The ongoing debate between Calvinism, Arminianism, and Free Grace,
predominantly - with a few other theologies which have crept in -
has been wearing on my theological nerves! I have long known and
understood what Calvinism and Arminianism teach and have
disagreements with both.
But in the past ten years or so, Free
Grace theologian, Bob Wilkin, and his group have jumped into the
controversy with both feet. And I guess what has been most
aggravating about the Wilkin, et al, entry into the
theology wars - is their constant cannon fire at John MacArthur.
In those three leading theologies I see at least one doctrine in
each which, from a biblical view, I cannot accept. Yet each
theology camp has a lot of doctrinal teachings which are solid and
biblical. With Calvinism I cannot find biblical support for their
"Elect / Reprobate based Predestination."
With Arminianism it is
their teaching that a true believer can "Lose His/Her Salvation"
over a sin which they are not even aware of committing. And with
Free Grace, it is their "Saving Faith Without Repentance" - while still
possibly living a sin-based lifestyle, which I find hard to
swallow.
Today if we mention Calvinism one thinks of John MacArthur. In
the Reform branch of Calvinism we find the late R.C.Sproul, John
Piper, Ron Rhodes, and Wayne Grudem, among others - but primarily John
MacArthur under the Calvinism umbrella.
In the Free Grace camp, the first name in my mind would be Bob
Wilkin. Also a number of others, but for me, primarily Bob Wilkin.
Yet the Arminian camp, for me, is virtually faceless. Yes there
are denominational branches, many Pentecostals, some Methodists, etc. -
but overall, virtually faceless. No one person championing this theology jumps out
for me at the mention of Arminianism.
Both Calvinism and Arminianism are easy to tag: the Calvinist
will be marching with a flag boldly proclaiming "Predestination
of Elect / Reprobate" - while the Arminians, when you can
spot them, are waving a flag which declares, "Watch out! That
little sin may send you to hell!" And those in the Free
Grace camp wave a big flag which declares, "Lordship Theology
will sink your ship!" But what exactly is Lordship
Theology?
What has been most aggravating to me about the Free Grace Movement
is that, at first I did not understand what they were arguing
about - and I truly wanted to get a better understanding of what
Free Grace theology teaches. I sent e-mails and other inquiries
asking for a good definition of the Free Grace Movement and what,
in their view, is found in Lordship Theology.
Not once did I ever
get a response from those folks who were so loud and vocal in
their disagreements with John MacArthur. I suppose I was
thinking: "If they can spend that much effort disagreeing
with John MacArthur - why can't they take just a moment and share
some insight with Bill Gray?"
In muddling through their mortar fire into the Calvinist camp, I
think I have discovered their main sticking point: While most of
the Christian world views "repentance" as an integral component of
believing - the Free Grace Movement folks want to stand it alone as a
separate action and label it a "work" and in so doing, say that it
goes against the teaching found most specifically in Ephesians
2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and
this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; NOT A
RESULT OF WORKS, so that no one may boast."
They are trying to build a wall around "REPENTANCE" and declare it
to be a work. I can see how Baptism is viewed as a work, for it
is a physical thing a new believer does to acknowledge his/her new
relationship with Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. But Repenting
- spiritually believing that the sin nature which Christ died to "pay in
full" for us - is not a physical action on our part, not a
physical work.
It is an integral, spiritual component of
believing why Christ had to die on the cross - it is as integral
to believing, as getting wet is when one jumps into the lake to
swim. One cannot swim without getting wet. And one cannot
believe without acknowledging the sin nature which Christ died on
the cross to atone for in our stead.
Wikipedia: Free Grace Theology is a Christian view of salvation (soteriology) that says anyone can, and does, receive eternal life the moment they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31).
Bill Gray Note: So far, so good.
Wikipedia: Free Grace advocates believe that good works are not the condition to merit (as with Catholics) - maintain (as with Arminians) - or to prove (as with Calvinists) eternal life. But rather are part of discipleship and the basis for receiving eternal rewards.
Bill Gray Note: First I have to agree with my Free Grace Friends, Eternal Rewards and Salvation are absolutely two different goals. A person can receive Salvation while still losing Eternal Rewards in heaven. But a person CANNOT gain Eternal Rewards in heaven, without first gaining Salvation - the reason a person is promoted to heaven. In other words, a Saved person can lose Eternal Rewards, but not Salvation. But for a person to gain Eternal Rewards, that person must first be Saved.
