Is Faith in Jesus Christ a Gift of God?

Dr. Charlie Bing

A person is eternally saved through faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, but does God give this faith or is it purely a human response? Those who teach that faith must be given by God are usually constrained to do so by their theological perspective, as is true of Reformed theology. Their view of man’s total depravity does not allow for any positive response from man toward God. They claim that if faith originated in man it would be a meritorious work that robs God of His glory. In their view, since God gives the faith that saves, that faith will sustain the believer in a life of obedience. But there are problems with viewing faith as a gift of God.

Theological problems with faith as a gift

Those who view faith as a gift interpret man’s condition, described in Ephesians 2:1 as “dead in trespasses and sins,” as a total inability to respond to God in a positive way. But that phrase describes man’s total separation from God, not his inability to respond to God. Sinful man is totally separated from God and therefore without eternal life. Man retains the image of God to some degree; it was severely marred in the fall, but not totally destroyed. Acts 10:2 describes Cornelius before he came to know Jesus Christ as Savior as a devout man who feared God, gave alms, and prayed to God (and God heard his prayers! Acts 10:31). In Acts 17 the Athenians did not have the proper object of faith but worshiped idols. Paul encourages them to seek to know their “unknown God” which of course is Jesus Christ. Men can seek God in their unsaved state as God draws them (John 6:28-29, 44-45).

Another theological problem with the view of faith as a gift of God is that it misunderstands the nature of faith. Faith is not (as they claim) a divine energy, a special power, or an infused dynamic. That confuses faith with the power of the Holy Spirit. Faith is simply faith. It means that one is convinced or persuaded that something is true so that there is a personal appropriation of that truth. There is not a special kind of faith for eternal salvation. There is only a special object of faith—Jesus Christ. The kind of faith one might have in Buddha is no different from the kind of faith that one can have in Jesus. The only difference is the object: Buddha does not save; Jesus saves. To make faith the power of salvation is to confuse faith with the Holy Spirit. According to Ephesians 2:8 grace is the grounds of salvation and faith is the means by which we appropriate that grace. Properly speaking we are not saved by faith, but through faith.

To show that faith is not a meritorious work, the Bible contrasts faith in Christ with meritorious works in both Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 4:4-5. Faith means exactly that we can do nothing for our salvation. We can only receive salvation as a gift. Faith is like an empty hand that simply accepts a gift.

Exegetical problems

The main passage used to support faith as a gift of God for salvation is Ephesians 2:8-9. “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; [it is] the gift of God, not of works lest anyone should boast.”

It is claimed that the demonstrative pronoun “that” refers to “faith” as a gift of God (the words “it is” are not in the original language, but are supplied by the translation as shown by the brackets). But “that” cannot refer to “faith” (nor to “grace”) because in the original Greek it would have to be in the feminine gender. But “that” is neuter which shows that the best antecedent is the concept of salvation by grace. This fits the context which is governed by salvation by grace in chapter 1 and especially in 2:4-9. There are other passages used to argue that faith is a gift of God, but they offer no support. For example, it is clear that some passages speak of faith as a special spiritual gift (Rom. 12:3; 1 Cor. 12:9) or simply as the opportunity to believe (Phil. 1:29), but not as a gift for salvation.

Logical problems

On the surface the view that says God must give us faith to believe is a tautology. It assumes what it seeks to prove. In other words, this view claims we believe because God gives us faith. But if God give us faith, then we do not need to believe. Or if we can believe, then God does not need to give us faith.

Another problem with that view is its theology, which says unsaved man is “dead” and cannot believe unless he is first made alive. Therefore God gives us faith as a divine life-giving energy that regenerates us so that we can believe. But if we have the divine life and are regenerated, we would not need to believe to have eternal life—we already have it!

Also, if faith as a gift is a divine power that sustains the believer in a life of obedience, then that obedience would be perfect and never interrupted by sin or disobedience. New Testament admonitions and commands to live righteously would be superfluous. But since believers do sin, it shows that their human response is a crucial aspect of their sanctification.

Finally, if we cannot be saved unless and until God gives us faith in the gospel, then God could not hold us responsible for not believing the gospel. But he clearly does (John 3:18, 36, 5:40).

Conclusion

It is hard to escape the conclusion that those who claim that God must give us the faith to believe for salvation do so out of a theological construct that is not validated by Scripture. Sinful man retains the image of God to the degree that he can have faith in either an unworthy or a worthy object for salvation. The only faith that saves is faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Faith is not the gift; Jesus Christ is the gift. God can draw us to Himself (John 6:28-29, 44-45), convict us of the gospel’s truth (John 16:8), and invite us to receive eternal life (John 3:16; 4:10; 7:37), but it is our responsibility to believe the gospel for eternal life.


Is Faith in Jesus Christ a Gift of God? no. 42 - Dr. Charlie Bing

GraceNotes is a concise quarterly Bible study on the important issues related to salvation by grace and living by grace. They are designed for downloading (*pdf available) and copying so they can be used in ministry. No permission is required if they are distributed unedited at no charge. You can receive new GraceNotes by subscribing to our free quarterly GraceLife newsletter.

