I recently had a conversation about biblical repentance with an inquirer, who gave me permission to re-post his questions. It is my hope that the following Q & A will bless others who may have the same or similar questions about repentance. The questioner’s name has been changed for privacy.
* * *
Thu, Aug 3, 4:31 PM
G. K. wrote:
How are you, Jonathan?
How are you, Jonathan?
Had another question or two for you today. To what extent must a person believe and understand that they are a sinner before they can be saved? Must one have a gut-wrenching guilt and pain, whilst tearing their clothing and throwing ash in their face? Or can one simply acknowledge it, perhaps without much emotion involved at all? Must one verbally confess that they are lost, or just understand it to be so? I’m having trouble describing what I mean here. For example, when I was a kid and first believed I was saved, I do not remember feeling torn to the core over my sin or lostness. I merely accepted it as fact. I don’t remember specifically thinking, “Oh, crap, I really am lost! I really am a wicked sinner!” But if I believed in Jesus as my Savior from sin, then logically, I had to know that I was a sinner, and lost, even if not in those exact words. I knew I was not right with God, anyway. I knew that sin sent people to hell, and that it needed to be forgiven. Why else would one accept Jesus as Savior unless they realize they need one (a Savior)? Again, I can’t quite articulate what I’m getting at. I guess I’m asking whether my childlike understanding of my sin and guilt was sufficient. I knew that my sins were bad, though perhaps not HOW bad. I knew they needed forgiveness. I knew that if my sins were not forgiven, I could not go to heaven. But how well can a child really understand the depth and seriousness of their sin? How deeply can they feel torn over it?
Also today, I’m having some struggles with the idea of repentance as merely a change of mind. Looking into the meaning of Hebrew “nacham” there does seem to be an element of regret or sorrow. And can we really suggest that while the NT might not specifically say “repentance from sin” that it is not nevertheless implied? How are we able to so pick and choose which instances of repent refer to temporal judgment and which refer to eternal judgment? Why does even Bob Wilkin feel that repentance does refer to turning from sins? He said something along the lines of 44 of 55 examples of repentance in the NT being most definitely a turning from sin. My head is flooded with confusion over this. There’s a nagging voice in the back of my mind saying that the FG understanding of repentance is just wishful thinking, or “explaining away the obvious”. And obviously it matters, as I have not turned from all of my sin. Help!
Also today, I’m having some struggles with the idea of repentance as merely a change of mind. Looking into the meaning of Hebrew “nacham” there does seem to be an element of regret or sorrow. And can we really suggest that while the NT might not specifically say “repentance from sin” that it is not nevertheless implied? How are we able to so pick and choose which instances of repent refer to temporal judgment and which refer to eternal judgment? Why does even Bob Wilkin feel that repentance does refer to turning from sins? He said something along the lines of 44 of 55 examples of repentance in the NT being most definitely a turning from sin. My head is flooded with confusion over this. There’s a nagging voice in the back of my mind saying that the FG understanding of repentance is just wishful thinking, or “explaining away the obvious”. And obviously it matters, as I have not turned from all of my sin. Help!
Fri, Aug 4, 9:33 AM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
I’m doing well, thanks! I hope I can offer you some help and encouragement here in regards to your questions. You asked: "Must one have a gut-wrenching guilt and pain, whilst tearing their clothing and throwing ash in their face?" No, I wouldn't say that. I like what Roy Aldrich has to say about the emotions that may be involved in salvation. Aldrich writes: "The Greek word metanoia means a change of mind. [...] Because repentance is a change of mind 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." (Roy Aldrich, "Some Simple Difficulties of Salvation." Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 111, No. 442 [April 1954], pp. 158-160.) Related to this you also asked: "Or can one simply acknowledge it, perhaps without much emotion involved at all?" Yes, I would say that is entirely possible. You also asked: "Must one verbally confess that they are lost, or just understand it to be so?" A person does not have to verbally confess anything to be saved, otherwise how could mutes be saved? Furthermore, verbally confessing something is a human work, which if a requirement would make salvation by works or by something we physically do, instead of by simple faith.
