understanding-the-conversion-january-february-1992

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

mode rnREFORMATION

$4.00

modernREFORMATION Understanding the Conversion

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

ARTICLES

Union with Christ .......................................................................................................................................1

by Michael S. Horton

Biblical Conversion And The Modern Chu rch ............................................

11 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

5

by Kim Riddlebarger

Was Martin Luther a Born-Again Christian? ..............................................................................................................................7

by Rick Ritchie

When Your."Testimony" is Boring ...........................................................................................................9

by Michael S. Horton

Luther and Conversion ...........................................................................................................................14

by Richard Gilbert

Ta.le of Two Gospels ................................................................................................................................. 16

DEPARTMENTS

We Confess ..............................................................................................................................................11.4

Interv-iew ...................................................................................................................................................13

•................. -....................

•• •• ~

•

SUBSCRIBE TO...

: • •

Yes, I would like to subscribe and save half off cover price.

• D

1 YEAR

(6 ISSUES)

•• D

2 YEARS (12 ISSUES)

•

•

NAME

ADDRESS

: • •

$12.00

CITY

•

$24.00

STATE

ZIP

SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER ONL Y

••

•

•...................................... • •

~

MAIL TO: CURE 2034 E. Lincoln Ave. # 209, Anaheim, CA 92806

• ~

modernREFORMATION

Only through union with Christ can the believer enjoy the identity of belonging to God

rather, conversion or the new birth is the giftofGod given to those who are spiritually dead and, therefore, unable to choose Christ.

In the new birth, God grants the faith necessary to respond positively and it is through this faith, not conversion itself that one is accepted by God. '

MICHAEL S. HORTON

What Is "Union With Christ"?

Union with Christ

•

CURE PRESIDENT

Sal vador was a Cuban spy, sent to Miami as a mole in order to learn military secrets from the United States government However, Cuban nationalists with whom Salvador associated incognito eventually led the clever spy to renounce his loyalties to Castro. As a result, Salvador turned himself in to the United States government and they offeredassylum, protection, and a new identity.

The government masterminded a "murder" of Salvador so Castro's officials would assume the death of their spy, and once this plan was carried out Salvador was issued new documents, a new name, and a new life.

Paul appeals to this sort of language when he answers the question, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" with his familiar response, "Heaven forbid! How shall we who have died to sin live any longer in it?

Or do you not know that as many of you as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore, we were buried with him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness oflife. For if we have been united together in the likeness of his death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of his resurrection" (Rom. 6:1-5).

The apostle goes on to speak of the crucifixion ofour old identity and its burial, as the believer is raised with a new life.

"Let us never forget that our old selves died with him on the cross that the tyranny ofsin over us might be broken-for a dead man can safely be said to be free from the power of sin" (v.7, Phillips Trans.)

Israel had long sought its identity in conforming to the Law. By outward observance, many thought union with the Law and with Moses would lead to the identity which brought fulfillment, hope,

and salvation. But Christ alone possessed in himself, in his essence as well as in his actions, the righteousness which God required of humanity. Therefore, only through union with Christ could the believer enjoy the identity of belonging to God. "For sin can never be your master-you are· no longer living under the Law, but under grace" (v.I4).

This new identity is not something we achieve by converting ourselves or by trying to enter into it. It is given to us graciously

by God, apart from and outside ofourselves.

Just as Salvador could never again return to his former identity and owed his loyalty to those who had given him the new identity, so "released from the service of sin, you entered the service ofrighteousness" (v. 19).

Before, righteousness made no claims on us to which we could respond favorably, but now, because we are united to Christ, new affections and new loyalties produce new service.

It is important to realize that Christ does not come to improve the old self, to guide and redirect it to a better life; he comes to kill us, in order to raise us to newness of life. He is not the friend of the old self, only too happy to be ofservice. He is its mortal enemy, bent on replacing it with a new self. Notice that the new birth is not the same as justification. The contemporary Wesleyan theologian, John Lawson, confuses justification and the new birth in. precisely the same manner as medieval scholasticism: "To be justified is the frrst and all-important stage in a renewed manner of life, actually changed for the better in mind and heart, in will and action."

Further, "regeneration is an altemati ve word for the initial step in the life of saving faith in Christ. The legal term 'justification' has in mind this step ... " (lntro. To Christian Doctrine: Zondervan, pp..226-7).

We are not justified by conversion;

If this doctrine is, as John Murray wrote, "the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation," what does it mean and why is it so important?

First, union with Christ describes the reality of which Paul wrote in Romans chapter six. As a husband and wife are united through marriage and parent and a child are united through birth, so we are united to Christ through the Spirit's baptism.

Those who are familiar with the historical (if not contemporary) discourses of Reformed and Lutheran preaching will immediately recognize the emphasis on the objective work of Christ in history.

Themes such as election, the incarnation, the substitutionary atonement, the active and passive obedience of Christ, justification, adoption, and the objective aspectofsanctification (i.e., the declaration that we arealready holy in Christ), form the diet of the best and most biblically faithful preaching. Each of these themes serves to remind the believer that his or her righteousness is found not within, but outside.

Nevertheless, there is a subjective aspect to our union with Christ which receives equal attention in Scripture and, therefore, commands equal attention from us. Calvin wrote, "We must understand that as long as Christ remains outside of us, and we are separated from him, all that he has suffered and done for the salvation of the human race remains useless and of no value for us .... A11 that he possesses is nothing to us until we grow into one body with him" (Institutes, III.i.I).

All of our righteousness, holiness, redemption, and blessing is found outside of us-in the person and work of Christ This was the declaration of the Scriptures and, following the sacred text, of the reformers, in the face of a subjective righteousness located in the believer. And

Please turn to Union on Page 2 ' JANUARY~BRUARYl~2

•

1

modern REFORMATION Continued from Union on Page 1 yet, as Calvin points out, this "alien righteousness" belonging to someone outside of us would mean nothing if this righteous one remained forever outside of us. An illustration might help at this point In my junior year of college, I went ' to Europe with some friends and ran out of money. Happily, my parents agreed to deposit enough money in my account to cover my expenses. Was that now my money? I had not earned it I had not worked for it. It was not my money in the sense that I had done something to obtain it. But it was in my account now and I could consider it my own property.

While none ofour righteousness is our own, Christ is! While none ofour holiness belongs to us, properly speaking, Christ does! The devils know that Christ is righteous, but they do not, cannot, believe that he is their righteousness.

It is essential, therefore, to point unbelievers and believers alike to Christ outside oftheir own subjective experiences and actions, but that is only half the story!

The Christ who has done everything necessary for our salvation in history outside of us now comes to indwell us in the person of his Holy Spirit. "God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" (CoLI :27). While our assurance is rooted in the objective work of Christ for us, it is also true that "We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit" (1 In.4:13).

John employs this language of union in his Gospel, where Jesus is referred to as a vine, with believers as branches (1n.I5).