For Related Reading:

The Danger of Teaching That Faith is the Gift of God by Brother George Zeller

Fruits and False Prophets – Matthew 7:15-20

We began the new year with an article by Dr. Charlie Bing, which was Lordship [Salvation] and False Followers- Matthew 7:21-23. Regarding the subjects of that passage we learned,

“They are evidently related to the false prophets of [Matthew] 7:15-20…who would lead people away from Jesus as the narrow gate (7:13-14). The ‘Not everyone who says’ in verse 21 links to the ‘them’ in 7:20, as does the ‘you’ of verse 23. Jesus could also be speaking of those deceived by the false prophets. Outwardly this group displays good works (they look like sheep; 7:15), but their true beliefs are revealed ultimately in what they say.”

Today, we will consider Dr. Bing’s essay on the false prophets of Matthew 7:15-20

15“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”

This passage is often used to argue that a person’s works will be proof of his or her salvation. It assumes that “fruits” refers to visible conduct that can be quantified in such a way that others can pass judgment on that person’s salvation (“you will know them”). According to this interpretation, bad behavior proves a person is not saved; good behavior proves a person is saved. Is that what this passage teaches?

The Subject of the Passage

It should be noted first that Jesus is not addressing believers or professing believers in general, but false prophets and how to recognize them. To be exact, the test is not for judging the reality of another’s salvation, but for judging whether a prophet is from God or not.

The Focus of the Passage

Context clarifies the focus of the passage. These statements are from the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus Christ is explaining the highest standards of righteousness that characterize the kingdom. It is a righteousness that exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). The Scribes and Pharisses were highly scrupulous in their behavior, so it seems unlikely that Jesus’ reference to “fruits” would focus on conduct. Likewise, the following passage in 7:21-23 mentions those who do great things in Jesus’ name, but Jesus ignores the significance of those professors’ works.

The prophets first appear deceptively as true believers (“in sheep’s clothing”). They are indiscernible from believers in what can be seen. They are evidently clothed in a façade of Christian behavior, which proves to be an inadequate basis of judgment. It is only what is unseen that later proves them false prophets.

The Test of the Prophets

The test that Jesus gives is not for the existence of fruit, but for the quality of fruit (v. 17). The false prophet may have fruits, but given time to ripen, they prove “bad” (v. 16). Likewise, a tree cannot be judged good or bad from its outer appearance, but from the fruit it produces (vv. 17-18). The true test of a prophet is whether his fruits are good or bad. But what does “fruits” refer to?

If “fruits” refers only to works, this creates a couple problems. First, many false religions produce teachers and adherents with good moral conduct and good works. Second, there would be a conflict with the following verses, 21-23, where the professors have good works, but the Lord says He never knew them.

“Fruits” must certainly refer to more than works; words must be in view. In Matthew 12:33-37 there is a similar discussion about fruits that shows they are one’s words:

33“Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or else make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for a tree is known by its fruit. 34Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. 36But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

This is how a person proves his true nature. Given time, what is beneath the deceptive façade is exposed in his words. Word express one’s beliefs, thus they are the basis for vindication or condemnation.

The Mosaic Law also prescribed the test of a false prophet. In Deuteronomy 13:1-3 the Israelites are told to ignore any miraculous works of a so-called prophet and judge him only by his words. Likewise, in Deuteronomy 18:18-22 the validity of a prophet of God ultimately depends on his words, whether they are true or false, fulfilled or not.

Conclusion

Words of a teacher or any person will eventually betray his or her beliefs. Outward conduct can be deceiving and is not a reliable judge of the reality of one’s faith. A person can only be judged by what he or she says when compared to the truth of the Bible. The Word of God is the final judge of a teacher’s credibility or a person’s salvation. Don’t be fooled by someone’s works; they are not a reliable basis for judging (See GraceNotes no. 28, “Can Good Works Prove Salvation?”). If we are saved by grace through faith, then one’s verbal testimony should affirm that truth according to God’s Word. We would hope that one’s conduct is consistent with that profession.


Dr. Charlie Bing, GraceLife Ministries

GraceNotes is a concise quarterly Bible study on the important issues related to salvation by grace and living by grace. They are designed for downloading (*pdf available) and copying so they can be used in ministry. No permission is required if they are distributed unedited at no charge. You can receive new GraceNotes by subscribing to our free quarterly GraceLife newsletter.

Lordship and False Followers – Matthew 7:21-23

21“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’”

This passage is often cited to show that many professing Christians are not actually saved. It is clear that these false followers are rejected by Jesus Christ even though they know who He is and have abundant good works. But does this passage teach, as some claim, that a person must be totally surrendered to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in order to be saved? What is doing “the will of My Father in heaven” that gains entry into heaven?

