Some Free Grace people seem to think that Roman Catholics are born-again because they "believe in Jesus". For example, one church historian who identifies as Free Grace and who is on the faculty of Grace School of Theology writes: "But where does Scripture state [that] adding good works (that God produces in us) negates faith in who Jesus is for salvation? It is wrong, but it does not negate faith in Jesus Christ as God and Savior for justification.”[1] The author, Dr. Ken Wilson, then goes on to say: "Evangelicals want to oust some Christians as [not being] 'true Christians' because they add works for final salvation. Roman Catholics, Calvinists, Ariminians [sic], and other Protestants all add works."[2] He concludes by saying: "Therefore, if all Roman Catholics are non-Christians, then so are all other Protestants (except those few believing in eternal security without works). That is the problem with 'faith alone in Christ alone' as a requirement for justification."[3]
I find these statements by Wilson quite surprising. I've grown up in Free Grace circles and I've never heard a Free Grace person say that it's a "problem" to require "faith alone in Christ alone" for justification. I hope I'm misunderstanding Wilson on that point, because if he truly views "faith alone in Christ alone" to be a "problem" as a requirement for justification, then how is that not heresy? Additionally, I'm not sure that I completely follow Wilson's logic; he seems to be equating (for all practical purposes) the Roman Catholic view of salvation with the Protestant view of salvation. But if that's true, I doubt there ever would have been a Protestant Reformation![4] Many of the Reformers died as martyrs for their beliefs; surely they never would have done so if their doctrine of salvation was essentially the same as the Roman Catholic Church. However, I want to make it clear that I'm not saying that "all Roman Catholics are non-Christians". I have personally met some Roman Catholics who were indeed born-again, they just didn't want to leave the Roman Catholic Church.
Ken Wilson then goes on to say: "Even Martin Luther did not believe the GES heresy that faith alone guarantees eternal security".[5] This is true, but Luther did believe in faith alone as a requirement for justification! So much so, in fact, that Luther added the word alleine ("alone") to his German translation of Romans 3:28: "Thus, we conclude that a man is justified without the deeds of the law, through faith alone." Thus, to borrow the question posed by Wilson in his book, we can ask: "Is Martin Luther, the father of the Protestant Reformation, in hell?"[6]
Three Free Grace Views
I should also point out that there are actually different views in the Free Grace camp on how "justification by faith alone" (sola fide) relates to the gospel message and to the content of saving faith. The three main FG views that I've seen are:
(1) The view of Bob Wilkin and the Grace Evangelical Society (GES). In their view, the apostle Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff is not the saving gospel message, and so even if Roman Catholics did believe it they would still not be saved until they believe in Jesus "as the guarantor of everlasting life to them."[7]
(2) The view of Ken Wilson, from his book Heresy of the Grace Evangelical Society. As I understand him, he says that the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff is the saving message (even though there is no explicit mention of "justification by faith alone"), and although Roman Catholics add in good works, they are nonetheless saved because they also have "faith". Apparently Wilson thinks that people can be saved (justified) by faith plus works! But according to the Bible this is not how a person is justified (see Rom. 3:28, 4:4-5, 11:6; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5).
(3) I would like to present a more balanced and biblical third option, namely: Paul's gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff is indeed the saving message (and works are excluded by the requirement to "receive"/"believe"), but many Roman Catholics don't truly believe it in the biblical sense of the word believe (which means reliance upon, not mere credence), and so unfortunately they are not saved. For example, if a person supposedly puts his or her "faith" in Christ, but is at the same time also trusting in their own good works for salvation (justification) – are they relying on Christ or on their own good works? The Bible says in Jeremiah 17:5: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes the arm of flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the Lord!" It is either one or the other: trust in man or trust in God; it cannot be both.[8] There is no room for a divided trust. (Notice I didn't say "a divided allegiance" such as a Lordship Salvationist might say. I'm talking about reliance or dependence, not allegiance.) According to the Bible, faith is being "fully persuaded" (Rom. 4:21) in God (not myself), and what He has said and done in Christ (in the gospel).[9] This is saving faith (see Romans 4:21-25).
