Sunday, July 26, 2026

The Great Gospel Heist

The Great Gospel Heist: Whatever Happened
To The Good News?


By B.A. Richardson


Copyright © 2026 by Brad Richardson.
2nd Edition.

All rights reserved. No parts of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission of the publisher, except for brief quotations in reviews or articles.

Unless otherwise indicated all Scripture references are taken from the King James Version of the Bible.

Contents


Contents

Introduction

The Gospel Defined

The Gospel Defrauded

The Gospel Defended

Confusion Over What It Means To Believe

The Gospel And Assurance

Simple Salvation Metaphors

Conclusion

About The Author

Introduction


On March 18, 1990 the greatest heist of physical property in American history occurred. Two men disguised as police officers responded to a fake disturbance call at the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum which is located in Boston, Massachusetts.

Once the two imposters gained entry into the building they quickly over-powered the museum guards and spent the next hour identifying and stealing 13 irreplaceable works of art.

They got away with stealing works by Rembrandt, Degas, Monet, and Flinck. The value of the stolen paintings surpassed 580 million dollars!

To this day the museum leaves the empty picture frames on display to give a visual testimony to the enormity of this crime. No one has been brought to justice since this theft occurred 31 years ago.

Ironically, the thieves lacked a thorough knowledge of the value of the museum contents and could have increased the value of their haul considerably if they had done their homework. They left undisturbed a Rembrandt that was valued at over $200 million. Nonetheless, the damage was considerable.

The Boston museum heist was epic as far as physical earthly property was concerned but there is a heist in the spiritual realm that makes the Boston crime look like child’s play.

The greatest promise and offer ever given by God to sinners has been stolen. The gospel has been stolen from most churches, seminaries and Bible colleges. The heist has been carried off by men who have not taken but instead have “added” to the requirements for receiving the gift of eternal life, aka the good news. They have greatly muddied the waters concerning the crystal clear answer to the question “What must I do to be saved?” Or put another way, “What must I do to gain eternal life?”

The Apostle Paul proclaimed a message of reconciliation between man and God. It was so radically transforming that he called it “my gospel” in Romans 2:16 and the “gospel of the grace of God” in Acts 20:24.

His gospel was very simple and it described how anyone could gain forgiveness and eternal life just by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for eternal life. By simply trusting in Christ’s saving work, sinners can experience the good news of salvation offered so freely.

Like the Boston crime where men disguised as agents of the law stole the precious contents of the Stewart museum, so too have men disguised as agents of the cross stolen the promise of forgiveness and heaven by altering ever so subtly Paul’s gospel.

This book seeks to lay out the greatest heist in history and to do it in layman's terms. If you have never experienced the deliriously good news of the gospel, then the following pages may help you to understand why.

The Gospel Defined


Ask people on the street what the word “gospel” means and you will get a wide range of different definitions. Some would say that the gospel is the Bible itself, others will tell you that the word refers to one of the first four books of the New Testament.

The truth is that there are many uses of the word gospel in the New Testament. In fact, there are several different gospels that are presented to different groups of people.

The word gospel simply means good tidings or good news. There is a particular passage of Scripture that I want to direct your attention to and it’s found in First Corinthians, chapter 15 and verses 1-8.
  1. Moreover brethren I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
  2. By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
  3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures;
  4. And that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures;
  5. And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve;
  6. After that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
  7. After that, He was seen of James, then of all the apostles.
  8. And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

You don’t have to be a seminary trained theologian to know that the Apostle Paul was the great messenger to the gentiles and the most prolific writer in the New Testament. His “gospel” was delivered to him by direct revelation from God; he didn’t learn it from another. See Galatians 1:12.

It was different from anything ever taught before. In fact, it was a mystery revealed to Paul, and he referred to this message as “my gospel.” See Romans 16:25.

The passage above that I shared from First Corinthians 15 says that this gospel is the one that saves, in verse two. It must be received, verse one, and this reception is accomplished by belief, verse two.

What is it that we must believe in order to be saved? It is the simple message that Christ died for our sins, He was buried, He rose again and His resurrection had numerous eye witnesses; it is a historical fact.

That’s it, all of it. That is the gospel in eight verses. By believing that Jesus Christ died for “your” sins, was buried, and rose again, you can have eternal life and the complete forgiveness of sins. This condition is referred to in this passage and others as being “saved.”

It’s simple, isn’t it? Profoundly simple! And it’s why Paul warned against anyone who would tamper with this simplicity. See Second Corinthians 11:3, “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

Just as Eve was tricked by the serpent in the garden, so today there are evil men, false teachers, and deceivers who are tricking multitudes of listeners to doubt that the gospel is a simple message.

I recently was sharing the good news with a friend of mine. When I told him that eternal life and forgiveness were his for the taking if he would simply believe it he responded by saying “I don’t think we are going to get off that easy.”

What makes his response even more tragic is that he has grown up in the church and continues to attend regularly. Evidently, there has been a gospel heist at the church he attends. His eyes remain blinded to the simplicity of Christ’s offer.

The Gospel Defrauded


Let me stress again that the only requirement that is demanded from sinful men is that they “believe” this good news to be true for their own lives. It requires nothing more, no work of any kind. Romans 4:5 says, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

I hope you got two important facts from that verse. First, God justifies (declares righteous) those who “work not” but only believe. Second, God justifies “ungodly” people. Many folks think they have to clean up their act before God could save them. They are wrong; God receives people just where they are in life.

I stress this point because this is precisely where the modern-day church has slipped in their despicable additions into the simple promise of the gospel. While most of the church will attest to the fact that we must believe in Jesus Christ and His work on the cross, they will then subtly add an additional requirement and in some cases, several additional requirements. Here is a list of some of those requirements...
  • Turning from sin
  • Being willing to turn from sin Being sorry for sin
  • Submitting to the Lordship of Christ Total surrender of our life to God Total commitment of our life to God Baptism
  • Tithing
  • Church membership Reciting a “sinners prayer” Inviting Jesus into your heart Coming to the altar

And the list could go on and on. I think you get the point.

You will not find these additions on most church websites on their “beliefs” page. They won’t divulge those specifics on their “about” page. They keep their “statements of faith” and “what we believe” pages pretty vague. You must attend several of their services and listen closely to their teachings to discover their devilish additions to the good news.

It is not just a problem with local churches but it is far more systematic. Take for example one of the largest protestant denominations in the world. They proudly proclaim their beliefs and practices are in sync with a statement of faith that they formulated decades ago.