As the branch is dead apart from the life­ giving nourishment of the vine, so humans are spiritually dead unless they are connected to the vine. Elsewhere, "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me,andIin him" (1n.6:56).

As baptism is a sign and seal of our attachment to the vine (the beginning of our union), the Lord's Supper is a sign and seal of our perpetual nourishment from the vine.

Paul appeals to this doctrine as the organizing principle for his entire systematic theology. The First Adam-

2

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

,

Second Adam contrast in Romans five depends on this notion. "In Adam," we possess all that he possesses: original sin, judgment, condemnation, fear, alienation; "in Christ" we possess all of his righteousness, holiness, eternal life, justification, adoption, and blessing.

Further, "Even when we were dead in trespasses, God made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ

In the newbirth, God grants thefaith necessary to respond positively and it is through this faith, not conversion itself, that one is accepted by God. Jesus ... " (Eph.2:5). "I have been crucified with Christ, " Paul declares, "and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" (Gal.2:20).

Thus, this doctrine is the wheel which unites the spokes of salvation and keeps them in proper perspective. "In Christ" (Le., through union with him) appears, by my accounting, nine times in the first chapter of Ephesians. Chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, God has thus "made us accepted in the Beloved."

He cannot love us directly because of our sinfulness, but he can love us in union with Christ, because he is the one the Father loves. "In him we have redemption"; "in him we have an inheritance," and so on.

Union with Christ and Conversion This doctrine is another way ofsaying, "Christ alone!" All spiritual blessings in heavenly places are found in him. Even the gifts of the Holy Spirit are through and for the ministry of Christ the Mediator. No one is baptized in the Holy Spirit, but baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ.

Regeneration, or the new birth, is the

_

commencement of this union. God brings this connection and baptism even before there is any sign of life-"while you were dead ...he made you alive" (Eph.2:I). The first gift of this union is faith, the sole instrument through which we live and remain on this vine. But this is a rich vine, pregnant with nourishing sap to produce an abundance of fruit. Though we are not attached to nor remain attached to this vine by the fruit (what branch depends on the fruit?), those who are truly members of Christ inevitably produce fruit. Through union with Christ, we receive his righteousness imputed (justification) as well as his righteousness imparted (sanctification).

So conversion to Christ is one aspect ofa prior work ofGod's grace in uniting us to his Son. At this point, then, it is essential to relate this to contemporary concerns.

1. Two-Stage Schemes. Human-centered religion has always created two paths to life: one for the spiritually-gifted and another for those who settle for heaven, but not the "abundant life." Roman Catholicism (medieval and modem) has offered this in terms of distinguishing between the priesthood and others in the category of "the religious" on one hand, and "the seculars." Further, there are those who have indulged in venial sins (those which can interupt fellowship with God) and mortal sins (those which can clear the board and make one start from scratch).

Evangelicals have done this, in part, by following the "Higher Life" version of conversion and the Christian life, in which super-saints (often involved in "full-time Christian ministry") are "filled with the Spirit," while normal (Le., "carnal") Christians make it to heaven, but without having any of the gifts of the Spirit "The Holy Spirit will fill us with His power the moment we are fully yielded," declares Bill Bright, founder of Campus Crusade for Christ "God would be breaking His own spiritual laws if He forced man to do His bidding." It's a tragedy that "At the time of conversion the will of man is temporarily yielded to the will ofGod," but "after conversion, the heart frequently loses its first love" and therefore requires us to seek another filling. lust as the medieval believerrequired some ritual in order to fill up the bathtub of grace that had begun

modernREFORMATION

leaking from a venial sin, Bill Bright urges, "If a Christian is not filled, he is disobedient to the command of God and is sinning against God." What is required is for the carnal Christian to follow ~e steps which would have been familiar to the medieval monle: First, "meditate"; second, "make it a practice to spend definite time each day in prayer for God's guidance ..."; one must also confess each sin, since "unconfessed sin keeps many Christians from being filled with the Holy' Spirit" (Handbook for Christian Maturiy,CCCI,pp.133-145).

Charles Finney is even approvingly quoted by ~right: "Christians are as guilty for not being filled with the Holy Spirit as sinners are for not repenting. They are even more so, for as they have more light, they are so much the more guilty." And Norman B. Harrison is cited: "The Spirit­ filled life ...is the only life that can please God." Of course, the Reformation heirs reply to today's medieval heirs, that there is only one life that can please God, and that is Christ's. And because his life is accepted and we are in him, hidden as it were, we are pleasing to God and are filled with the Spirit because every believer possesses everything of Christ's.

What kind offather shares himself and his possessions with only a few favorites and withholds his best from others? Perhaps some would answer, "It's not a matter of the generosity of the father, but of the children's willingness to receive." While that is logically coherent, it reveals a fundamentally different theological perspective. Union with Christ is not tile result ofhuman decision, striving, seeking, yielding, or surrendering, but of Christ's.

While we are called to be "filled with the Spirit" (Ga1.5: 18), it is a figure of speech: "Do not be drunk with wine ...but be filled with the Spirit." In other words, make sure you're under the right influence!

2. Confusing Indicative and Imperative.

Everywhere the Scriptures provide both the declaration of who we are in Christ (indicative) and the command to respond to that particular declaration in a certain way (imperative). For instance, Paul does not simply issue an imperative like, "Stop living with your boyfriend." He says, "How should we who have died to sin live any longer in it?" Paul does not call people to die to sin; he does not invite them to enter

into a higher level of abundant life; there are not appeals to become something which the believer is not already. The believer has died, is buried, is raised, is seated with Christ in the heavenlies, and so on. These are not plateaus for'victoriousChristians who have surrendered all, but realities for every believer regardless of how small one's faith or how weak one's repentance.

Thus, we must stop trying to convert believers into these realities by imperatives: "Do this," "Confess that," "Follow these steps," and so on. Union with Christ ushers us into conversion and conversion ushers us immediately into all ofthese realities so that, as Sinclair F~rguson writes, "The determining factor of my existence is no longer my past. ItisChrist'spast" (Christian Spirituality: Five Views,Zondervan,p.57).

For those who speak as though the filling of the Spirit, the gifts of the Spirit, justification, the new birth, and union with Christ are things to be attained by obedience to imperatives, Paul insists, "But of

All of our righteousness~

holiness~

redemption, and blessings are found outside of us -­ in the person and work of Christ. him[God] you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God-and righteousness and sanctification and redemption-that, as it is written, 'He who glories, let him glory in the Lord'" (1 Cor.l:30-31).

3. Quietism &Legalism. Some Christians so emphasize a "let go and let God" passivity that even after conversion they act as though they believe they are still "dead in trespasses and sins" and do not "understand the things of the Spirit of God. " Wanting to attribute everything to grace and God's work, they confuse justification and sanctification just as surely as those who want to underscore human involvement. In our initial

conversion we are passive: acted upon rather than acti ve, as Luther put it. Weare justified through receiving what someone else has earned for us. But we grow in sanctification through living out what someone else has earned for us. Both are gifts we inherit from someone else, but the former is passively recei ved and the second is actively pursued. If I were a pauper who had some benefactor deposit one billion dollars in my bank account, I would be regarded a billionaire; but there would be the need to share this new wealth with friends living on the street. The gift was received passively, but in tum it was put to use for good actively.