Some Questions Answered
Question 1:
If 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 is the saving message, doesn't this mean that Roman Catholics are saved since they also believe this?
The Bible says that a person can be saved ("born-again") simply by believing the gospel message concerning the person and work of Christ (see Rom. 1:16; 1 Cor. 4:15, 15:3-5; 1 Pet. 1:23-25, KJV). But Roman Catholics and others who hold to works-salvation don't really believe that message. Belief is apart from works; it excludes works (see Rom. 3:28, 4:4-5, etc.). So, since they add-in works to the whole equation, they show that they don't really believe the gospel, at least not in the biblical sense. Thus, since faith alone is the sole condition for salvation, and they don't really believe in the biblical sense, how are they saved if they never believed? In other words, while many people intellectually agree with the facts of the gospel, they have never trusted in Christ alone for salvation. Lance B. Latham makes this same point in his book The Two Gospels, when he writes the following under the heading "Believe in Jesus" (p. 46): "Ask any Roman Catholic, 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ?' and he will answer, 'Of course.' Is this man therefore saved? The real question is, 'Where is your hope?' Are you DEPENDING upon Christ and what He has done at Calvary alone, or is your hope in penances performed, masses, baptism and so forth? This is not faith in Christ and His work; this is faith in YOUR own works, faithfulness to church, and therefore cannot SAVE!"
A Roman Catholic, for example, agrees with the gospel message and in their mind they "believe" it. But of course according to God's Word they don't really believe it in the biblical sense if they are at the same time believing that salvation is by faith plus works. So no, such a person is not saved if they haven't really believed the gospel in the biblical sense of the word "believe" (see Romans 4:4-5). Today we use the word "believe" quite broadly to basically mean: "Yes, I agree with that." But biblically, the way God uses the word "believe" in Romans 4:4-5 and similar Scriptures, it excludes works for salvation![10] Unfortunately Roman Catholics haven’t really believed the gospel in the biblical sense if they are still at least partly trusting in their good works for salvation.
To say that Romans Catholics are saved because they believe in Christ’s deity, death, and resurrection also seems quite ecumenical to me, because I would think that a lot of false religions also "believe" (at least to some extent) in the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They just add those things in with their other beliefs. So in my view, the point is not whether or not they agree with those three facts (the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus), but rather: Who are they trusting in for salvation? Is it Christ alone, or Christ plus something else? If they have never trusted in Christ alone for salvation then unfortunately they are not saved, even if they happen to agree with certain facts of the gospel (or even the gospel as a whole). If they never trusted in Christ alone, i.e., believed the gospel in the biblical sense (which means "apart from works"), then unfortunately they are still not saved (see Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12, 16:31).
Since people can believe in the deity, death, and resurrection of Christ without ever trusting Him as their personal Savior, the question needs to be asked: Who or what are these people trusting in for their salvation? Is it Christ alone or Christ plus? Maybe it's not even Christ at all! I mean, don't the demons even believe in the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus?[11] In other words, saving faith is more than someone giving mental assent (mere credence) to certain facts about Christ. We must also take into consideration the object(s) of their faith, and if it is really faith (in the biblical sense) that they have. Maybe it's not faith at all – at least not saving faith. Maybe (as I mentioned previously) they just agree with those historical facts but don't really trust in Christ alone for salvation.
Question 2:
Where is the message of faith alone in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4?
