Debunking Calvinism: Did the Snail Have to Persevere to Reach Heaven?

Debunk (verb): “to show that an idea, a belief, etc., is false; to show that something is not as good as people think it is” —Oxford English Dictionary

* * * 

The other day I was researching about the Calvinistic doctrine of “The Perseverance of the Saints” and I came across a statement by Charles Spurgeon that I’ve never seen before. It’s the statement when he says: “By perseverance the snail reached the ark.”[1]

At first glance, the quip about the snail reaching the ark might seem to support Calvinism, specifically in reference to the Calvinistic doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. After all, it must have taken perseverance for the snail to reach the ark, right? But as I thought more about it, I realized that in reality it doesn't support “The Perseverance of the Saints” but actually argues strongly against it! The quote does have a superficial plausibility until you think about it for five minutes and realize that it doesn’t hold up biblically to what the Bible teaches. 

What do I mean? Think about it: if the snail by perseverance reached the ark, then in order to support the Calvinistic doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, the ark would have to represent the end of the Christian life. But biblically, the ark doesn’t represent the end of the Christian life, but the beginning! The ark is a picture of Christ and the salvation He provides to those who are under the sentence of judgment. Therefore, the quote simply shows that God “is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). Spurgeon even affirms this. For example, in his article titled “The Ark: A Type of Christ’s Salvation,” Spurgeon concludes by saying: “the ark receives all who come!”[2] And in another sermon Spurgeon says: 

“The story of Noah’s preservation [notice that Spurgeon doesn’t say “perseverance of the saints” but instead he says “preservation”] in the ark, is a suggestive representation of salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ. It is, we think, especially intended to depict that part of our salvation which lies in the washing of regeneration.”[3] 

This is true! When a sinner first believes in Christ for salvation, he or she is placed “in Christ” and is thus kept safe from God’s wrath and judgment that is coming on the unsaved (see Rom. 8:1). 

Walter L. Wilson also affirms that the ark is a type of salvation in Christ, specifically picturing “His Calvary experience....by which we are saved.” Notice what Wilson says in his classic book Wilson’s Dictionary of Bible Types, under the heading “Ark” (Gen. 6:14-18): 

“This boat may be taken as a type of the Lord Jesus in His Calvary experience. As the ark was under the deluge of the downpouring rain, so the Lord Jesus suffered under the rolling billows of God’s terrible wrath. This experience of Christ He calls a baptism in Luke 12:50. As those who were in the ark were saved from drowning, so those who are in Christ Jesus are saved from the wrath of God. It is the baptism of the Lord Jesus under God’s anger and wrath, as described in 1 Pet. 3:20-21, by which we are saved. We are saved by baptism, but it is Jesus’ baptism, and not ours.”[4] 

So this is why I say that the statement “By perseverance the snail reached the ark” really argues against the Calvinistic “Perseverance of the Saints” doctrine, because it shows that from the very first moment of entering into the Ark, the sinner is safe and secure! In other words, whoever is in the ark can have assurance of salvation from the very moment he or she first enters! They are safe the very moment they enter the Ark. They don’t have to wait to be safe; they don’t have to persevere to be safe. Actually, Spurgeon even affirms this! Notice what he says in his sermon titled “Waiting Changed for Believing”:

“Christ has built the ark for us, we have nothing to do with building that; but when was Noah saved? Does any one say, ‘He was safe after he had been in the ark a month and had arranged all the things and looked out on the deluge and felt his danger’? No! the moment Noah went through the door, and the Lord shut him in, Noah was safe. When he had been in the ark a second he was as secure as when he had been there a month.”[5] 

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying that Christians shouldn’t persevere, indeed we should (see 2 Pet. 1:5-9): but not in the Calvinistic sense of “The Perseverance of the Saints” doctrine that teaches that true faith will persevere until the end in order to reach Heaven. No! True faith is true faith because of one look at the Savior, not because of a lifetime of perseverance! Spurgeon even affirms as much when he says in the same sermon: “there is life in a look at Jesus”![6] 

 
There is life for a look at the Crucified One. 

There is life at this moment for you! 

Then look, sinner, look unto Him and be saved! 

Look unto Him who was nailed to the tree.

Look! look! look and live! 

There is life for a look at the Crucified One, 

There is life at this moment for thee.[7]

APPENDIX 1

The Meaning of Matthew 24:13: 

“But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.”

In regards to the meaning of Matthew 24:13, I’d like to begin with an excellent quote by Dr. Thomas Ice of the Pre-Trib Research Center. The following statements by Dr. Ice are from his article titled “An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25”. The footnote citations (numbers 9, 10, and 11) are from the original article. Commenting on Matthew 24:13, Dr. Ice writes the following:

The exact meaning and implications of “the one who endures to the end, he shall be saved,” is a hotly debated passage. Some use this passage to teach a Christian doctrine known as [“]the perseverance of the saints.” While others believe that it refers to a physical deliverance. I hold to the latter position, primarily because it is the only view that makes sense in this specific context. 

The first issue that must be dealt with in this matter is the meaning of the term “saved.” Because the word “saved” is used in the New Testament to refer to the time when one becomes a Christian (the moment of justification as in), many just plug that meaning into this passage. The leading Greek lexicon of our days says that the basic meaning of this word is “save, keep from harm, preserve, rescue.”⁹ [“William F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 805.”] This word can be used in relation to the doctrine of salvation (Matthew 1:21; Acts 16:31; 1 Corinthians 1:18; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 1:19; Titus 3:5; etc.), or it can simply refer to physical deliverance or rescue (Matthew 8:25; 14:30; 27:49; Acts 27:31; Hebrews 5:7; Jude 1:5; etc.). The exact nuance is determined by its context. “The problem begins with the superficial hermeneutic of giving ‘saved’ the same meaning in every context, which is not true of any word,” declares Glasscock. “Words have no specific meaning apart from context. Here, ‘saved’ (sozo) means basically to ‘deliver’ or to ‘rescue’—from what and in what manner is dependent upon the context.”¹⁰ [“Glasscock, Matthew, p. 466.”] 

Many commentaries on this passage fail to consider the contextual factors before they start sermonizing on endurance in the Christian life. They make this into a passage that teaches the Christian doctrine of endurance, even though it is not supported by the specific factors in the text.¹¹ [“An example of one who turns this passage into a sermon on Christian endurance is found in John MacArthur, The New Testament Commentary: Matthew 24-28 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1989), pp. 28-29.”] Truly, there is a Christian doctrine of endurance taught in the Epistles (Romans 12:12; 1 Corinthians 13:7; 2 Timothy 2:10, 12; Hebrews 12:3, 7; James 1:12; 5:11; 1 Peter 2:20). This doctrine teaches that one of the many character qualities that believer is to have is endurance. Why is this so? It is true because endurance under suffering produces character (Romans 5:3-4). Yet, none of those references to the Christian doctrine of endurance speak of “enduring to the end.” Instead, passages that speak of enduring to the end all occur within the same context—the tribulation (Matthew 10:22; 24:13; Mark 13:13; Luke 21:19; Revelation 13:10; 14:12).[8]