What we know about these followers

Here’s what we know about the subjects of the passage:

• They are evidently related to the false prophets of 7:15-20 (see GraceNotes no. 51, Fruits and False Prophets – Matthew 7:15-20) who would lead people away from Jesus as the narrow gate (7:13-14). The "Not everyone who says" in verse 21 links to the “them” in 7:20, as does the "you" of verse 23. Jesus could also be speaking of those deceived by the false prophets. Outwardly this group displays good works (they look like sheep; 7:15), but their true beliefs are revealed ultimately in what they say.
• They have a correct theology in that they confess that Jesus is Lord. The title "Lord" is a title of respect, but also of deity when used of Jesus Christ. Its repetition here indicates an emphasis on who Christ is.
• They are submitted to Jesus Christ as Lord of their lives. By their emphatic address ("Lord, Lord") and boast of miracles done in His name (v. 22), we could even say that these professors are ultra-lordship. There is no indication they err in their concept of who Christ is, nor is there any indication that they are not totally submitted to him in their ethical conduct. Indeed, they are very enthusiastic about following and serving Jesus Christ.
• They have many good works—actually, great works. They have preached and spoken as prophets, performed exorcisms, and done many supernatural signs.
• They are trusting in their works to merit eternal life. Their plea to Christ reveals an attempt to justify their entrance into the kingdom of heaven based on their magnificent performances. Their pride in their deeds reveals an attitude of self-righteousness. In their plea, they do not say, “Have we not believed in You alone?”
• They are "many" in number (v. 22), not rare exceptions. Sadly, the nature of this self-deception is widespread. This is not surprising, since Jesus previously indicated that most people would miss the way to eternal life (7:13-14).
• They have never been eternally saved. They did not have salvation and lose it, or believe in Christ and fail to persevere. Jesus said He never knew them and rejects them (v. 23).
• They are practicing lawlessness (v. 23). But what does this mean? There is no hint of conduct contrary to the Mosaic Law or of blatant immorality. The meaning of “lawlessness” must be connected to doing "the will of the Father" that Jesus mentions in verse 21. They are not doing God's will in relation to Jesus Christ, because they are misinterpreting the law as the Scribes and Pharisees did (5:21-7:6), using it to establish their own righteousness instead of looking to the exceeding righteousness of Christ (5:20).

What we know about the Father's will
God’s will for unsaved people is not merely proper theology and impressive works. In the context, Jesus wants people to accept God’s Way (7:13-14) and God’s Word (7:24-27), and obey accordingly. Previously in this Sermon, Jesus taught that the kingdom of heaven was entered only by those whose righteousness exceeds that of the self-righteous Jewish leaders (5:20-48). The righteousness required for eternal life is not based on outward conduct (5:21-28), which is why they should seek God’s righteousness (6:33). Jesus is the narrow gate that leads to God’s righteousness and life (7:13-14; John 10:9). Similar words and concepts in 7:21-23 and 21:23-46 show that the issue is belief in Christ and His righteousness (21:25, 32). Other Bible passages help us know how to receive God’s righteousness (Rom. 3:21-24). Works are not acceptable for obtaining God’s righteousness (Rom. 4:4-5). The only thing God wants an unbeliever to do is believe in His Son, Jesus Christ (John 6:27-29). The will of the Father is to believe in Jesus Christ for righteousness (Matthew 12:50; John 6:40).

What we learn from this example

• Good theology is not enough to save a person. In Mark 1:24 demons also knew and proclaimed a proper view of Christ’s position as Lord.
• Submission to Christ’s lordship is not enough to save a person. Someone can surrender all of his or her life and be a devoted follower and servant of Christ’s ethical commands, but not know Jesus Christ as Savior. After all, the people in this passage do not cry “Savior, Savior.”
• Good works, no matter how great they are, are not enough to save a person. Neither can one’s deeds prove a relationship to Jesus Christ as Savior. Miraculous performances can come from sources other than God (Acts 19:13; 2 Thess. 2:9; Rev. 13:1-12).
• Self-righteousness cannot save a person. Those in the passage are not claiming to have believed in Christ for His righteousness. Unsaved people need a righteousness outside of themselves and their own good works, which can never meet God’s perfect standard. Only Christ’s righteousness obtained through faith in Jesus Christ satisfies God’s righteous requirements.
• Many people who think they are Christians may not be saved. They are trusting in proper Christian theology, dedicated service to Jesus Christ, or performance of great deeds. They have missed God’s will, which is to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior from sin and receive His righteousness rather than try to establish self-righteousness.
• Those who do not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior reveal an utter disrespect and contempt for God’s command and desire for them to believe. Jesus rejects such people because this unbelief is the greatest form of disobedience (John 3:36), or lawlessness.