Here is a summary of what their statement of faith (sometimes referred to as a “doctrinal statement”) says about salvation...

Under the section titled “Salvation” they have a statement concerning justification: Justification is God's acquittal of all sinners who repent and believe in Christ. It sounds good at first reading but there is a slight addition, the requirement to repent, which they define as a “turning from sin.” I don’t know about you but I find the idea of “believing” to be a very doable request. I believe in a lot of things. I also understand the meaning of “believe” to be persuaded that a proposition is true. I do not find the request to “turn from sin” to be very doable at all. Before you call me a heretic or a false teacher, let me explain.

When I hear a preacher, church, or denomination asking me to turn from sin, I am immediately filled with questions. What do you mean by “turn from”? Does “turn from sin” mean to quit sinning? How many sins am I to turn from, 50%, 75%, 90%, all of them? How long am I supposed to turn from these sins, the rest of my earthly life? Does turning from sin mean to cease from all sin? What happens when I stop turning from sin? It’s easy to see that the notion of turning from sins is really a silly request because it’s something that no human being has ever done with the exception of One, the Lord Jesus Christ! In fact, He never turned from sin because He never sinned!

The Apostle Paul described himself in Romans chapter seven as a “wretched man” because he did things he didn’t want to do, and left undone things he knew he should do. We are all sinners and will remain sinners until the day we die. It is unbiblical and impossible to turn from sins to gain eternal life. The gospel asks us simply to believe in the person and work of Jesus to be saved or justified. Thanks be to God that he asked us to do something that can actually be done!

Additionally, in the same “statement of faith” they say that salvation comes by “commitment of the whole person to Him as Lord and Savior.” What in the world does that even look like? When would I even know when this seemingly incredible standard has been met? What happens when I don’t commit myself to God? What would be the obvious signs that I am not 100% committed? What happens if I fall out of a state of “total commitment”? The doubts and questions would never end.

So the simple gospel message of belief in Christ has now morphed into believing, turning from sin, and committing your entire person to Him. That results in three steps, but only the first step is Biblical, simple, and attainable.

So one of the largest Protestant denominations has effectively changed the terms of salvation. They have stolen the good news by adding man-made requirements to God’s simple gift.

Sadly, they are not alone and I will give more examples later in this book.

Remember that Paul wrote that men are saved by receiving or believing the good news of Christ’s death for our sins, His burial, and resurrection. He further indicated that God’s grace extends only to those who “worketh not.” It's obvious that “turning from sin” and “committing our entire person to God” are works and will continue to be works the rest of our life.

Because they are works, they make grace ineffective and the gift of eternal life unattainable. Wages are the reward of work, but the gift of God is the result of grace. Don’t let your “works of righteousness” cost you Heaven itself! Remember, the Bible calls our works of righteousness “filthy rags”! See Isaiah 64:6.

So, you may be thinking: “Are there churches that get the gospel right”? Are there institutions that get the good news right? The answer is yes.

Here is a spectacularly accurate belief statement by the Dallas Theological Seminary. This paragraph comes from Article VII, “Salvation Only Through Christ”:

We believe that the new birth of the believer comes only through faith in Christ and that repentance is a vital part of believing, and is in no way, in itself, a separate and independent condition of salvation; nor are any other acts, such as confession, baptism, prayer, or faithful service, to be added to believing as a condition of salvation (John 1:12; 3:16, 18, 36; 5:24; 6:29; Acts 13:39; 16:31; Rom. 1:16–17; 3:22, 26; 4:5; 10:4; Gal. 3:22).

It’s interesting that Dallas Theological Seminary views repentance as part of believing, not a separate act of “turning from sin.”

The Greek word translated most often into the English “repentance” is metanoia and it simply means a change of mind. Dallas Seminary gets this right. You must change your mind about Christ, yourself and your sin in order to believe solely in Christ for salvation. Unfortunately, most of the Protestant world believes the word “repent” means to turn from sin; they are in serious error on this point. The Dallas statement says no other acts are to be added to believing as a condition of salvation. I salute them for this clear description of the gospel. Read their entire statement of faith, you will be blessed.

Here is a clear statement from Burleson Bible Church in Burleson, Texas. Why can’t more churches proclaim the good news with this kind of clarity?

The Condition for Salvation. We believe that all human beings are sinners, and as such are separated from God and in need of salvation (Rom. 3:23; 5:12). We believe that salvation is a free gift of God’s grace provided for all in the saving work of Jesus Christ (John 3:16; 1 John 2:2), and any who simply and only believe in His saving work, not in their own good works, effort, or merit, will receive the gift of eternal life (Rom. 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9).

Did you catch that: only those who “simply and only” believe in His saving work?

The Free Grace Alliance is equally clear in their definition of the gospel and its terms.

The sole means of receiving the free gift of eternal life is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whose substitutionary death on the cross fully satisfied the requirement for our justification. Faith is a personal response, apart from our works, whereby we are persuaded that the finished work of Jesus Christ, His death and resurrection, has delivered us from condemnation and guaranteed our eternal life.

There are churches and organizations that get the message right but they are in the minority. That is a sad thought, isn’t it? The greatest gift in the history of this world has been hijacked by adding requirements that God did not intend to be added to His precious gift.

The gospel is the good news that anyone who simply believes in the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus has forgiveness and eternal life. It is for those who “simply and only believe in His saving work”! That is the gospel, the good news indeed.

The gospel is about what has already been done, not about what you must do. And I will use the word the Free Grace Alliance used by asking this question: Are you “persuaded” that the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ has delivered you from sin and granted you eternal life?

I hope that is the case in your own life!

The Gospel Defended


We have already seen that the Apostle Paul delivered the gospel for our dispensation, or era. He called it “his gospel” and it is also referred to as the “gospel of grace.”

Paul was very zealous in his defense of the simple gospel that saves any man, woman, boy, or girl who simply believes in Jesus as their Savior. This is why Paul so strongly denounced anyone who would add to or take away from this simple message.

He strongly stated his defense of this message in Galatians chapter one, verses 6-9. Here is that passage of Scripture...

6. I marvel that you are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.
7. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8. But though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

We know the gospel that Paul preached and he warned anyone whether human or angelic against meddling with his gospel.

The word accursed means to be “condemned to Hell.” That is a very strong warning. Add anything to the gospel of grace and you can go to Hell. Don’t add anything at all. It’s faith alone.

It’s interesting and alarming that the great heist of the gospel began during the Apostle Paul’s lifetime and sadly it has continued right up to our present time.

So are there churches, preachers, seminaries, and organizations today that are accursed? The answer is a resounding yes.