In regards to your questions about repentance, I think it helps to realize (especially in the Old Testament), that God repents! For me, that's huge! Because if the core meaning of repentance means "turn from sin" (as Wilkin advocates), then that would make God a sinner! I like the statement by Dr. Scofield on repentance in the Old Testament. Scofield writes: "Repentance (O.T.), Summary: In the O.T., repentance is the English word used to translate the Heb. nacham, to be 'eased' or 'comforted.' It is used of both God and man. Notwithstanding the literal meaning of nacham, it is evident, from a study of all the passages, that the sacred writers use it in the sense of metanoia in the N.T.—a change of mind. See Mt. 3. 2; Acts 17. 30, note. As in the N.T., such change of mind is often accompanied by contrition and self-judgment. When applied to God the word is used phenomenally according to O.T. custom. God seems to change His mind. The phenomena are such as, in the case of a man, would indicate a change of mind." (C. I. Scofield, The Scofield Reference Bible [New York: Oxford University Press, 1917], p. 972, note on Zechariah 8:14.) For more information you may want to read some more in-depth articles that I've written on biblical repentance:
In regards to your questions about repentance, I think it helps to realize (especially in the Old Testament), that God repents! For me, that's huge! Because if the core meaning of repentance means "turn from sin" (as Wilkin advocates), then that would make God a sinner! I like the statement by Dr. Scofield on repentance in the Old Testament. Scofield writes: "Repentance (O.T.), Summary: In the O.T., repentance is the English word used to translate the Heb. nacham, to be 'eased' or 'comforted.' It is used of both God and man. Notwithstanding the literal meaning of nacham, it is evident, from a study of all the passages, that the sacred writers use it in the sense of metanoia in the N.T.—a change of mind. See Mt. 3. 2; Acts 17. 30, note. As in the N.T., such change of mind is often accompanied by contrition and self-judgment. When applied to God the word is used phenomenally according to O.T. custom. God seems to change His mind. The phenomena are such as, in the case of a man, would indicate a change of mind." (C. I. Scofield, The Scofield Reference Bible [New York: Oxford University Press, 1917], p. 972, note on Zechariah 8:14.) For more information you may want to read some more in-depth articles that I've written on biblical repentance:
• The Scofield Reference Bible on Repentance (May 24, 2021)
• Is Repentance Sorrow for Sin? 10 Reasons Why It Is Not (Feb 18, 2023).
I talk about the Hebrew word nacham in some detail in the blog post titled "7 Ways Grudem Misrepresents Biblical Repentance". I hope this helps! God Bless
Fri, Aug 4, 9:56 AM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
In my last email, I forgot to answer some of your other questions about repentance. So you asked about Wilkin's view of repentance. Yes, I do agree that in many biblical contexts, the idea of "repentance from sin" is implied. But again, it depends on the context. Apparently Wilkin has counted them up and there are about 50 or so contexts in which the repentance is about turning from sins. I don't have a problem with that, necessarily. That could very well be the case. But it doesn't redefine repentance or disprove my point that repentance is a change of mind. All it shows is that in those 50 passages, the context of the change of mind is about turning from sin. So for example, in Revelation chapters 2-3 God tells the various church assemblies to "Repent!" The context shows that it is in regards to whatever sin Jesus has mentioned. Wilkin wants to take those specific contexts and apply it to EVERY context whenever the word repent is mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Anybody see a problem with that? That would be like me saying that the word "save" (Greek sōzō) always means salvation from hell wherever we happen to find it, regardless of the context. That's true in SOME contexts, but not every context. You see the difference? Sometimes in the NT, the word "save" simply means "to be made whole", or "to heal", "to deliver from sickness" (e.g. James 5:15). It just depends on the context. What the salvation or deliverance is from depends on the context. If we said that the word "save" always means salvation from hell because 50 times in the NT it is found in that context, that obviously doesn't mean that sōzō means that in every other instance. You see? But that's essentially what Wilkin is saying in regards to the word "repent". He's basically saying that since repent is seen to refer to "turning from sin" in 50 passages, therefore that is the meaning of the word in every context. So he's redefining the word "repentance" based on a limited sample of evidence. Besides being a logical fallacy, that is just bad hermeneutics. It should be obvious that he is reading his theological bias into the biblical text (eisegesis), not deriving the meaning out of the text (exegesis). So Wilkin has it backwards. Wilkin is twisting the Scriptures and thus his view is rightly rejected.
Thu, Aug 3, 5:41 PM
Thu, Aug 3, 5:41 PM
G. K. wrote:
Does a person have to be willing to give up their sin in order to be saved? I heard someone say that you can’t be saved if you’re still trying to hold on to your sin. In other words, you can’t ask God to save you while still want to cling to your sin.
Does a person have to be willing to give up their sin in order to be saved? I heard someone say that you can’t be saved if you’re still trying to hold on to your sin. In other words, you can’t ask God to save you while still want to cling to your sin.
Fri, Aug 4, 12:08 AM
G. K. wrote:
Jonathan, I am not doing well. Please pray for me. I can't escape the idea that repentance from sin really is necessary for salvation, and that I will never attain it because I just won't let go of my sin. Sure, I'm shaken and disturbed by the thought of punishment, but then I harden my hard and refuse to let go. I fear I'll reach a point where I can't repent, and will perish. Like the saying, if you won't let go of your sin, then God says "Your will be done" and you will take it to hell with you.
If it really is just a change of mind, then what about Revelation 9:21 — it mentions those who would not repent of their wickedness. How am I any different?