Conclusion

This passage shows that there can be unsaved professing Christians who follow Jesus Christ outwardly, but do not know Him personally. This passage cannot be used to say that those who believe in Jesus Christ as Savior are not saved unless they also submit to His lordship. That is exactly what the passage is not saying. There is no indication that this group has believed in Jesus as their Savior from sin, yet there is every indication that they have believed and submitted to Him as Lord of their lives. The reason they are not saved is that they have not done the Father’s will—believed in the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior from sin who imputes His righteousness. Many professors of Christianity have a false security because they are looking at and trusting in their submission and their works instead of resting fully in the merit of Christ and His work on their behalf. Sadly, on the final Day of reckoning, they will find they do not have eternal life and have misled others to the same fate. We should surrender to Jesus Christ as our Lord, but we must believe in Him as our Savior if we are to have eternal life.

GraceNotes, no. 52 - Dr. Charlie Bing
Lordship and False Followers – Matthew 7:21-23

GraceNotes is a concise quarterly Bible study on the important issues related to salvation by grace and living by grace. They are designed for downloading (*pdf available) and copying so they can be used in ministry. No permission is required if they are distributed unedited at no charge. You can receive new GraceNotes by subscribing to our free quarterly GraceLife newsletter.

Perseverance Versus Preservation by Dr. Charlie Bing

The concept of The Perseverance of the Saints has been a part of various Christian theological systems from early Christianity. Simply stated, this teaching says that a true Christian will persevere in faith and good works to the end of life and so proves he or she is eternally saved. If a professed Christian does not persevere to the end of life, it proves that person was not a true Christian after all.

While perseverance emphasizes the Christian enduring through God’s power, preservation emphasizes the Christian secured by God’s promise. Preservation means that when God promises eternal life to believers in Jesus Christ, He will keep them secure with no possibility of ever losing their salvation.

Preservation of believers, not perseverance of the saints, is the view taught by God’s Word and is consistent with the gospel of salvation by grace.

The argument for perseverance

Perseverance is taught by differing theological systems. The Reformed Calvinist position (It is the P in their TULIP) argues that since man is totally unable to respond, individuals must be unconditionally elected and they alone receive the benefits of Christ’s atonement through God’s irresistible grace. The faith that must be given to man as divine enablement to believe also becomes the power to keep one in the faith to the end of life. At the other end of the theological spectrum, the Arminian system argues that a person is saved only as long as he perseveres.

In both systems, works are necessary to prove and validate one’s salvation. Without enduring good works, no one is finally saved. In both systems, assurance is temporary, that is, one can be sure of salvation only as long as he perseveres. Many in both systems admit that absolute assurance is impossible because no one can predict the future.

The arguments against perseverance

Perseverance depends on faith as a special power given to man, but the Scripture does not accommodate this thought at all. Faith is our response to God’s promise of eternal life. In Ephesians 2:8, the gift is not faith but salvation by grace (See GraceNotes No. 48).

In spite of Ephesians 2:9 that says we are saved “not by works,” perseverance makes works a necessary proof, and thus a condition of salvation. This is inconsistent with being saved by grace. Romans 4:4-5 makes the contrast clearly, “Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness” (See also Rom. 11:6; Titus 3:5). There is only one condition for salvation by grace, and that is to believe (Rom. 3:22).

When a person believes, he is convinced of God’s promise to give eternal life, to justify, or redeem (There are a number of terms used for eternal salvation). Assurance can be absolute because God’s promise is absolute: “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.” (John 5:24). Romans 4:16 makes it clear that our assurance of receiving God’s promise has to be through faith in God’s grace (not our performance). Abraham was credited with righteousness because he was “fully convinced that what [God] had promised, He was also able to perform” (Rom. 4:21).

If eternal salvation was dependent on our performance enduring to the end of life, then no one couldbe sure about salvation until life has ended. Yet the Bible has clear indications of genuine believers who did not endure in faith and works to the end of their lives (Acts 5:1-11; 1 Cor. 11:30; 1 John 5:16). In 2 Timothy 2:12-13 it is implied that it is possible for believers not to endure: “If we endure, we shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.” Endurance is rewarded with reigning, but denial of the Lord is met with denial of that reward. Even if we are faithless (from Greek apisteo , literally, “be without faith” or “disbelieve”) God will be faithful to His promise of making us alive with Him (verse 11).

The preferred term, preservation

Preservation is a term that speaks of our security of salvation. Unlike perseverance that emphasizes our performance, preservation emphasizes God’s promise to give us eternal life (John 3:16), God’s purpose to see us conformed to the image of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:29), and God’s power to let nothing separate us from His love (Rom. 8:31-39). If God preserves us in our salvation, we can be absolutely sure we are saved forever, something that is impossible in perseverance.

Preservation does not negate the true biblical concept of perseverance, which understands that perseverance is not for salvation but for rewards, as seen above in 2 Timothy 2:11-13. In 1 Corinthians 9:27 Paul was expressing the possibility of losing not his salvation, but his reward, when he wrote: “But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified” (from Greek adokimos, which never refers to hell or loss of salvation in the New Testament). A major theme of Hebrews is the importance of the Christian to endure, or persevere (Heb. 6:11-12; 10:36; 12:1).

