This is the final of the two part series by Pastor Tom Stegall. You may read Part One and find that Pastor Stegall is answering this question,
Lou, if a person wanted to still be an idolator and be a Christian, would you tell him:Pastor Stegall opened by stating,
a) he could not continue in idolatry
b) he would need to stop the idolatry after he accepts Christ
This is a loaded theological question that will require some careful unpacking. Yet, it is worthwhile to answer since it presents an opportunity to highlight once again the radical difference between the biblical, grace-oriented approach to salvation and the inherently meritorious, works-based approach of Lordship Salvation.Let's continue now with the conclusion of this compelling series.
Another question that must first be addressed before someone could answer the question above is, what is idolatry according to the Bible? Is it not giving to any created thing the honor and devotion that is due only to the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ? Many people don’t even realize the extent to which they are idolatrous when they first believe in Christ. When a man loves football to such an extent that he chooses to skip church on Sunday mornings in order to catch the pre-game show and not miss the kick-off and watches his favorite team for at least 3 hours each game, how is he NOT an idolater?! And if a person has to be willing to give up certain sins, such as idolatry, to be saved, isn’t this really saying that he has to be willing to give up watching football and come to church in order to be saved? Sounds like a works-salvation to me! And what else does he have to give up before he has forsaken all forms of idolatry and is now finally saved? For that matter, since the first two commandments prohibit having any other gods before the LORD or making idolatrous images (Exod. 20:1-4), isn’t this approach really requiring that a person must keep the commandments, the Law, in order to be justified in the sight of God? That is not salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone but is the very meritorious, legalistic, works-based salvation so clearly condemned in the New Testament (Rom. 3:19-28; Gal. 1:6-9; 2:16; 3:1-13; 5:1-6).
Finally, we must ask regarding Kime’s propositional question, what does the phrase “wanted to still be an idolator” mean? The term “wanted” has also been left undefined and is quite ambiguous. What verse in all of Scripture speaks in terms of “wanting” versus “not wanting” certain sins in order to be saved, born again, justified, redeemed, receive eternal life, etc.? The issue and condition of eternal life is always stated to be a matter of “believing” something. It is conspicuous that Scripture never presents the condition for salvation in terms of us being willing not to sin certain sins or sin to a certain unacceptable degree. Why are there no Bible verses that say something along this order, “He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him and wills not to sin, shall not perish,” (John 3:16); or “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and will not to sin, and you shall be saved,” (Acts 16:31)? Therefore, we must ask, is this question at hand derived from what WE think God must require for salvation or is it driven by what GOD has actually stated in His Word to be the condition for salvation?
The Bible itself nowhere requires that we must be willing to no longer sin in some particular area before God will save us.
God is not asking US to do something with respect to our sin problem before He will save us. Rather, He is merely asking us to believe what HE has already done for our sin-problem through the propitiatory death of His Son at Calvary.
Romans 3:24-25 says, “being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood....” Some professing but legalistic Christians view God as not being practically satisfied with the work of His Son. They think that they must resolve to do something about their sins in order to satisfy God before He is willing to save them. Their own resolve practically becomes the propitiating factor with God. No longer is it Christ Jesus “Himself” who is the propitiation for our sins (1 John 2:2), it is Christ plus the determined sinner that ultimately brings satisfaction for sin in God’s sight. Yet, it is solely the Rock of Ages upon which we are rest our confidence for acceptance before God, as the hymn writer put it years ago: “Could my zeal no respite know, could my tears forever flow, these for sin could not atone, Thou must save and Thou alone.”
God already knows our future earthly life and walk with all its sins and failures at the moment of new birth; and yet in spite of foreseen future failure He accepts us and clothes us with His righteousness. And if this is true, we must then ask, from God’s perspective, why would He be any more willing to save a person who willed and determined not to sin and yet still ended up sinning anyway (as all Christians do) versus the one who didn’t resolve or determine to stop sinning and yet still ended up sinning just the same? In either case, both parties still sin and God knows they will both still sin. From God’s vantage point, at the very moment He regenerates a soul He already knows that individual is going to choose to sin after the new birth, and yet He accepts that person on the basis of the finished work of His Son not their future performance or even their present determination not to sin.