Contrary to what the Calvinists want us to believe, Matthew 24:13 does not support the doctrine of “The Perseverance of the Saints” and here’s why. First of all (as Dr. Ice has pointed out), look at the context of Matthew chapter 24. It has to do with Israel (not the church) and Christ’s return to the earth after the Tribulation (see Matt. 24:20-21, 29-30). Matthew 24:1 says, “And Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when his disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him.” The Jewish temple was for the Jews under the Law, not for the church in the dispensation of grace! J. Vernon McGee has well said: “You see, back in the Old Testament [under the dispensation of Law], they brought a little lamb [to the temple]. And I’m sure you don’t take a little lamb to church to sacrifice. Today it would be sinful to do that [because it would be like trampling underfoot the Son of God and regarding as unclean His once-for-all sacrifice on the cross, Heb. 10:29]. But back then, before Christ came, it was required; the Law required it.”[9] In Matthew chapter 24, Jesus is answering the disciples’ question about the end of the age (v. 3), that is, the end of the Law age related to the nation of Israel. This has to do with the 70 “weeks” (or seventy units of seven years) spoken of through Daniel the prophet (Matt. 24:15; cf. Daniel 9:24-27): “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the wrongdoing, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy Place” (Dan. 9:24). Prophetically speaking, the first 69 “weeks” have already taken place; there is but one more “week” remaining: the coming seven-year Tribulation. This is the context of Matthew chapter 24. It is related to Israel's 70th “week”, the seven-year Tribulation period: “the time of Jacob's trouble” (Jer. 30:7). It is in this context that Jesus says in Matthew 24:13: “But the one who endures to the end, he shall be saved.” This statement is pertaining to those who are left behind after the Rapture of the church. Jesus is saying that those Israelites (notice the reference to the “Sabbath” in v. 20) who persevere to the end of the Great Tribulation will be saved, i.e. physically delivered. The word “saved” in verse 13 is in reference to physical deliverance. Jesus uses the word “saved” again in Matthew 24:22 in the same way, as meaning physical deliverance: “And unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect [i.e. Israel] those days shall be cut short.” John F. Walvoord, the second president of Dallas Theological Seminary, affirms this interpretation of Matthew 24:13. Walvoord writes: 

“those that endure to the end (Mt 24:13), that is, survive the tribulation and are still alive, will be saved, or delivered, by Christ at His second coming. This is not a reference to salvation from sin, but rather the deliverance of survivors at the end of the age as stated, for instance, in Romans 11:26, where the Deliverer will save the nation Israel from its persecutors. Many, of course, will not endure to the end, in the sense that they will be martyred, even though they are saved by faith in Christ, and the multitude of martyrs is mentioned in Revelation 7:9-17.”[10]

In conclusion, I agree with Dr. Charlie Bing of GraceLife Ministries when he says in regards to Matthew 24:13: “This passage should never be used to teach a doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints.”[11]

References:

[1] Charles Spurgeon, The Salter-Cellars: Being a Collection of Proverbs (New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1889), p. 89. Note: In quoting the proverb about the snail reaching the ark, Spurgeon apparently was not trying to illustrate the Calvinistic doctrine of “The Perseverance of the Saints”. This becomes clear in light of the fact that immediately after quoting the proverb, Spurgeon goes on to write: “No doubt the snails start early, and by keeping on they entered the ark and were saved as surely as the greyhounds.” So according to Spurgeon, entering the ark was a picture of salvation. In other words, Spurgeon wasn’t saying that the snail had to persevere after that in order to get to heaven. Other Calvinists have used the proverb that way, but Spurgeon did not. Thus, the proverb about the snail reaching the ark simply highlights the biblical truth that: “The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9, NIV). This is not to say that Spurgeon didn’t believe in the Calvinistic doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. Indeed he did! For example, see his sermon titled “Enduring to the End” (Sermon 554), which is based on Matthew 10:22. It should be noted that the context of Matthew 10:22 is similar to that of Matthew 24:13. Both passages are related to the Jew and pertain to physical deliverance. For more information see Appendix 1: The Meaning of Matthew 24:13 (above).

[2] Charles Spurgeon, Flashes of Thought; Being One Thousand Choice Extracts (London: 1874), p. 11.

[3] Charles Spurgeon, “The Rainbow.” The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, June 28, 1863.

[4] Walter L. Wilson, Wilson's Dictionary of Bible Types (London: Pickering & Inglis, 1958), p. 33.

[5] Charles Spurgeon, Sermons of the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1883), pp. 240-241. Note: The quote is excerpted from Spurgeon’s sermon titled: “Jesus at Bethesda; or Waiting Changed for Believing”.

[6] Ibid., p. 242.

[7] Amelia M. Hull, “There is Life for a Look” (circa 1832). See Isaiah 45:22; compare Number 21:4-9 with John 3:14-17.

[8] Thomas D. Ice, “An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25” (2009). Article Archives. 2.

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/pretrib_arch/2 

[9] J. Vernon McGee, Romans: Chapter 1-8 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1991), p. 72, comment on Romans 3:25-26. Note: Reprint. Originally published: Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 1975.

[10] John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come, comment on Matthew 24:13. 

[11] Charlie Bing, “The Salvation of Those Who Endure to the End in Matthew 24:13” (GraceNotes, Number 61). https://www.gracelife.org/resources/gracenotes/pdf/gracenotes61.pdf

Where Did the Thief on the Cross Get His Assurance?

Calvinists tell us that we have to look at our lives and look to our good works for assurance of salvation. Salvation is not a sure thing for them because they never know if they have been good enough to make it. But did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he must go and do good works for assurance of salvation? Did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he couldn't have assurance because there was no time for him to reform his life and establish “some patterns of conduct”[1] as evidence of being born again? Did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he had to “continue in the faith”[2] in order to have assurance of salvation? Did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that assurance is secured by “keeping His commandments”?[3] Did Jesus make fruit-bearing a basis for assurance? Did Jesus say that a change in life was required? Did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that assurance of salvation “comes from various kinds of evidence in a person's life”?[4] The answer to all these questions is: “No!” In other words, Jesus gave none of the Calvinistic requirements for assurance of salvation! Let that sink in. But what did Jesus say? Jesus gave the thief on the cross a simple promise: “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43, NKJV). That was the assurance given to the thief on the cross. So the thief's assurance of salvation was based on the promise of Jesus, not looking at his own life nor to his good works. In other words, the thief on the cross got assurance of salvation by “looking unto Jesus” (Heb. 12:2) and taking God at His Word! 

* * * 

Charlie Bing of GraceLife Ministries has well said: “What did the thief on the cross promise Jesus when he said, ‘Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom’? And Jesus replied, ‘Today you will be with Me in paradise.’ Could the thief walk an aisle? No, his feet were fastened to a cross. Could he raise his hand? No, his hands were tied or nailed to the cross. Could he be baptized? No, the cross would have floated. Did he promise Jesus anything? No. Did Jesus demand anything of him? No. Salvation by grace through faith means there is hope for a dying man, for someone who can do nothing for himself.”[5]

Even John MacArthur has admitted: “How did the thief on the cross know he was saved? He had the Lord’s own promise.”[6]

References:

[1] Wayne Grudem, “Free Grace” Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel (Wheaton: Crossway Publishers, 2016), p. 79.

[2] Ibid., p. 89.

[3] Ibid., p. 91.

[4] Ibid., p. 89, emphasis his.

[5] Charlie Bing, “Why Lordship Faith Misses the Mark for Salvation” (Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Spring 1999).

[6] John MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus, Revised and Expanded Anniversary Edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), p. 272.

Finding Assurance

In order to gain assurance of salvation, Calvinists mainly focus on the outward effects of their faith and whether or not they have lived a good enough life, and that is where they try to find "assurance". The following statement by John Piper is typical of Calvinists when he says, "we persevere. That is the way we have assurance."[1] Not surprisingly, Calvinists can never say with 100% certainty in this life if they're really saved or not because according to their belief system, they have to wait until they die before they can find out if they really persevered to the end and finally made it to heaven. But of course by then it's too late! What if you thought you were saved because you thought there was fruit in your life, but then after death you come to find out that you never really trusted in Christ alone for salvation. There are no second chances after death. The Bible says: "it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:27). 