The practical applications

When we separate perseverance from salvation by grace through faith, the New Testament has many rich applications for Christians:

1. We are exhorted to persevere in faithful living and service (1 Tim. 6:11; Heb. 10:36; 12:1; 2 Peter 1:6).

2. We are rewarded for persevering not with salvation, but with temporal and eternal blessings (Rom. 5:3-4; Col. 1:21-23; 2 Tim. 4:7-8; Heb. 11; James 1:12; 5:11; 2 Peter 1:8-11).

3. We can be absolutely sure of our salvation since it does not depend on our performance but on God who preserves us (Rom. 8:28-39; 1 John 5:11-13).

4. We are motivated to serve God and remain faithful by His forgiving grace and His unconditional love (Rom. 12:1; Titus 2:11-12).

5. We can counsel other believers on the basis of who they are (true Christians), not on the basis of whether they are saved or not.

Conclusion

Preservation, not perseverance, is the promise of the gospel. If this is misunderstood, the gospel of grace is nullified. Salvation is not based on our persevering performance, but on God’s preserving promise, purpose, and power.
________________________________________

GraceNotes is a concise quarterly Bible study on the important issues related to salvation by grace and living by grace. They are designed for downloading (pdf available) and copying so they can be used in ministry. No permission is required if they are distributed unedited at no charge. You can receive new GraceNotes by subscribing to our free quarterly GraceLife newsletter.

Can an Unregenerate Person Believe the Gospel?

Courtesy Dr. Charlie Bing, GraceLife Ministries

Many would answer this question, “Of course. How else could a person be eternally saved?” But there are some who would disagree, because they think that a person must be regenerated (born again) before he or she can believe the gospel. That perspective is demanded by their view of man’s sinfulness, which they call total depravity. But what does the Bible say?

The issue of total depravity
Total depravity is a theological term used by some to describe the sinfulness of man. The term itself is not in the Bible. After Adam’s fall in Genesis 3, man is considered “dead in trespasses and sins” as described in Ephesians 2:1 (see also Rom. 3:10-18; 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:22). How one understands this spiritual death determines how one relates faith to regeneration.

Those who insist that God must regenerate a person before that person can believe define total depravity as man’s total inability to respond positively to God. They believe that an unregenerate person cannot even understand and believe the gospel. This view is held by Reformed theology and strong versions of Calvinism.

It would be more biblical to take “dead in trespasses and sins” as a description of man’s condition before God. Because of Adam’s sin and man’s relationship to Adam, man is totally separated from God and lacks anything that can commend him to God. Though sin’s corruption extends to every man and all of his being, man retains the capacity to respond to God’s initiative. Even after Adam sinned and died spiritually, he was able to talk with God immediately (Gen. 2:17; 3:1-19).


The biblical evidence that regeneration does not precede faith

Many biblical arguments show that man’s sinfulness does not require regeneration before faith.

Man remains in God’s image. Man was made in God’s image, which includes a measure of self- determination. The image of God was not destroyed by man’s fall, but marred or corrupted, with the result that man, when left to himself, is inclined toward evil and rejection of God. Self-determination, even if used to reject God, is essential to humanness and personhood. Without self-determination man would be nothing more than a robot with every decision and action determined and controlled by God.

Man is responsible. Because human beings can make self-determining choices, unbelievers are held accountable by God for rejecting the gospel (John 3:18, 36; 5:40-47; Acts 17:30; 2 Thess. 1:6-10). God would not be just or fair if He condemned people who could not believe because He did not regenerate them. That would actually make God the author of evil.

The invitation to believe is legitimate. God’s invitation to be saved through the gospel is a sincere and legitimate offer only if any and every person can believe it. If God must regenerate people before they can believe the gospel, then the invitation is not really to all people, but only to those already born again. But this is contrary to biblical statements that the gospel is for all (John 3:16; 2 Cor. 5:19-20; 1 Tim. 2:3-6; 1 John 2:2). Just as Paul preached everywhere with the assumption that anyone could respond to the gospel (Acts 20:21), we also should share the gospel with everyone (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15; Acts 1:8) because it is a genuine offer to everyone. God regenerates anyone who believes the gospel.

God draws men to Himself. Because in his sinful state man does not seek God. The Bible teaches that before anyone believes, God draws that person to Himself (John 6:44; 12:32). God convinces or persuades the unbeliever of truth, righteousness, and judgment concerning Jesus Christ (John 16:8-11). The Holy Spirit works mysteriously in a person’s heart to bring her to the point of faith (John 3:8).

Faith is the means not the result. Nowhere does the Bible say that faith is created by regeneration. John 3:16 is a very familiar verse which, according to the preceding context of 3:1-15, explains how God gives eternal life as a result of faith, not a requirement for faith. Likewise, Ephesians 2:8 explains how it is through faith God made alive those who were dead in sins (Eph. 2:1-7). Regeneration is the result of receiving God’s eternal life, and that life is only available through faith (John 5:24; 20:31).