In fact, to say that God will only save the one who wills or determines to stop sinning and yet continues to sin anyway (as all Christians do after conversion) actually depreciates the holiness and righteousness of God. It does this by teaching in essence that God is not so concerned with whether we actually commit sin but only that we desire not to. In other words, the committal of sin is inconsequential; it is the intentions that count! But salvation is never granted to mankind on the basis of his good intentions, but only on the basis of the perfect, finished work of Christ which is the only thing that satisfied the just requirements of an infinitely righteous God.
With that said, one final clarification is in order regarding Kime’s proposition and the sole condition for becoming a Christian (i.e., becoming born again). The preceding explanation should not be misinterpreted to mean that a sinner can actually consider sin to be a good thing, or acceptable, while still exercising faith in Christ for salvation. That is impossible. In order for people to place their faith in Christ’s propitious death for their sins, they must come to a realization and acceptance of the fact that they are sinners (Rom. 3:9-12). As such, they come to accept the fact that they are guilty before God and worthy of His judgment (Rom. 3:19-20), and that apart from Christ’s finished work and salvation by grace, they stand separated from a holy God (Rom. 3:23-25). When this realization and acceptance occurs within a lost sinner, this is biblical repentance. Such repentance is inherent to faith in Christ (Acts 20:21). Therefore, when lost people come to see their sin and its consequences, the normal result is to no longer intend to continue sinning out of sheer gratitude and appreciation for Christ’s atoning death. But although this determination normally accompanies repentance, it is not inherent to repentance; nor is it necessary for salvation. It is necessary for on-going fellowship with God (1 John 1:3-10).
Pastor Tom Stegall
Pastor Tom Stegall is author of the new book, The Gospel of the Christ: A Biblical Response to the Crossless Gospel Regarding the Contents of Saving Faith and pastor of the Word of Grace Bible Church in West Allis, WI.
Previous articles by Tom Stegall include:
Vigilance Regarding the Truth of the Gospel: Reengaging the Heresy of the GES “Crossless” Gospel
Does “Final Salvation” Serve as a Cover for Works-Salvation?
The Gospel of the Christ: The “No Lordship” Counter-Claim
Is the Message of Salvation in Luke’s Gospel?
Excellent work Pastor Stegall. What more could I say? I want to quote nearly your entire article and say "GOOD JOB!!" on each paragraph.
ReplyDeleteKev
Excellent! This concise yet thorough treatment of the topic was a means of refreshment to my sin sick soul. Oh that such clear teaching was the mark of our churches today; sadly my experience indicates it is not. I would have saved many years of gloom & much unnecessary heartache if I had known such clear gospel teaching when I first began to ask after the way to eternal life. May God richly bless this article to many souls. Thank you for posting it.
ReplyDeletePC
Bros. Lou and Tom,
ReplyDeleteThank you for this two part series. Tom, you have articulated well what the Bible says concerning salvation. We must give what the Bible says and not what we desire it to say.
God is not asking US to do something with respect to our sin problem before He will save us. Rather, He is merely asking us to believe what HE has already done for our sin-problem through the propitiatory death of His Son at Calvary.
ReplyDeleteWhat I cannot figure out is, why does the LS crowd have a problem with this? What is wrong with this statement that they must repudiate it as they do? Especially with Pastor Stegall's explanation at the end of the article. I just don't get it. Why is simple faith and trust in Christ crucified so offensive to them? Can anyone make heads or tails of it? I am at a loss.
JanH
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKev/Pat/Brian/Jan:
ReplyDeleteThanks for these kind remarks. Ps. Stegall is on a very tight schedule this week. He will try to respond by weeks end.
I am so grateful for this excellent two part series. I trust it will strengthen our resolve to resist the teaching and spread of Lordship Salvation and help the unsuspecting from falling into the trap of Lordship's works based theology.
Lou
Kev, Pat, Brian, Jan,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the positive comments. It’s good to see that there are others passionately convinced of the “true grace of God” (1 Pt. 5:12) for eternal salvation.
Jan wrote: "What I cannot figure out is, why does the LS crowd have a problem with this? What is wrong with this statement that they must repudiate it as they do? Especially with Pastor Stegall's explanation at the end of the article. I just don't get it. Why is simple faith and trust in Christ crucified so offensive to them? Can anyone make heads or tails of it? I am at a loss."
Two points to consider.