If sanctification is confused with justification, it will lose the tension, reality, and rigor necessary for the battles of the Christian life; if justification is confused with sanctification, the product will be of no redemptive value.

Therefore, let us distinguish conversion from justification and realize that ini tial con version is a passive reception ofGod's gracious acceptance ofus in Christ, while the life-long conversion process is an active pursuit of holiness and righteousness, the very thing which the gospel promises that we already possess fully and completely in Christ.

In conclusion, let us meditate on the wonderful promise that in Christ we possess all ofhis riches, not just one or two ofthem.

Do we try to imitate him? Yes-not merely as our moral example, the way Greek sailors may have venerated Neptune or Greek philosophers venerated Aristotle's ethics, but as our indwelling Head. As the little brother stands in awe of his elder sibling, let us imitate our Elder Brother because of the fact that through his incarnation, death, resurrection, ascension, and mediation, we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone.

For "Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family" (Heb.2:11).

The call to the converted, therefore, is not, "Come to Christ; only he can give you the power to live the abundant Christian life!" Rather, it is, "Come to Christ; only he can be your abundance," as the Father has only "blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ."

JANUARY~BRUARYl~2

•

3

nlociernREFORMATION

We Confess...

This new section of Modern Reformation will be a regular feature, as we spotlight the wisdom of those who have gone before us in an attempt to wrestle with contemporary questions. In this issue we confess, with the Nicene Creed, that "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of i.f. .... " L lje

From the Lutherans... ".... According to the teaching of St Paul, 'all who have been baptized have put on Christ' (Gal.3:27), are thus truly born again, and now have liberated wills-that is, as Christ says, they have again been made free. As a result, they not only hear the Word of God but also are able to assent to it and accept it, even though it be in great weakness.

But since in this life we have received only the first fruits of the Spirit, and regeneration is not as yet perfect but has only been beguri in us, the conflict and warfare of the flesh against the Spirit continues also in the elect and truly reborn. Again, there is not only a great difference between Christians, one being weak and the other strong in the Spirit, but even the individual Christian in his own life discovers that at one moment he is joyful in the Spirit and at another moment fearful and terrified, at one time ardent in love, strong in faith and in hope, and at another time cold and weak....It is, of course, self-evident that in true conversion there must be a change, there must be new activities and emotions in the intellect, will, and heart, so that the heart learns to know sin, to fear the wrath of God, to tum from sin, to understand and accept the promise of grace in Christ, to have good spiritual thoughts, Christian intentions, and diligence, and to fight against the flesh, etc. For if none of these things takes place or exists, there is no true conversion."

The Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Art. II.

From the Reformed...

"Without justifying faith, men would never do anything out of love to God, but only out of self-love and fear of damnation. Therefore it is impossible that this holy faith can be unfruitful in man: for we do not speak of a vain faith, but of such a faith as is called in Scripture a faith that worketh by love, which excites man to the practice of those works which God has commanded in his Word. Which works, as they proceed from the good root of faith, are good and acceptable in the sight of God, since they are sanctified by his grace: nevertheless, they are of no account towards our justification. For it is by faith in Christ that we are justified, even before we do good works.

For what could we merit?"

The Belgic ConfeSSion, Art.XXIV

"All of those whom God hath predestined to life, and those only, he is pleased in his appointed time to effectually call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power setting them on the course of that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace."

The Westminster Shorter Catechism, Chap. X

4

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

modernREFORMATION

Biblical Conversion And The Modern Church Tremendous confusion - and error - can arise when we seek a conversion "experience" KIM RIDDLEBARGER

•

CURE VICE PRESIDENT

There was a time not too long ago, when the phrase "conversion experience" was part arid parcel of popular Christian vocabulary. Though this term may have fallen into disuse of late, the concept of some type of emotional, psychological or religious "experience" marking the initiation ofthe believer into a relationship with Jesus Christ, remains an important part of modern Evangelical theology.

Terms such as "accepting Jesus Christ as my personal savior," "asking Christ into one's heart," other well-defined acts marking conversion, such as "going forward," by walking a church aisle, or "experiencing" the presence or the peace of God, are often used in connection with this discussion. There is much that is true in this popular understanding. And yet, there is a great deal that is false and confusing, and it would be very helpful to define what we mean by conversion, and deal with the biblical data on the subject.

In the Reformed tradition the idea of conversion is often broadly defmed as the awakening ofa person who is dead in sin to an awareness of the need to place faith in Jesus Christ, and to turn from sin and self to God in repentance. Thus conversion includes the exercise of faith and repentance. Conversion may be marked by a personal crisis in one's life, wherein one is dramatically converted almost instantaneously.

Yet, on the other hand, conversion may also by the result of a gradual process over a long period of time. In the classical Reformed understanding regeneration, which is the sovereign act of God in supernaturally giving the new birth to his elect (John 3:3-8; Ephesians 2:5), is prior to conversion. Only those regenerated by God are thus converted through the subsequent act of believing and repenting.

This means that conversion must be seen as a response to a prior work of God in the human heart, and a divinely aided one at that.

From the sinner's perspective, psychologically speaking, it really seems as though the sinner has been asleep, unaware, indifferent, if not altogether hostile to the things of God, until regenerated by God. At best God and his gospel made no difference to him. At worst the sinner hates God and opposes his kingdom at every turn. But now "awakened," after the new life is implanted within by the Holy Spirit, the sinner now becomes consciously aware of his or her sin (Acts 2:37). This conviction of sin is usually brought about through the preaching of the Law (the Ten Commandments) and includes both the awareness of personal guilt for breaking God's law, and the awareness of the inability that one has to please God through one's own works or efforts (Romans 3:20). The individual becomes aware of the great fact that he or she is a sinner in desperate need ofa savior.

The Bible teaches that conversion may occur either simultaneously, as in the case ofSaul ofTarsus (Acts 9: 1-19), or graduall y asin the cases ofJeremiah, John the Baptist or Timothy. Thus biblical accounts of conversion "experiences" vary.

Another aspect of conversion is the doctrine of illumination. God the Holy Spirit, through the preaching, reading or teaching of the word of God, opens a person's mind and heart to understand what the Scriptures say about the human condition, and the need that the sinner has to act upon this awareness (Romans 10:14­ 17). Once regenerated and convicted of sin, God opens their minds to understand the truth of God and their hearts to now act upon what the mind knows to be true (Acts

16: 14). Thatis, sinners at some point come to realize that they cannot save themselves, but instead must trust in Christ to save them. This is where the exercise of saving faith enters the picture. They now are compelled to believe or trust in the fmished work of Christ as the object of their faith, rather than trust in their own efforts or righteousness to merit favor from God. They surrender to Jesus Christ through sim pIe trust in his ability to save them from the wrath to come. They have been converted.

