What Is Saving Faith?

Hello Paul. And it is a pleasure to be with you here in Jensen. This is not my first trip to Nebraska by any means but it is my first trip to Jensen. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here and share with you.

I found out coming over in the car that we are not far from the location of a story that I love to tell in my ministry. I have told it in many, many churches. The story of the explosion at the West Side Baptist Church in Beatrice. And the fact that all the choir was late. And I almost feel like I ought to make a pilgrimage by this time to Beatrice and take a look at the West Side Baptist Church and see what it looks like.

Reference was made to the book Absolutely Free. And ever since we published this book we’ve had a little insider’s joke that we hoped that the purchasers of the book would not mistake the title of the book for its price. And when our little company sent out its first flyer to potential customers we got a note back from a lady. And I kid you not she said this. And I think she was serious. She said I think it is terrible to charge 14.95 for a book called Absolutely Free. She said I’m not a perfect Christian but at least I don’t lie.

We were properly chastened and went ahead however and sold it for 14.95 because the reference is to the gospel and not to the book itself.

I couldn’t help but think as Pastor Carpenter was up here that as he was discussing my financial connection with this that at first he was apparently saying that my ministry here was absolutely free and then he was apparently saying that my ministry was not absolutely free. And that’s perfectly acceptable when we’re discussing ministry situations. But it would be bad confusion in the gospel wouldn’t you agree Paul? And so what we’re talking about tonight and what we will be talking about is a message that is genuinely absolutely free.

Now what I’d like to do tonight is to begin a discussion that will carry over till tomorrow morning. And perhaps it would be best to begin with a definition of terms. Since our topic tonight is lordship salvation it would be sensible to start with a definition of lordship salvation. What do we mean when we talk about lordship salvation?

Well basically and as we have defined it in our book we would suggest that a definition of lordship salvation would be like this. Lordship salvation is the view that a commitment to obedience is necessary for true conversion. Lordship salvation is the view that a commitment to obedience, whether that commitment is made implicitly or explicitly, varies with the particular lordship teacher. But basically they all have in common the understanding that a commitment to obedience is a necessary part of the conversion experience.

So we would say lordship salvation involves a commitment to obey.

Now we might easily ask the question and this is my second major consideration. Is this important? Before going further my answer to the question is this. Important? Is yes. Yes. Yes. And yes.

But it is surprising as I travel around the country and as I talk to people both in Dallas and elsewhere how many people there are who would like to hold the opinion that this is not an important issue. And I have been asked more than once by individuals a question of this sort. Don’t you think that you and Dr. John MacArthur are really saying the same thing only you are saying it in a slightly different way? Or to put it another way don’t you think there is no real substantive difference between what you’re saying and what lordship theology is saying?

In answer to a question like that I usually like to start by referring the questioner to a section in John MacArthur’s book. Very early in his book he makes the observation that he used to think he used to think that the two sides were engaged in a merely semantic debate. That is that it was just simply a discussion over how we articulated the gospel. But that he has come to change his mind. And that as a matter of fact he has now concluded that the two sides are talking about two different gospel messages.

And so I usually say to the questioner that is one of the very few places in Dr. MacArthur’s book where I thoroughly agree with him. That what we are engaged in here is not a semantic discussion. Not a quibbling about the way in which we express the gospel. But a substantive difference in our understanding of the gospel message. So substantive in fact that we would say that the two sides are saying something entirely different. That they are presenting different gospel messages.

Now even though there is a reluctance in some quarters to accept this fact I would like to point out to you that the man in the street who doesn’t trouble himself about the niceties of theology can understand perfectly the difference between the two views.

I have said a moment ago in defining lordship salvation that lordship salvation is the view that a commitment to obedience is necessary to conversion. Over against this stands the what we are coming to call the free grace position. And that is that salvation is simply God bestowing a free gift upon everyone who will receive it in simple faith.

So the difference fundamentally is between a commitment that we make to God according to lordship salvation and the reception of something that is absolutely free.

The man in the street can understand this with many simple illustrations. For example suppose I am in a car dealer’s office. And the car dealer says to me I have an Eldorado out there. A brand new Eldorado. And I’m going to give it to you as a free gift. And here are the keys. All you need to do is accept this gift and the car is yours. No strings attached. That’s one thing.

But suppose the car dealer says to me, and car dealers have said trickier things than this I can assure you, but suppose he says to me I’m going to give you this Eldorado and it’s not going to require you to put anything down. I’m giving it to you freely. Only before you pick up the keys and go out and drive it please sign this contract with me that you will be making payments on a regular basis for the next 10 years.