And in Acts, when Paul preaches to Felix and Drusilla, he preaches about self-control, not the gospel. He didn't tell them they only needed to believe. He brought up sin and judgment, and Felix shuddered and asked Paul to leave. I fear that's all I am — a Felix. I don't want to be punished for my sins, but I am not willing to give them up. And so I will take them to hell with me. Maybe I can't break free from sin because I'm just not willing, and that because I'm not saved. Are people just telling me what to hear so that I won't worry? These two passages really seem to suggest that repentance is necessary, but since people don't want to repent, they won't be saved. Again, Paul could have told Felix and Drusilla (who were living in adultery) that all they had to do was believe, and they'd be saved, but he didn't. Have I missed a step? Have I, like Felix, just never wanted to hear about my sin and guilt, and just wanted to fast-forward to the mercy part? Could it be that I've just never acknowledged that I am a lost sinner, worthy of death? Maybe I tried to skip that part in my mind, and so I can't be saved because I won't really LOOK at my guilt. I just want to skip it and think everything will be ok. But if I won't look at it, acknowledge it, I can't be saved.
I read an article by a Micah Colbert. He says in the first section, "Can I Keep My Sin and Go to Heaven?" A while back, I was witnessing to a group of college-age guys. They were familiar with Christianity, but they didn’t know the gospel. As I spoke of sin and judgment, one of the guys began squirming nervously. I could tell that he was troubled by what I was saying. Finally, he interrupted me with a question I won’t soon forget: “Hey man, I’m gonna be honest with you,” he blurted out, “I’m living with my girlfriend right now and I don’t want to stop. I know it’s wrong, but I don’t want to give it up… But I don’t want to go to hell either. Can I keep my sin and go to heaven?” At that point, the rest of the guys suddenly became interested in the conversation. What was I going to say in response to their friend’s dilemma? What would you say?
Sadly, many Christians would argue that he can as long as he simply trusts in Jesus: “That sin isn’t the issue,” they would argue. “You can deal with it later. Good works, after all, can’t save you. What really matters is whether or not you’re trusting in Jesus for eternal life. If you believe in Jesus, He will save you!” Thus, another sin-loving, non-repentant soul would be “led to the Lord” and given a false hope of salvation."
I feel like that might as well have been written about me. I’m trying to get to step B without first dealing with step A. I am not willing to give up my sin, to repent, like Felix, like those in Revelation 9:21. I am not willing to hear the bad news before the good news. And if I’m not saved, but everyone tells me I am, and I’m just “struggling” then I will never be saved because I can’t be honest with myself. It just doesn’t make sense that a person could be saved without turning from sin, otherwise why aren’t those in Revelation saved? Why weren’t Felix and Drusilla saved?
I’m a hopeless mess.
Fri, Aug 4, 12:27 AM
Jonathan, I am not doing well. Please pray for me. I can't escape the idea that repentance from sin really is necessary for salvation, and that I will never attain it because I just won't let go of my sin. Sure, I'm shaken and disturbed by the thought of punishment, but then I harden my hard and refuse to let go. I fear I'll reach a point where I can't repent, and will perish. Like the saying, if you won't let go of your sin, then God says "Your will be done" and you will take it to hell with you.
If it really is just a change of mind, then what about Revelation 9:21 — it mentions those who would not repent of their wickedness. How am I any different?
And in Acts, when Paul preaches to Felix and Drusilla, he preaches about self-control, not the gospel. He didn't tell them they only needed to believe. He brought up sin and judgment, and Felix shuddered and asked Paul to leave. I fear that's all I am — a Felix. I don't want to be punished for my sins, but I am not willing to give them up. And so I will take them to hell with me. Maybe I can't break free from sin because I'm just not willing, and that because I'm not saved. Are people just telling me what to hear so that I won't worry? These two passages really seem to suggest that repentance is necessary, but since people don't want to repent, they won't be saved. Again, Paul could have told Felix and Drusilla (who were living in adultery) that all they had to do was believe, and they'd be saved, but he didn't. Have I missed a step? Have I, like Felix, just never wanted to hear about my sin and guilt, and just wanted to fast-forward to the mercy part? Could it be that I've just never acknowledged that I am a lost sinner, worthy of death? Maybe I tried to skip that part in my mind, and so I can't be saved because I won't really LOOK at my guilt. I just want to skip it and think everything will be ok. But if I won't look at it, acknowledge it, I can't be saved.
I read an article by a Micah Colbert. He says in the first section, "Can I Keep My Sin and Go to Heaven?" A while back, I was witnessing to a group of college-age guys. They were familiar with Christianity, but they didn’t know the gospel. As I spoke of sin and judgment, one of the guys began squirming nervously. I could tell that he was troubled by what I was saying. Finally, he interrupted me with a question I won’t soon forget: “Hey man, I’m gonna be honest with you,” he blurted out, “I’m living with my girlfriend right now and I don’t want to stop. I know it’s wrong, but I don’t want to give it up… But I don’t want to go to hell either. Can I keep my sin and go to heaven?” At that point, the rest of the guys suddenly became interested in the conversation. What was I going to say in response to their friend’s dilemma? What would you say?
Sadly, many Christians would argue that he can as long as he simply trusts in Jesus: “That sin isn’t the issue,” they would argue. “You can deal with it later. Good works, after all, can’t save you. What really matters is whether or not you’re trusting in Jesus for eternal life. If you believe in Jesus, He will save you!” Thus, another sin-loving, non-repentant soul would be “led to the Lord” and given a false hope of salvation."