In contrast to Calvinism, the Bible makes it clear that we can have real assurance of our salvation right now! The apostle John says: "These things I write to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life" (1 John 5:13). We can have a "know so" salvation, not a "hope so" salvation. In fact, the Bible tells us that faith is the assurance! Commenting on Hebrews 11:1, W. H. Griffith Thomas writes: "It is important to notice that this verse is not a definition of faith in itself, but only a description of its effects. The word 'is' is emphatic. Faith is described in a two-fold way. It is the foundation of things hoped for, and the 'conviction (or proof) of things not seen.' The word rendered 'substance' or 'foundation' indicates that faith must have a basis—the Word of God. And so the vital question is not 'Do we believe?' but 'Whom do we believe?' It is not a case of sincerity of belief, but of the truth of what is believed....It will be seen throughout the chapter that faith is not passive but active certitude".[2] In other words, faith is being absolutely certain that what God says in His Word is true. The Bible says, "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God" (Rom. 10:17).

But Calvinists have a different focus. For example, in his book "Free Grace" Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel, Wayne Grudem seems to make good works the benchmark of salvation and the basis for assurance. Grudem's focus is not on God's Word, but on himself; that's how he gains assurance: by looking at himself. That's why he asks, "How do I know that I have believed and that I have been born again?"[3] What Grudem is saying is that in his view, the only way to have any real assurance of salvation is to look at your life and see if there are any positive changes after you got saved (or supposedly got saved), and if there are, then he says you can have some measure of assurance that you're saved. In response to Grudem's question, my first thought is that if you have to ask that question, maybe you haven't been born again! Maybe you never did believe. So one possibility is that Grudem may not be born again. Even Grudem would have to admit that this is a possibility according to his theological viewpoint, because as I mentioned, he thinks that people can't really know for sure they're saved until they die. In regards to this, someone has wisely said: "If you don't know you're saved, how can I know you're saved?" As the Scripture says, "For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of a man that is in him" (1 Cor. 2:11). 

I like how D. L. Moody responded whenever someone would say, "I can't believe." (Maybe we could update the statement to say, "I can't believe that I'm saved.") Mr. Moody would ask: "Believe whom?"[4] And so in answer to Grudem's question, "How do I know that I have believed?", I would ask: "Believed whom?" Notice that W. H. Griffith Thomas made the same point in his statement above! He said that "the vital question is not 'Do we believe?' but 'Whom do we believe?' It is not a case of sincerity of belief, but of the truth of what is believed."[5] And so this shows again that the real question is: "Believed whom?" That changes the focus of the original question, doesn't it? It takes the focus off myself and puts the focus on something or someone outside of myself. And biblically, that is where the focus of our faith should be: not on ourselves, but on Christ! We need to take our focus off ourselves and turn our eyes upon Jesus! The Bible says that we need to be "looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith" (Heb. 12:2). In the Gospels, what happened to Peter when he tried to walk on the water but then took his eyes off the Lord? Peter began to sink! Likewise, when we take our eyes off Jesus we too will begin to sink into doubts and despair. The Bible says that Christ has been made unto us our "righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption" (1 Cor. 1:30). We have God's Word on it, and that is where our assurance is found. In other words, our assurance is based first and foremost on God's Word, knowing that what He says in His Word is true. Or in the words of W. H. Griffith Thomas, faith is having an "active certitude" or an absolute certainty that what God says in His Word is true.

Saving faith looks outside of ourselves to Christ. Whereas doubt focuses back on ourselves or in some way takes the focus off of Christ and His promise of Eternal Life. We need to "turn our eyes upon Jesus and look full in His wonderful face!"[6] H. A. Ironside affirms: "And now the One who is alive forevermore (Rev. 1:18) is presented as an object for the hearts of His own. 'He was seen' [1 Cor. 15:5, KJV]; and the same apostle exclaims, in another place, 'We see Jesus!' (Heb. 2:9). Poor sinners are first led to see the utter impossibility of improving or rendering themselves more fit for God's presence. The eye of faith is then directed to the One who died, in whom believing, they are 'justified from all things' (Acts 13:38, 39). Now they have also an object for the heart, even Christ in glory (2 Cor. 3:18). How different this from what you [the unbeliever] have presented! Here, '’Tis Jesus first, ’tis Jesus last, ’Tis Jesus all the way,' while you are cast entirely on yourself."[7]

Calvinists lack assurance because they are focusing on themselves when they should be focusing on CHRIST! 

References:

[1] John Piper, "What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism" (March 1, 1985), www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-we-believe-about-the-five-points-of-calvinism

[2] W. H. Griffith Thomas, Hebrews: A Devotional Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977), p. 141, ellipsis added. Note: Notice that Griffith Thomas says that "faith is not passive but active certitude". (Ibid.) This is very important to point out because Calvinists oftentimes take the position that faith is passive in the sense that they view faith as a gift of God. They typically cite Ephesians 2:8 in support of their view that faith is a gift of God. But Greek scholars such as Daniel B. Wallace reject this view.  In reference to the word "faith" in Ephesians 2:8, Wallace says that "it is not a gift per se". (See Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp. 334-335.) Nonetheless, it is still a popular viewpoint among Calvinists. In regards to faith supposedly being the gift of God, D. L. Moody has wisely said: "Faith is taking God at His Word; and those people who want some token are always getting into trouble. We want to come to this: GOD SAYS IT—LET US BELIEVE IT. But some say, Faith is the gift of God. So is the air; but you have to breathe it. So is bread; but you have to eat it. So is water; but you have to drink it. Some are wanting a miraculous kind of feeling. That is not faith. 'Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God' (Rom. 10. 17). That is whence faith comes. It is not for me to sit down and [passively] wait for faith to come stealing over me with a strange sensation; but it is for me to [actively] take God at His Word." (Moody, The Way to God, p. 51, emphasis his, brackets added.)

[3] Wayne Grudem, "Free Grace" Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel (Wheaton: Crossway, 2016), p. 89, emphasis his.

[4] D. L. Moody, "Mr. Moody on Believing." The Institute Tie (September 1900), Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 151.

[5] W. H. Griffith Thomas, Hebrews: A Devotional Commentary, p. 141.

[6] Helen Howarth Lemmel, "Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus" hymn (1922), adapted.

[7] H. A. Ironside, The Mormon’s Mistake, or What Is the Gospel?, p. 5.