I would answer that question by pointing to two things. First, in regards to the content of the gospel, it says that Christ died for us ("for our sins"). This text says nothing about us dying for Him as is required by Lordship/Discipleship/Mastery Salvation.[12] Christ is the one doing all the work; we are just the recipients. I might add that Christ alone is the subject of all four verbs in the sentence: "Christ died...He was buried...He was raised...He was seen...." (vv. 3-5). William R. Newell (1868-1956), the Free Grace author from Moody Bible Institute, has well said: "The gospel is all about Christ. Apart from Him, there is no news from heaven but that of coming woe! Read that passage in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5: 'I make known unto you the gospel which I preached unto you: that Christ died, Christ was buried; Christ hath been raised; Christ was seen.' It is all about the Son of God!"[13]
The second point I want to make in answer to the question has to do with the one condition for salvation stated in the context, which is to receive/believe the gospel (see vv. 1-2). So this goes back to what I said above about how Roman Catholics who never trusted in Christ apart from works don't really believe the gospel in the biblical sense. All this has to do with the proper response to the gospel, which again, is stated in the context. This is not explicitly stated in the gospel itself, but the context clarifies that this is the proper response. And we must always understand the gospel in context, because as the saying goes: "A text without a context is a pretext for error."[14]
Question 3:
What does it mean to "believe" in the biblical sense?
I would like to quote the following statements from my article "Getting the Gospel Right" (in reference to the meaning of the word believe): "There is general agreement among Greek grammarians as to the meaning of the term believe (pisteuo). In his Greek-English lexicon Walter Bauer affirms: 'believe (in), trust of relig. belief in a special sense, as faith in the Divinity that lays special emphasis on trust in his power and his nearness to help, in addition to being convinced that he exists and that his revelations or disclosures are true. In our lit. God and Christ are objects of this faith.' (Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 661.) In the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Colin Brown gives a similar understanding of believe (pisteuo): 'The trusting acceptance and recognition of what God has done and promised in him [Christ].' (Colin Brown, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 4 Vols. 1:588.) Likewise, W. E. Vine writes: "pisteuo...'to believe,' also 'to be persuaded of,' and hence, 'to place confidence in, to trust,' signifies, in this sense of the word, reliance upon, not mere credence." (W. E. Vine, Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary, 61.) Lewis Sperry Chafer, quoting the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, affirms the following concerning faith (which is but a synonym for the verb believe): 'In conclusion, without trespassing on the ground of other articles, we call the reader's attention, for his Scriptural studies, to the central place of faith in Christianity, and its significance. As being, in its true idea, a reliance as simple as possible upon the word, power, love, of Another, it is precisely that which, on man's side, adjusts him to the living and merciful presence and action [i.e. person and work] of a trusted God. In its nature, not by any mere arbitrary arrangement, it is his one possible receptive attitude, that in which he brings nothing, so that he may receive all.' (Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, 4 Vols. 4:148.) By definition, belief is consistent with "grace" (1 Cor. 15:10-11; cf. Eph. 2:8-9). Thus it is clear that belief relies upon another, it trusts something as true, it eliminates obedience [as an added requirement], it excludes good works, it narrows the door."[15]
In regards to the question, "What Does it Mean to Believe?"[16], Ken Wilson affirms that faith is "confidence/reliance."[17] He goes on to say, "Faith that justifies does not require a special category of faith. It requires a special object. What God uses to justify a person by faith is the object of that faith. The object required for justification is Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Throughout Christianity this has been understood to mean that Jesus is God incarnate and Messiah/Savior from sin. To expand on this essential understanding, Jesus is the one and only God (YHWH) that the Old Testament promised would become a human in order to die for our sins as Savior so that we could enter an eternal relationship with God. This is faith alone in Christ alone."[18] This relates to the point I made above when I said: "Since people can believe in the deity, death, and resurrection of Christ without ever trusting Him as their personal Savior, the question needs to be asked: Who or what are these people trusting in [placing their faith in] for their salvation? Is it Christ alone or Christ plus?" If it is Christ plus something (such as one's own good works to merit salvation), then the object of that person's faith is no longer Christ alone. Therefore, such a person would not be saved, even according to Wilson.
Appendix 1:
LEWIS SPERRY CHAFER
ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROFESSION AND SALVATION
What did Lewis Sperry Chafer say in regards to the difference between profession and salvation?