(1) The sin of pride is a pandemic of universal proportions that encompasses even LS “evangelicals” and “fundamentalists.” Mankind is systemically plagued with pride in our sinful, fallen natures; and as a result, we naturally have an aversion to God’s grace and a bent towards earning the favor of God by some work that we can do---any work. Even something as virtuous as “turning from sin” is a work if it is deemed to be required to make a person acceptable to God. Think about it---it really doesn’t matter whether it is a Muslim trying to keep the commands of the Qur’an, the Jew, Roman Catholic, or Protestant trying to keep the 10 commandments to be accepted by God, the Hindu living a better life to come back reincarnated to a higher caste level, or the Buddhist trying to keep the Eight-fold path to attain nirvana. It’s all works. It’s all pride. It’s all an affront to God’s grace and salvation through faith in Christ alone. This point was indelibly impressed upon me by the Lord years ago. I had an agnostic friend and co-worker who I had been witnessing to tell me that he didn’t believe there was a God or a heaven or a hell. But if he discovered upon his death that God really does exist, along with heaven and hell, he was sure that he would go to heaven because he had lived such a good life!
(2) Some sincere Christians, including LS proponents, are genuinely concerned by the masses of professing “born again” Christians who live lives indistinguishable from the lost world around them. I share this concern. But they think that the reason there are so many false professions must be that sin is not taken seriously enough---that professing Christians haven’t really dealt with sin seriously enough by turning away from it. They say that if these masses did believe in Christ, they didn’t believe with the right “kind” of faith---a dedicated, committed, surrendered, working, turning kind of faith. But this misses the boat completely. The solution isn’t trying to get people to do something about their sin but to believe that God has already fully dealt with their sin-problem through His Son---the only Savior and sole object of faith. Thus, I think a lot of LS Christians are sincere but mistaken and misfocused; and this is often due to inherent human pride that seeks to find some work to do to merit acceptance before God. The sufficiency of the cross to satisfy the infinite righteousness of God is the real offence to people looking for just one work to do—whether it be circumcision (Gal. 5:11; 6:11-14) or claiming that I turned from all my sins to be saved.
Tom S.
I enjoyed the articles and comments. Hopefully it will also have an impact on Mr Kime.
ReplyDeleteSwrdnShld:
ReplyDeleteYou have twice tried to post here and I have not allowed either to appear. If you want a response to your question send it to me in an e-mail with your real name.
I am not open to allowing comments/questions from those will will not identify themselves.
LM
Lou, for whatever reason my computer will not let me open your email.
ReplyDeleteI have added some more details about myself, but am leary of the internet. Is that sufficient?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSwrdnShld:
ReplyDeleteMy e-mail is indefense06@gmail.com
I just sent you an e-mail from your blogger profile. Now you have my e-mail to which you can respond to with your full name and question. I’m sure your computer can handle an e-mail to me.
Full name and I will have a response for you from myself and Ps. Stegall. Your name will not appear on the Internet. You are going to reveal your identity to me in the e-mail or we are done here. As I said above, no identity, no response.
LM
Brother Martuneac, Would you be willing to explain why my comment was initially approved but later deleted without comment? Please and thank you.
ReplyDeleteDavid Oestreich
Dave:
ReplyDeleteThanks for asking. Blogger has been having some issues with its comment box and uploads. I lost over a dozen comments in various threads. In another thread I accidentally deleted about 8, which I was able to retrieve from my e-mail alerts. If you will resubmit it, I'll be happy to reload it. If you remember the date I'll try to find it in my e-mail alerts and send it back to you so you can upload it again; OK?
Sorry, but I really don't know what hapened to yours, it may have gone away when I lost the other ones I mentioned above.
LM
While it is true that it is not necessary to identify the depths of idolatry in detail in order to be saved from it, idolatry is one of the sins pointed out in both Old and New Testament in texts that point to the need for salvation. The 10 commandments, whose purpose is to identify sin. Paul identified idolatry as one of the sins that keeps a person from eternal life. The Holy Spirit wrote both passages that identify this sin. Therefore when pointing one to the reality of sin, which all of us deny before we come to Christ, idolatry is one sin to which most honest people will admit.
ReplyDeleteWhen you say,"Therefore, when lost people come to see their sin and its consequences, the normal result is to no longer intend to continue sinning out of sheer gratitude and appreciation for Christ’s atoning death. But although this determination normally accompanies repentance, it is not inherent to repentance; nor is it necessary for salvation" it sounds to me that you have said it is not necessary to turn from sin in order to be saved.