DTS Doctrinal Statement on Assurance of Salvation

I want to thank Dr. Andy Woods of Sugarland Bible Church for pointing this out in one of his recent sermons. Notice what he says:

See: DTS Doctrinal Statement Article XI—Assurance Slide 

These doctrines that I’m teaching – people have never heard them before because the bad doctrine is so prevalent that they think that what I’m teaching is some kind of new thing. No. if you were to go back into the 1920’s, when Dallas Seminary was founded roughly in 1929, you would see that the doctrines I’m proclaiming here were in the majority. Here is the Dallas Seminary doctrinal statement, Article 11 on the assurance of salvation. Notice what they say: 

“We believe it is the privilege, not only of some, but of all by the Spirit through faith who are born again in Christ as revealed in the Scriptures, to be assured of their salvation from the very day [look at that] they take Him to be their Savior and that this assurance is not founded upon any fancied discovery of their own worthiness or fitness, but wholly upon the testimony of God in His written Word,…” 

The Word of God is what will never lie to you; it is objectively true; like the compass in a vehicle; you can feel you are driving the right or the wrong way, but the compass is objectively true. You can feel like you are saved one day and unsaved on another day, but God’s Word is objectively true; God cannot lie; God told you are saved the moment that you trusted Christ as your Savior. You can have that assurance of salvation not getting to the end of your life wondering ‘Do you have enough good works to prove that your faith was authentic on the front end?’ But you can have that assurance of salvation from the very day, the very moment in time that you trust in Christ. Now you say, ‘Well, what about other experiences that people have, I mean, you ask your average Christian today how do you know you are saved? Well, I have a renewed interest in prayer. Well, I have a renewed interest in Bible study; I have a desire to share my faith; I didn’t have any of those desires before, but now that I’m a Christian, I have those desires, so aren’t those desires and new experiences proof that I am a Christian?’ Notice what Lewis Sperry Chafer says, “There is a normal Christian experience. There are new and blessed emotions and desires. Old things do pass away; and behold all things do become new; but all such experiences are but secondary evidences, as to the fact of salvation, in that they grow out of that positive repose of faith which is the primary evidence.” [Chafer, Salvation, p. 82 in the 1917 edition.]

I mean, having a desire to share your faith, to pray, to study the Bible – those are wonderful things that God does, but those are not the ultimate proof that you are going to heaven. Chafer calls them ‘secondary evidences.’ ‘Primary evidence’ is what? It is what God said about you. It is a promise that God made you the moment you placed your faith in Christ alone for salvation. That is how you can go to your grave with joy and courage. Because you have built your life on the promises of God, and you’re not introspectively always looking at yourself, ‘Did I have [an] up week or a down week? Am I close to God today or far away from Him?’ Those things come and go with life, and we should pay attention to those things in terms of our productivity, reward once we get to heaven, but they’re no evidence in a primary sense of whether you are going to heaven or not.[1]

This is so true, and this is why on my “Free Grace Ministries” page (on my blog) I said that I’m including Dallas Theological Seminary on this page because it was originally a Free Grace school. Unfortunately it’s not anymore, but originally it was. It was founded by Lewis Sperry Chafer, a well-know Free Grace advocate. Some might say that Lewis Sperry Chafer is the founder of Free Grace Theology, but Jesus Christ is the real founder (see Jn. 1:14-17; cf. Eph. 2:20), and then the apostle Paul who said, “Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24).[2] 

I also like how Chafer says that the “new and blessed emotions and desires” in the life of a Christian “are but secondary evidence, as to the fact of salvation, in that they grow out of that positive repose of faith which is the primary evidence.”[3] I made the same point a few years ago here on my blog. Commenting on an article by J. Vernon McGee on assurance titled “How You Can Have the Assurance of Salvation,” I wrote the following:

McGee goes on to list “some things that are evidence of salvation.” These evidences include a desire to obey God, reality in prayer, love for the brethren, and a consciousness of being God’s child. I agree that these things can be evidences of salvation, but I believe they are secondary evidences. They are not the main evidence of our salvation. The main evidence of our salvation is what God says in His Word: all the “great and precious promises” of God! For example, Jesus says in John 5:24, “Truly, truly I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life, and shall not come into condemnation, but has passed from death unto life.” And similarly, in John 6:37 Jesus says, “whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” It’s important to remember that ultimately my assurance needs to be based on God’s promises, not on my performance, and not on my feelings. As Martin Luther said, “Feelings come and feelings go, and feelings are deceiving, my warrant is the Word of God, naught else is worth believing.” I do believe that all Christians will bear fruit “sometime, somewhere, somehow” (as Charles Ryrie has said in his book So Great Salvation). The apostle Paul says that at the Christian's judgment (which is for reward, not salvation), “every man will have praise from God” (1 Cor. 4:5). But as I said, I believe these (i.e. fruits in the Christian life) are secondary evidences of salvation, not the primary evidence of salvation. 

We need to take our focus off ourselves and turn our eyes upon Jesus! The Bible says that we need to be “looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith” (Heb. 12:2). In the Gospels, what happened to Peter when he tried to walk on the water but took his eyes off the Lord? Peter began to sink! Likewise, when we take our eyes off Jesus we too will begin to sink into doubts and despair. The Bible says that Christ has been made unto us our righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption (1 Cor. 1:30). We have God’s Word on it, and that is where our assurance is found![4]

 

References:

[1] Andy Woods, “James 012 - Faith Without Works is Dead? Part 1” (January 13, 2021), emphasis and first brackets his (https://slbc.org/sermon/james-012-faith-without-works-is-dead-pt-1/).

[2] For more information see the article by Bob Nyberg titled “A History of Free Grace”. Note: Bob Nyberg’s article is available in the Grace Research Room on the gracelife.org website (https://www.gracelife.org/resources/grr/?id=31).

[3] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Salvation, p. 82 in the 1917 edition.

[4] Jonathan Perreault, comment under the blog post “I Never Knew You” (FGFS, July 6, 2019), Free Grace Free Speech blog, bold added (https://freegracefreespeech.blogspot.com/2019/07/i-never-knew-you.html).

"GOD LOVES ME!" | by Hugh Henry Snell

“MANY persons entirely mistake the Gospel. They imagine that God is now demanding something of them—that they have something to do, in order to be saved. At least, they think they must love God before He can regard them with complacency [i.e. the love of complacence, or loving what is beautiful or morally excellent; loving those who love Him]. They do not see that the Gospel is the very opposite to this; that it is a declaration of God’s love to man, and that God in it brings to them, just as they are, every thing they need for present peace and eternal blessing, through our Lord Jesus Christ. There is nothing for the sinner to do; first, because he cannot do any thing acceptable to God—‘they that are in the flesh cannot please God;’ and secondly, because Jesus has done it all. 

The thought that we must love God, to be saved, instead of being saved solely because God loves us, clings most tenaciously to fallen nature; but nothing short of seeing God’s love to us in the cross of Christ, even when we were dead in sins, can give peace. 

A gentleman, after living in sin for many years, in companionship with many others, heard that the ringleader of the party was converted. All were sorry to lose such a jovial friend, and marveled that he could be such a fool as to be religious. Still he was very decided, and went to his old associates one by one to speak to them of the salvation he had found in a crucified Saviour. There was one, however, that he passed over. It was this very gentleman of whom I am speaking, and he felt it much. This led him to reflect, and soon he began to realize the unsatisfying character of the pleasures of sin, and to feel that he too had a soul. He read his Bible, but could get no comfort. He thought that he had something to do, and that he never accomplished what he wished. One day, however, he met his old friend, who said to him, ‘Do you ever read your Bible?’ ‘Yes, I do,’ he replied; ‘but I cannot get comfort out of it—I cannot love God.’ ‘No,’ said his friend, ‘nor could I; but the blessed truth is, that God loves me,’ and then wished him good-morning. 

‘God loves me?’ ‘God loves me?’ thought the gentleman to himself—what can he mean? But before he reached home that day, the thought of God having given His only-begotten Son to die on the cross to save sinners flashed upon his soul with divine, living light. Now, thought he, I see it. I see now that God loves me as a sinner. Yes, God so loves me as to save me; and his whole soul was filled with joy and peace. 

So it is as the Apostle John declares, ‘Herein is love; not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.’ This enables us to love and serve God; for ‘we love Him because He first loved us.’ It is here the heart finds real joy, gathers up strength for service, and gives glory to God.”

“He saw me ruined in the fall, 

Yet loved me notwithstanding all; 

He saved me from my low estate, 

His loving-kindness, oh! How great.” 