I have already pointed out how one of the largest Protestant denominations has so cobbled up the gospel that they would have a person believe that it takes more than faith in the gospel to be saved; they say it also takes turning from sin and commitment of the whole person to God.

No wonder there are so many who follow these false formulas who lack any real assurance that they’ve been saved! But are there others who preach another gospel? Yes, there certainly are multitudes.

I’m not going to give a list of false teachers in this work. You can do a Google search and find a lot of information. Just do a simple search such as “lordship salvation teachers”. However, I would like to give you my thoughts on why we have strayed so far from the simple gospel. I will do that in the next chapter.

Confusion Over What It Means To Believe


In the 16th chapter of the book of Acts we find the story of the incredible escape from jail of the Apostle Paul and his assistant, Silas. God sent a powerful earthquake which loosened the chains on these two men and opened the doors of the jail. The terrified Roman jailer who was guarding these prisoners ran up to Paul and Silas and asked one of the greatest questions in the Bible. In verse 30 he asks: “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” Paul and Silas answer this man’s question quickly and succinctly in verse 31 by saying, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.”

Paul and Silas proclaimed the good news to this man with one sentence and one requirement: believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. The Greek word translated into English as “believe” is the Greek word pisteuo. The vast majority of times that pisteuo is used, it is translated simply as “believe.”

So what does “believe” mean? It means to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to place confidence in, or to trust in. If you are persuaded that the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus on your behalf are sufficient to forgive you of sin and secure your eternal life in Heaven then you are a BELIEVER, a child of God and you are destined for Heaven!

Here is what the Bible scholar Dr. John Robbins had to say about this matter...

“Belief, that is to say, faith (there is only one word in the New Testament for belief, pistis) and trust are the same; they are synonyms. If you believe what a person says, you trust him. If you trust a person, you believe what he says. If you have faith in him, you believe what he says and trust his words.” Source

Let’s put it another way. If you are “trusting” in the person and work of Christ “alone” to be your ticket to eternal life and forgiveness of sin then you are a BELIEVER.

It is really not that difficult; but thanks to theologians who have complicated God’s plan, the simple idea of believing has evolved into a work. According to many in the church today, Paul and Silas should have told this Roman jailer to totally commit himself to Jesus and to turn from his sins and surrender to Jesus. Thankfully, Paul and Silas correctly responded to this frightened man with a “one step solution” – believe on Jesus!

Another classic text in the Gospels is found in John 11:25-26. Here is the passage as it reads in the King James Version...

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

In this passage, Jesus has just arrived at the cemetery in the small town of Bethany. His close friend Lazarus died four days prior to His arrival and Jesus is visiting with Lazarus’ sister, Martha. Jesus declares to her that her brother will live again because He (Jesus) is the resurrection and the life. Then Jesus asks her for a response and it is the only response that anyone should and can make, and that is to believe. Notice that Jesus uses “believeth” in verse 25 and “believest” in verse 26. Both words are translated from the Greek word pisteuo.

Again, let me emphasize that of the 248 times that pisteuo appears in the Greek it is translated into the English as “believe” 239 times. Only one time is it translated “to be committed unto.” I hope you can grasp the importance of that fact. While so much of the church wants our belief to be a work of commitment, the Bible only uses that meaning one time in the New Testament. The overwhelming meaning of pisteuo is to be persuaded or convinced of a truth. The Gospel is a declaration of good news to be persuaded of, not commands to be obeyed. It is not good news to hear that you must turn from sin or completely commit your entire person to God. Those are huge challenges that will be met with failure. But to simply be persuaded that Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life is a joyous invitation.

So how do these modern-day “scholars” mess up a simple concept like believing? Let’s examine a three-part Latin definition that liberals, Arminians, and Calvinists have used to make the act of believing into a complicated work. They use a three-part Latin definition of the simple word for believe and magically transform this simple act of the will into a work of the flesh.

The first element is Noticia which refers to the intellectual content of faith. Faith must believe in something; it has to have a subject. This aspect of Biblical faith is true. We can have faith in George Washington but believing in Washington will not secure forgiveness of sins or eternal life.

The second word is Assensus or assent. This element is the state of persuasion that a proposition is true. This is exactly in line with the Biblical concept of belief.

The third word is Fiducia. This is the element of faith that some of these scholars label as trust. Fiducia comes from the word faith or faithfulness. Some of these scholars say an element of “commitment” is necessary on the part of the believer. This Latin idea of fiducia (which they call trust) is where the Bible would disagree with them. Belief and trust are synonymous from a Biblical perspective. Again, I could care less what the Latin definitions of belief are; I’m only concerned with the Bible’s definition of belief. If I believe in someone then I trust them.

Now the problem with these three Latin elements is that the Bible was not delivered to us in Latin. The New Testament was given to us in Greek, not Latin. The Greek meaning of pisteuo is most closely aligned with their Latin element, Assensus. Pisteuo or belief is assent to a proposition. Those who desire to make believing more than assent will run to this Latin trifecta, and Fiducia in particular, in order to promote their distorted views. The Gospel is not about my commitment to Christ, but Christ’s commitment to me. And of that truth I am persuaded...assensus!

There is no shortage of theology books written by Calvinists and Arminians that expound on the wizardry of these Latin concepts. I would encourage you not to chase such ungrounded teachings. Instead, I would encourage you to take the Apostle Paul and the Lord Jesus at their word and know with certainty that the only requirement for salvation on man’s part is to believe.

The Apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians chapter two, verse three, told us that the coming day of the Lord would be preceded by a great falling away (apostasia) or apostasy. An apostasy is an abandonment of true doctrine for any heinous false religious teaching. I believe that the precious truth that the gift of eternal life received by faith which has now been twisted into a reward to those who totally commit themselves, is in fact that great apostasy that Paul predicted. We are living in perilous times when the church, universities, seminaries, and denominations have hijacked the good news. The Gospel is declarative not imperative. It is good news to be believed, not a list of demands to be obeyed.

Another source of confusion concerning the Gospel is the failure of men to correctly separate teachings on salvation from teachings on discipleship.

To be clear, salvation comes by simple faith in the person and work of Jesus. Discipleship is another matter altogether. Discipleship requires discipline and commitment. Phrases like taking up the cross, counting the cost, following Christ, and forsaking family (and many more) all depict the work aspect of becoming a disciple. But salvation is a gift received by faith...alone.

