Wesley Center Online
Issue 2, Fall 2002, Volume 20
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."
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.
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.
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.