H. H. S.

Reference: 

H. H. S., “GOD LOVES ME!” James Inglis, Editor, The Witness (May 1869), p. 84, italics his. Note: The Witness was a Plymouth Brethren monthly publication of the late 19th century. The author of this article (“H. H. S.”) is likely Hugh Henry Snell.

Must Saving Faith Include Love?

I recently purchased John Piper's new book What Is Saving Faith? I bought it because I want to read it and write a book review on it from a Free Grace perspective. I took the book out of the packaging and began to flip through some of the pages. A few of Piper's statements really puzzled me because I know they're contrary to what the Bible actually teaches. For example, commenting on 2 Thessalonians 2:10, Piper says: "In 2:10, people perish because they do not 'love the truth.'"[1] After a few comments, Piper goes on to elaborate by saying: "Paul is saying that people perish not only because they do not love the truth, but also because they do not want to love the truth."[2] Piper then asks this question: "would it not be right to say that saving faith includes a love for the truth, the gospel?"[3] Piper goes on to answer this question by saying: "So Paul again [in v. 12], as in verse 10, calls attention to the affectional nature of saving faith. It includes a love of the truth, the gospel."[4] But is this what the apostle Paul is saying? Let's take a closer look. 

Notice first what Dean Henry Alford (a leading New Testament Greek scholar from the 19th century) has written on 2 Thessalonians 2:10. Alford writes: 

"those who are perishing (on their way to perdition), (WHY? not by God’s absolute decree, but) because (in requital for this, that) they did not (when it was offered to them) receive the love of the truth (the opposite of the ψεῦδος ["lie"] which characterizes all the working of the man of sin: see as before, Joh 8:44) in order to their being saved."[5]

I mention these comments by Henry Alford because Reformed theologians (such as John Piper, for example) commonly teach that people must love God in order to be saved.[6] But that's not what the Bible teaches. The gospel is not about us loving God, but rather it's about God loving us! Romans 5:8 says, "But God demonstrates His own love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." The truth of the Gospel is that "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but has everlasting life" (John 3:16). Commenting on John 3:16, R. A. Torrey affirms: "We are not saved because we love God; we are saved because God loves us."[7] This is what the apostle Paul is talking about in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 when he says that "they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved" (NASB). In other words, people are perishing because "they did not receive" (v. 10) the gospel message of God's love. 

The New International Version (the NIV) and the English Standard Version (the ESV) really "drop the ball" (mishandle the text) in their translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:10. For example, the NIV says, "They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved." Notice that in the NIV, the word "love" is an infinitive verb. It says: "they refused to love" (v. 10b, NIV). But in the Greek, the word "love" is actually a noun![8] In Greek it is tēn agapēn, meaning "the love" (as in the KJV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB, the 1901 ASV, the 1885 Revised Version, Young's literal translation, Tyndale's translation, etc.). The word "love" is a noun in the accusative case in the Greek, signifying that love is the direct object, not a verb. Thus, Paul is not describing something the unsaved must do, but rather he's describing something they must receive, i.e. the gospel message of God's love. Commenting on 2 Thessalonians 2:10b, Leon Morris affirms: "They did not receive that truth of God which is expressed in the love that brought about the gospel."[9] I like how the NET Bible translates 2 Thessalonians 2:10. It says that people "are perishing, because they found no place in their hearts for the truth so as to be saved." 2 Thessalonians 2:10 in Mounce's Reverse Interlinear translation reads similarly. It says that people "are perishing, because they did not accept the love of the truth so as to be saved." In other words, "[they] are perishing, because they did not accept" the gospel message.[10] But of course Piper loves to quote the ESV (a favorite among Reformed theologians) and he takes that ball and runs with it! Unfortunately, Piper doesn't realize that the ESV "dropped the ball" in their translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:10, and therefore whatever points he may score from his use of the ESV will be of none effect because it's not what the Greek text actually says.

Appendix 1: 

What about the "objective genitive" in 2 Thessalonians 2:10?

If we understand "the love of the truth" (2 Thess. 2:10) as an objective genitive, then the phrase could be translated "the love in the truth".[11] In other words, in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 the apostle Paul is saying that unbelievers will perish because they did not accept the love of God demonstrated "in" the gospel! A similar example of the objective genitive is found in Luke 11:29: "the sign of Jonah" means "the sign shown in Jonah". Concerning this, A. T. Robertson affirms: "So το σημειον Ίωνα (Lu. 11:29) may be the sign shown in Jonah".[12] Thus in 2 Thessalonians 2:10, "the love of the truth" may be understood to mean "the love shown in the truth"—i.e., the love shown in the gospel. What is the love shown in the gospel? Is it our love for God or rather His love for us? The apostle Paul says: "But God demonstrates Him own love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). Likewise, the apostle John (the apostle of love) writes: "In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent His only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins" (1 Jn. 4:9-10). 

Appendix 2: 

What about loving God in John 3:19? 

Somebody might respond by saying, "Doesn't Jesus say in John chapter 3, 'And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil.' Doesn't this show that a person has to love God in order to be saved?" 

No, not at all. Notice that Jesus doesn't say, "And this is the way to heaven." But what does He say? Look at the text. He says, "And this is THE JUDGMENT, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil" (Jn. 3:19). This is simply a description of those who reject Christ. In the words of the prophet Isaiah: "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness" (Isaiah 5:20). Commenting on John 3:19, Donald Grey Barnhouse affirms: "Men love the state of darkness. Their works are malicious. They practice worthless living. They hate the light. They refuse to come to the light. They fear exposure. This is a terrible indictment of the unregenerate heart of man. (See Jer. 17:9.)"[13]

Read John chapter 3. Nowhere in the whole chapter does Jesus say that salvation is obtained by loving Him (although this should follow after a person is saved, but it does not always do so in proper measure), but rather Jesus emphasizes that salvation is GIVEN to the one who believes in Him (see John 3:12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 36). Eternal life is given to those who "believe"! 

William R. Newell has rightly said: "To preach devotion first [i.e. love God to be saved], and blessing second, is to reverse God's order, and preach law [see Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:36-40], not grace. The Law made man's blessing depend on devotion; Grace confers undeserved, unconditional blessing: our devotion may follow, but does not always do so,—in proper measure."[14] Newell goes on to say, "Only those can and do really love God whose hearts have been 'sprinkled from an evil conscience'—delivered from fear of God’s just judgment. The question therefore, comes right back to this: Have we believed, as guilty lost sinners, on this propitiation by the blood of God’s Son on the cross? Is that our only hope? If so, 1 John 4.16 becomes true: 'We know and have believed the love which God hath in our case,' and verse 19 follows: 'We love, because he first loved us.' We cannot work up love for God, but His redeeming love for us, believed in, becomes the eternal cause and spring of our love to God."[15] 

This does not mean that there will be no emotions in the salvation experience. Roy Aldrich, a Free Grace advocate and the author of Holding Fast to Grace, is correct to say: "it should not be concluded that the experience of salvation will be devoid of emotion. Psychologists say that every important decision of the mind is accompanied by emotion. Surely there will be emotion with the great change of mind that takes place when a sinner first believes in Christ. However, this emotional experience will vary with circumstances and temperament and it should not be demanded either as a condition or proof of salvation."[16] 

References: 

[1] John Piper, What Is Saving Faith? (Wheaton: Crossway, 2022), p. 180. 

[2] Ibid., p. 181, emphasis his. 

[3] Ibid., p. 181, emphasis his.

[4] Ibid., p. 182, emphasis his. 

 

[5] Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (Cambridge: 1897), 4 vols., vol. 3, p. 292, emphasis his, brackets added. 

