Stan, Aaron and DeeAnna, those are excellent points.

Something John MacArthur said once in an interview with Phil Johnson struck me. Phil asked MacArthur how the doctrine of God’s sovereignty had a practical impact on his ministry. MacArthur answered by saying that without God’s ability to sovereignly work through the gospel, he would feel the weight of every non-conversion on his shoulders. He would constantly be worried about a person who might be missing something in what he said, and as such, lose their eternal salvation because he wasn’t clear or persuasive enough with his human arguments. But in believing that God works through the proclamation of the good news to save souls, MacArthur pointed out that the preacher’s job becomes relatively simple–teach what the Bible does and let the Holy Spirit do the rest. Sadly, Osteen and other purveyors of the “prosperity gospel” have taken it upon themselves to “improve” the good news so that it will be palatable to the greatest number of people, but as Paul would say, this is no gospel at all (Galatians 1:6-7).

Greg

Greg thank you for sharing that MacArthur story.

I so needed it today! My shoulders were feeling a bit droopy.

Ane

One of the things that puzzles me about the prosperity preachers--or at least the willingness of large numbers of people to show up in their stadiums and theatres--is they are basically reduced to saying variations of the same thing over and over again.

Granted, this can be a problem in many churches if the preacher has a particular hobby-horse theological fixation. But it’s pronounced among those I would label as prosperity preachers (T.D. Jakes apparently refers to himself as a “life-coach").

That’s why I have a hard time understanding the huge followings many of these celebrity preachers have. I would think that after a while, most people would realize this and become bored rather quickly. And maybe this does happen, and there is a great deal of turnover in these churches, but I guess the mega-churches thrive in part on curiosity and the natural human longing for fellowship and positive messages, so there is always a new group of people coming in to replace the ones that leave.

The other thing that sticks out when I watch these preachers is their messages typically consist of broad, sweeping generalities about their audiences that obviously can’t be true for every person.  Everyone’s assumed to be having job problems, or money problems, or having kids on drugs, or dreaming of a bigger house, or nicer car, etc. What if none of these things are true?

[quote author="Greg"]Glenn, I understand your points, but we have explicit Scriptures dealing with God’s role in our salvation that I think are at odds your understanding of this parable. I think I’ve mentioned this text before, but it bears repeating again:

“Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from work...” (Romans 4:4-6 ESV)

If the Bible is to be its own interpreter, we must find harmony between the parable of the talents in Matthew 25 and Paul’s explicit teaching on justification in Romans 4.

To reconcile this apparent contradiction, we can see in the parable that those who are redeemed will respond by bearing fruit for the master. The unredeemed servent does not respond in kind, and we know he is unredeemed because he criticizes his master’s character: “Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground.” (Matthew 5:24-25). If this servant had genuine faith, he would not have rationalized his decision to hide the talent by criticizing the master.

This parable shows that true salvation results in good works. Said another way, we are justified by a faith that only God can see, but the results of our justification can be seen by men in our works. Incidentally, this is the take-home message of James 2:24. Getting back to the parable, if any of the servents were saved because of what they did with the talents, Romans 4:4-6, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:4-6 (and other Scriptures) are implicated as being false and salvation is at least partly of works.

Putting this all together, a helpful formula for salvation is:

Faith = Salvation + Works

not

Faith + Works = Salvation

Also, I’d like to suggest that if we make the concept of man-centered vs. God-centered religion into a false dichotomy, we’ve moved down the path toward Roman Catholicism (and other works-based religions) where man cooperates with God to secure his own salvation. This is in direct contradiction to Romans 9 and many other Scriptures. “Salvation is of the Lord” (Jonah 2:9)–not just partially, but completely.

Greg

There’s not much here I would disagree with.

Regarding Jonah and Ninevah, however, I would just point out that while salvation is from the Lord, the people of Ninevah actually did repent. And the effect of this repenting was to change the mind of God towards them (or to at least put off the city’s punishment). That God changed His mind towards Ninevah is what so incensed Jonah.

Jonah 3:

1 And the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time, saying,

2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.

3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey.

4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.

7 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:

8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.

9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not .

[quote author="Greg"]Glenn, I understand your points, but we have explicit Scriptures dealing with God’s role in our salvation that I think are at odds your understanding of this parable. I think I’ve mentioned this text before, but it bears repeating again:

“Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from work...” (Romans 4:4-6 ESV)

If the Bible is to be its own interpreter, we must find harmony between the parable of the talents in Matthew 25 and Paul’s explicit teaching on justification in Romans 4.

Greg

At the risk of belaboring this point, one way of reconciling the assertions of these texts is to understand that by “belief”, Paul does not mean here merely an intellectual or verbal assent to something, but that the term “belief” encompasses something more akin to “followership”.

The unfaithful servant with the one talent was identified in the parable as a servant of the master, so as I would understand it, this man was at least a self-proclaimed believer. But what really mattered was not whatever this servant proclaimed in words, but what he actually did in deeds, which was a product not of his words or intellectual beliefs, but of the state of his heart, which his derogatory comments about his master illustrate. 

[quote author="glennspring"]
At the risk of belaboring this point, one way of reconciling the assertions of these texts is to understand that by “belief”, Paul does not mean here merely an intellectual or verbal assent to something, but that the term “belief” encompasses something more akin to “followership”.

Glenn, “followership” sounds a lot like “faithfulness”, which is different than “faith”. There is a big debate in Reformed circles right now over this concept of “faith” vs. “faithfulness”, with some arguing it is only by continued “faithfulness” that men can be saved.

Paul’s argument in Romans 4:4-6 really undermines this idea, though, don’t you think? He doesn’t allow for any human action to enter into the picture, even bringing up Abraham as his chief example. Abraham was justified by God before he did anything at all. He was even asleep when God ratified the covenant with him (Genesis 15:12)!

We need to be careful how we think about faith, because we can easily turn it from a gift of God into a work we perform. Christians do have work to perform, but it is in response to what God has done in saving us, not as a way to secure or maintain our salvation. This is precisely the order of cause and effect presented in Ephesians 2:8-10.

Greg

[quote author="Glennspring"]
But what really mattered was not whatever this servant proclaimed in words, but what he actually did in deeds, which was a product not of his words or intellectual beliefs, but of the state of his heart, which his derogatory comments about his master illustrate.

One more thought on this. The first concern here is indeed the “state of the heart”, and Jeremiah 17:9 says, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” So the heart must change somehow before belief can occur, which subsequently gives rise to actions that others can see. And there is only one way I know for the heart to be changed–it must happen through a sovereign act of God (John 3:6-8, Ephesians 1:3-10, and 2 Corinthians 5:17).

Greg

[quote author="Greg"][quote author="Glennspring"]
But what really mattered was not whatever this servant proclaimed in words, but what he actually did in deeds, which was a product not of his words or intellectual beliefs, but of the state of his heart, which his derogatory comments about his master illustrate.

One more thought on this. The first concern here is indeed the “state of the heart”, and Jeremiah 17:9 says, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” So the heart must change somehow before belief can occur, which subsequently gives rise to actions that others can see. And there is only one way I know for the heart to be changed–it must happen through a sovereign act of God (John 3:6-8, Ephesians 1:3-10, and 2 Corinthians 5:17).

Greg

I agree with the bolded statements you’ve made. Absolutely.

[quote author="Greg"][quote author="glennspring"]
At the risk of belaboring this point, one way of reconciling the assertions of these texts is to understand that by “belief”, Paul does not mean here merely an intellectual or verbal assent to something, but that the term “belief” encompasses something more akin to “followership”.

Glenn, “followership” sounds a lot like “faithfulness”, which is different than “faith”. There is a big debate in Reformed circles right now over this concept of “faith” vs. “faithfulness”, with some arguing it is only by continued “faithfulness” that men can be saved.

Greg

Michael Horton partially addresses this in the Amazing Grace book, where he briefly discusses the distinction some Christians draw between Christ as Savior and Christ as Lord. My reading of the book’s discussion was that Horton doesn’t appear to care for the “Lordship” frame of reference.

While the problem of “faithfulness” theology may indeed lend itself to human credit-claiming, a faith-as-intellectual-belief-only risks undermining the importance of the new birth as transformative experience and acceptance of Jesus as both Lord and Savior.

I would be interested in any material you may know of that thoroughly addresses the role of sin and repentence in the Christian life. It doesn’t seem to be a point of emphasis in most of what I have read on Calvinist sites so far (although I think the Greg Gibson site does give greater attention to this).

Glenn,

First, I am very thankful we agree that God must change our hearts.

Second, your point about repentance is a very good one. I’m sure I haven’t emphasized this point nearly enough here. Often we get caught up discussing something else, and confession of sin and repentance gets lost in the shuffle. I hope to do better on this in the future.

If you examine the lives of the Puritans, you’ll see that they placed a heavy emphasis on confession and turning from sin. These men and women believed God was sovereign to save them, but also gave rise to a response in them that made them hate their own sin and endeavor to “walk in the light” as a result. There’s a book of Puritan prayers that captures these thoughts so well, and I will be happy to send a paperback copy to you or anyone else who might be interested, just email me at This is an absolutely free offer with no strings attached–you don’t even need to agree with my theology to ask for it!

Here is an example prayer named “Confession and Petition”:

Holy Lord, I have sinned times without number, and been guilty of pride and unbelief, of failure to find Thy mind in Thy Word, of neglect to seek Thee in my daily life. My transgressions and short-comings present me with a list of accusations, but I bless Thee that they will not stand against me, for all have been laid on Christ. Go on to subdue my corruptions, and grant me grace to live above them. Let not the passions of the flesh nor lustings of the mind bring my spirit into subjection, but do Thou rule over me in liberty and power.

I thank Thee that many of my prayers have been refused. I have asked amiss and do not have, I have prayed from lusts and been rejected, I have longed for Egypt and been given a wilderness. Go on with Thy patient work, answering ‘no’ to my wrongful prayers, and fitting me to accept it. Purge me from every false desire, every base aspiration, everything contrary to Thy rule. I thank Thee for Thy wisdom and Thy love, for all the acts of discipline to which I am subject, for sometimes putting me into the furnace to refine my gold and remove my dross.

No trial is so hard to bear as a sense of sin. If Thou shouldst give me choice to live in pleasure and keep my sins, or to have them burnt away with trial, give me sanctified affliction. Deliver me from every evil habit, every accretion of former sins, everything that dims the brightness of Thy grace in me, everything that prevents me taking delight in Thee. Then I shall bless Thee, God of jeshurun, for helping me to be upright.

Glenn, you also may be interested to read what the John Piper has to say about 1 John 1:7-10. The transcription of his sermon on the subject is here. Here’s an excerpt:

[quote author="John Piper"]
I think the implication is that one essential part of walking in the light is confessing known sin. Walking in the light does not mean perfection, for then verse 7 would make no sense at all—“if we walk in the light, we are cleansed from sin!” If walking in the light meant perfection, there would be no need for cleansing. Besides, verse 8 warns against claiming to be sinless while you walk in the light.

Walking in the light means seeing things the way God sees them and responding the way he does. We walk in the light when we hate the sin we fall into and name it for the ugly thing it is and agree with God about it and turn from it. So confessing sin is a crucial part of walking in the light. And verse 9 makes forgiveness of sin dependent of the walking in the light. Therefore we are warranted in taking the cleansing of verse 7 to refer forgiveness and not just to sanctification.

In sum then the on-going cleansing of the blood of Jesus in our lives refers to two things. First, it refers to the experience of having all our sins forgiven, so that God does not hold any of them against us. It is the experience of being acquitted or justified, as Paul says in Romans 5:9, “Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.” And Ephesians 1:7, “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses.” To be cleansed by the blood of Jesus means first to have all our sins forgiven (past present and future)!

I also agree that Greg Gibson does a good job in this area, from what little I’ve been able to read on his site.

Greg

Posted anonymously by: Anonymous

I became a member of the church in the 60s and if we had done what God called us to do we would not be on this earth,
The time to be obedient to death has arrived,
Samir will be judged according to hs meticulous obedience to God’s will. So will you and I. Jesus also insulted the disciples by talking to an outsider at the well and Jesus chose an outsider to bring many to worship his name while his faithful insiders were upset about his inclusive attitude. Are we winning the multitude with the good news or are we still upset with Jesus conversation with the outsider who brought a multitude to Christ while the 12 pure ones brought noone to the Master that day. Should we crucify this man who dares to break with our traditions? Should we listen to the prophets? Should we encourage Samir to travel the safe path which allows us to stay in our comfortable disobedience?

Posted anonymously by: Anonymous

Am I not saving myself by works when I choose to ignore the Sabbath rest?

Posted anonymously by: Anonymous

I wish I knew more about how people in the 10-40 window view the gospel, and to what extent they are able to separate their perceptions of Christiandom (linked to less desireable aspects of western culture, perhaps?) from genuine Christ centered Christianity--the kind I think we truly seek.

I left adventism for the sake of the gospel.  I’ve personally told Samir what leaving cost me.  He at least knows that for some of us the gospel isn’t a commodity that can be compromised on a whim.

At the same time, maybe we should see what happens.  If the Lord is in it, we’ll soon know.

Bob

Greg,

Thank you for sharing the comment by John MacArthur in regard to God’s sovereign election.  The excerpt from the MacArthur interview really brought home to me, in a new light, my background as a publishing leader in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.  We used to exchange stories at literature evangelist (colporteur) rallies about instances when a worker didn’t bother to canvass the last house on the block before going home for the night. Sadly, only later to discover that the person in that last house committed suicide just moments after the colporteur left for home without ringing his doorbell. These stories were meant to create a guilt trip for not working more diligently in reaching the lost.  We even encouraged literature evangelists to canvass six days a week and even on Saturdays nights after the sun had set.

Oh, how I regret all those instructions and stories that even resulted in some colporteurs losing their marriages through divorce because they were hardly ever at home. The weight of everyone’s salvation, in their district, was supposedly upon their shoulders.  The constant theme was “Sales mean Souls.” Indeed, it really does make a difference whether we embrace the doctrines of grace that salvation is from the Lord.  The difference between Arminianism and Calvinism is not just empty rhetoric.  Calvinism removes the guilt from our shoulders in our likely having said the wrong word or having acted somehow imperfectly in regard to our witness to others. For many reasons, the doctrines of grace even help us to sleep better at night.  To God be all the glory!

It’s all about Him,

Dennis Fischer

Hi Dennis, Until your post I had completely blanked out that, back in the 70’s when I joined the church, I tried colporteuring and consider it one of the most depressing periods of my life. I found the whole approach quite repugnant and have no idea why I didn’t flee for my life - took me another 30+ years to figure out that something was wrong.

John Douglas