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

One final hurdle to understanding Biblical belief in all its simplicity has been the erroneous teaching of Calvinists concerning “perseverance.” The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints can mean different things to different people. The typical Calvinist will generally take this doctrine to mean that if a person has truly believed in Christ as Savior then he will persevere in good works and belief for the rest of his life. Hence they really need a definition of belief in which faith becomes a “working faith.” Some will even say that a faith that doesn’t work doesn’t save.

I once became ensnared in Calvinistic teachings until I became more concerned about what the Bible taught than what men teach. I am now a firm believer in the “perseverance of the Savior.” God is the only One who truly perseveres. We are sinners, disloyal, unfaithful, and frail. The Scriptures support this version of perseverance. Notice what 2 Timothy 2:13 says…If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

The Gospel And Assurance


There are no hard statistics on this but my experience as a pastor has led me to believe that many Christians lack assurance of their salvation. However, if these same believers properly understand the Gospel then they should have assurance that they are God’s children and on their way to a place called Heaven.

On the other hand, if you have a concept of faith that must persevere and “hold on” to be valid, then you will probably never have assurance of salvation.

God wants us to know we are saved and He has told us this explicitly in His Word. Note what the Apostle John had to say in I John 5:11-13...

“And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.”

Did you see the connection between “believe” and “know”? If we believe on the name of the Son of God, we can “know” that we have eternal life. That is pretty simple, isn’t it? I can tell you that I know I have eternal life because I believe in Christ. Because I believe; not because I persevere, turn from sin, do good works, go to church, tithe, pray, or any of a multitude of man-created requirements. My job is to believe and Christ’s promise is to save.

Several years ago my wife and I visited a Baptist church near our home town. We were looking for a church home and the pastor of this church offered to come to our house and visit us. The night the pastor and his wife arrived at our house we had a pretty good visit about the church and then the conversation turned to our own beliefs. Toward the end of our visit, I asked the pastor a question that I have asked many others and it went like this... “Pastor, what do you base your assurance of salvation upon?” The question seemed to catch him off guard. He looked up toward the ceiling, then back down to the floor. Finally, he answered by saying… “I guess I would need to take a hard look at my life and take an inventory of how I am living.”

In effect, what the pastor was saying was that he based his assurance on his performance. Let me just say that if you are basing your assurance of salvation on your own works, faithfulness, or performance, then you may never have real certainty that you are in good standing with God.

Why do I make such a claim? Because your performance or faithfulness will never be good enough to please God. The only thing that pleases God is faith in His dear Son. Jesus lived a perfect and sinless life and then died as a substitute sacrifice for you and me. He is the only One who could ever appease the wrath of God.

I base my assurance on the finished work of Jesus. I do not have any confidence in my so-called Christian life. C.I. Scofield once said, “Law condemns the best person; grace justifies the worst.”

I agree with the hymnist who wrote, “My hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.” My hope is not built on any of my so-called merits, faithfulness, ministry, dedication, commitment, or any other filthy righteous act. My hope rests in the person and work of the Son of God.

Simple Salvation Metaphors


In John the third chapter we have the most famous verse in the Bible, v.16...

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

Jesus was having a spiritual discussion with a man named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. John 3:16 is sublime because of its simplicity that everlasting life goes to those who believe in Jesus! What many people don’t know is that Jesus used an O.T. story to prove to Nicodemus just how simple it is to believe in Him.

Jesus recounted the story of how the Israelites, while wandering in the wilderness following their exodus from Egypt, came under the attack of venomous snakes in the desert. God told Moses to make a serpent out of bronze and mount it on a staff. God further instructed Moses to lift the serpent into the air and when the people simply looked on the bronze serpent for relief, they were spared from the vipers.

Jesus then likened Himself to the bronze serpent. Whereas just one look at the bronze serpent saved the children of Israel, so too just one look of faith unto Jesus can save the vilest sinner. Just one momentary act of faith can bring eternal blessings.

These two verses precede the famous 16th verse: John 3:14-15 says, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.”

Just one look can change your future and change your eternity. That is the good news that has been stripped from modern-day distortions of the gospel.

The Apostle John wasn’t done illustrating how simple this faith can be. In the fourth chapter, Jesus was visiting with the “woman at the well” and told her that He was the issuer of water that springs up to eternal life and just one drink of that water would cause one to never thirst again.

Again, in the sixth chapter, Jesus illustrated the simplicity of believing when He compared believing in Him to eating and drinking.

It’s not difficult at all. It’s freely available to anyone who simply looks, drinks, or eats in faith. The angel says in the final chapter of the book of Revelation, chapter 22, verse 17...

“And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.”

Conclusion


To this day, the empty picture frames still hang in the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston. They are a constant reminder of the heinous theft of some of the most valuable paintings in the world. Those pictureless frames are a reminder of the sinfulness of men and the crimes they commit.

Likewise, religious organizations today present a perverted gospel that is not really the gospel and certainly not good news. The distorted and confusing messages brought forth from pulpits today offer no hope, no forgiveness, and no eternal life. Their false gospels have been stripped of the treasure of the really good news that Jesus saves people who simply believe in Him. Only the message of simple faith in the person and work of Jesus offers salvation to the seeking soul.

At a cemetery in Bethany over two thousand years ago, Jesus told Martha that He is the resurrection and the life and asked her “Do you believe this?”

Dear Reader, do you believe this?

If, after reading this e-book you have come to believe in Jesus as Savior I would love to know. Send me an email at freegracegospel@gmail.com.

About The Author


Brad Richardson is a retired Baptist pastor. He is married with two children and six grand-children. He maintains the evangelistic blogs How To Be Forgiven and Rapture Journal.

Wednesday, July 22, 2026

My Dialogue with Antonio da Rosa on 1 John 5:1


by Jonathan Perreault


Introduction: The Content of Saving Faith

What is the absolute "lowest common denominator" required for a person to be born again? Does a person simply need to believe that someone named "Jesus" promises "eternal life," or does saving faith inherently require an understanding of Christ's substitutionary death on the cross and His resurrection?

In October 2007, I engaged in a week-long blog dialogue with Antonio da Rosa regarding 1 John 5:1: "Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." Antonio, representing the perspective popularized by Zane Hodges, argued that this verse is a strict logical equation—asserting that simple belief in Jesus's identity as the Christ is sufficient for eternal life, apart from any other theological considerations.

Representing the traditional Free Grace position, I approached the text from a different angle. By digging into the original Greek syntax—specifically the relationship between the present participle ("believing") and the perfect tense verb ("has been born")—I argue that John is providing a description of those who are already regenerated, rather than a prescription for how the lost receive eternal life.