[6] For example, see the article by John Piper on the Desiring God website titled "Love Is the Main Thing in Saving Faith". Piper begins the article by saying, "Love is the main thing in saving faith. Those are the words of Jonathan Edwards, and if they are true, life and ministry are changed forever. By love, he means love to God. And by main thing, he means 'the life and power of [saving faith], by which it produces its great effects' (Writings on the Trinity, 448)." (Piper, "Love Is the Main Thing in Saving Faith" [February 29, 2016], Desiring God website, italics and brackets his. www.desiringgod.org/articles/love-is-the-main-thing-in-saving-faith)

[7] R. A. Torrey, Real Salvation (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1905), p. 188. Note: Dr. Torrey makes a similar statement elsewhere. In an article on John 3:16, R. A. Torrey writes: "We are not saved by loving God; we are saved by God loving us." (Torrey, "God is Love," The Expositor and Current Anecdotes [Vol. VIII, No. 1., October 1906], p. 521.)

[8] In his commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2:10b, Leon Morris similarly points out that the "NIV has made a verb 'to love' out of the noun 'love'". (Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, Revised Edition [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991], p. 233, italics his.)

[9] Ibid., p. 233.

 

[10] Commenting on 2 Thessalonians 2:10, A. T. Robertson (another noteworthy NT Greek scholar from the 19th century) affirms this when he writes: "The love of the truth (tēn agapēn tēs alētheias). That is the gospel in contrast with lying and deceit." (See Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament, commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2:10.) 

[11] See A. T. Robertson's discussion of the objective genitive in his book: A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in Light of Historical Research, pp. 499-500. 

[12] Ibid., p. 500. 

[13] Donald Grey Barnhouse, The Love Life (Glendale, CA: Regal Books, 1973), p. 40.

[14] William R. Newell, Romans Verse-By-Verse (Chicago: Moody Press, 1938), p. 247. 

[15] Ibid., p. 328. 

[16] Roy Aldrich, "Some Simple Difficulties of Salvation" (Bibliotheca Sacra, April 1954), p. 160. 

The Kingdom in Scripture | by C. I. Scofield

Reference:

C. I. Scofield, Editor, The New Testament and Psalms, with References (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920), p. vii, https://archive.org/details/newtestamentpsal00scof/page/n9/mode/2up. Note: To my knowledge, this chart is not in the full-size Scofield Reference Bible.

When Moody Preached to the Atheists

D. L. Moody

In East London during the visit of Moody and Sankey, a hall in the dense working population of that city had been reserved one evening for an address to atheists, skeptics, and freethinkers. Bradlaugh, champion of atheism, hearing of this meeting ordered all clubs he had formed to take possession of the hall. They obeyed and five thousand men marched in from all directions. The atheists laughed when Moody asked the men to choose their favorite hymns, for atheists do not sing hymns. Mr. Moody spoke from “Their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.” He poured in a broadside of telling incidents from his own experience of the deathbeds of Christians and atheists and let the men be the judges as to who had the best foundation to rest their faith upon. He attacked them in their most vulnerable points, their hearts of unbelief. The sermon ended, Mr. Moody announced a hymn, and gave opportunity for all to leave who did not want to stay for the inquiry meeting. Moody was astonished when not one man vacated his seat. After a few words Mr. Moody asked all who would receive Christ to say, “I will.” One person, the leading club man, shouted, “I won’t!” Moody said: “Men, you have your champion there in the middle of the hall who said, ‘I won’t.’ I ask every man here who believes that man is right to rise and say, ‘I won’t!’” None arose. “Thank God,” said Moody. “Now who’ll say, ‘I will’?” The Holy Spirit seemed to have broken loose upon that great crowd, and five hundred men sprang to their feet, saying, “I will!” “I will!” till the whole atmosphere was changed, and the battle was won. —From the Alliance Weekly.

Reference:

The Sunday School Times (October 1946): p. 929.

https://archive.org/details/sim_sunday-school-times_1946-10-12_88_41/page/8/mode/1up

How Could the Law Give Life?

Some people think that the commandments of the Mosaic Law (at least the moral requirements of the Law) are a measuring stick to live up to, or to live one’s life by. But biblically, the Law is more like a mirror showing us how sinful we are and that we don’t measure up to its righteous requirements. The Law says “do and you will live.” How is it possible that the Law could give life? In the book Law and Grace by Alva J. McClain, chapter 2 is titled “How the Law Could Give Eternal Life”. Notice what Dr. McClain says:

“1. HYPOTHETICALLY, the law could give life if men kept it. In Leviticus 18:5 it is written: ‘Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.’ The same idea is repeated in Ezekiel, ‘And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them’ (Ezek. 20:11, 13, 21). Unquestionably our Lord had the same principle in mind when he said to the rich young ruler who was seeking eternal life by works, ‘If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments’ (Matt. 19:17b). And these ‘commandments’ were all taken from the Mosaic law. The Apostle Paul summarizes the testimony, ‘For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them’ (Rom. 10:5). 

    2. But this keeping of the law had to be perfect. In the first place, it had to include the whole law: ‘Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them’ (Gal. 3:10). This obedience did not dare to fail at any point, no matter how small, ‘For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all’ (James 2:10). 

    Furthermore, this perfection of obedience included the inward attitude as well as the outward act, the thought as well as the deed (Matt. 5:28). The question has been raised: Did not the law provide for failure to keep it? The answer is: Yes, in a certain sense, through the ritual of animal sacrifice. But here we must be careful to remember two things: First, the smallest failure meant that the law was broken. Second, the blood of animal sacrifices could never take away sins. The sacrifice prescribed by the law did indeed bear witness to a way of salvation but that way was wholly outside and apart from all law (Rom. 3:21). 

  3. Certainly no man (Christ excepted) ever kept the law in the complete sense. ‘Sin is the transgression of the law’ we are told, and in Christ there is ‘no sin’ (I John 3:4-5). But with reference to all other men it is just as certain that ‘all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God’ (Rom. 3:23). This is the testimony of all Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. 

   4. Actually, then, the law can save no sinner. On this point the witness of the Bible is ample and unbroken. ‘By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight’ (Rom. 3:20). ‘By him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses’ (Acts 13:39). ‘But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith’ (Gal. 3:11). 

   So crucially important is this truth that the Holy Spirit repeats it no less than three times within the scope of a single verse in Galatians. ‘A man is not justified by the works of the law . . . not by the works of the law . . . for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified’ (Gal. 2:16). As a matter of fact, Calvary itself should make this clear to all, ‘for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain’ (Gal. 2:21).”[1]

Reference:

[1] Alva J. McClain, Law and Grace. See chapter 2: How the Law Could Give Eternal Life (pp. 17-19). For more information see the statements by William R. Newell on "The Purpose of the Law" (from his book Old Testament Studies).