Well I would draw the conclusion and the man in the street would draw the conclusion that the first offer is the offer of a true gift. And the second offer is the offer of a contract. I give you this in return for you giving me that.

So when we talk about the difference between lordship salvation and the free grace position that’s the kind of difference we’re talking about. The salvation that is offered in the Bible is totally free.

Whoever wishes let him take of the water of life freely.

But lordship theology is calling the sinner to enter into a contract with God. God will give them salvation up front if the sinner is willing to commit himself to lifelong obedience. But if the sinner is not willing to make that commitment to God God is not willing to give him a free salvation.

That’s why the term absolutely free is so good here. You know ever since writing the book every time I hear the words absolutely free on the radio or on television my ears prick up. I’ve always heard them but now they come to me with a special force. And surprising how many advertisers use the phrase absolutely free. Because the word free in the marketplace has become encumbered with the suspicion that some hidden clauses are there. That it’s not totally free. That it’s being presented as free but it’s really going to cost you something. We’re going to give you a free book if you buy a book. But what you’re really doing is getting two books for the price of one. But you’re not getting something that is absolutely free.

So it is important for us I think to realize that the offer of salvation that is presented in the word of God is unencumbered by conditions. It is not a contract into which the sinner enters with God. It is the sinner coming in all of his sinfulness and all of his desperate need and all of his horrible guilt. And coming to a Savior who has a free and full salvation to offer him on the basis of faith and faith alone.

Needless to say how we understand the gospel will obviously affect how we present the gospel. We’re talking about whether this is an important issue. It is an important issue because it’s not a semantic problem. It is really the articulation of two entirely different concepts of how men are saved. And depending on which of these concepts you yourself believe in that will determine the way in which you are presenting the gospel to the unsaved world. Or to put it another way it will determine whether your presentation of the gospel to unsaved men is really the biblical gospel or whether it is not.

That’s important don’t you agree? So we must understand that the discussion that we are engaged in tonight is not a trivial peripheral discussion. It comes to the very heart of what Christianity is all about. It comes to the very heart of the revelation that God has made of Himself in Jesus Christ. It is central to our understanding of God and of the Bible.

Yes and yes and yes it is important.

Now I propose to handle the discussion of lordship salvation under two categories. Let’s say we have two major areas of discussion. It seems to me that although many kinds and qualities of discussion are involved in the whole debate that we can actually resolve the lordship debate into two fundamental issues around which most of the other things cluster.

These are first of all the nature of saving faith. What is saving faith? The second major area it seems to me is the nature of discipleship. Almost everything that comes up in the discussion about lordship salvation can be categorized under one of those two areas.

Tonight what I would like to do is discuss with you the issue of the nature of saving faith. And when I’ve completed my discussion in a few minutes we will open it for your questions as they impinge upon this area of the discussion.

Then tomorrow morning I hope to discuss with you what is the nature of discipleship. What is discipleship? And we will address that subject for a little while and then open it up once again to your questions and concerns.

So for tonight the nature of saving faith. The first thing that I think we might say about this subject is that in a sense the question what is saving faith is almost absurd. It is almost absurd to ask the question what is faith or what is saving faith. For the simple reason that we all know what faith is. That we all understand what faith is about. That we talk about it in everyday life. We use it in everyday life. And as a matter of fact in our normal intercourse with other individuals and situations we are in no doubt as to what we’re talking about when we talk about faith, trust, believe etc.

Somehow or other when we move into the realm of biblical discussion, when we move into the realm of theological discussion we frequently check all of our common sense at the door. And now we begin to create the monstrous questions and issues which really ought not to exist in our mind in the first place.

The Bible takes for granted basically that we understand what faith is. That we understand what it means to believe something. And if we were simply content to stay with the common sense meaning of faith we wouldn’t have any problem here. But unfortunately in evangelicalism today there are a lot of things said about faith which are very confusing. And many things said that are very, very mistaken indeed.

If we want to define faith in terms of the Bible then perhaps as good a passage as any would be we find it in First John 5:9-13. On the basis of this text we might suggest that from the biblical standpoint faith is accepting or receiving God’s testimony as true. Or put it more simply faith is believing what God says.

If we receive the witness of men the witness of God is greater. And this is the witness that God has given of His Son. He that believes in the Son has the witness in himself. And he that does not believe the Son has made God a liar because he has not believed the witness that God has witnessed concerning His Son. And this is the witness that God has given to us eternal life. And this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life and he who does not have the Son of God has not life. These things have I written to you that believe on the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

Nothing complicated about this. Here is what God has to say. His witness is much more to be accepted than the witness of men. And when we do accept it it is with our hearts we accept it. And when we do accept it we are acknowledging that what God says is true. And that is that He’s given us eternal life in His Son. And that the possessor of that Son is the possessor of eternal life. And on the basis of our faith we can know that we have eternal life.