What follows is an edited transcript of our back-and-forth. It serves as a case study in how minor grammatical details can completely reshape our understanding of gospel clarity, biblical context, and the structure of New Testament epistles.

To summarize my thesis and understanding of 1 John 5:1, it is simply this: 1 John 5:1 is a summary confession of faith for the believer rather than the specific content of saving faith required for the unbeliever.

About This Transcript:
The following dialogue occurred between October 2–8, 2007, and is excerpted from the comments on Antonio's original Free Grace Theology blog post, "'Whoever [simply] believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God' (1 John 5:1). Do you believe this?" (October 1, 2007).

To highlight our specific back-and-forth, I have removed all other comments from the original thread except for those between Antonio and myself. I have also done some light editing mainly to correct spelling errors and typos, but otherwise, the comments are copied and pasted directly as they were originally written.

Original Source Links
  • Link to Antonio’s Blog Post: "'Whoever [simply] believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God' (1 John 5:1). Do you believe this?" (Hyperlink)
  • Link to the Full Discussion: Original Comment Thread Archive (Hyperlink)

Dialogue Transcript: October 2-8, 2007

Jonathan
Hi Antonio,
In context, do you understand 1 John 5:1a to be a description or a prescription? And why?
October 02, 2007 5:33 PM

Antonio
If you will indulge me, I would like to ask you a question first.
What difference would it make?
John's statement is very emphatic:
"Whoever [there are no exceptions!] believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."
So, no matter what else can be stated about a person, if he or she simply believes that Jesus is the Christ (and obviously in the soteric sense that John has imported into this title) they are among the redeemed, regardless of any other consideration.
Thanks for your visit,
Antonio
October 02, 2007 5:57 PM

Antonio
Let me ask you another question, JP:
Did you read the total of my appended article? If not, could I persuade you to finish reading it before we continue a dialogue?
Thanks, man!
Your forever fg brother,
Antonio
October 02, 2007 5:58 PM

Jonathan
Hi Antonio,
In answer to your questions, the difference is between a correct or incorrect application. A correct application of a Scripture must be based on the correct interpretation of that Scripture.
And yes, I did read your expanded and edited version of your post.
Talk to you later!
October 03, 2007 2:33 PM

Antonio
Let me ask you a question, what is wrong with this:
John's statement is very emphatic:
"Whoever [there are no exceptions!] believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."
So, no matter what else can be stated about a person, if he or she simply believes that Jesus is the Christ (and obviously in the soteric sense that John has imported into this title) they are among the redeemed, regardless of any other consideration.
Now unless you want to argue that regeneration precedes faith, for John, the consideration if one is born again or not is determined by if this individual believes that Jesus is the Christ.
We know that 1 John 5:1 does not speak of regeneration preceding faith, for John 20:31 states that as a result of believing that Jesus is the Christ one obtains life (in other words, born of God) ("that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ... and believing, have life in His name").
I am desiring to discuss my arguments of this opening post. If you have problems with it, please share them that we may discuss them.
In 1 John 5:1, John has described for us what the lowest common denominator is for considering one born again. As long as anyone, without exception, believes that Jesus is the Christ (apart from any other consideration) he is born of God. Therefore, fundamentally, whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.
Antonio
October 03, 2007 3:03 PM

Jonathan
Hi Antonio,
The following is my understanding of 1 John 5:1. Also let me add that I believe the context of 1 John concerns believers and addresses fellowship with God and with each other.
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him" (1 John 5:1, NKJV).
Since a proper application must be based on the proper interpretation, let’s briefly try to understand this verse by properly understanding two key terms.
First, let’s look at the word "believes" (NKJV). In Greek, this word is a present tense, active voice, participle. Concerning the Greek participle, Mounce writes, "The present participle is built on the present tense stem of the verb. . . . It describes a continuous action . . . [an] 'on-going' nuance" (Basics of Biblical Greek, p. 246). For this reason, D. Edmond Hiebert (Bibliotheca Sacra, April 1990, p. 217, An Expositional Study of 1 John, Part 9: An Exposition of 1 John 5:1-12) translates this Greek participle as "believing".
Second, let's look at the phrase "is born" (NKJV). In Greek, this verb is in the perfect tense, passive voice, and indicative mood. Mounce writes that the Greek perfect tense "describes an action that was brought to completion [in the past] and whose effects are felt in the present" (Basics of Biblical Greek, p. 225). Similarly, Daniel Wallace writes, "The force of the perfect tense is simply that it describes an even that, completed in the past (we are speaking of the perfect indicative here), has results existing in the present time (i.e. in relation to the time of the speaker)" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 573). For these reasons Hiebert translates this phrase as "out of God has been born". (Ibid.) Similarly, the NET Bible renders it as "has been fathered by God", and the Jerusalem Bible reads, "has been begotten by God".
Now let's put it all together. The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament by Alfred Marshall literally translates 1 John 5:1 as follows: "Everyone believing that Jesus is the Christ of God has been begotten, and everyone loving the [one] begetting loves the [one] having been begotten of him."
So what does this mean? A. T. Robertson aptly writes, "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing". (Word Pictures in the New Testament.) Similarly, Dr. Norman Geisler says, "First of all, this text says nothing about how one becomes born of God." (Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, p. 484.)
I believe Greg Schliesmann sums it up well when he says that 1 John 5:1 is a summary DESCRIPTION, not a detailed PRESCRIPTION.
We also need to remember that, as someone has said, "No man is an island, but no Scripture is either."
October 04, 2007 2:44 PM