I feel like that might as well have been written about me. I’m trying to get to step B without first dealing with step A. I am not willing to give up my sin, to repent, like Felix, like those in Revelation 9:21. I am not willing to hear the bad news before the good news. And if I’m not saved, but everyone tells me I am, and I’m just “struggling” then I will never be saved because I can’t be honest with myself. It just doesn’t make sense that a person could be saved without turning from sin, otherwise why aren’t those in Revelation saved? Why weren’t Felix and Drusilla saved?
I’m a hopeless mess.
Fri, Aug 4, 12:27 AM
G. K. wrote:
[Dr. Thomas L.] Constable, referring to Felix, mentions how as people get older, they harden their hearts more and more. He says it’s perhaps easier for people to come to faith when they are young, before they become so hardened. Then if I am indeed not saved, then perhaps it’s too late for me, or others like me. We just want our sin, harden our hearts, close our ears and eyes, and ignore it all. And now nothing will get through. I feel so without hope. And I worry about people like my friend Dave, who is also in his 40s now, and perhaps too hardened ever to come to the truth about himself, if he isn’t saved. I don’t see any good news for myself or for him, at the moment. Even if I could admit that I’m a wicked sinner, how much would I need to say/do/understand about my state for it to be enough? A brief, “Yes, I am a sinner in need of mercy” seems like it isn’t enough. That would seem like I’m just going through the motions to get what I want (mercy). How do I know I really believe I’m a lost sinner in need of mercy? There will always be a part of my mind thinking that I really did believe when I was young, so I won’t be able to admit I’m lost now, if I am lost. And so my situation gets worse with time, and more hopeless.
[Dr. Thomas L.] Constable, referring to Felix, mentions how as people get older, they harden their hearts more and more. He says it’s perhaps easier for people to come to faith when they are young, before they become so hardened. Then if I am indeed not saved, then perhaps it’s too late for me, or others like me. We just want our sin, harden our hearts, close our ears and eyes, and ignore it all. And now nothing will get through. I feel so without hope. And I worry about people like my friend Dave, who is also in his 40s now, and perhaps too hardened ever to come to the truth about himself, if he isn’t saved. I don’t see any good news for myself or for him, at the moment. Even if I could admit that I’m a wicked sinner, how much would I need to say/do/understand about my state for it to be enough? A brief, “Yes, I am a sinner in need of mercy” seems like it isn’t enough. That would seem like I’m just going through the motions to get what I want (mercy). How do I know I really believe I’m a lost sinner in need of mercy? There will always be a part of my mind thinking that I really did believe when I was young, so I won’t be able to admit I’m lost now, if I am lost. And so my situation gets worse with time, and more hopeless.
Fri, Aug 4, 10:40 AM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
I wouldn't get so discouraged, but I would suggest you stop listening to Bob Wilkin; he's a false teacher! You said: "I can't escape the idea that repentance from sin really is necessary for salvation." I would agree if by "sin" you mean the sin of unbelief (see John 16:8-9). So we have to "accurately handle the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). In regards to Revelation 9:21, I don't see how that in any way disproves repentance as a change of mind. Because obviously before someone can change their actions they must change their mind!
No offense, but who is saying that about Felix and Drusilla? You said: "And in Acts, when Paul preaches to Felix and Drusilla, he preaches about self-control, not the gospel." That's not true, because Acts 24:24 says that they sent for Paul "and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus." That is the gospel! And you said that Felix and Drusilla "were living in adultery". Again, where are you getting that from? My Bible says, "Felix arrived with Drusilla, his wife" (Acts 24:24).
In regards to your question: "Can I Keep My Sin and Go to Heaven?" what you're really asking is: "Do I Have to Stop Sinning to Get Saved?" Regarding this, Roger Post has well said: “To preach that repentance is ‘turning from sins’ is ambiguous, for it presupposes people understand what is signified by ‘turning from.’ If ‘turning from sins’ means to stop sinning, and people can be saved only if they stop sinning, it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved. Many people who resolved to stop sinning at an emotional part of a decision and a confused proclamation of ‘repentance’ are afterwards emotionally devastated to discover that they still sin.” (Roger Post, “The Meanings of the Words Translated ‘Repent’ and ‘Repentance’ in the New Testament,” Master’s Thesis, Wheaton College, June 1972, pp. 66-67. Note: This statement by Roger Post is quoted by Richard A. Seymour in his book All About Repentance [Hollywood, FL: Harvest House Publishers, 1974], pp. 47-48.) Dr. Curtis Hutson makes the same point in his booklet titled Repentance: What Does the Bible Teach? Under the heading “Faulty Ideas About Repentance”, Hutson writes the following: “We suppose there are many faulty ideas about repentance, but we will deal here with the more popular ones. Perhaps the most popular false idea is that repentance is turning from sin. We have heard some well-known preachers say, ‘If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins.’ If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don’t know anyone who has ever stopped sinning.” (Hutson, Repentance: What Does the Bible Teach? [Murfreesboro: Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1986], p. 4.) For more information in regards to the question, “Do I Have to Stop Sinning to Get Saved?” see my blog post titled: “Must A Person Stop Sinning To Receive Eternal Life?” (FGFS, Dec 31, 2022). I hope this helps! God Bless
Fri, Aug 4, 11:02 AM
No offense, but who is saying that about Felix and Drusilla? You said: "And in Acts, when Paul preaches to Felix and Drusilla, he preaches about self-control, not the gospel." That's not true, because Acts 24:24 says that they sent for Paul "and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus." That is the gospel! And you said that Felix and Drusilla "were living in adultery". Again, where are you getting that from? My Bible says, "Felix arrived with Drusilla, his wife" (Acts 24:24).