Closely related to this is the idea of repentance. Someone who places his or her trust and exercises saving faith in Christ will also repent of their sin. The Bible speaks of repentance as including a knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20), sorrow for offending the holy God (psalm 51), and a desire to be cleansed from their moral pollution (II Corinthians 7:9-10). Thus someone who is regenerated will believe and repent, freely and gladly, since the new nature desires.the things to which the old nature was oblivious, or was actively opposed to. Repentance should be seen primarily as a fruit of faith, "and is wholly an inward act, and should not be confounded with the change of life that proceeds from it "(Berkhof, Systematic Theology, pA87).

In other words, repentance itself is a negati ve condition, a turning towards God and away from sin. Repentance is not merely ceasing from specific acts of sin.

Therefore, tremendous confusion results from several erroneous ideas now popular in American Evangelicalism. The first of these false ideas arises when the conversion experience itself is made the prerequisite, or the cause of regeneration.

This raises serious logical problems. For If someone must be converted before he or she can be regenerate, we are left to conclude that infants cannot be saved. We know that this is not the case in Scripture, but this does not mean that conversion is not necessary in the case of adults. Since conversion is the God given response which is produced by regeneration, all of those whom God regenerates in adulthood are subsequently converted. But as we have seen, conversions can and do vary, and those who do not know just exactly when it

Please turn to Biblical on Page 6 JANUARY~BRUARYl~2

•

5

rnodernREFORMATION

Continuedfrom Biblical on Page 5 was that they fust placed their trust in Jesus Christ, need not live under the tyranny of those who insist that unless one can tell the exact moment in time that they were "saved," that they can have no assurance that they are Christians. If someone has faith in Jesus Christ, he or she is saved regardless of when, or of how it happened.

People have faith in Christ because God was pleased to give them faith through his gracious act of new birth.

Another point ofconfusion is a related one. Not all conversions can be made to fit a ready-made pattern. In the cases ofthose who have lived open lives of sin, and rebellion against God, their conversion may, in fact, be dramatic, both externally as seen in the dramatic outward change in their lives and inwardly, in that their own psychological experience ' is one of great crisis and emotion. God deserves all the praise when such a person is converted.

But it is a great error to insist upon a dramatic or emotional conversion experience as the norm for all Christians.

Those who were raised in Christian homes, for example, and who have been taught the word of God from their youth (as in the case of Timothy), may have a gradual or even "mundane" conversion in which there is no observable external change, or noticeable internal crisis, or sensational experience. Many Christian believers may not even remember when it was that they were converted, since many such people have never known what it was not to believe in Jesus Christ. They may not know when, merely that they have been converted, through faith and repentance, It is easy to overlook them, but God deserves all of the praise in this type of conversion as well!

Thus conversions may vary from individual to individual.

The evidence of conversion then, is not to be found in a person's having sought a "conversion experience." In biblical conversion, public profession of faith in Jesus Christ as Lord to the glory of God the Father is the ultimate test of genuine transformation. In conversion accounts in the New Testament, the public profession offaith in Christ was immediately followed by baptism. Yes, there should be a noticeable change in affections, and in performance. But using this as an empirical 6

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

"proof' of conversion is a dangerous practice. In the first place, there are many persons who appear outwardly godly, but are members of sects and cults, such as the Mormons, who may pass such outward tests with flying colors. Yet people who reject the true gospel cannot be converted.

No, good works and a changed life are fruits of faith, and we must remember that in many cases, true piety remains deliberately private and is self-consciously not self-seeking. Thus a public profession of faith, followed by baptism, rather than

Yes, there should be a noticeable change in affections, and in performance. But using this as an empirical "proof" of conversion is a dangerous practice. demonstrable outward performance, has been historically taken as the sign that conversion has occurred. Failure to understand this has had a profound consequence for many evangelicals.

Since the American church has lost the doctrinal foundation for conversion in the prior work of God in regeneration, conversion has become increasingly seen as itself effecting regeneration. That is, it is commonly understood that I am regenerated through my own actof faith or repentance. Hence a dramatic conversion experience is seen as the sure-fire mark that someone has become a Christian. Such a theological perspective has led to all kinds of manipulation in much of modem evangelism, since the goal ofthe evangelist is now to produce the conversion "experience" itself rather than preach a pure gospel in which the word of God is faithfully proclaimed, and through which God is pleased to call his people to faith.

Thus many in the modem church now find psychological and emotional manipulation

an attractive means to an end. If someone can be made to feel emotional enough, or guilty enough, orembarrassed enough, they can be manipulated to cry, to walk an aisle, and to meet with a counselor after the service. It is far easier to take the safer course and evangelize by means of undulating music, witty and entertaining oratory, complete with image-oriented dramatic pageantry, rather than confront an entire culture with the life giving message of Christ crucified.

What we must recover, ifwe are going to understand conversion from a biblical sense is that we cannot produce conversion through any means! God, however, has promised to produce multitudes of conversions through the proper means of the simple proclamation of the gospel and any approach which attempts to short­ circuit this divinely ordained process must be seen to miss the biblical mark by a wide margin. Until we go back and recover the biblical understanding of conversion, the easier way will always win out. Mter all, it is far easier to tell someone what they want to hear, instead of confronting them with the truth. It is certainly much easier to entertain the television generation rather than to instruct them in the deeper truths of the faith. It is far easier to get people to raise their hand in a darkened room with every head bowed and every eye closed than it is to get them to understand what Christ has done for them (by explaining concepts such as the atonement, imputation, justification, and union with Christ), or to get them to submit to the waters ofbaptism in front ofan entire congregation. But such is modem America.

.

modernREFORMATION

Was Martin Luther a Born-Again Christian?

He was a Protestant . - and an evangelical- but would he have known the four spiritual laws?

RICK RITCHIE

•

CURE STAFF WRITER

Martin Luther was a Protestant. He was the father of Protestantism. Martin Luther was an evangelical. He defended the authority of Scripture and restored the Gospel to its central position in the church.

Martin Luther was a Protestant, and an evangelical; but was he a born-again Christian?

Absolutely Yes! Jesus told Nicodemus that he had to be born-again to enter the kingdom of heaven (John 3:3). Oearly, in order to be a Christian, one must be born again in the way Jesus intended. If Martin Luther was a Christian - and he certainly was- then he must have been a born again Christian.

Absolutely No! In twentieth century America, there are many zealous Christians whose experience of the faith bears little resemblance to that of Luther. We may think that if we just strip away the cultural accretions that have attached themselves to today' s born again Christianity, we might discover the type of faith that Luther advocated, but that is mistaken. When all the cultural layers are peeled back, what is revealed is, at best, the faith that Luther left behind in the monastery when he discovered the gospel. If Martin Luther was a born again Christian in the biblical sense, he was not a born again Christian in the modem sense.