Antonio
Hey John,
thanks for the reply.
Let me ask you a few questions:
1) Do you believe that eternal life is the result of a simple act of faith (punctilliar) or the result of a linear, continuous faith?
I ask, because your description of the present, active participle is a very general, basic, first year Greek statement that can be very misleading.
Dan Wallace has this to say about your description of the present participle, "... but the present participle, by itself, can hardly be forced into this mold," and states that "caution must be exercised" when considering the present participle. (Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics, p. 616.)
When all the evidence is considered concerning John's use of the present, active participle, "pisteuwn", it can be clearly shown that for John, this is a general, gnomic usage, simply denoting "whoever believes". This is how John uses this participle (which he uses 43 times).
The following (not exhaustive) is a list of how 15 translation committees and/or translators rendered the present participle in 1 John 5:1
NIV: Everyone who believes
NKJV: Whoever believes
NASB: Whoever believes
ASV: Whosoever believeth
KJV: Whosoever believeth
HCSB: Everyone who believes
RSV: Everyone who believes
NRSV: Everyone who believes
Darby Translation: Everyone that believes
Weymouth: Every one who believes
21st Century KJ : Whosoever believeth
Wycliffe: Each man that believeth
ESV: Everyone who believes
NASBE: Whoever believes
NJB: Whoever believes
It seems to me that they understand this precisely the way that I do, generally, denoting simply "whoever believes" (NKJV).
Let's get down to the nitty gritty.
I agree that the verse is describing, for John, what is the fundamental concern on how a Christian is identified, and that it is not prescriptive.
Let me ask you the next question. Can you answer affirmatively, as John has in 1 John 5:1... can you answer "yes" to this question:
Do you believe that WHOEVER believes that Jesus is the Christ can accurately be described as having been born of God (note the perfect tense of my question)?
The epistle writer John answers an emphatic, "yes!".
Let us test John's emphatic statement. It is, in fact, an assertion. He is asserting a truism about the one who believes that Jesus is the Christ.
Let us have an interview with John:
John, would you consider someone who had black skin and believes that Jesus is the Christ to be born again (remember, the perfect tense is an action in the past that has present results)?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God!"
John, would you consider someone who didn't understand or believe that Jesus would die on the cross or that He rose from the dead (as Peter did) yet believes that Jesus is the Christ to be born again?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God!"
John, would you consider someone who didn't understand or believe that Jesus was equal with the Father (as all the disciples did when they were first born again) yet believes that Jesus is the Christ to be born again?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God!"
John, would you consider someone who was ignorant of much theological doctrine yet sincerely believes that Jesus of Nazareth, who raised Lazarus from the dead, and walked on water, and healed the sick, and gave sight to the blind, and made the lame whole, and cleansed the leper, is the Christ to be born again?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God!"
JP,
Fundamentally, for John, the Christian is sufficiently and accurately identified as whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ.
So, according to this simple statement, regardless of what can be said about a person, if he believes that Jesus is the Christ, he is a born again Christian.
And why would we think otherwise?
Jesus prescribed how men and women are to be born again (in other words receive life): "believe that Jesus is the Christ... and believing you might have life in His name" (John 20:31)
Antonio
October 04, 2007 5:32 PM 

Jonathan
Antonio,
I want to comment on your statement, "There is not one scripture in the whole of the bible which states that one must believe that Jesus Christ died substitutionally on a cross for the sins of the world in order to receive eternal life, eternal salvation, or justification." If by "one Scripture" you mean one Bible verse, I would say that the Greek text has no verse divisions. Furthermore, as I stated above, we need to remember that "no man is an island, but no Scripture is either". (I am quoting a prominent Free Grace scholar from a personal correspondence.) And so with these things in mind, I would answer your statement by pointing simply to the book of Acts. In this book alone there are many Scriptures which state that one must believe that Jesus Christ died substitutionally on a cross for the sins of the world in order to receive eternal life, eternal salvation, or justification. See, for example: Acts 2:14-38, 3:12-26,4:8-12, 5:28-31, 8:30-35, 9:15 cf. 20:24, 10:34-43, 13:23-39, etc. (I am not even half-way through Acts but I will stop.) Notice in the last passage I cited from Acts 13, we see an example of Paul's witnessing technique. He has no aversion to quoting from different Scriptures, yet you do. This I do not understand. While the apostle does encapsulate the saving message in Acts 16:31 [or at least the one condition of it], Paul goes on to fill in the details in the very next verse.
October 04, 2007 5:37 PM

Jonathan
Hi Antonio,
Yes, I believe a person becomes born again at a point in time. But I don’t believe this is what the apostle is referring to in 1 John 5:1 (see my comments above regarding this). Rather, I believe John is speaking of characteristics that can only be true (but are not necessarily always true) of those who already have been born again (in the past): “Everyone believing that Jesus is the Christ of God has been begotten, and everyone loving . . .” (1 Jn. 5:1a, Marshall, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament). So, as a Christian, who should I consider my brother (1 Jn. 4:21)? Fundamentally, everyone who confesses that they believe that Jesus is the Christ (1 Jn. 5:1, cf. 1 Jn. 4:15). I see this as the SUMMARY CONFESSION OF FAITH of a believer, not the SPECIFIC CONTENT OF FAITH for the unbeliever.
October 05, 2007 2:44 PM

Antonio
JP,
Thanks again for your comments. I believe that it is a good discussion.
I made a blanket assertion: there is not one scriptural passage that enjoins men to believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross, substitutionally, for sins, that has an explicitly stated result of eternal salvation, justification, or eternal life. Not one. And I stand by that assertion. [Editor's note: But see Jn. 3:14-16; Acts 13:26-41; 1 Cor. 1:17-21, 4:15, 15:1-3, etc.]
You have brought forth some verses for me to consider. So I will.

Acts 2:14-38
This is Peter's famous sermon on that great birthday of the church. I can see that Peter mentions Jesus' miracles, wonders, and signs, which attest to Jesus' messiahship (Acts 2:22). I also see that Peter mention's Christ's death and resurrection. When I do evangelism, I do the same thing. I present Christ’s miracles and wonders. And I present His death and resurrection. Likewise, like Peter, I point to the fact that Jesus is the Christ. For Peter, this is his main and ending point:

Acts 2:36
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." I can see myself stating something similar, "In light of my preceding testimony, let all here in the village of Keikhu in India, know assuredly, that God has made this Jesus, who did the miracles, who died on the cross and rose again, both Lord and Christ. And all who simply believe that Jesus is the Christ will have eternal life in His name."
Nowhere in the text are we met in this text with an explicit command, enjoining the Israelites to believe that Jesus died on the cross and rose again, for the express purpose of receiving eternal life. You are reading this into the text, JP. It is not there! Show me where! [Editor's note: See Acts 2:38, "Repent...for the forgiveness of your sins," etc.] Are we met with, "Men and brethren, believe that this Jesus who I preached to you died on the cross for your sins, and as a result, you will receive everlasting life, justification, and eternal salvation!"? Of course not. [Editor's note: Christ's substitutionary death on the cross is clearly in the immediate context! See Acts 2:23; cf. Isa. 53:5-6.]
What we are met with is Peter leading people to the knowledge that Jesus is the Christ! He is using the same signs that John did to show that Jesus is the Christ. He is using that information to persuade his crowd to believe in Jesus. He is not providing his commentary as a checklist of doctrines that one must consciously assent to as a necessary theological requirement in ADDITION to believing that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ (which is the only theological requirement and condition of saving faith).
Furthermore, it is interesting to note, that there is not even a shred of speech concerning Christ's death as a substitution for the sins of Israel. [Editor's note: But see Acts 2:23; cf. Isa. 53:5-6.] This is one of Stegall's 5 conditions!
It is a logical fallacy to suppose that just because Peter mention’s Christ’s death and resurrection that he deems them necessary content to saving faith. [Editor's note: Antonio's statement here is a straw man argument because no one is saying that. Obviously Christ's death and resurrection are part of the gospel, and that is why those facts are necessary to believe to be saved. See 1 Cor. 15:1ff.] As we have mentioned in the text of this post, the Christ was to be King of Israel. Peter also mentions this in the text of his sermon here in 2:30 (see also 2:34-36). Why aren't you demanding the lost to assent to this also as a necessary, theological requirement for eternal salvation? [Editor's note: Because that is not part of the gospel. See 1 Cor. 15:1ff.] Peter, like his Apostolic brother John, speaks of Jesus’ miracles, signs, and wonders. Why aren’t you demanding the lost to assent to this also as a necessary, theological requirement for eternal salvation? [Editor's note: Because those things are not part of the gospel. See 1 Cor. 15:1ff.] Again, your reasoning is faulty. [Editor's note: Antonio's statement here is another straw man argument because traditional Free Grace folks don't use the reasoning that Antonio is suggesting.] Just because Peter mentions it, doesn’t make it a requirement for saving faith. [Editor's note: Traditional Free Grace folks agree! Antonio's statement here is a huge straw man argument!]
In such a case as this, we must employ the hermeneutical principle of the law of affirmation, which states that we may only affirm identity and equality if such is stated. Nowhere in the Bible is it affirmed that believing that Jesus died on the cross substitutionally for sins is either saving faith, or one of many components of saving faith. [Editor's note: That is false. See Acts 2:23; cf. Isa. 53:5-6; 1 Cor. 1:17-21, 4:15, 15:1ff.] This is true of this passage as well.

Acts 3:12-26
This is, of course, Peter's second sermon in the book of Acts, at the occasion of healing a lame man in Solomon's Portico. Peter is taking the usual tact. He is explaining things about Jesus, that prove who He is, and then enjoining men to believe in Him. I do the same thing. I tell men and women about Jesus of Nazareth. I lift Jesus up in such a way that I show Him to be able, qualified, and authorized to impart eternal life to all who simply believe in His name for it. Peter here does the same thing. He speaks about Jesus, proving by what He did that He is the Christ, and then speaks about faith in Him. It is interesting, as well, that when Peter heals the lame man, he says, “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk” (Acts 3:6). It is by belief in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth that one is eternally secure.
Peter adds something else here. He refers to Jesus as the prophet whom Moses wrote about (3:22-23). The Christ was to be a prophet, indeed! Jesus fulfilled this role, and so therefore is the Christ. And when anyone understands to be true that Jesus is the Christ, he is born again. Peter mentions that Jesus is the prophet that Moses spoke about! Why aren’t you demanding the lost to assent to this also as a necessary, theological requirement for eternal salvation? [Editor's note: Because it is not part of the gospel, and it is by believing the gospel that a person is saved. See 1 Cor. 1:17-21.] Just because Peter gives prominence to something in his sermons, doesn’t make it required, theological necessity for saving faith. [Editor's note: Another straw man argument! No one is saying that "just because Peter gives prominence to something in his sermons" it is therefore a "required, theological necessity for saving faith."] And again, in this passage, nowhere are we met with a command enjoining the lost to believe that Jesus died on the cross substitutionally for sins for the express purpose of receiving eternal life. You have read this into the text. [Editor's note: That is false. See Acts 3:18; cf. Isa. 53:5-6, particularly when it says: "But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities."]
This is sufficient. I have grown weary making these arguments. Having read each scripture that you have referenced, there is not one single passage that enjoins the lost to believe in the cross of Christ for sins as a requirement for saving faith. Not one. My challenge is to prove me wrong. Show me any passage that conditions everlasting life, eternal salvation, or justification on believing that Jesus died a substitutionary death on the cross. [Editor's note: See 1 Cor. 1:17-21, 4:15, 15:1ff; Eph. 1:13-14; 2 Thess. 1:8-9.]
I have read Greg S.'s stuff on Lou's blog. There are a lot of words! But his arguments are grasping at air. They are nothing but allusion, intimation, and conjecture. We have shown his faulty arguments both in the opening post, and in this comment thread. You wrote this in your comment:
"Notice in the last passage I cited from Acts 13, we see an example of Paul's witnessing technique. He has no aversion to quoting from different Scriptures, yet you do. This I do not understand."
I just read the entire passage. I approve of Paul’s witnessing technique here. What would ever give you the impression that I did not? I have no aversion to quoting from different Scriptures. As a matter of fact, I use all kinds of Scriptures to show that the Jesus born of Mary and legally the son of Joseph is indeed the promised Christ. You seem to be having more misconceptions about my position.
In closing, for Peter, Paul, and John, anyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God, and there are no exceptions. As for your last comment on 1 John 5:1, I suggest that, if you haven’t already, a class on logic. [Editor's note: But notice that the fatal flaw in Antonio's logic is that he is only taking into consideration the English syntax of 1 John 5:1 and completely ignoring the Greek perfect tense of the word gegennÄ“tai meaning "has been born," which disproves his entire argument.] What John has done for us is given us a solid and exceptionless assertion. He has stated that whoever, everyone, anyone, anywhere, at any time, who believes that Jesus is the Christ is a Christian. This is airtight. John considers ANYONE who believes that Jesus is the Christ to be a born again Christian. This is his fundamental definition of a Christian. [Editor's note: It's not a definition of a Christian, rather, it's a description of a Christian. That's a big difference! If what Antonio is saying is true, then every characteristic of a Christian becomes a requirement for salvation, which of course is absurd.]
Let us ask John another question:
John, who are our Christian brothers?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ."
So you are telling me that if someone believes that Jesus is the Christ that this person is indeed a born again Christian? "Yes!"
John's statement in 1 John 5:1 is clear and unambiguous. It is subject to the rules and laws of logic. There are no qualifiers or modifiers to this statement. It is an ABSOLUTE statement of truth.
And what is that absolute statement of truth, JP?
That no matter who you are, what you do, or any other consideration about you, if you simply believe that Jesus is the Christ, you are to be regarded as a born again Christian. [Editor's note: Notice here that Antonio seems to admit that 1 John 5:1 is not talking about how to be saved, but rather how to recognize those who are saved! And that is the whole point.]
As a statement of truth, it cannot be falsified. In other words, providing the premise is true, the conclusion is sure, no matter what. Therefore, if we were to add anything to the premise, the conclusion would be sure. Only if we were to subtract from the premise would the conclusion be negated.
Providing that someone believes that Jesus is the Christ, the certain conclusion is that this person is indeed a born again Christian.
Add to the premise "whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ" ANYTHING ELSE, it DOESN'T MATTER WHAT, providing the premise is true, the conclusion is sure. This can be amply demonstrated through logical proofing. If someone, anyone, believes that Jesus is the Christ he is a born again Christian. [Editor's note: Notice here that Antonio is not quoting the rest of the sentence from 1 John 5:1, and when he does quote it he twists the meaning of the English grammar instead of going back to the Greek text. The reason why Antonio doesn't go back to the Greek text of 1 John 5:1 is because it disproves his entire argument. In light of the Greek grammar of 1 John 5:1, if someone believes that Jesus is the Christ, he has been born again at some time in the past and the results are ongoing into the present. This is the meaning of the Greek word gegennētai in 1 John 5:1, which literally means "has been born".]
And again, I leave with:
Why would we think anything otherwise?
The same author has prescribed for us how we are to receive eternal life, being born again:
"…believe that Jesus is the Christ… that believing you may have life in His name" (John 20:31).
October 05, 2007 7:21 PM