Faith is simply a personal response. Man can believe either truth or falsehood that is presented to him. An unregenerate person can believe the truth of the law of gravity, or he can believe the error of a flat earth. Likewise, an unregenerate person can believe the truth of Christ’s gospel or she can believe the error of a false religion. Since faith is only the instrument, the response of faith in the gospel is not a special kind of faith. Faith is simply faith. It is the object of faith, the gospel of Jesus Christ, that is special and brings salvation.

Faith is not a good work. Those who define total depravity as total inability claim that if man were able to believe, then that faith would be a meritorious good work for salvation. But that cannot be true, because the Bible declares that faith is necessarily contrary to works (Rom. 3:27; 4:4-6; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9). Faith is not the cause of our salvation; God is the cause. Faith is God’s designated means by which the unregenerate can receive His grace for salvation. Faith is passive because it means that one is convinced that something is true or trustworthy. It is not a work in the sense of actively doing something, thus it is non-meritorious.

Conclusion

The view that regeneration must precede faith is a theological construct,

not a biblical one.

To say that a person goes from being spiritually dead to eternally alive before he believes in Jesus Christ is both absurd and contrary to biblical teaching. The Bible teaches that man is so corrupted by sin that left to himself, he would not seek God or believe the gospel. Therefore, God must draw a person to the point of faith. Nevertheless, it is the person who believes. Faith is not man’s contribution or good work. It is the means through which man receives God’s grace in salvation. The unregenerate person believes in Jesus Christ as Savior precisely because he can contribute nothing to God’s work of salvation. Faith makes the new birth accessible to anyone, but that birth is God’s work.


Dr. Charlie Bing
GraceLife Ministries
Original article appears in GraceNotes

Editor’s Note: You can read more answers to regeneration before faith. Follow these links to Brother George Zeller’s

The Danger of Teaching That Regeneration Precedes Faith

The Danger of Teaching That Faith is the Gift of God

What is, “The Content of the Gospel of Salvation?”

“The Content of the Gospel of Salvation”

Dr. Charlie Bing

GraceLife Ministries

When sharing the gospel clearly we should have two great concerns. First, we should be absolutely clear about the condition of salvation—believe. That belief must be free from any works, commitment, or idea of merit on our part so that grace remains grace.

The second concern is that we should be clear about the content of the gospel, or what has to be believed. The content of the gospel is the person and work of Jesus Christ, which are inseparable as the object of saving faith.


The Person of Jesus Christ
We are saved by Someone, the Lord Jesus Christ. Not just any Jesus, but the One sent from God who is the Son of God. There are many things implied by the designation Lord Jesus Christ such as deity, humanity, and messianic mission. While someone may not comprehend a full-blown Christology, there must be some understanding of Jesus’ uniqueness and divine authority. The Gospel of John, recognized for its evangelistic intent (John 20:30-31), emphasizes the deity of Jesus more than any other Bible book (e.g., 1:1-3, 14, 18; 5:17-21; 6:69; 7:38; 8:19, 58; 10:30; 20:28). In John the person of Jesus Christ is the object of faith in many evangelistic contexts (e.g., John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; 6:29, 47; 9:35-37; 11:25-26).


The Provision of Jesus Christ
As the Son of God, Jesus saves us by what He did for us; He provided for our greatest need. We are after all, saved from something and to something. As sinners separated from God, we needed someone to pay the penalty that we could not pay. Jesus paid that price by dying on the cross. Of course, a dead savior could save no one, so Jesus rose from the dead. His resurrection shows that the price has been paid, that God accepted the payment, and that He lives to give us eternal life. Jesus made it possible for us to pass from death into life if we accept His provision (John 5:24). 
The person of Jesus can not be separated from His work. Jesus is the "Lamb of God" who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). He gave His life for us (e.g., John 6:51; 10:11-18) as the supreme sacrifice for our sins (Heb. 10:5-10). Isaiah 53 speaks prophetically of Jesus’ substitutionary death (Isa. 53:3-12) and His resurrection (Isa. 53:10-12).

Again, there are many deep and profound intricacies surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection which an unsaved person may not grasp immediately. Yet it seems there must be at least the simplest understanding that we are sinners separated from God, that Jesus removed the barrier caused by that sin through His death and resurrection, and that He now lives to give us His life. That is why we see the preaching of the cross and the resurrection in the early church (e.g., Acts 2:23-24, 36; 3:18-20; 4:2, 10; 5:29-31; 10:39-40; 13:29-30; 17:3; 26:22-23) and why those great facts were reiterated in the epistles (e.g., Romans 3—8, 1 Cor. 1:18-24; 2:1-2; 15:1-4; Gal. 3:1; Eph. 1:20; Phil. 2:8-9; Col. 2:12- 14; Hebrews; 1 Pet. 1:3, 18-21; 3:18).