Born-Againism Versus the Gospel The thought of pitting born again Christianity against the gospel is bound to strike some as bizarre. If it is not the born again Christians who know the gospel, who does? How many times have we heard of staunch church-goers who were converted at a Billy Graham crusade after years ofspiritual deadness in their mainline churches? Are we to discount all of these

stories? If not, what does it mean to say that born again Christianity is in conflict with the gospel?

It is not its emphasis on evangelistic outreach that the born again movement is to be faulted for. Its evangelistic crusades and campus ministries are probably responsible for more unchurched Americans hearing the gospel than all other means combined. The born again movement is to be commended for preaching the cross to those who have not heard, wherever it has done this faithfully.

The real problem is that this movement preaches not only two births, but two gospels, and is not even aware of it One gospel tells us of our estrangement from God and how, while we were dead in sin and hostile to God, God reconciled us to himself on the cross. The other gospel tells us how we can be saved by making a decision for Christ and asking him into our hearts. Most of us were taught to think that these teachings were two parts of the same message.

When we study the life of Martin Luther, we find that the Reformation occurred when Luther abandoned the second message for the first.

Martin Luther the Monk Just like their spiritual brethren today, Christians in the Middle Ages liked to pattern their lives after the great saints in the Bible. It has been said that the entire monastic movement was a commentary on the text, "We have left all to follow you."

Like St Paul before him, Martin Luther had a catastrophic conversion experience while journeying on a road. In his youth, Luther, caught in a storm, was struck by lightning. This experience filled the young man with dread at the majesty of God. He

knew that he had to get right with his divine judge.

Luther did this by vowing poverty, chastity, and obedience. He dedicated himself to a lifestyle oflearning about God and subduing the flesh. Praying and fasting, his consecration and effort was to no avail, however. The harder Luther strove to please God, the more distant God seemed.

The harder Luther struggled, the greater his sense of sin became. To make matters worse, God could read Luther's heart, and know that he was motivated by fear and not love. How could Luther escape?

Mortifying the flesh would not help.

One cannot get to heaven by works. But what about love? Luther was advised by the mystics to come to God by loving him.

This mystical piety was the sixteenth century version of "Christianity is not a religion, but a personal relationship."

Instead of being a solution to Luther's spiritual anxiety, however, it only made things worse. He wanted to love God so that God would grant him salvation, but how could he produce this love within himself? How could he be sure that his love for God was genuine when it sprang not from a desire for God, but a desire to escape wrath? No, this would not work. If law-keeping was an impossibility, producing a pure love for God in oneself was doubly impossible.

Luther the Evangelical If the new life that Luther found after his conversion experience was a living death, Luther found true life when he repented ofhis youthful repentance. While teaching on the book of Romans as a uni versity professor, Luther's anxiety was only intensified by those passages that spoke of the righteousness ofGod. At first Luther thought that this righteousness meant solely his justice - that God must punish the wicked. Then he came to see that if the righteous were to live by faith, and if there were to be any righteous, then God's rightousness must fmd its foremost expression in his demonstration of mercy, when he declared the wicked to be righteous by punishing Christ in their place. It was in abandoning the manufacture of a new life within himself (Yes, even with the help of

Please turn to Luther on Page 8 .

JANUARY~BRUARYl~2

•

7

modernREFORMATION

Continuedfrom Luther on Page 7

that the only way to God is through Christ?

Surely Luther would not have had harsh words for any of them - or would he?

Many of those who were raised in churches which advocated born again Christianity were taught that they were the true heirs of Luther's reformation. The evidence used to support this claim was the fact that we could compare born again Christianity to medieval Catholicism, and of the two, born again Christianity had produced a more biblically literate laity which was less attached to superstitious ceremony . Was not this the result that Martin Luther had envisioned for his work?

The problem with this reasoning is not that there is no difference between today's

born again Christian and his medieval Catholic cousin. but that this contrast does not run deep enough. This becomes more the Holy Spirit-medieval Christians were appareilt to use when we discover how quite familiar with that one too!) that Luther hospitably today' s born-again Christianity rediscovered the Gospel. would have been received by one of Luther's opponents. While Pope Leo would Luther, the Enemy of Free Will have been irate over the success of our Luther discovered that trying to find present born again Christianity, one of his peace with God apart from the work of fellow churchmen, Desiderus Erasmus, Christ was a dead-end, even if pursued by would have been quite pleased. a devoted person desiring a personal Erasmus was a brilliant contemporary relationship with God. Fine. This may be of Luther who agreed with Luther an indictment against the excesses of born concerning the need for church reform, but again Christianity, but Lutl)er's criticisms disagreed with Luther's understanding of of medieval Catholicism do not seem to the gospel.

For Luther the gospel was an militate against its essence. What about our reasoning, harsh in its offense to those churches where people are warned condemnation of sinners, and generous in ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fur~~ngthem. hw~amessageofguili and grace. For Erasmus, the Bible was God's guide to a better lifestyle: an owner's manual. During the early years of the Reformation Erasmus and Luther appeared to be heading in the same direction.

One name which stands out in the history of American evangelical reflection on the subject Erasmus's scholarship had provided Luther of conversion is that of Charles Finney (1792-1875). Claiming aradical conversion himself, with the Greek New Teastamentfrom which Finney nevertheless built his doctrine on a naturalistic base which transformed evangelical Luther produced the fIrst widely circulated theology in terms of a more human-centered message and methods. Finney, the father of German translation of the Bible. Both men the "altar call, n had'this to say about conversion: hoped that increased Bible knowledge among the laity would bring about a Religion is the work of man. changed society. h was later that the It is something for man to do. h consists in obeying di vergence between the two men's God with and from the heart. h is man's duty ... [people] understandings of reformation was made must be so excited that they will break over these evident. counteracting influences, before they will obey God .... There In 1524, seven years into the must be excitement suffIcient to wake up the dormant moral reformation, Erasmus wrote a work titled powers and roll back the tide of degradation and sin .... Now The Freedom of the Will in which he you must realize that God does not create these excitements. argued that individuals were saved by a We must do all that pertains to this .... A revival is not a combination of God's mercy and their miracle. There is nothing in religion beyond the ordinary efforts. While he tried to give proper credit powers of nature. It consists entirely in the right exercise of to the operation ofGod's grace in salvation, the powers of nature. It is just that, and nothing else. When Erasmus's focus was on the need for human mankind become religious, they only exert the powers they effort. In his response to Erasmus, The had before in different way. It is not a miracle, or dependent Bondage of the Will, Luther thanked on a miracle in any sense. It is purely a philosophical result Erasm us for uncovering the true difference of the right use of means. No doctrine, therefore, is more between Erasmus's Romanism and dangerous to the prosperity of the church than the belief that Luther's Protestantism. h was not in the conversion depends on God. Failure results from the presence or absence of ceremony, in the church's being persuaded that promoting religion is formality or informality of one's approach somehow a subject of Divine sovereignty .... The conversion to God, but in how they were to be made of a sinner consists in his own obedience .... Men cannot do right with God in the first place. the devil's work more effectually than by preaching the Scripture is clear that in sal vation God sovereignty of God." . ­ must act fIrst: Had our debt not been paid From Finney's Lectures on Revival on the cross, there would have been no way back to God for us no matter what we did.