In his Systematic Theology, Lewis Sperry Chafer writes the following under the heading "PROPHECY CONCERNING THE COURSE AND END OF APOSTATE CHRISTENDOM":
"In this age, when both Jew and Gentile programs are suspended, the gospel of divine grace is to be preached to every creature....As the gospel has been preached to the multitudes—the vast majority of whom have not received it...a by-product has been created which incorporates an unnumbered company who have been content to adopt certain Christian ideals but have never received Christ as their personal Savior. Many of this number have joined Protestant churches, or are reared under a Romish [i.e. a Roman Catholic] profession, or have merely subscribed to elementary Christian conceptions. This great company, including the true Church, is termed Christendom. Like the 'mixed multitude' which followed the camp of Israel, so the Church is accompanied by many who merely respect an ideal, but know not the transforming power of God in salvation....a mere profession which has been superficially moved, but not saved."[19]
Appendix 2:
CHARLES RYRIE
ON EVANGELICALS AND CATHOLICS TOGETHER
Did Charles Ryrie agree with the Roman Catholics on "the core beliefs of Christianity"?
Notice what Dr. Ryrie said in a 1998 graduation commencement speech for Multnomah University:
"Perhaps the documents 'Evangelicals and Catholics Together' in 1994 and 'The Gift of Salvation' in 1998 were a kind of climax to this [ecumenical] togetherness. It acknowledged yet-to-be resolved differences (small matters like the place of the sacraments, devotion to Mary, purgatory, etc.) but said that 'on the ancient creeds and the core beliefs of Christianity we stand together.' Not so. Certainly not on the core beliefs concerning the supreme and final authority of the Scriptures and justification by faith alone. Certainly there are born again Roman Catholics, and certainly it is often quite right to cooperate with those who differ theologically in standing for morality, but when the bases [basis] of cooperation for societal concerns seeks to be built on a common theological base, on common core beliefs, it becomes deceptive, and it can divert our attention from eternal things to temporary things. Focus your life on things that are eternal and always remember: it is better to be divided by truth than to be united in error."[20]
References:
[1] Kenneth Wilson, Heresy of the Grace Evangelical Society (NP: Regula Fidei Press, 2020), p. 133.
[2] Ibid., p. 133.
[3] Ibid., p. 134.
[4] More more information see the article by Dr. Charlie Bing titled: "The Reformation and the Gospel of Grace" (GraceNotes, Number 77).
[5] Kenneth Wilson, Heresy of the Grace Evangelical Society, pp. 134-135.
[6] Ibid. p. 135.
[7] Bob Wilkin and the Grace Evangelical Society have published numerous articles that set forth his views on this topic. For example, see the following articles: Wilkin, "Another Look at 1 Corinthians 15:3-11" (January 1, 2008), Grace in Focus; Wilkin, "Why Isn't Everyone in Christianity Born Again?" (March 18, 2021) GES blog; Wilkin, "What 'Gospel' Did Jesus Preach?" (January 3, 2022), GES blog; Wilkin, "What Is the Place of the Cross In Evangelism?" (February 21, 2022), GES blog. Also see the article by Jeremy D. Myers titled: "The Gospel is More than 'Faith Alone in Christ Alone'," Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 19 (Autumn 2006): 48.
[8] See Romans 3:28, 4:4-5, 11:6; Galatians 3:2; Ephesians 2:8-9. For more information see the excellent booklet by Dr. H. A. Ironside titled: Letters to a Roman Catholic Priest (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.), pp. 32-35.
[9] I remember reading an article years ago that was titled "ALMOST PERSUADED". The author made a point to say that one of the saddest statements in the Bible is when King Agrippa says to the apostle Paul in Acts 26:28: "You almost persuade me to be a Christian." King Agrippa was saying: "I'm almost persuaded to trust Christ." Think of it: "almost persuaded"! As the hymn writer has so well said:
"Almost" cannot avail;
"Almost" is but to fail!
Sad, sad that bitter wail—
"Almost"—but lost!
