faith and not by works, from beginning to end; and an apostasy that cannot be
remedied. He demonstrates that these beliefs (apostasy being more implicitly
implied than explicitly stated) are the teachings that Jacob Arminius defended
from Scripture. He quotes from The Works of Arminius throughout the book
and has provided a helpful index for each of these citations.
This book is not filled with emotional rhetoric but is rather a
simple and straightforward stating of the facts. Therefore, for some people,
this will not be an "exciting" book to read. Nevertheless, it does serve in
accomplishing his goal "to present both sides, so that the reader will know
exactly what those issues are: to clarify understanding of both positions and
help readers intelligently decide for themselves" (Forward, p. i).
Picirilli begins by giving a brief biography of Arminius that helps
to place the issues in their historical context. He then tackles the issues
surrounding God's sovereignty, predestination, human depravity, grace,
atonement, and perseverance. Picirilli takes great care in accurately
representing the Five Point Calvinist position. He quotes mostly from three
highly respected Calvinists: Louis Berkof, William Shedd, and Roger Nicole. I
would have liked to have seen Picirilli quote from John Calvin himself, yet the
people he chose are fine representatives of his theological system.
Picirilli cogently defends conditional election and unlimited
atonement. He wisely reminds his readers that "the extent of the atonement
should be determined by Biblical exegesis rather than by the logic of one's
system" (p. 90). It is Picirilli's detailed exegesis on 1 John 2:2 and 1 Timothy
2:1-6 in chapter seven that I found to be extremely valuable. He concludes this
chapter with an important observation:
All of us who handle God's word do well to remember that we do not honor Him
with our interpretive ingenuity but with submission to what He says. To say,
even to show, that a given statement can be interpreted in a certain way
does us no credit at all. The question is always not what the words can
mean but what they do mean, here. In 1 John 2:2 and in 1 Timothy 2:1-6,
the most obvious meaning of "world" and "all men" is universalistic. In these
cases, careful exegesis supports the obvious meaning. [emphasis is his] (p. 137)
As to be expected, Picirilli defends the biblical doctrine of
prevenient grace that Arminius so vigorously held to. He prefers to call the
drawing and convicting work of God on all sinners as "Pre-regenerating Grace." I
take it as simply an oversight on Picirilli's part, but he does fail to mention
John 12:32 in his defense of pre-regenerating grace. This is unfortunate since
this verse complements the drawing of the Father mentioned in John 6:44.
In the last two chapters of the book Picirilli gives a solid defense
for conditional security. There is a perceptive response that he makes
"to Scriptures prized by Calvinists as teaching the necessary perseverance of
the regenerate" (p. 200). He writes,
Those passages, especially in the Gospel of John, which contain strong
promises of (final) salvation to believers and are therefore thought to
imply necessary perseverance can not be used for that purpose lest they "prove
too much." . . . For example:
John 5:24 John
3:36
He that believes. he that believes
not.
shall not shall
not
come into condemnation see life
Grammatically, if the first means that the condition of the believer
can not be changed, then the second means that the condition of the
unbeliever likewise can not be changed. In fact, neither passage is even
speaking to that issue. The unbeliever can leave his unbelief, become a
believer, and see life-thus escaping from the promise made to the unbeliever who
continues in his unbelief. Likewise, the believer can leave his belief, become
an unbeliever, and come into condemnation-thus escaping from the promise made to
believers who continue in faith. Each promise applies with equal force to those
who continue in the respective state described. [emphasis is his] (pp. 200-201)
Picirilli goes on to convincingly argue from Hebrews 6:4-6 and 2
Peter 2:18-22, that these two passages describe an apostasy that can not
be remedied. His careful exegetical analysis has convinced me that he is correct
in his conclusion. Therefore, I would agree with him that Robert Shank's
position, that the apostasy envisioned in Hebrews 6 could be remedied, is not
exegetically capable of being defended.
A compelling case for holding to Classical Arminianism has been made
by Dr. Picirilli. Anyone who is interested in a balanced discussion and a
strongly argued case for believing in conditional election, unlimited atonement,
and conditional security would do well to read this book. We need more books
written from this perspective that provide a detailed exegetical defense for the
possibility of apostasy. My God raise up other faithful men or women to do so.
Streiff,
Patrick. Reluctant Saint? A Theological Biography of Fletcher of Madeley.
Peterborough, U.K: Epworth Press, 2001. Reviewed by Vic Reasoner
The theme of Luke Tyerman's 1882 biography was that Fletcher
exemplified the highest ideals of Methodism. Yet history does not reveal how
successful Fletcher would have been as leader of Methodism. Fletcher drew this
comparison between himself and Wesley, "The snail does best in its shell: were
it to aim at galloping like the race horse, it would be ridiculous indeed."
In this more modern biography, John Fletcher comes across as
self-deprecating, more mystical, and less assertive. While Wesley was chloric
by temperament, Fletcher was melancholy. Wesley admired Fletcher's piety, but
Fletcher possessed none of Wesley's organizational genius. Streiff reveals that
while Fletcher strove earnestly for holiness, he was reluctant to be held up as
the Methodist model of holiness. While Fletcher strove for perfection, he never
claimed that he had obtained it.
|
|