Nothing complicated. Nothing abstruse. Nothing mysterious about that. And to even raise the question what is faith is in a sense almost absurd. Nevertheless it is urgently important for those who hold to lordship salvation theology to redefine saving faith.

So what lordship salvation does is to redefine. If the simple common sense understanding of faith were allowed to stand there would be no room whatsoever for lordship theology. Because there are any number of texts in the Bible as you know that predicate salvation on faith alone.

God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

He that hears my word and believes the one who sent me has everlasting life.

Truly truly I say to you he that believes in me has everlasting life.

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.

Where is lordship theology in those verses? If the simple straightforward definition of saving faith is allowed to stand it’s not there. It therefore becomes incumbent upon lordship theology to redefine saving faith. And to define saving faith not only in terms of belief but in terms of commitment, surrender, repentance.

The exact way in which the redefinition is carried out will vary from lordship salvation person to lordship salvation person. But fundamentally redefinition is what is taking place. And wherever repentance is made a part of saving faith, wherever commitment is made a part of saving faith, wherever surrender is made a part of saving faith what is really occurring is that the biblical concept of faith is being redefined in terms of the theology that the interpreter brings to the text.

I don’t think it is going too far to say that if we will allow the Bible in all of the verses that speak of this issue and predicate salvation on faith alone, if we would allow the Bible to speak for itself the church would not be plagued with the doctrine of lordship theology. It is only when we begin to entertain the idea that there is some need for a redefinition of saving faith. It is only then that the door is opened to lordship theology.

Now very closely related to what I’ve just said about the lordship redefinition of saving faith is also another factor. And that is that from the biblical point of view assurance is part and parcel, the theologians would say is of the essence of saving faith.

What this simply means is this. That when we believe the gospel we know that we are saved. We know that we are saved because you see the gospel is that the Lord Jesus Christ offers us salvation on the basis of faith alone. And when I put my confidence in that offer then I know on the basis of God’s own declaration that I’m saved.

He that hears my word and believes the one who sent me has everlasting life and will not come into judgment but has passed from death into life.

You cannot believe that verse without believing that you have eternal life. That you will not come into judgment. That you have already passed out of death into life. That’s part and parcel of the message.

I like to refer and we do refer in Absolutely Free to that lovely exchange in John chapter 11 verses 25 and 27 between the Lord Jesus Christ and Martha. And you remember our Lord’s famous words,

I am the resurrection and the life. He that believeth on me though he were dead yet shall he live. And whoever lives and believes in me shall never die.

Then He says to Martha, notice the extreme simplicity of this,

Do you believe this?

Do you believe this? And Martha gives Him what I have sometimes called a full-fledged Johannine confession of faith. She says,

Yes Lord I believe that You are the Christ the Son of God which should come into the world.

How interesting. Because when we get to John chapter 20 verses 30 and 31 John says these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and believing that you might have life through his name.

So what Martha is saying in response to our Lord’s question do you believe this is yes I believe that you are the Christ the Son of God the one who is to come into the world.

Now look at those verses very closely. Notice the emphasis that Jesus has. It is not only an emphasis on what He is. I am the resurrection and the life. It is also an emphasis on what He guarantees to every believer. It is an emphasis on what He guarantees to every believer.

I am the resurrection and the life. He that believeth in me though he were dead yet shall he live. I guarantee resurrection to him even if he dies he shall live again. And whoever lives and believes in me shall never die. There is a sense in which when you get what I have to offer you there’s no death because I give everlasting life. There’s no end to that life.

So in other words this is His exposition of what it means for Him to be the resurrection and the life. He guarantees resurrection. He guarantees unending life to every believer.

And when He says to Martha do you believe this there’s no way for Martha to believe that without knowing that she had the same guarantee to herself. He did not say to her whoever with the exception of Martha believes in me is guaranteed resurrection and life. But whoever believes in me do you believe this? Yes. Already by the very nature of the expression of the gospel that He has given by believing this Martha also has believed that she possesses eternal life and will be resurrected someday by Jesus Christ.

It follows therefore as certainly as day follows night that to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ is to know that you’re saved when you do so. That is to say assurance is of the very essence of saving faith.

Now in lordship theology however not only has saving faith been redefined but it has been separated from assurance. So that according to lordship theology it is possible for me to have believed and yet not to know whether I have believed or not. And therefore not to know whether I’m saved or not. And then I am shut up to the exhausting and impossible process of trying to prove to myself that I have believed by the kind of life that I’ve lived.