[10] Bob Wilkin seems to agree on this point. For more information see his blog post titled: "Works Salvation and the New Birth, Part 3" (February 15, 2021), GES blog. Note: This is not just a Free Grace view. In the article Wilkin quotes Douglas Moo, Leon Morris, and Robert H. Mounce in support on this particular point. For example, commenting on Romans 4:5, Leon Morris writes: "The believer's faith is credited as righteousness. This is not to regard it as a meritorious work; it is the very absence of all work, of all claim on God. Whereas systems of justification by works all look to the worshipper to produce the desired righteousness, Paul is speaking of a system that requires him to produce nothing. All he does is to reach out in faith for God's good gift." (Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 199, italics his.)
[11] See Matthew 8:29, 16:21-23; Mark 1:23-24, 1:34, 3:11-12; Luke 4:41; Acts 19:15-16; James 2:19. In regards to this, Bob Wilkin makes a good point when he says: "So, the demons are more orthodox than a lot of people who talk about 'demon faith'. They know the Bible well, and they know – remember when Satan is tempting Jesus, he's quoting Bible verses!" (Bob Wilkin, "What do the demons believe? What is demon faith?" YouTube [time stamp: 2:32 min. – 2:45 min.], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYXSOwT0gjM&t=152s)
[12] For example, in a sermon titled "Losing Your Life to Save It", John MacArthur (one of the leading Lordship Salvationists alive today) says: "When we come to [Mark] chapter 8, verses 34 to 38, we really come to the diamond for which the rest of the gospel is the setting. This is the jewel of the Gospel of Mark. If you could only hear one message in the Gospel of Mark, this would perhaps be the most important one that you could ever hear because it is the pinnacle of our Lord’s teaching, with regard to inviting sinners to come to Him. [Editor's Note: But actually Jesus says in verse 34: "If anyone wants to come after Me...."!] Here, in the text before us, are the words of our Lord to sinners, inviting them to come to Him for forgiveness, and blessing, and peace, and joy, and eternal life. This is our Lord’s own invitation. Those of us who’ve been in the church for any length of time are used to invitations. They have been a part of the church, at least in America, for many, many years. Perhaps today there will be thousands of invitations given across America in churches to sinners to come to Christ. However, I think I’m safe in saying that few of them will follow the pattern of our Lord’s own invitation.
Here is the standard; here is the archetypal invitation. Here’s the model for all invitations and one that is not always followed. Not only do preachers need to understand this invitation, but all believers do because we are all held responsible – aren’t we? – to be witnesses to Christ, to be evangels to declare the gospel, to proclaim it to sinners, and to invite them to salvation. You need to know this as well as I do. And so, it’s such an important portion of Scripture for us.
Here is the way to life. Here is the way to forgiveness. Here is the way to heaven. Here’s the way to joy and peace. Listen to our Lord’s words, starting in verse 34. “And He summoned the crowd with His disciples, and said to them, ‘If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it. For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.’” (John MacArthur, "Losing Your Life to Save It" [September 19, 2010], Grace to You website, www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/41-41/losing-your-life-to-save-it)
[13] William R. Newell, Romans Verse-By-Verse (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1994), p. 6. Note: This book was originally published in Chicago by Moody Press, © 1938.
[14] The word "pretext" is defined by Collins English Dictionary to mean: "a false reason or motive put forth to hide the real one; excuse, a cover-up; front".
[15] Jonathan Perreault, "Getting the Gospel Right," Free Grace Free Speech blog (October 31, 2009), https://freegracefreespeech.blogspot.com/2009/10/getting-gospel-right.html
[16] Kenneth Wilson, Heresy of the Grace Evangelical Society, p. 112. Note: In his book, Wilson's question is in bold print.
[17] Ibid., p. 113.
[18] Ibid., p. 114.
[19] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1976), 8 vols., vol. 4, pp. 352-353.
[20] Charles Ryrie, “Eternal Perspective”, Multnomah University graduation commencement speech (1998), p. 2. Note: See the link below.
https://ryrielibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Commencement_Eternal-Perspective_OCR.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment