Many today have taken the following passage (Romans 10:9-10) to mean, “acknowledge Jesus death on a cross, acknowledge that you are a sinner, ask Jesus to make His home in your heart, and you will be forgiven of your sins so that you can enter heaven after your physical death.”
If the gospel is to be understood as such, what are we to make of the following words of Jesus:
“Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'”
…what else could possibly be meant by these words than what is the plain and stated meaning of the words!
I guess as evangelicals committed to both the gospel of Jesus, and the authority of Scripture we must come to a new and deeper understanding of just what the gospel is. This passage and others simply do not allow for the atomized, formulaic, and self-focused gospel that has been the mainstay of the Church during my lifetime.
Let us begin by saying that I do not want to denigrate anyone who came to faith in Jesus by way of the “American Gospel” (as this is how I came to faith), nor anyone who has led others to faith in this way (I have also led others to faith in this way); simply to clarify the gospel. Sincere men and women have been describing the gospel in terms of “heaven when you die,” with nothing but heartfelt passion for Jesus and a firm commitment to serve him here on earth. I applaud their devotion to Jesus, and point to their very devotion as yet more reason to rethink the common language of the American Gospel. The compulsion that they feel to live for Jesus this side of heaven, is reason to doubt the message they preach that Jesus only concern is what happens after they die.
9 comments:
If you have truly and asked Jesus to make his home in your heart, then I think you will be on the road to becoming what God intended. This will place you out of the ‘stony ground’ with wonderful opportunities for nourishment and pruning, rather than simply covering your emptiness and faults with declarative-Christian-Americana-candy-coating, that is no more rooted in the Lord than a double dipped cone at the DQ. I do enjoy chocolate, but it sure does melt nice when the heat gets turned up. [fun and emotive language]
One of the first bits of scripture I hid in my heart (that I wasn’t made to) was Luke 6:46, "Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?” I always liked Luke, and not just because he was the only gentile putting pen to paper in those days. In his telling of the gospel he let me know that even thought the Lord would meet me well more than half way, I had to be involved in my own spiritual transformation. Me and Him together…not just a ticket to ride.
Dig the hot-link Title dude.
True it is that many miss this and think a simple prayer is a ticket to heaven. Agreed. That is wrong. But, I would be careful to put works as conditions or even get close to that.
Are there conditions for getting me in and keeping me in the relationship with Jesus? Do I have to earn God's favor? Or, CAN, I earn God's favor?
Our faith is one that is honest in saying that we cannot meet the requirements of the holiness of God. It is the ONLY faith that views things this way with God.
Romans has all the answers...
Romans 3:3 What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God's faithfulness? (This is not a faith of WORKS)
Romans 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.
Romans 4:5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. (Again, the same thought here. We are "justified" because of faith, not by maintaining a code. Even a "spirtual formation" code we might call today as "being with Jesus.")
I submit that it is actually harder to actually believe this to be true, which is what made the rich young ruler walk away. It was not that Jesus was putting a law or condition to earn God's favor, he was pointing out that we really can't do it. Only God can "save" us. Our part is indeed there, but we do not have the power of that the Spirit has. Later in Romans it becomes more clear.
8:26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words
We rely on the Holy Spirit for the power of our sanctification, which is not our justification. Justification is a done deal. God is working in us every day to form us. To go against this really is a miserable life. But, sinning does not erase our "ticket" or our "seal" in Christ or our being buried and raised with Christ. It has consequences such as discipline this side of heaven and loss of reward. And, we quench the Spirit, hampering the power that is working to form us.
We act like we are paupers when we are princes. This is sad. I believe that really the act of transformation is more of an act of the will to allow the Spirit to do His thing in us and partnering with that process by filling our mind with the words of Christ--getting to know him deeper. But, this process is the journey. As Willard says, the spiritual disciplines are a way to grow conduits to God's grace in our life. They are not to earn favor with God. They do not save us. They help us agree with the power of the Spirit that is already in us testifying that we are God's children.
Shalom!
It's funny that you have been thinking about this. Last week God was really speaking to me about this exact subject and I mentioned to a few that He (I) came to understand a deeper meaning of the Gospel, which has normally (in US) been, "Jesus loves you and if you repent he will give you a life you never imagined," but this is not the Gospel; it is only part of the Gospel. The Gospel is "Jesus loves you, gave his life for you; if you repent, give your life as a (living) sacrifice for him, he will give you the desires of your heart (which will be Himself). This was a huge revelation for me last week, which might have been when God was revealing this to you? Jean Vanier in "Community and Growth" calls the (US) Gospel the "gospel of salvation." I can’t have all of him while only giving part of me.
Sean-
This train of thought came out of the conversation we were having the other day about some of the young believers in our midst who are actually trying to learn to live for Jesus instead of settling for the contemporary American, marketable, “religious experience.” We were talking about how they have not been given any options other than being totally sold out for Jesus (with the caveat that it is something pursued wholeheartedly, but lived out with flaws and warts included) when Kyle made the comment that this fruit is a result of the Gospel we preach, and likewise the lack of fruit (that we all have seen) is a result of the gospel that is preached.
…which brings me to the comment Rich made.
Rich, I would not deviate from what you said (especially since much of what you said was a quotation of a highly reputable author J). …much.
Certainly one would be tempted to view our disagreement as merely a semantic one, as it is my understanding that you and I are attempting to live our lives in similar ways (having heard at least some of your heart in what you have written), however I believe that the language we use points to a reality, and I have seen firsthand (and even experienced personally in my own spiritual journey) how the gospel we preach has an impact in the type of people that are produced (Jesus talks an awful lot about fruit!). I believe that the communication of the gospel is not something that we can afford to be slack about, relying on tracts or formulas that have no scriptural precedent (we must do serious violence to the text to pull out the formulas that we do, I will get to that later).
I disagree with the following definitions and/or concepts:
Salvation=Justification
The Gospel=personal salvation
Justification, Sanctification, and Glorification are three distinctly separate aspects of Christian life
Salvation is gained by believing certain facts about the person of Jesus
It is possible to be “saved” without some outward display
The word “know” means something other than “know” when we say “know Jesus,” the words “give your life” mean something other that “give your life” when we say “give your life to Jesus,” the word “love” means something other than “love” when we say “love Jesus,” the word “follow…” you get my point!
I would say that the major disagreement that I have with the gospel preached in America has to do with your comment “Romans has all the answers...” I believe that this is a flawed approach to the Bible; begging the question why was the whole Bible written if Romans was all that was needed, and failing to ask the relevant hermeneutical questions of Paul’s letter in light of 2000 years of global church interpretation of that passage (instead of 50 years of American church interpretation).
We must let the whole of the Bible speak for itself and refrain from “proof-texting” even when it helps us get people to a point of decision. I have heard the distinction made between “accuracy” and “truth.” A statement could be accurate and yet still misleading; still fail in communicating truth. I have used the analogy (forgive me if I have already used it on you) of describing my wife as having two arms and two legs; accurate yet failing to communicate truth. This is the way that I see the “American gospel;” accurate in its delineation of certain aspects of the message of Jesus yet ultimately failing to communicate the message He lived out for us.
“Are there conditions for getting me in and keeping me in the relationship with Jesus?”
I would answer this with a question; what do we mean by “relationship with Jesus?” Do we mean relationship with Jesus, or something else? It is here that I would focus my energies in trying to recast the gospel in new/ancient ways. I too lament the “princes living like paupers,” however I believe that this is a result of the message we preach. If we tell people that they can have salvation (relationship with Jesus) without having relationship with Jesus, what else do we expect…
I would agree that “knowing’ Jesus is a process and a journey, and that our efforts towards that process do not earn our salvation; I would rather say that that journey is salvation. Just as Willard explains the law as “not the source of righteousness, but still the course of righteousness,” so I would say that we do not earn salvation (relationship with Jesus) by having relationship with Jesus, but we do participate/engage/receive salvation (relationship with Jesus) by having relationship with Jesus.
Be blessed brother, I hope nothing is getting too antagonistic here! Come and see the smile on my face and the twinkle in my eye and there will never be any chance of that!
…I will buy you a drink any time… come on down!
Things are heatin' up in Buffalo!
We are saved by grace alone, however…
"Anyone who claims to be intimate with God ought to live the same kind of life Jesus lived." (1 John 2:6) I think Paul fits this description.
"Cheap grace is the deadly enemy of our Church.
Cheap grace means grace as a doctrine, a principle, a system. It means forgiveness of sins proclaimed as general truth, the love of God taught as the Christian 'conception' of God. An intellectual assent to that idea is held to be of itself sufficient to secure remission of sins. The Church which holds the correct doctrine of grace has, it is supposed, ipso facto a part in that grace. In such a Church the world finds a cheap covering for its sins; no contrition is required, still less any real desire to be delivered from sin. Cheap grace therefore amounts to a denial of the living Word of God, in fact, a denial of the Incarnation of the Word of God.
Cheap grace means the justification of sin without the justification of the sinner. Grace alone does everything, they say, and so everything can remain as it was before."
(Dietrich Bonhoeffer Cost of Discipleship pg. 1)
I think we all agree that we are saved by grace alone, however, what we probably disagree on is the cost that “salvation” will then have in reference to our “own” lives. Becoming a follower of Christ does require repentance of sins (Romans), however, by virtue of who we then become (Christians) we must continue to follow Christ picking up our cross, so his life may be plainly seen in those around us. Grace is free, but it is not cheap. I appreciate what Kyle said too, “the (American) church teaches people how to say a prayer, not how to live a life.” At the church I was hired at, one year we counted 85 people who had marked the “salvation” box on our card; yet our leadership couldn’t tell you the spiritual condition of more than 5 of those people a year later. Oh well, at least they’re “saved.” Jesus and Paul never taught people how to say a prayer; they taught them how to live a life…”(Jesus) follow me” or “(Paul) I urge you to imitate me.” Where is the “salvation” prayer in the gospels?
At what point is simply 'being' a work? Is there a difference between "I am a Christian" and "I have Chrisitan feelings or thoughts now and again"?
When I read that bit in Hebrews 5:11-6:12 I am joyful there are "things that accompany salvation." But enjoying knowledge [only slightly aware of its traps],I often wonder if "solid food" is meant to be found in all that new fangled book learnin', or in those "elementary truths of God's word" that simple farmers can understand. It isn't so much that I lost the gift of salvation and decided to start a thistle garden and roadside stand (Heb 6:8), it's that I never truly accepted the gift, much less actually hide it away in my heart.
I am so thankful God is God, and that we get to meet him where we are at. Good stuff...
One has to either believe that we are not saved by working or not. Lordship Salvation is really what you seem to be saying here, Steve. You resemble John McArther in that aspect. I would say Galatians is the book that deals with the idea of justification so specificially where Paul mentions how he defeated Peter's idea of adding circumision (on OUTWARD SIGN).
Justification, Santification and Glorification all come from the cross and are our "salvation"-or the process of salvation (being made whole). But, we do not experience these at the SAME time (expect that the first two are begun at the same time). So, justification is the penalty of sin being taken care of, sanctification is what comes after this when we "work out" salvation, and glorification is certianly when we are dead. Imputed righteousness as opposed to imparted righteousness.
Grace is not cheap. Read Romans 5 to hear the heart of Paul on this. "Shall you sin more so grace might increase.." This is answered there. The fact is that we just can't beleive that God's grace is big enough, powerful enough without our works being added in the mix. And, the mystery is that legalistic living will not save you, regardless of how much outward expression you can attain--such as the ascetics and walking on glass, keeping a Hebrew diet, doing three quiet times a day, speaking in more tongues than your neighbor.
When Jesus says "I did not know you" he is saying that all the OUTWARD things you did are not what saves you. I (Jesus) DO. Even in our sanctified state, we cannot be good enough to meet God's standards for salvation. Even with best intentions, we "miss the mark." It only takes one drop of sin to make us far from God. What keeps us justified--the blood of Jesus. Remember the parable of the workers--the ones that came at the END of the day got the same reward. This is how God's kingdom works. This is grace. It is not cheap. It is MORE costly.
When we live for Christ it is out of the conviction of sonship (Romans 8) not out of the fear of loss of relationship. One cannot say he has more faith because he can behave a certian way. WIllard calls this the gospel of "sin management" where we think behaviorally. Think heart--not just behavior. Who are we to think that just cause one person is so scared that he behaves in a way that looks saved that he is really saved? That is certainly not grace.
Oh well...of course if you bent is Armenius, then there is futility in further discussion about this. Again--imputed righteousness or imparted righteousness??
“One has to either believe that we are not saved by working or not. Lordship Salvation is really what you seem to be saying here, Steve. You resemble John McArther in that aspect. I would say Galatians is the book that deals with the idea of justification so specificially where Paul mentions how he defeated Peter's idea of adding circumision (on OUTWARD SIGN).”
I will try to be clear on this point; I do not believe that there is anything that we can do to earn salvation. I have not actually tried to address what one must “do” to be saved in anything I have said. There is only one thing that must be “done” to be saved, and that is to receive salvation; to trust God for it enough to ask (Romans 10:9-10). What I have been trying to describe and define is the nature of salvation, not how to be saved.
”Justification, Santification and Glorification all come from the cross and are our "salvation"-or the process of salvation (being made whole). But, we do not experience these at the SAME time (expect that the first two are begun at the same time). So, justification is the penalty of sin being taken care of, sanctification is what comes after this when we "work out" salvation, and glorification is certianly when we are dead. Imputed righteousness as opposed to imparted righteousness.”
I recognize the terms and understand how they are used; I do not have a problem defining the concepts, and I do recognize the (limited) benefits of speaking of salvation in these terms; my problem is that speaking of salvation in light of these “reduced” terms inherently inhibits our understanding of the gospel message as a whole. Why must we divorce concepts from each other that were thought of as what one author called an “ancient unity?” If Jesus did not feel compelled to explain the gospel in these terms, why do we? Why should we even divorce the imputed from the imparted? It amounts to the theological hairsplitting that simply allows us to live our lives apart from God, while still claiming his presence. (Please understand that I do not speak of your life, but of mine. This very understanding is what allowed me to call myself a “Christ”-ian with out any commitment to Christ, for so many years.)
”Grace is not cheap. Read Romans 5 to hear the heart of Paul on this. "Shall you sin more so grace might increase.." This is answered there. The fact is that we just can't beleive that God's grace is big enough, powerful enough without our works being added in the mix. And, the mystery is that legalistic living will not save you, regardless of how much outward expression you can attain--such as the ascetics and walking on glass, keeping a Hebrew diet, doing three quiet times a day, speaking in more tongues than your neighbor.”
Again, I do not believe that works of any kind will save. I simply say that works of some kind will always proceed from our salvation; no this does not go far enough; I would say that it is deeper than works following salvation, it is that salvation is knowing Jesus, and experiencing his fellowship. It is not that “knowing Jesus” is what earns our salvation, it is that “knowing Jesus” is the definition of salvation! We do not earn our relationship with him by anything we do, but to say that we can have relationship with him without having relationship with him is to say nothing at all.
”When Jesus says "I did not know you" he is saying that all the OUTWARD things you did are not what saves you. I (Jesus) DO. Even in our sanctified state, we cannot be good enough to meet God's standards for salvation. Even with best intentions, we "miss the mark." It only takes one drop of sin to make us far from God. What keeps us justified--the blood of Jesus. Remember the parable of the workers--the ones that came at the END of the day got the same reward. This is how God's kingdom works. This is grace. It is not cheap. It is MORE costly.”
It seems to me that you are doing an injustice to the text. If Jesus wanted to make the point you are making, why didn’t he say that instead of what he did say? Again, I am not arguing that we can ever “make the mark,” I am simply saying that Jesus is not offering us entrance into heaven, he is offering us Himself. Jesus is not talking about the relationship between works and entering heaven, he is talking about the relationship between a relationship with him and entering heaven.
I agree that God’s economy operates on grace; the difference between our respective understandings of this parable lie in what the “payment” is: I understand you to say that payment is forgiveness of sins and subsequent entrance into heaven upon our physical death, whereas I believe that “payment” is friendship with God.
”When we live for Christ it is out of the conviction of sonship (Romans 8) not out of the fear of loss of relationship. One cannot say he has more faith because he can behave a certian way. WIllard calls this the gospel of "sin management" where we think behaviorally. Think heart--not just behavior. Who are we to think that just cause one person is so scared that he behaves in a way that looks saved that he is really saved? That is certainly not grace.”
Again, I am not primarily addressing the issue of what we do to become “saved” (what a problematic term!), I am trying to describe what that “salvation” is like. I seem to hear you saying that salvation looks like heaven when you die, whereas I would describe salvation by Jesus words in John 10:10. I would never point to an individual and say “saved, not-saved,” (didn’t someone important say not to do this?) I am saying only that Jesus did not primarily describe salvation in terms of after-death experiences, but rather a present reality. It is not an issue of how much we sin, or how passionately we worship, that will save us (we cannot do anything to earn our salvation!!); it is that if we are “saved” (read “experiencing abundant life”) we will be “experiencing abundant life” (read “saved”). Grace is often described as “unmerited favor,” what would it look like for you to experience “favor?” That is what salvation looks like, even though it is still “unmerited!” Are we trying to say that because God’s favor is unmerited, we don’t have to experience, it to experience it… ?? If we are living out of “sonship” then we will be living out of sonship! One cannot be a son with out the relationship to a Father, the term son is defined by its relationship to “father!”
I would humbly suggest that you and I are not understanding Willard in at all the same way. I did not understand him to be making the point you are trying to use him to make, in fact I understood him to be making the opposite point. This is one of the things that has intrigued me about our conversation; you have read some of the same works that I have and yet seem to be saying the opposite of what I take those works to say. I do not say I know them better than you, only that we have very different understandings of what we have read, we must certainly sit down together at some point.
”Oh well...of course if you bent is Armenius, then there is futility in further discussion about this. Again--imputed righteousness or imparted righteousness??”
Don’t make assumptions… I hope and pray that my “bent” is Jesus. I simply recognize the inherent problems with a Calvinist position when we judge it as Jesus instructed us to judge (Matthew 7:15-20); and I recognize the hermeneutical assumptions that undergird the Calvinist position. Do we see the Bible as written to “tell me how to go to heaven,” or is it given to us so that we can understand and know God? Ultimately I have to ask, is the Gospel about me, or is it about Jesus?
Salvation is about Jesus not about us! Certainly the Gospel that Jesus preached during his ministry was one that brought great hope to all, and included within it the concept of personal salvation (which itself includes the concept of “heaven when you die”), but it was so much more! Which I will address in my next post…
I know I’m not getting my degree in Greek, but I thought I’d give some new spunk to some NT texts.
"Then someone came to him and said 'Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?' And he said to him 'Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into life, (say the salvation prayer).' He said to him, 'Which (prayer)?' And Jesus said, '(You know, the salvation prayer)' The young man said to him, '(I said the prayer)' Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come follow me." (Matthew 19:16-21)
"One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: 'aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!'
But the other criminal rebuked him. 'Don't you fear God,' he said, 'since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.'
Then he said, 'Jesus, remember me when you come into you kingdom.'
Jesus answered him, '(First, repeat after me...)' (Luke 23:39-43)
”Oh well...of course if you bent is Armenius, then there is futility in further discussion about this…”
I am a Calmeniest thank you very much. There are other reasons why this discussion could be futile, but we’re all pastors here, so no worries.
Post a Comment