In regards to your question: "Can I Keep My Sin and Go to Heaven?" what you're really asking is: "Do I Have to Stop Sinning to Get Saved?" Regarding this, Roger Post has well said: “To preach that repentance is ‘turning from sins’ is ambiguous, for it presupposes people understand what is signified by ‘turning from.’ If ‘turning from sins’ means to stop sinning, and people can be saved only if they stop sinning, it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved. Many people who resolved to stop sinning at an emotional part of a decision and a confused proclamation of ‘repentance’ are afterwards emotionally devastated to discover that they still sin.” (Roger Post, “The Meanings of the Words Translated ‘Repent’ and ‘Repentance’ in the New Testament,” Master’s Thesis, Wheaton College, June 1972, pp. 66-67. Note: This statement by Roger Post is quoted by Richard A. Seymour in his book All About Repentance [Hollywood, FL: Harvest House Publishers, 1974], pp. 47-48.) Dr. Curtis Hutson makes the same point in his booklet titled Repentance: What Does the Bible Teach? Under the heading “Faulty Ideas About Repentance”, Hutson writes the following: “We suppose there are many faulty ideas about repentance, but we will deal here with the more popular ones. Perhaps the most popular false idea is that repentance is turning from sin. We have heard some well-known preachers say, ‘If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins.’ If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don’t know anyone who has ever stopped sinning.” (Hutson, Repentance: What Does the Bible Teach? [Murfreesboro: Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1986], p. 4.) For more information in regards to the question, “Do I Have to Stop Sinning to Get Saved?” see my blog post titled: “Must A Person Stop Sinning To Receive Eternal Life?” (FGFS, Dec 31, 2022). I hope this helps! God Bless
Fri, Aug 4, 11:02 AM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
I took a look at Dr. Contable's Notes on Acts, particularly what he says about Paul preaching before Felix in Acts 24. Notice what Dr. Constable says on Acts 24:24, "Paul's emphases in his interview with Felix and Drusilla were the same three things that Jesus Christ had predicted the Holy Spirit would convict people about that would bring them to faith. These things were sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8-11)." This is very significant because in John 16:8-9, Jesus says that the Holy Spirit will convict the world concerning sin, righteousness, and judgment, "of sin because they don't believe in Me" (Jn. 16:9). This is what the unsaved must change their minds ("repent") about: unbelief in Christ! This is the one damning sin: unbelief in Christ. Thus, if we define repentance as "turning from sin", it is specifically about the one sin of unbelief in Christ. I noted this numerous times in my article "The Meaning of Repentance: Quotes from the Ancients, Lexicons, and Theologians". Note that this is entirely consistent with saying that saving repentance is a change of mind from unbelief in Christ to belief in Christ.
Dr. J. Vernon McGee also has some helpful commentary on Paul's sermon to Felix in Acts 24. For more information, see Dr. McGee's commentary Acts: Chapters 15-28.
Fri, Aug 4, 2:02 PM
Dr. J. Vernon McGee also has some helpful commentary on Paul's sermon to Felix in Acts 24. For more information, see Dr. McGee's commentary Acts: Chapters 15-28.
Fri, Aug 4, 2:02 PM
G. K. wrote:
Thank you, Jonathan, for your thoughtful responses. God bless you for taking the time to go through my questions with such patience and detail.
I'm not able to see McGee's commentary on Felix and Drusilla for some reason. It says that borrowing is unavailable. Usually there is an option to borrow.
As far as Felix, it says he had a more perfect knowledge of that way. That makes me wonder how much of the Gospel he already knew. And if he was familiar with it, why did he tremble and dismiss Paul? The Gospel is good news to be believed. Why react with fear and trembling, and then send Paul away? This is why I can't help but wonder if Paul did in fact emphasize turning from sin, and that shook Felix. I can't remember where exactly I read that Drusilla was his 3rd wife, and that he'd been known as a man with little self-control. He had convinced Drusilla to leave her husband for him. So Paul's message must have really cut into him. But again, why would it cut, if he was only being asked to believe? He was just being told about faith in Jesus. This makes me wonder whether he was preaching repentance from sin, which is scary, and Felix trembled because he just couldn't handle the thought of having to turn from his life of sin. David J. Stewart said the following in a blog, which similarly confuses me:
"I've actually witnessed to some people, who refused to get saved because they weren't willing to receive the Holy Spirit into their life, because of sin. That was honest of them. They fully understood that even though they didn't have to turn from sins to BE SAVED, they knew God would expect them to turn from sins ONCE THEY ARE SAVED, and they don't want that Holy Spirit conviction."