Jonathan
Hi Antonio,
I'd like to continue our discussion on 1 John 5:1a, and later I'll comment again on Acts.
"Everyone believing that Jesus is the Christ of God has been begotten, and everyone loving the [one] begetting loves the [one] having been begotten of him." (1 John 5:1, Marshall, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament.)
1 John 5:1a is not a COMMANDING REQUIREMENT FOR the new birth, but a CHARACTERISTIC RESULT OF the new birth. (Please reference the Greek exegesis by noted scholars I have set forth above.)
In 1 John, what does the apostle John say are three CHARACTERISTIC (but not automatic) RESULTS OF the new birth?
1) BELIEVING (1 Jn. 5:1a, cf. Rom. 1:17, 2 Cor. 5:7, Gal. 2:20, Col. 2:6, 1 Tim. 1:19-20 and 1 Cor. 5:5, 2 Tim. 2:13, Heb. 3:12, 1 Pt. 1:8 – Notice the believing and loving characteristics of the Christians to whom Peter writes.)
2) CONFESSING BELIEF (1 Jn. 4:14-15, 21-5:1a, cf. Jn. 12:32)
3) LOVING (1 Jn. 4:7, cf. Rev. 2:4)
October 07, 2007 2:44 PM

Jonathan
Hey Antonio,
I finally was able to read your comments regarding the Bible verses I cited in Acts.
Right now I would like to simply speak regarding a quote of mine you disagreed with in which I said,
"Notice in the last passage I cited from Acts 13, we see an example of Paul's witnessing technique. He has no aversion to quoting from different Scriptures, yet you do. This I do not understand."
To this you responded,
"I just read the entire passage [in Acts 13]. I approve of Paul's witnessing technique here. What would ever give you the impression that I did not? I have no aversion to quoting from different Scriptures. As a matter of fact, I use all kinds of Scriptures to show that the Jesus born of Mary and legally the son of Joseph is indeed the promised Christ. You seem to be having more misconceptions about my position."
What gave me the impression that you have an aversion to quoting from different Scriptures in your witnessing technique is when you stated in this post on 1 John:
"If a lost man were to ask them [TFG] where in the Bible does it give these conditions for eternal salvation, they [TFG] could not turn to any single passage to show them. They would need to hop around the Bible, stringing a multitude of passages together. In the end, not a single passage they would turn to clearly states that the conditions that the TFG offer for the reception of eternal life do indeed appropriate salvation. This, itself, is a most major problem."
I seem to remember having read other comments of yours in which you state similar sentiments.
October 08, 2007 2:53 PM

Jonathan
Brother Antonio,
Once again, we have to understand Acts 2 in context, because a text without a context is a pretext!
Peter is preaching to a JEWISH audience. It has been said that Judaism was a bloody religion – and it was! For the sins of the people there were yearly sacrifices, daily sacrifices, sin offerings – ex abuntanti – in abundance! If any culture was familiar with substitutionary sacrifices, it was Israel! For according to the Law: "WITHOUT THE SHEDDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO REMISSION OF SIN" (cf. Heb. 9:22). Furthermore, in Acts 2, Peter was preaching to the very Jews who had crucified Christ (Acts 2:22-23, 36)! These were the Jews who had heard John the Baptist proclaim of Jesus: "BEHOLD! THE LAMB OF GOD WHO TAKES AWAY THE SINS OF THE WORLD" (Jn. 1:29b)! These were the Jews who had heard Jesus say, "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd GIVES HIS LIFE FOR THE SHEEP. . . . As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I LAY DOWN MY LIFE FOR THE SHEEP. . . . Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father" (Jn. 10:11, 15, 17-18). These Jews didn't have to be reminded of what Jesus did and said, they knew full well - and that's why they crucified Him! Therefore Peter simply emphasizes the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (Acts 2:22-36), and tells Israel to "REPENT!" (change their minds from unbelief to belief concerning this Man they had crucified) "FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS" (Acts 2:38) – emphasizing again the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God! [Editor's note: Furthermore, lest anyone think Peter only included the cross because of a Jewish audience, when he later preaches to the Gentile household of Cornelius in Acts 10, he explicitly conditions salvation on this same message, concluding in Acts 10:43: "To Him all the prophets bear witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins."]
I will address the second passage in Acts that you responded to the next time I comment.
October 08, 2007 7:05 PM


Conclusion: Why Grammar and Context Matter for the Gospel

Looking back at this dialogue, the core issue remains as vital today as it was then. It shows that theological debates are rarely just about individual words; they are about how we fit those words into the grander tapestry of Scripture.

When we isolate a verse like 1 John 5:1 from its structural Greek grammar and its broader New Testament context, we risk turning a beautiful description of Christian fellowship into a checklist that leaves out the very heart of the gospel—the cross and the resurrection. By understanding that John is describing the ongoing confession of someone who has already been born of God, we protect the clarity of the saving message while remaining faithful to the text.

But a dialogue like this shouldn't end in the past.

Over to You:
How do you approach 1 John 5:1? Do you see it as a strict equation for salvation, or a descriptive hallmark of a believer's life?

How heavily does original language syntax weigh into your own study of the text?

*  *  *

Note: A print-ready PDF version of this article is also available to view and download here.