The question then arises as to what part we

How Did We Get Here?

8

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

modern play now that the debt has been paid. Did God merely set up a system whereby we could now use our free will to save ourselves? That is what synergism (the teaching that we work together with God to save us) always boils down to, and this is what Luther saw in Erasmus's teaching.

Erasmus taught that our salvation resulted from the working of new powers imparted to fallen humans by God's grace.

At ftrst this sounds like a grace-centered theology. God makes the first move; we cannot save ourselves without his help.

Who is supposed to use these new powers, though? Fallen man? The Bible teaches that man is dead in trespasses and sins and hostile to God (Eph. 2: 1,Rom. 8:5-8). Will a dead man follow his doctor's orders?

Will a hostile man help his enemy to conquer him? We have wills that can choose to follow one course or another, but these wills always will sinfully even when they will what is outwardly good. As Luther used to say, we have all the free will in the world to choose which path to follow to hell. Getting into heaven will require something other than our sinful wills, even contrary to them. Perhaps it might be asked "Might credit not be shared with the new wills which God gives us?" At best this is how Erasmus's position can be understood.

While Luther insisted that God does change our wills in salvation, he would flatly deny that our new nature was the cause of salvation. IfGod chose to save us when we were hostile, would it make sense to say that we were saved because we were not hostile? Even when credit was given not to fallen man, but to the new nature, Luther saw lurking behind this the desire of the old sinful nature to steal God's glory.

What Erasmus really wanted to do was to gi ve the old nature credi 1. If the new nature were responsible for salvation, how come it did not turn out the same for all? All are equally sinful, and one would suppose that God gave equally good new natures to people, yet in the end some were not saved.

Erasmus was trying to locate the explanation for this in man. Whether we were rewarded for cooperating with the new nature or for resisting it less, Erasmus really taught that some people were more

P lease turn to Luther on Page 15

EFORMATION

When Your "Testimony" is Boring Some of us just don't have exciting testimonies - does it matter?

MICHAEL S. HORTON

•

Growing up in evangelicalism, I was one of those kids who felt mediocre at meetings where ex -drug addicts gave their "testimony" of suddenly losing their craving for LSD. My grandmother used to speak of two groups of Christians: those who were "saved" and those who were "gloriously saved." Everything a good, clean Baptist youth is supposed to be, I didn't "dance, drink, smoke or chew, or go with girls who do." So unimpressive was my testimony that I did not even remember the day I was "saved." That, ofcourse, was a problem ...a big one.

From time to time, I even played with the idea of embellishing my spiritual autobiography in the interest of becoming a "trophy" like these other folks (none of whom, I am certain, had embellished their story). The time spent at a friend's house past my curfew could become a period of rebellion. Yea, in fact, I left home to become a Vegasact...sure, that could work.

In conservati ve evangelical circles, one must remember the big day. Birthdays would be celebrated with a modifted version of the usual song: "Happy birthday to you, only one will not do. It takes two for salvation-how many have you?" Since I "asked Jesus into my heart" on a weekly basis as a child, I simpl y selected age seven as the date to avoid embarassment Finall y, as I was going through Paul's epistle to the Romans and wanted to share it with the youth group as I entered high school, the pastor, worried about my interest in the theology of that book, asked the familiar query, "Son, when were you saved?" But this time I wasn't going to reach for a date out of a hat. Before I could catch myself, I heard myself answering, as though I were watching my mouth move from the rafters of his office. "In God's

CURE PRESIDENT

plan, I was saved before the foundation of the world," I replied. "Then, in God's sacrifice, I was saved when Christ died and was raised, and I am being saved by God's preserving and sanctifying grace. " Years later, Conservative Baptist scholar, Dr. Earl Radm ac her , told me, "When someone asks me if I'm 'saved' I tell them, 'I have been, I am being, and I shall one day be saved; now which one do you want to talk about?'"

If only there were more Earl Radmachers!

But my pastor was not as accomodating and conftdently announced that I was not "saved," since there was no special date.

He told me I was a "Calvinist," a shibboleth I had never heard of before, but have been forced to wear ever since.

Decisional Regeneration Many who would accuse baptismal regeneration of being a form of works­ righteousness have no problem with decisional regeneration, the belief that God has done his part by providing a means of forgiveness, and waits patiently for us to "let him have his way" and "let Jesus come into our heart," by "making Jesus Savior and Lord." In many ways, this is at the bottom of the so-called "lordship controversy" addressed in our last issue of Modern Reformation. Many Christians spend their lives questioning whether they are really "saved" because of the nature of their conversion experience, while others who have no interest in Christ and live scandalous, unrepentant lives are self-confident in their depravity, assured ­ ofthe absurd and preposterous illusion that they are "safe and secure from all alann" because they signed a card, prayed a prayer, or knelt at an evangelical altar before an

Please turn to Boring on Page 10 JANUARY~BRUARY1~2

•

9

1110der1lREFORMATION

Continued from Boring on Page 9

evangelical priest.

Let us, therefore, take a brief look at some ofthe biblical material on this matter of conversion.

The Old Testament While Israel is constantly called to renew her covenantal loyalty and reminded of her responsibilities to carry forward redemptive history by insuring the faithfulness of future generations, individual Israelites are not considered unbelievers who need to be converted.

There is no "age of accountability" and Jewish children are not told that they must have a radical experience which will make them immediately lose all desire for their sinful cravings. Because they are circumcised members of the covenant community, they belong to the people of God and, therefore, to God himself. Even the children are considered believers whose faith needs to be confirmed and strengthened, not granted.

God issues an absolute, unconditional edict to his redeemed community: "I will be your God and you will be my people," and the date individual Israelites must remember is the day "when Israel came out ofEgypt, the house of Jacob from a people of foreign tongue, [when] Judah became God's sanctuary, Israel his dominion" (ps.114:1). They must never forget the day, not when they "let him have his way," orwhen they "accepted Christ," but "when Yahweh provided redemption for his people; he ordained his covenant forever­ holy and awesome is his name" (ps.lll :9).

Again and again, the Psalmist calls upon the people to remember dates, but they are the dates when God did something important in history: creation, the promise, the exodus, the preservation of the redeemed community in the wilderness, and so on.

From time to time, Israel's unfaithfulness is met with a divine "cold shoulder," as God treats his people like any other unbelieving nation. Israel's national unfaithfulness cannot invalidate God's unconditional promise to Abraham, which included the decree that Abraham would­ be "the father of many nations."

"Understand, then," Paul argues in the 10

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

New Testament, "that those who believe are children ofAbraham" since "the Scriptures foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith," as Abraham was justified (Ga1.3:6-7).