Is this what happened to Felix? Is that possible my own case? I don't understand why someone would reject salvation even after knowing that they don't have to turn from their sins to be saved. That would be good news. So why tremble and reject it? And if these people he mentions heard the truth, and understood it... we're saved when we simply hear and believe the truth. So I'm confused. Why even mention that the Holy Spirit would convict them later? If the truth is simply believing, what hindered them? Sin. The desire for sin. Well, I don't always want to let my sin go either, and I'm told I don't have to (to be saved). And though a person should obey after salvation, we don't always, but we're still saved. So it seems the desire to hold on to sin can still keep a person from belief, and I don't understand why. And of course, that makes me wonder if the same applies to me. My desire to hang on to sin is keeping me lost, if in fact I am not saved. But I really don't know how much more I can believe than I already do. I can't articulate my thought process well, so please forgive the confusion. I just see myself in those people somehow, and they went away unsaved. So what's the difference between them and me?
As far as Revelation, I can see your point about their not believing, but then why not just say they refused to believe? Why emphasize the lack of repentance unless turning from sin really is necessary for salvation? Why does it not simply read, "Neither believed they the Gospel of our Lord Jesus."? There seems to be a heavy emphasis on the lack of turning from sin if all they needed to do was believe.
I'm not trying to come across as argumentative in any of these questions. I'm not argumentative by nature. These are just the follow-up questions that pop into my head as I read your responses.
Thank you for your graciousness in responding to me.
Fri, Aug 4, 4:52 PM
Thank you, Jonathan, for your thoughtful responses. God bless you for taking the time to go through my questions with such patience and detail.
I'm not able to see McGee's commentary on Felix and Drusilla for some reason. It says that borrowing is unavailable. Usually there is an option to borrow.
As far as Felix, it says he had a more perfect knowledge of that way. That makes me wonder how much of the Gospel he already knew. And if he was familiar with it, why did he tremble and dismiss Paul? The Gospel is good news to be believed. Why react with fear and trembling, and then send Paul away? This is why I can't help but wonder if Paul did in fact emphasize turning from sin, and that shook Felix. I can't remember where exactly I read that Drusilla was his 3rd wife, and that he'd been known as a man with little self-control. He had convinced Drusilla to leave her husband for him. So Paul's message must have really cut into him. But again, why would it cut, if he was only being asked to believe? He was just being told about faith in Jesus. This makes me wonder whether he was preaching repentance from sin, which is scary, and Felix trembled because he just couldn't handle the thought of having to turn from his life of sin. David J. Stewart said the following in a blog, which similarly confuses me:
"I've actually witnessed to some people, who refused to get saved because they weren't willing to receive the Holy Spirit into their life, because of sin. That was honest of them. They fully understood that even though they didn't have to turn from sins to BE SAVED, they knew God would expect them to turn from sins ONCE THEY ARE SAVED, and they don't want that Holy Spirit conviction."
Is this what happened to Felix? Is that possible my own case? I don't understand why someone would reject salvation even after knowing that they don't have to turn from their sins to be saved. That would be good news. So why tremble and reject it? And if these people he mentions heard the truth, and understood it... we're saved when we simply hear and believe the truth. So I'm confused. Why even mention that the Holy Spirit would convict them later? If the truth is simply believing, what hindered them? Sin. The desire for sin. Well, I don't always want to let my sin go either, and I'm told I don't have to (to be saved). And though a person should obey after salvation, we don't always, but we're still saved. So it seems the desire to hold on to sin can still keep a person from belief, and I don't understand why. And of course, that makes me wonder if the same applies to me. My desire to hang on to sin is keeping me lost, if in fact I am not saved. But I really don't know how much more I can believe than I already do. I can't articulate my thought process well, so please forgive the confusion. I just see myself in those people somehow, and they went away unsaved. So what's the difference between them and me?
As far as Revelation, I can see your point about their not believing, but then why not just say they refused to believe? Why emphasize the lack of repentance unless turning from sin really is necessary for salvation? Why does it not simply read, "Neither believed they the Gospel of our Lord Jesus."? There seems to be a heavy emphasis on the lack of turning from sin if all they needed to do was believe.
I'm not trying to come across as argumentative in any of these questions. I'm not argumentative by nature. These are just the follow-up questions that pop into my head as I read your responses.
Thank you for your graciousness in responding to me.