The Promise of Jesus Christ
It is certainly conceivable that a person can understand the facts about the person and work of Christ and yet not be saved because he does not apply them to his own spiritual condition. We believe Christ for something, and that is eternal life. God has promised us that whoever believes in Jesus Christ as the One who died and rose again will have eternal life (e.g., John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; 6:40, 47; 7:38; 10:26-29; 11:25-26; 12:44-50; 20:31). A person must believe, or be persuaded, that the promise is true and true for himself.

Eternal life has many implications that a person may not fully comprehend. It encompasses eternal security, forgiveness of sin, justification, new birth, glorification, and other wonderful truths that will become clearer with instruction in God’s Word. Eternal life is also defined as knowing God through Christ (John 17:3). A person must believe God’s promise for some salvific aspect of this eternal life.


Some Unknowns
While the gospel’s content is essentially simple and we can share it clearly, questions may remain about certain situations: How does a very young child understand the gospel’s content? How can a mentally impaired person be saved? What happens to babies who die without any knowledge of the gospel? How does a Hindu understand the concepts of God, sin, Son of God, resurrection, eternal life? When we share the gospel, we must realize that the communication process has two components, the communicator and the one who receives it. Not always does the listener process the information exactly as the communicator means it. In other words, there are barriers in communicating the gospel such as language, cultural interpretation, attentiveness, clarity, processing, pre-understanding, and religious preconceptions.

In light of these unknowns, we must humbly acknowledge that a person’s understanding may not always be what we think it is. Thankfully, the Holy Spirit knows what we do not. While it is our responsibility to share the gospel as clearly as possible, it is His work to convince (convict; John 16:8) the hearer of its truthfulness. As we share the gospel, we must depend on the Holy Spirit to work in the hearer to give enough understanding to bring about faith (Rom. 10:14-17). Exactly how the Spirit works in a person’s understanding will always remain somewhat a mystery (John 3:8; 6:44-45, 65). None of this, however, takes away from the fact that if we are wrong in our message, the listener will be wrong in his faith.


Conclusion
We are called to share the gospel of salvation, which means that we share the person, provision, and promise of Jesus Christ. Why would we share anything less? Whether we explain it in the most basic terms or in great depth, it is always the Holy Spirit who brings the understanding, which prompts faith. We preach the gospel of grace through faith alone in Christ alone and allow God to do the rest. Certainly that requires us to communicate it clearly, but also to pray fervently.

This GraceNotes may be copied and distributed freely. For a full set of GraceNotes or for more resources about growing in grace contact GraceLife at GraceLife.org or write to P.O. Box 302, Burleson, TX 76097.

Dennis Rokser on the FGA Panel Discussion

The following is from Pastor Dennis Rokser. He is pastor of the Duluth Bible Church in Duluth, MN. Pastor Rokser also hosts the Grace Family Journal


Greetings everyone in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ:

I also attended the Free Grace Alliance (FGA) conference and am thankful for their desire to stand for the grace of God.

Dr. Charlie Bing made it clear in his plenary session that while we must be gracious in our manner, the FGA stands behind their covenant/statement of faith:

“The Grace of God in justification is an unconditional free gift. The sole means of receiving the free gift of eternal life is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whose substitutionary death on the cross fully satisfied the requirement for our justification. Faith is a personal response, apart from our works, whereby we are persuaded that the finished work of Jesus Christ has delivered us from condemnation and guaranteed our eternal life.”

Dr. Bing then proceeded to clarify that that “finished work” involves the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that those who cannot agree with that statement should not be in the FGA.

Also, I heard a number of comments after the panel discussion from a variety of people in attendance that they greatly appreciated Tom Stegall's use of the Scriptures to defend his position as well as his humble & gracious manner. I thought his biblical defense was outstanding for the time allotted.

I was encouraged with the basic doctrine and direction of the FGA leadership, and they will be in my prayers, especially their new executive director, J.B. Hixson, whom I respect.

As any start-up organization, they have some loose ends to tie up and issues to address, and may God give them the courage to stand for the Gospel and the truths of grace, leaving the results with the Lord, and to not practice the “ends justify the means” mentality of human viewpoint so prevalent in evangelical circles today.

We were assured by FGA leadership that they are going to continue to discuss and resolve the issue of the Crossless gospel in the near future. Please pray for them.

The atmosphere was relaxed; the fellowship was encouraging; the panel discussions were informative (though they needed a couple more hours on the crossless issue).

I'm glad that I attended. It was also great to meet new folks and fellowship with those I've met in the past.


Dennis Rokser

Grace Conference Update: Day 1

Greetings:

It is late, and I have to be up early for Day 2 of the conference. More detail to follow, but for now...

I have thoroughly enjoyed the conference thus far. For the first time I met Dr. Robert Lightner and Dr. Charlie Bing. Dr. Ryrie’s flight was canceled so he will be at the conference on Friday. I quote each of these men liberally in my book. Each has made valuable contributions to the refutation of Lordship theology.