The New Testament Therefore, the New Testament is a continuation, not a disruption, in God's redempti ve plan to save a covenant people.

In the Gospels, the Jews are called to embrace their covenant Redeemer-King, but the majority refuse to become a part of

While we have the responsibility to accept God's gracious provision, we must never think that such acceptance produced God's acceptance of us. this Abrahamic community. The unbelieving Jews, therefore, are not the people of God because of their ethnic identity and they can no longerrely on their racial heritage as Abraham's children (Mt.3:9; In.8:39-47).

This point is driven home in the epistles as a major theme. Thecovenantcommunity is established on the basis offai th in Christ.

In this way, the believer, sharing Christ's "last will and testament," owns all of his riches. As he redeemed his people from Egypt and led them through the wilderness to the promised land, so too he has saved, is saving, and will one day save his people fully and finally at the last day.

Conversion in the New Testament (especiall y in Acts) is of a missionary type.

Pagans hear about Christ for the first time and dramatic conversions take place. But notice, throughout these accounts, from our Lord's invitations in the Gospels, to the urgent appeals of the apostles, the call is

not to conversion, but to Christ The challenge is not to do something, but to believe something. Christ's appeal is not, "Convert yourself and you shall be saved," or "Whoever makes a decision and makes Me Lord and Savior will be born again."

Rather, we read, "Repent and believe" (Lk.13:3). Peter charges people to "Repent and be baptized...The promise is for you and your children .... " (Acts 2:38-39).

Thus, while conversion is often radical for the fIrst generation believers, it is usually less dramatic for their children, but the promise is as much for them as for adults.

It is difficult for us to accept this idea because of our emphasis on decisional regeneration. Instead of viewing conversion as part of a process in God's successive activities, we see it as a step we have taken that was truly determinative of our salvation. There must be something, even the smallest effort, on my end which I can show God on judgment day: "Look, here is the one thing I did. You must let me in, because I fulfilled the conditions." Is there something, however, that is decisive about our acceptance of God's gracious gift?

To answer this question, we have to understand something about order of salvation and the nature and style of conversion itself.

The Order of Salvation The conversionist vocabulary ("making Jesus Savior and Lord," "making a decision," "letting him have his way," "letting Jesus into your heart," etc.) is largely the product of an Arminian "order of salvation/' which makes faith logically prior to regeneration. Because terms can be used differently over time, we must be very careful on this one.

First, there is a problem of defmition.

When the reformers wrote about "regeneration," they were not thinking about the new birth (as most of us do today), but about "sanctification," that is, the process ofinward moral transformation by the Holy Spirit's gradual renewal ofour sinful affections. Thus, the reformers (and today's Lutherans), understanding by "regeneration" what we today refer to as "sanctification," insisted, against Roman Catholic objections, that faith preceded regeneration. But they would never have

,

argued that faith (the decision to trust Christ's person and work) produced the new birth. The new birth, unlike sanctification, is not a process, but the instantaneous and gratuitous resurrection of those who are spiritually dead. Paul writes, "While you were dead he made you alive .... " (Eph.1:5). "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2: 14). ''Therefore, it does not depend on a person's decision or effort, but' on God's mercy" (Rom.9:16). As Jesus declared, "No one can come to me unless the Father draws him"(Jn.6:44). Then does it matter whether we receive Christ? You bet! "To those who received him, he gave .the right to become children of God"-but read the rest of the verse: "--children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but of God" (In.1:12-13).

Therefore, while we have the responsibility to accept God's gracious provision, we must never think that such acceptance produced God's acceptance of us. It was because he accepted us, made a decision for us, and made himselfour Savior and Lord that we accept his gift. The new birth gives us the principle of spiritual life . which causes us to cry out, "Abba, father," and without it all of our works, all of our movements, all of our decisions and rededications are nothing more than the stirrings of those who are only alive, and utterly alive, to sin.

Therefore, the children of the Refonnation, though differing on specifics, join voices in the biblical affirmation that "salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9) and that even our new birth is the result ofgrace alone, not ofhuman cooperation with grace.

m(jdernREFORMATION

fountainheads for growth in faith and repentance-a life of conversion which follows.

The first of Martin Luther's "Ninety­ Five Theses," which launched the Refonnation, was the following: 111. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, 'Repent', he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

This was to establish the guardrails against two equally dangerous cliffs. On one side was the precupice ofthe medieval sacramental system, which promised forgiveness and full repentance when the sinner had jumped through the prescribed hoops deemed appropriate by the priest. A financial contribution could help secure this in Luther's day. On the other end, there were those, like Erasmus and other humanists, who argued that outward repentance was not important; that II

We need to recapture thissense of conversion as lifelongrepentance.

Conversion is never complete in this life and is always demanding.

conversion or repentance was merely inward. Luther specifically attacks this view in his third thesis.

Once again we are faced with these two equally disasterous altemati ves: either to make repentance a once-and-for-all external act of penance (by going through the modem sacrament of the altar call) or by making it exclusively internal, as if it The Style of Conversion Conversion and repentance can be did not matter whether you hate your used, therefore, in two ways without neighbor, as long as you mean to do contradiction: we come to a place when we otherwise.

We need to recapture this sense of are converted (the new birth, preceding a human response), but this conversion does conversion as lifelong repentance. not change us morally. We trust Christ for Conversion is never complete in this life the first time (faith) and hate our sinful and is always demanding. Since we are resistance to him and to his reign converted (Rom.6), the process of (repentance). Nevertheless, these two repentance and sanctifying conversion is aspects of the new birth are the not a goal to which we strive, but a reality

from which we live. We do not live godly lives in order to become godly, but because of a reality of godliness which is declared in our justification before God and in the principle of new life implanted within us through the new birth. If our justification depended on our conversion experience, we would never be justified, for conversion is always imperfect in this life. This is why, once again, we must insist that while the new birth precedes faith, the process of conversionfollows faith.

If this is the nature of conversion, the style of conversion will differ from person to person. Those who have had dramatic beginnings in conversion ought to treasure the radical nature of God's grace which they have experienced first-hand. They ought to be able to joyfully share this experience with others without cynical slurs like, "Becky 'got religion.'" But those who have been raised in Christian homes and have never rebelled against the promise God made to believers and their children are also God's people and are also being converted. Promised or actually begun in their infancy, conversion and regeneration become as rich a treasure of Christ's presence as memories of "before" and "after" portraits can be for new converts.

In conclusion, therefore, if the focus ofthe gospel is Christ, not conversion, and the date we are to remember is a dark afternoon nearly two millenia ago outside Jerusalem's city gate, what notion of conversion do we substitute?

The Covenant As we have seen, the Bible records two essential facts: (1) God is the one acting in our redemption and (2) he is redeeming a people, not just individuals.

Our conversionist evangelism largely overlooks these two central convictions.