Fri, Aug 4, 4:52 PM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
You may want to check back to see if you can read Dr. McGee's commentary on Acts 24:24. I had borrowed it earlier and that may have been why you couldn't read it. In regards to when you asked: "So Paul's message must have really cut into him. But again, why would it cut, if he was only being asked to believe?" Well because the text says that Paul told Felix about "the judgment to come" (Acts 24:25). The Bible say, "The wages of sin is death" (Rom. 6:23a). That doesn't mean that people have to stop sinning to be saved, but sin does have a penalty. The solution that is given for our sin problem is not for us to "stop sinning": if it was, then why do we need Jesus? See Gal. 2:21. But rather the solution to our sin problem is: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved!" (Acts 16:31). By the way, does Paul even mention "repentance" in his sermon to Felix? Maybe I'm missing it, but I didn't see it. Of course, a change of mind is implied; but it seems like you've made that section something like "a hill to die on" (no offense) in regards to your view of repentance, when maybe the word "repentance" isn't even mentioned there! Either way, I think there are much clearer passages to appeal to in regards to understanding biblical repentance.
I know you also mentioned Revelation 9:21, but the context doesn't say it's about salvation. Again, if we say that repentance means "turn from sins", even Wilkin doesn't make that a condition for salvation. Because that would mean that salvation is by works, or that a person would have to be perfect or sinless or stop sinning to be saved. Or at least willing to do so. Which is Lordship Salvation. That's why Wilkin doesn't make repentance (with his definition) a condition for salvation. Because otherwise he'd be advocating Lordship Salvation. So if you are going to use that definition of repentance, to stay consistent with Free Grace, you would need to say that it's not a requirement for salvation. But it seems like you are saying it is necessary for salvation. So I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. But my point is that using the "change of mind" definition of repentance is perfectly understandable in Revelation 9:21. The meaning is: the unsaved didn't "change their minds" about those sins. That's my point, highlighting the "change of mind" definition of repentance and that it makes sense grammatically and contextually there.
Blessings,
Jonathan
I know you also mentioned Revelation 9:21, but the context doesn't say it's about salvation. Again, if we say that repentance means "turn from sins", even Wilkin doesn't make that a condition for salvation. Because that would mean that salvation is by works, or that a person would have to be perfect or sinless or stop sinning to be saved. Or at least willing to do so. Which is Lordship Salvation. That's why Wilkin doesn't make repentance (with his definition) a condition for salvation. Because otherwise he'd be advocating Lordship Salvation. So if you are going to use that definition of repentance, to stay consistent with Free Grace, you would need to say that it's not a requirement for salvation. But it seems like you are saying it is necessary for salvation. So I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. But my point is that using the "change of mind" definition of repentance is perfectly understandable in Revelation 9:21. The meaning is: the unsaved didn't "change their minds" about those sins. That's my point, highlighting the "change of mind" definition of repentance and that it makes sense grammatically and contextually there.
Blessings,
Jonathan
Sat, Aug 5, 1:38 AM
G. K. wrote:
Hello Jonathan,
Thank you again for your kind, patient, and well-thought-out replies. To tell you the truth, after looking over these passages again, I'm not even sure what it was I saw in them that made me think along those lines. I think it all boils down to fear. "What if the Lordshippers are right? What if Free Gracers are just making excuses, or playing semantics?" That kind of thing. I suppose in some ways I see myself in Felix, or in the sinners in Revelation, or in those people who would not accept Jesus because of their sin. I worry that I am no different from them. And I don't want to share their fate. But I do know that I have, at least at some point, trusted in Jesus to take my sin away from me. I've felt the relief, the joy that comes with it. I've shed tears (genuinely) thanking Him for doing for me what I could not possibly have done for myself. But that fear still lingers, the doubts still come, the what-ifs still rear their ugly heads. Maybe it's from the years of Lordship teaching I sat under, coupled with a lack of confidence in myself. I was always taught to doubt myself — never trust anyone or anything, because they're all "deceivers" waiting to drag me down to hell. Please continue to pray for me, that I'll find freedom from that, and that I'll simply cling to Jesus and trust HIM over these Lordshippers whenever my doubts come rushing back. He at least has been kind to me, and has loved me, and has desired my best. They have not. Also, you referred to my "definition" of repentance as being a turning from sin — I'm sorry if I gave that impression. That is very much not my definition. That's their definition, and I'm merely asking, "Is it really so?" while hoping that it is not. I believe I told you before how I take a lot of convincing before I can let something go, not because I want it to be so, but because I must be persuaded that it is not so, lest I give myself a false sense of assurance. That's all.
Your testimony mentions that you have always been in the Grace movement. Did you never question it or have doubts? Never a time when you wondered whether the MacArthurs of the world were right? I admire your confidence in your position, and I hope that I too will have it someday. I want it to be true. I think it is. It would be an infinitely more beautiful truth than lordship salvation. Otherwise, there is no hope for someone as sinful as I am. A "scum of the earth" sinner like myself has no hope in a lordship world.
May God bless you for your willingness to help me. Really. I know it’s a lot, but it does help immensely. I suspect there is a crown waiting for you as a reward for your help to the confused, frightened and spiritually wounded.
Have a lovely weekend.