I asked Dr. Lightner to sign my copy of Sin, the Savior and Salvation. He did so, and I really appreciated it. He brought the opening keynote sermon, and it as on the Lordship of Christ. I intend to post key elements of this fine sermon.

It was quite humorous how I met Dr. Bing. I was in the first five minutes of my workshop and I was showing some of the books both for and against Lordship Salvation. So, I showed some of MacArthur’s Lordship books, then I showed Ryrie’s So Great Salvation and Lightner’s Sin, the Savior & Salvation.

Then I lifted Dr. Bing’s dissertation, Lordship Salvation: A Biblical Evaluation & Response. I was remarking on my appreciation for his book and how it helped me get off the ground in 1997 while I was in South Africa. All of a sudden I notice a member of the audience to my left getting my attention and pointing to his left, my right.

So, I look in that direction, and sitting right in front of me, two rows back, is Dr. Bing. My jaw dropped! I think I did a Ralph Cramdon (Jackie Gleason: Honeymooners) “hamana, hamana, hamana.”

Dr. Bing and I have corresponded via e-mail for 10 years and spoke on the phone once. I had no idea he was coming to the conference. I greeted, and recognized him for the audience. It took me several minutes to recover and get back on track. He and I were able to visit later.

Incidentally, I also met and spent a good deal of time with Pastor Dennis Rokser and Pastor Tom Stegall. At the conference there has been some unofficial discussion of Hodge’s “Crossless” gospel making the rounds. Several men asked me about it having read some of the details here at my blog and having read Brother Stegall’s first two articles in his series.

More to follow…


LM

Why I Did Not Cite Zane Hodges

To All:

Following is a continuation of what was not at first intend to be, but has become a short series.

In 1997, while I was VP of the Calvary Baptist Theological College in South Africa, I was asked to write an official position paper for the College. The purpose for the paper was to set down the college position in regard to the interpretation of the gospel commonly known as Lordship Salvation (LS). Lordship Salvation had been introduced by two American missionaries into the Bible College while the president was on furlough and I had not yet arrived. This situation lead to the decision to produce an official statement on the Lordship issue.

When I began to read and study in earnest for the college position paper I had no problem finding books by John MacArthur, for example, representing the Lordship gospel, but resources that answered LS were not plentiful. Many that I did find were somewhat helpful, but not comprehensive, some were not balanced. Eventually I did receive a copy of Dr. Charles Ryrie’s So Great Salvation. Later I was directed to Dr. Charles Bing. I shared with him my interest in the Lordship debate, and he sent me a copy of his dissertation Lordship Salvation: A Biblical Evaluation and Response. Bing’s and Ryrie’s books were, and remain very helpful resources. Through an internet search, I located the Grace Evangelical Society (GES) and consequently Zane Hodges.

The GES and Zane Hodges have made some helpful contributions to the Lordship debate. In my reading, however, I discovered several doctrinal issues that left me very concerned. As I continued to read Hodges it became increasingly clear that I was having more than just minor disagreements with what I was reading by him in the Lordship debate.

My concern with some of Hodges' doctrinal positions rose to a level where I decided it would not be in the best interest of my work on the Lordship controversy to include him as a source. I felt if I were to use Hodges as a source I would have to include a strong disclaimer and/or warning. Furthermore, I felt citing Hodges without expressing the concerns and reservations I had with him could give the impression that I might be in agreement with certain elements of his doctrine that clearly I was not then, and am not now. This is especially true in regard to his position on repentance as he defines it in Harmony With God.

The over-riding motive for my producing In Defense of the Gospel was to address Lordship’s corruption of the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3). Hodges, in my opinion, takes a polar-extreme position in his answer to Lordship Salvation. Citing Hodges in my book had great potential for becoming a lightning rod, and a distraction from the main objective of my book, which was to explain, expose and refute Lordship Salvation.

A “distraction” is exactly what developed over my very brief mention of Dave Hunt's What Love is This: Calvinism's Misrepresentation of God. The mere mention of Hunt's book exposed a raw nerve with men who are Calvinistic in their theology. Over time I was able to deal with, and get everyone past that issue. It was a brief and unfortunate distraction from the discussion of Lordship theology. [The brief mention of Hunt's book has been deleted from the upcoming revised edition of my book.]

It is not my desire to take anything away from the positive contributions Hodges has made to the Lordship debate and in other areas. There are, however, serious concerns I have with some of the polarizing statements he has made in various books and publications. Today, I am especially troubled with what I am reading by Hodges on repentance. I am also very concerned with the comments I noted from Hodges on presenting the gospel invitation. See The Teaching of Zane Hodges.

Hodges is very close to the heart of the Lordship debate, and I am not as comfortable with him as I'd like to be on several key points of doctrine. Because of this I decided it would be in the best interest of accomplishing my goals for the book to make only a brief mention of Hodges, with a caution to my readers.

Later in the week I will post an article to very briefly review how Hodges defines repentance in the context of conversion.


LM