And here I am going to have to assume that, in the Free Grace
Movement "Discipleship" is what most theologians refer to as
"Sanctification." In other words, a believer is saved the
moment we believe, which we call Justification. That
begins the Sanctification (Discipleship) part of our
Christian life where we, hopefully, on a daily basis, become
more mature in our knowledge of God's Word and in our daily walk
with Him. When we die or are Raptured, that kicks in the Glorification
part of our Christian faith - where we are made to be like Him,
Jesus Christ.
1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him (in our glorified bodies), because we will see Him just as He is (in His glorified body)."
Wikipedia: (In the Free Grace Movement) The Grace (gift) of eternal life is said to be free - as the only condition for receiving it (Him) is initial faith. This view distinguishes between salvation and discipleship – the call to believe in Christ as Savior and to receive the gift of eternal life (is Justification) - and the call to follow Christ and become an obedient disciple, respectively (is Sanctification).
Bill Gray Note: For me, the Free Grace folks are playing the name game, i.e., Salvation vs Justification - Discipleship vs Sanctification. For me this is playing the old "Apples and Oranges" game.
Wikipedia: The Lordship Salvation controversy (also called Lordship controversy) is a theological dispute regarding a soteriological question (the study of salvation) within Christianity on the relationship between Faith and Works. This debate has been notably present among some non-denominational and Evangelical churches in North America at least since the 1980s.
The dispute opposes (presents) two soteriological visions: (1) "whether it is necessary to accept Christ as Lord in order to have Him as one's Savior. The question then becomes: 'If someone accepts Christ as Savior without also explicitly accepting Him as Lord, is such a person truly saved?'."
That is, whether accepting Jesus Christ as Savior necessarily implies one must make a concrete commitment in life toward Christ such as following a certain behaviour or moral system.
The first opinion, that of the Lordship Salvation supporters, is, as Arthur W. Pink summarizes: "No one can receive Christ as His Savior while he rejects Him as Lord. Therefore, those who have not bowed to Christ’s scepter and enthroned Him in their hearts and lives, and yet imagine that they are trusting Him as Savior, are deceived."
The second opinion (2) is that of those opposing Lordship Salvation: "That one can accept Jesus Christ as Savior - but does not need to accept Christ's Lordship."
Bill Gray Note: What is the difference between saying that Jesus is my "Savior" - and saying that Jesus is my "Lord"? Jesus is my "Savior" means that MY sins are forgiven. Jesus is my "Lord" means a change in my lifestyle - which impacts both me and everyone around me, especially my family.
Example 1: At age 85, I spent a major part of the first half of my life partying, drinking, and satisfying my fleshly, earthly, carnal desires. But once I became a believer at age 50 - could I still have lived that same lifestyle and truly believed I would enjoy eternal life in Jesus Christ?
Could I truly have continued to immerse myself in that carnal, secular lifestyle - and still have been a born-again believer? Think about it! Could you continue to wallow in mud - and consider yourself clean? Really?
Example 2: I have long believed that a gay or lesbian person can be a born-again believer. BUT, can a person who continues to live in and practice a lifestyle which God Himself has declared to be: an abomination (Leviticus 18:22) - a detestable act (Leviticus 20:13) - a degrading passion (Romans 1:26) - an unnatural act (Romans 1:26) - an indecent act (Romans 1:27) - contrary to sound teaching (1 Timothy 1:10), unrighteous, those who practice it will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) - really be a born-again believer?
My question: "Can a person continue to LIVE a gay lifestyle and be a born again believer?" And the answer has to be: NO. Such a person may, and most likely will, still have those desires - but feeling the desires and LIVING that lifestyle are not the same.
So, to summarize: Jesus is my "Savior" impacts me alone - Jesus is my "Lord’ impacts me and everyone around me. Can He be my Savior without being my Lord? Both the Bible and I say, emphatically, NO!
Therefore I must side with John MacArthur and the Calvinist, and the faceless Arminians on this issue: I was saved the moment I received Jesus Christ as both
my Lord and my Savior. And, to the best of my current knowledge, only
on this issue do I disagree with my Free Grace brethren.
I do agree
with my Calvinist, Arminian, and Free Grace brethren that we cannot WORK
our way into heaven, that we cannot and are not saved by WORKS, but by
Faith Alone. The big question becomes: "What is a work - and what is an internal spiritual change - and how do we define each?"
Otherwise, I do highly recommend both the "Grace in Focus" magazine - and - also John MacArthur's writings, on all issues except Calvinist Predestination, to all my FRANs (Friends, Relatives, Associates, Neighbors),
for I know that both will continue to help both you and me grow more
mature in our knowledge of God's Word and in our daily walk with Him.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
Click on the image to enlarge:
No comments:
Post a Comment