Thank you again for your kind, patient, and well-thought-out replies. To tell you the truth, after looking over these passages again, I'm not even sure what it was I saw in them that made me think along those lines. I think it all boils down to fear. "What if the Lordshippers are right? What if Free Gracers are just making excuses, or playing semantics?" That kind of thing. I suppose in some ways I see myself in Felix, or in the sinners in Revelation, or in those people who would not accept Jesus because of their sin. I worry that I am no different from them. And I don't want to share their fate. But I do know that I have, at least at some point, trusted in Jesus to take my sin away from me. I've felt the relief, the joy that comes with it. I've shed tears (genuinely) thanking Him for doing for me what I could not possibly have done for myself. But that fear still lingers, the doubts still come, the what-ifs still rear their ugly heads. Maybe it's from the years of Lordship teaching I sat under, coupled with a lack of confidence in myself. I was always taught to doubt myself — never trust anyone or anything, because they're all "deceivers" waiting to drag me down to hell. Please continue to pray for me, that I'll find freedom from that, and that I'll simply cling to Jesus and trust HIM over these Lordshippers whenever my doubts come rushing back. He at least has been kind to me, and has loved me, and has desired my best. They have not. Also, you referred to my "definition" of repentance as being a turning from sin — I'm sorry if I gave that impression. That is very much not my definition. That's their definition, and I'm merely asking, "Is it really so?" while hoping that it is not. I believe I told you before how I take a lot of convincing before I can let something go, not because I want it to be so, but because I must be persuaded that it is not so, lest I give myself a false sense of assurance. That's all.
Your testimony mentions that you have always been in the Grace movement. Did you never question it or have doubts? Never a time when you wondered whether the MacArthurs of the world were right? I admire your confidence in your position, and I hope that I too will have it someday. I want it to be true. I think it is. It would be an infinitely more beautiful truth than lordship salvation. Otherwise, there is no hope for someone as sinful as I am. A "scum of the earth" sinner like myself has no hope in a lordship world.
May God bless you for your willingness to help me. Really. I know it’s a lot, but it does help immensely. I suspect there is a crown waiting for you as a reward for your help to the confused, frightened and spiritually wounded.
Have a lovely weekend.
Sat, Aug 5, 8:43 AM
Jonathan wrote:
Hi __________,
Thank you for your kind email. You know, that's an interesting question when you asked me, "Your testimony mentions that you have always been in the Grace movement. Did you never question it or have doubts? Never a time when you wondered whether the MacArthurs of the world were right?" I've never thought about that question quite like that, but here's how I would answer. I don't think that I've ever been afraid the Lordshippers are right. I have had doubts about my salvation to some extent at times, but my fear or concern has never been about whether or not the MacArthurs in the world are right, I know they are not. I think my fear has been what if this whole thing is just not true? What if Christianity and Jesus and the Bible are just not true, and it's a crutch for weak-minded people? I think that has been one of my fears, although not the main one. I think the historicity of Christianity and the empty tomb is convincing evidence that our faith has a rock-solid basis (pun intended, thinking of the empty tomb). But I think my main fear has been what if I'm not believing in Jesus quite right? Like what if I'm missing something? Not in regards to Lordship wondering if they might be right, but what if I'm just like 95% believing the right way but maybe missing one small piece of the "puzzle" (I know it's not a puzzle) somehow? I guess to put it into words, my worry is like if or when I get to the "gates of heaven" someday (not that I doubt that I will, but I mean if that's actually the scenario) and God or an angel asks me why should I let you in, am I going to say the exact right thing? Like how strict are they going to be on saying the exact right words or things? That's my somewhat dumb fear I guess. I say dumb because I think at those times I'm over-complicating it. My name is already written in the Lamb's book of life since I've trusted in Christ (Lk. 10:20; Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5, 20:15, 21:27). There probably won't even be a scenario like I'm imagining at the gates of heaven. You know, my fear is like if I say to the angel at the gates of heaven, "I'm trusting in Jesus' blood to save me; that's my only hope, my only plea." Is the angel going to be like, "Well, what about His resurrection? You forgot to mention that." And then I'll be like, "Well yes, of course. I believe that. I'm trusting in a living Savior." So that kind of thing is more what my doubts have been about. Not Lordship Salvation, but more like is there going to be a "final exam" at the gates of heaven and will I say the right thing or forget something at the last minute? It's kind of stupid I think. But that is a fear that I let get in my head sometimes and I really think it is probably an irrational fear. God knows our hearts, and he isn't trying to keep us out. I also like that Bible verse that says, "There is no fear in love" (1 Jn. 4:18). So I think the Bible answers my fears and doubts, but I have to keep dwelling on God's promises and thinking on the truths of God's Word. I have to put up the shield of faith to stop all the fiery darts of the wicked one (Eph. 6:16-18).
Many blessings to you. Have a great weekend, and thanks for giving me permission to post those questions. God Bless
Many blessings to you. Have a great weekend, and thanks for giving me permission to post those questions. God Bless
By His Grace,
Jonathan
No comments:
Post a Comment