Book Review: Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, 4th Edition

After reading through Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, I was happy to find that it is Free Grace friendly! Although Mounce is a Calvinist, you wouldn’t know it from reading his textbook. Actually, something he says in the DVD video lecture for chapter 15 gives credence to the Free Grace view of salvation, in distinction to “Lordship Salvation”. Commenting on Mark 8:34 and the invitation of Jesus to “deny yourself, take up your cross and follow Me” (which John MacArthur has said is “the most important one”[1] explaining how to get to heaven), Mounce says that “if you look at the parallel passage in Luke 9:23, he uses also the undefined aspect but he adds in afterwards ‘every day’, ‘daily’. In other words (and you can do with this in your Synoptic criticism what you want), but Luke is making it clear that the ‘taking up’ is not, that Jesus is not thinking about what happens at conversion, that Jesus is thinking about what you do every day, in fact, every minute of every day. That every day, you as a follower of Christ, are someone who has denied your own worldly ambitions. You don’t live for yourself, you live for Him. Every day you live as one who is crucified to himself. And that is how every day we follow Him.”[2] 

The 4th edition of Mounce’s textbook (which I will abbreviate as BBG4) is, I think, a definite improvement over the previous edition. In regards to the physical book itself, the 4th edition is a more compact size overall (6.5 inches x 9.5 inches) compared to the larger and somewhat awkwardly sized 3rd edition (which measured roughly 8.5 inches x 11 inches). While the 3rd edition had 418 pages, BBG4 has been expanded to an impressive – albeit somewhat daunting – 509 pages (due in part, no doubt, to the smaller page size). The more compact size of the newer edition makes it easier to fit into backpacks and to carry around. 

In terms of craftsmanship, I would say the book is very well-made. It has a sturdy cover and binding, and yet it will open fully (and stay open) and lay flat. After taking the book to work with me in my backpack every day for about six months, the book’s binding is still tight and the cover only has a few minor scuffs. 

Besides a more practical and convenient size, there are also other key improvements in the new edition. In BBG4 Mounce has completely updated his discussion of deponent/middle-only verbs to keep pace with adjustments in recent scholarship. I also noticed that in BBG4, Mounce has in general either reworded or added greater detail to many of the sections throughout the book. He has also added and/or expanded many of the footnotes, for example, in regards to the Greek “aspect” (p. 155) and the Greek participle (pp. 299-302). 

The new edition also has a more post-graduate level academic style. For example, except for one brief appearance at the beginning of the book, gone is the silly cartoon character whom Mounce has dubbed “The Professor”. The extra wide margins in the 3rd edition (often including “little tidbits of information” presented by “the Professor”) are also absent from the 4th edition. Whereas the 3rd edition had a sort of “kidzy” style (e.g. the oversized book, “the Professor” cartoon character, the interesting but often unnecessary “fun” facts such as “how to count to ten, ask where the bathroom is, and stuff like that”), the 4th edition has a much more scholarly look and feel. 

In addition to the BBG4 textbook, Mounce has provided quite a number of other helpful resources which can aid students in their quest to learn Biblical Greek (such as an accompanying workbook, DVD video lectures, vocabulary flashcards, an audio CD, an online website, FlashWorks, etc.). While Mounce’s other resources are optional (and sold separately), I found them to be quite helpful. The one exception was that I did not find Mounce’s FlashWorks computer program to be of much help because I could never get it to load and/or work properly and therefore I didn’t use it. (Instead of FlashWorks, I would recommend using either studystack.com or a phone app for learning the vocabulary words.) Personally, I preferred Mounce’s paper vocabulary flashcards for two reasons: (1) I could write down notes on the cards to help me memorize the words, and (2) I found it very helpful that Mounce included on the back of the vocabulary cards not only the definition of the Greek word but also the different tense forms for all the verbs. Also (and this may surprise some people), except for his online Greek Dictionary (billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/), I did not use Mounce’s website very much either. Personally, I found YouTube more helpful. But overall, especially in regards to the core essentials of language acquisition, I found Mounce’s resources for learning biblical Greek to be very helpful and really quite comprehensive. I recommend listening to his Basics of Biblical Greek: Vocabulary audio CD in the car (as I did) in order to help learn the vocabulary words from the lessons in BBG4. I also recommend doing the exercises in the workbook along with reading through the textbook. I also found the DVD video lectures very helpful and informative. The video lectures to the 3rd edition are much more extensive than those for the 4th edition (16 total hours of content vs. only 9.5 total hours of content in the newer video lectures). The video lectures for the 4th edition are helpful, but they are much more streamlined and abbreviated. I would recommend purchasing both and using them together. 

I found Mounce to be a very gifted communicator and teacher. It seems to me that he has successfully and quite comprehensively systematized the concepts of other Greek grammars all into one book. In this regard I would say that Mounce’s textbook is much more comprehensive than any of the other first-year Greek grammars that I have seen. 

Mounce has done his best to keep rote memorization to a minimum. He only requires the students to memorize a few paradigms and he only asks the student to memorize about 320 vocabulary words (the words that occur fifty times or more in the Greek New Testament). He also breaks down the concepts into more “bite-size” pieces as much as possible (e.g., he separates the Greek noun system from the Greek verbal system, teaching nouns first and then verbs, he also divides the Greek participles into five separate chapters, and the “-mi” verbs into 3 chapters). It is still a lot of information, but he breaks it up into smaller sections that are more manageable and easier to assimilate. 

There were two chapters in the book that I think could use some improvement. I thought that Mounce’s discussion in chapters 19-20 of what he calls “Patterns 1-4” verbal roots was a little confusing the way he explained it. It was not so much the concepts but the way in which he outlined and arranged the information that was confusing to me. The way the patterns and sub-patterns were arranged and presented seemed somewhat disjointed and hard to follow. The fact that Mounce began chapter 19 by introducing the four patterns (beginning with pattern 1 verbs) but then for the rest of the chapter went on to discuss “future active indicative” and “future middle indicative” verbs (and also a section titled “Odds ‘n Ends”) before he finally once again picked up his discussion of patterns 2-4 verbs in chapter 20, was especially confusing to me. I found myself having to flip back and forth between pages to read and reread the chapters in order to try to unravel the information. If there is a future edition of BBG, I would suggest maybe a different way of arranging and explaining the four patterns more cohesively as a unit. On the positive side, I will say that chapter 20 was a little easier to follow than chapter 19 (at least in chapter 20 Mounce keeps patterns 2-4 verbs together). Also, I did appreciate the “Summary” section at the end of chapter 20 because it summarizes all 4 verbal patterns. The “Check It Out!” section at the end of chapter 20 was also helpful in that it gave the reader the opportunity to work through a list of different verbal roots and identify the category or pattern of each. 

The way in which Mounce teaches Greek is different from most. In the book’s Preface, Mounce explains by saying: “The writing style of BBG is somewhat different from what you might expect. It is not overly concerned with brevity. Rather, I discuss the concepts in some depth and in a ‘friendly’ tone. The goal is to help students enjoy the text and come to class knowing the information. While brevity has its advantages, I felt that it hinders the self-motivated student who wants to learn outside the classroom” (p. viii). In Mounce’s “Rational Statement” at the beginning of the book he adds: “BBG is not just new to be different, but approaches the instruction of the language from a different perspective that I hope makes learning Greek as easy as possible, as rewarding as possible, and, yes, even enjoyable” (p. xii). Mounce’s teaching style may be different, but comparing Mounce’s textbook to Machen’s first-year Greek grammar (for example), personally I prefer Mounce’s. Not to take anything away from Machen’s work (which is a classic in its own right), but Mounce just has more explanations and helpful content to aid the reader in understanding the concepts and learning the language. The way he teaches Greek is very detailed and understandable for those who put in the time and effort. 

What I also liked about Mounce’s approach to learning Greek is that instead of having the student memorize tons of paradigms, Mounce gets down into the nuts and bolts of how the language is put together so that students can recognize different word forms when they see them in the text. Mounce puts it like this: “The key to learning these paradigms is to realize that translation does not require you to repeat paradigms; it requires you to recognize the endings when you see them” (p. 41, emphasis his). This means less rote memorization and less of a tendency to forget what was learned. In one of his DVD video lectures (for BBG3 not BBG4), Mounce says that this is actually how those who teach Greek learn the language; they don’t memorize paradigms. Instead they learn how to recognize patterns in words and how to recognize different “triggers” in how a word is formed (e.g. augments, tense morphemes, word endings, etc.) in order to then be able to parse the words and determine their meanings (cf. BBG4, p. viii). For example, instead of memorizing the paradigms for didōmi, Mounce gives you five basic rules that you can apply to all the 330 forms of “–mi” verbs so you don’t have to memorize hundreds of different forms. Mounce teaches the student to learn the roots of the words and to also recognize the different triggers in order to then be able to parse the words correctly. 