So lordship theology teaches that if you really believe you will live a life that reflects the genuineness of your Christian faith. And you will live it all the rest of your life. And therefore the grounds of assurance in lordship theology is not to be found in the person of Christ and not to be found in the offer of the gospel and not to be found in the words of Scripture. It is to be found in ourselves.

Stripped of all of its verbiage we are taught to look at ourselves for assurance. All right we baptize that into Christianity to say I’m looking for the work of God in me. But the work of God in you is always going to be flawed by you. So really what you’re looking for is you’re looking to see God through the distorted reflection of an image of yourself. There is no assurance in that kind of a process.

And according to lordship theology there should not be any absolute assurance at all until the day of death. And even in the day of death we may question whether anyone is going to be able to see enough in themselves to be absolutely sure that they are saved.

Bottom line no assurance of salvation in lordship theology because lordship theology arbitrarily redefines saving faith and arbitrarily divorces assurance from saving faith.

One final note and then we’ll give you a chance to ask questions. How did all of this come about? Let me give you a historical note. In the appendix or the section of notes in my book you will find me referring to two books. One by a man named R. T. Kendall and another by a man named M. Charles Bell.

The book by Kendall is entitled Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649. And the book by M. Charles Bell is entitled Calvin and Scottish Theology: The Doctrine of Assurance. Both of these men support with extensive quotation from John Calvin’s material as well as from the writings of later Reformed theologians. They support the thesis that John Calvin himself held to a doctrine of unlimited atonement. That is that Christ died for everybody. And that one could look to Christ in faith and be assured of his salvation by looking at the one whom God has made his substitute for sin.

In other words John Calvin held that assurance was of the essence of saving faith.

Now according to these men however beginning with Theodore Beza in Geneva who succeeded Calvin there and beginning in the English tradition with a man named Perkins a new point of view came into existence. And this was that God had only died for the elect. He had only died for those who would ultimately get saved.

And therefore it was now impossible for the unsaved sinner to look to Christ and know that Christ had died for him. Because he couldn’t know that Christ had died for him till he himself knew that he was elect. Since Christ had only died for the elect that led to what Kendall calls the reflex action of saving faith.

No longer could I look outward at Christ. No longer could I look outward at the cross and find assurance of my salvation. Now I had to look inward to see if the kind of faith that I had was the faith of the elect of God. Whether in fact my works verified the fact that I was indeed a believer in Jesus Christ.

Now these later Calvinists also introduced a further complication that was a disaster pastorally. They taught that it was possible for an unsaved man to believe temporarily. That is to say a person who was not saved in some sense or other believed. And for a while he might have evidences in his life that appeared to be the evidences of genuine saving faith. But after a while down the road there somewhere he lost his faith. And he lost all those evidences.

So now we have the parishioners coming to their Calvinist pastors and asking a question like this. I think that I have believed and I think that I have in my life the fruits of the Spirit. But how do I know that my faith and my fruits are not the faith and fruits of a reprobate? And that all I have really is the temporary faith of one who is non-elect.

The Calvinist pastor had no answer for that. He had no answer for that. If he had been perfectly honest he would have had to say to the individual wait and see. That’s all he could say.

Now according to Kendall and Bell this departure from John Calvin in terms of limiting the atonement to those who would ultimately be saved namely the elect and focusing our assurance on the fruits of the Spirit within us led to a horrible consequence in which the grounds of assurance and the joy of salvation were swept out from under the feet of those who heard and believed this teaching.

All that lordship theology does in our own current day and time is to popularize this kind of Calvinist thought. This kind of Reformed theology. And it’s important for us to understand that what we are confronting today in terms of lordship theology is not something that is brand new. It has been around for a long time. And the church had to confront it repeatedly.

I might even say that in essence the church confronted it in the Reformation. Because as you know the doctrine of Roman Catholicism is no assurance. And you have to look to the fruits of grace in your life. And what the Reformers did was to rebel against this in the light of Scripture. And to return to the doctrine of sola fide. Faith alone. By faith a man is justified apart from works.

Now it has proved difficult for men to retain the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith alone. And periodically the Christian church tends to slip and slide back toward fundamental Roman Catholic theology. Because basically lordship theology is simply a contemporary articulation of the idea that I cannot be saved apart from good works. Apart from keeping God’s law or keeping God’s commandments. Put it any way you want to. That’s the bottom line.

And that is why this doctrine is so dangerous. So destructive to the spiritual vitality of Christians. And so confusing to the lost who need to be told of the unconditional grace of God. And of the salvation that is freely given through faith in Christ.

As one of my old professors used to say when he got to a breaking point, Sila. So Sila.

And let me now invite you to raise questions that you might have.