Something else that I liked and appreciated about BBG4 (and Mounce’s teaching style in general) is that he almost never asks the student to translate from English to Greek (as other Greek Grammars are prone to do). Instead, the exercises are almost always translating from Greek (mostly from the Greek New Testament) into English. I’m sure there is some benefit to be had from translating from English to Greek, but since my goal is to translate the Greek NT, to me it just seemed more helpful and practical to translate from Greek to English. 

The chapters in the book for the most part follow a consistent pattern. With a few exceptions, each chapter begins with what Mounce calls an “Exegetical Insight”. Mounce explains: “At the beginning of most chapters there is an ‘Exegetical Insight’ based on a biblical passage. These are written by New Testament scholars and demonstrate the significance of the grammar in the chapter” (p. xv). I found the “Exegetical Insight” sections very interesting and informative. My two favorite “Exegetical Insights” in the book are the ones written by Daniel B. Wallace on John 1:1 (pp. 33-34) and by William D. Mounce regarding the perfect tense and John 19:30 (p. 275). I especially liked the “Exegetical Insight” by Mounce because he made a point to say in conclusion: “Because Jesus fully completed his task, the ongoing effects are that you and I are offered the free gift of salvation so that we can be with him forever. Praise the Lord. Tetelestai.” Getting back to the layout of each chapter in BBG4, after the “Exegetical Insight” section there is a chapter “Overview”, followed by a section of “English” grammar, a section of “Greek” grammar, a “Halftime Review”, a chapter “Summary”, a “Vocabulary” section, and sometimes an “Advanced Information” section, and also sometimes an “Exegesis” section at the end of the chapter. 

I should also mention that the book has what Mounce calls “Track 1” and “Track 2”. Track 1 keeps nouns and verbs for the most part completely separate (teaching nouns first and verbs second, as I mentioned above), while Track 2 is an alternate reading plan that “moves into verbs more quickly” (p. 91). Track 2 “allows you to move from [nouns in] chapter 9 up to chapter 15 and learn about verbs, and after several chapters on verbs come back and finish nouns” (p. xv). Since Mounce recommended following Track 1 (see pp. xiv-xv), this is the reading plan that I followed as I read through the book. I can also say that after reading through the book, I can definitely see how (especially for the new student) some of the personal endings for the verbs can be confused with some of the case endings on the nouns (e.g. the third declension dative plural, for example), so looking back I’m glad that I followed Track 1. 

The textbook also includes a number of Appendixes (pp. 418-509), thirty to be exact. The Appendix Table of Contents arranges the Appendixes into three sections: General, Noun System, and Verb System. Most of the Appendixes are either lists or paradigms. The one exception is the Appendix for Prepositions (p. 419), which features a spatial representation (and more lists!). 

Probably the most helpful Appendix for me was the Lexicon (pp. 475-504), a dictionary of all the Greek words in the NT that occur 10x or more. Besides the definition of the words, the lexicon also includes the principal parts (Mounce calls them “tense forms”) of all the verbs listed. I personally found the inclusion of the tense forms to be very helpful and a definite aid to learning the language. 

There is also a general Index at the back of the book (pp. 505-509), but it could perhaps have been more thorough. For example, I found myself penciling in other topics along with the accompanying page numbers that are not included in the book’s Index. 

The book would probably also benefit from a Scripture Index. (Daniel Wallace has an index in his textbook Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. So does the Manual Grammar by Dana and Mantey, for example.) I ended up penciling in (on one of the blank pages in the back of the book) the Scripture references and page numbers where certain key Bible verses are discussed, thus making my own makeshift Scripture Index. 

BBG4 does have a few printing errors and other errata. I would estimate that I only found about 5-10 typos and other errata throughout the entire book, which I would say is not bad at all considering that it’s over 500 pages in length! To be fair, I should also say that I didn’t document each and every typo, (1) because there were not that many, and (2) because I didn’t initially read the book with the intention of writing a book review of it. But a few of the typos and/or other miscellaneous errata that I can point out specifically are, for example: on page 207 the present tense form of kaleō appears with the Greek letter digamma prefixed to it (when in reality the digamma is the last letter of the word’s root, not the first letter of the present tense form); on page 339 the headings “masc”, “fem”, “neut” are shifted one column too many to the left and so they do not line up vertically in the correct columns; on page 439 under the heading “Athematic Second Aorist” (at the top of the page), under the sub-heading “active” it says “first perfect” and “second perfect”. I believe those last two headings are incorrectly placed since the verbs in those columns are aorist tense, not perfect tense. The headings “first perfect” and “second perfect” actually apply to the “Perfect Indicative” section on the same page, and they are correctly placed there. Other printing errors to mention are that in a few places the ink color is blue when it should be black (for example, see after the Greek word meta in the Lexicon where the parenthesis themselves are colored blue). There is also at least one incorrect page number in the Index (I did not check them all). On page 509, for the entry “Schreiner, Thomas R.” the page number 251 is incorrect. The correct page number is 250, not 251. 

In conclusion I would say that Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar is very thorough, but also very technical. (This is possibly one reason why Mounce wrote another book titled Greek for the Rest of Us.) BBG4 is definitely not any easy read (what Greek grammar is?), nor is it for the faint of heart.[3] But for those who are serious about learning biblical Greek and for those who really want to understand how the language is put together, this is the book for you! 

Overall, I can definitely say after reading through Mounce’s textbook and also doing the accompanying exercises in the workbook, that if you consistently put in the time and the effort and don’t lose heart, you will learn the “Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar”—and more! 

ENDNOTES: 

[1] 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 

[2] William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek Video Lectures (3rd Edition), Lesson15: Introduction to Verbs (time stamp: 20:23 min. – 21:39 min.), bold added. Note: In the updated DVD lectures for the 4th edition of the book, Mounce gives a much more abbreviated explanation which doesn’t really address the distinction between conversion and discipleship.  

[3] Throughout the book Mounce does his best to offer encouragement to the reader to keep them motivated to learn Greek and not get discouraged or give up hope. Mounce says in the book’s Preface (p. viii), “I try to include anything that will encourage students.” For example, at the end of each chapter Mounce has a vocabulary section and then a statistic showing the “Percent of total word count in the New Testament” learned by the student, which is anywhere between 11.71% at the beginning of the book, to over 80% by the end of the book! In the DVD video lectures, Mounce also has a pie chart showing this spatially. Something else that I appreciated about Mounce’s teaching style that relates to this topic of encouragement is in regards to how Mounce teaches the student to parse Greek verbs. I noticed that Mounce likes to say: “Tell me what you know. Don’t tell me what you don’t know, tell me what you know.” Personally, I found this reminder very helpful because in reading through the textbook and in doing the translations in the workbook, I noticed that I was prone to get discouraged because I kept focusing on all the Greek I didn’t know! Mounce’s reminder to “Tell me what you know” helped me to keep my focus on what I was learning and all the progress I was making, and thus not to get overwhelmed and discouraged by everything I didn’t yet know. For more information see Mounce’s “Rationale Statement” in BBG4, under the heading “Encouragement” (pp. xii – xiii).