Nowhere in either testament are there calls to, "Let Jesus have his way" or to "make him Lord of your life." The gospel is a promise, not merely an offer: "I will be your God and you will be my people" (Lev. 26:12). We do not "let" the Alpha and Omega, the Resurrection and the Life, the Author and Finisher of Faith, do anything! It is because of who he is and what he does, not because ofwhat we allow

Please turn to Boring on Page 12

JANUARY~BRUARY1~2

•

11

11'zodernREFORMATION

Continued from Boring on Page 11 him to do, that he is our Savior and Lord.

We do not "make him Lord" any more than someone in the mail room makes the CEO one's boss, or a child makes her father her parent The covenant, with all of its blessings (election, redemption, justification, adoption, sanctification, glorification), is God's idea.

Second, this Sovereign God is redeeming, not merely individuals who say "yes," but "a chosen .,people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that [we] may declare the praises of him who called [us] out of darkness into his wonderful light Once [we] were not a people, but now [we] are the people of God" (1 Pet2:9-10). God's goal is a redeemed and converted people.

Unlike the Marines, he is not just "looking for a few good men," but for a new humanity_ He does not simply want a few outstanding trumpet players who "wow" their adoring fans (not a few "testimonies" have fit that picture), but an orchestra, where the attraction lies in the harmony.

Therefore, a correct relationship to God can only take place within the context of the covenant community.

Entrance into this new society is secured through baptism, as circumcision served in the Old Testament This analogy, far from an imposition of a theological system, is directly affirmed by our Lord and his apostles. For instance, St. Paul tells us that we were united with Christ through "the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism" (Col.2: 11). As the apostle Peter assured his audience that the gospel promise was still "for you and for your children," so too we must challenge any conversionistic evangelism which ignores the covenantal context of conversion.

In this way, the anxiety of Christian children about being converted or born again is removed. They are called to deepen their understanding and experience ofGod and their inheritance with the saints, but they are not to tum inward, searching for that one radical change in their behavior which they brought about one day when

Please turn to Boring on Page 15 12

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

How Shall/ -Go To God?

Famous poet and hymnwriter, Horatius Bonar (1808-89), wrote the following lines, excerptedfrom one ofhis evangelistic sermons. In it we catch a glimpse of the sort ofReformation evangelism which, though largely lost, we trust God will renew in our time.

How shall I go to God? It is with our sins that we go to God, for we have nothing else to go with that we can call our own. This is one ofthe lessons that we are so slow to learn; yet without learning this we cannot take one right step in that which we call a religious life.

To look up some good thing in our past life, or to get up some good thing now, if we find that our past does not contain any such thing, is our first thought when we begin to inquire after God, that we may get the great question settled between Him and us, as to the forgiveness of our sins.

But men think this favor of God is a shadowy thing. "God seems so distant and it seems so difficult, and to require such a length of time!" You make that distant and difficult that which God has made simple and near and easy. "Are there no difficulties, do you mean to say?" In one sense, a thousand; in another, none.

"How is that? Did not the Son of God put difficulties in the sinner's way when He said to the multitude, 'Come unto Me, and I will give you rest'?" Certainly not; He meant them to go at once to Him, as He stood there, and as they stood there, and He would give them rest Had you then been upon the spot, what difficulties should you have found? "None, certainly; to speak of difficulty when I was standing by the side of the Son of God would have been folly, or worse."

Did the Son of God suggest difficulty to the sinner when He sat on Jacob's well, by the side ofthe Samaritan? Was not all difficulty anticipated or put away by these wondrous words of Christ, 'thou woudst have asked, and I would have given?'

"But is not my being sinful a barrier to my salvation?" Foolish question, which may be met by a foolish answer. Is your being thirsty a hindrance to your getting water or is being poor a hindrance to your obtaining riches as a gift from a friend?

Ah yes, the Son of Man came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.

If you be not wholly a sinner, there is a barrier; if you be wholly such, there is none!....

"But must I not quit some of my sins before I can expect blessing from Him?" No, indeed; He alone can deliver you from so much as even one sin. If you be not wholly a sinner, you do not wholly need Christ He does all, or nothing. A half salvation will only do for those who are not completely lost.. ..

"How can I dare believe in the favor of God so long as there is in me no real conversion? I must be changed before He can receive me." That conversion or repentance which you desire can never take place so long as you regard God as a stem and unloving Judge. It is the goodness of God that leads the sinner to repentance. Nothing between him and God! Nothing between him and pardon!

No preliminary goodness, or preperatory feeling! He learns the Apostle's lesson, "Christ died for the ungodly:" God "justifieth the ungodly."

"But mustn't the Holy Spirit make me acceptable first?" No, in no wise. You are not justified by the Spirit' s work, but by Christ's; nor are the motions of the Spirit the grounds of your confidence, or the reasons for expecting pardon from the Judge of all. The Spirit works in you, not to prepare you for being justified, or to make you fit for the favor of God, but to bring you to the cross, just as you are.

For the cross is the only place where God deals in mercy with the transgressor.

Dr. Jon Zens, pastor of Word of Life Church in Dresser, Wisconsin, and editor of Searching Together (form~rly the Baptist Reformation Review) Modern Reformation: What do we mean by "conversion"?

Jon Zens: There is a problem: we're "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph.2: 1), and therefore, have nothing on our end which can restore spiritual life. So there is a need for some kind of new life, and the way the Bible describes this is in terms of the Spirit comingupon peopleas the gospel ispreached.

They believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, repent, and "turn from idols to serve the living God." Sanctification begins, a process over an entire lifetime, through which believers take up their cross and follow Christ

Many people today look to aconversion experience as the basis for their being "saved." Is there a danger, especially if conversion is viewed as aprocessof renewal and rennovation, of depending on our own activity than upon the objective, historical work of Christ?

That's a good question. Yes, that is a very great danger. Since Charles Finney in the last century, with Moody, and others, you had an emphasis on a dramatic conversion experience, which usually culminated in a person going forward dur­ ing an altar call.

Ofcourse, people are saved in different ways and there may well have been people who were converted in spite of the theology undergirding that methodology, but something tragic happened to our understanding of evangelism. People began to look at conversion in terms ofanexperience they had when they were led through a prayer or walked an aisle.

But this is wrong~ fIrst because it points ) to the wrong event (and, for that matter, to the wrong person-myself), and also because, as I read John's Gospel, I read

INTERVIEW

modernREFoRMATION

about a present tense relationship: I am believing, following, trusting, and so on.

The New Testament notion of conversion doesn't put the emphasis on an emotional momentyou may have had fifteen years ago, but on the day-to-day successes and failures of the Christian life.

and a subjective way of looking at it The danger is either to so emphasize Christ's objective work that experience fades into oblivion, or to so emphasize experience that Christ fades into oblivion. The Lord Jesus Christmustbe the focus ofbothourobjective hope and our Christian experience. Look at Paul. He has no trouble shifting from explanations of great objective truths to expressing great excitement and calling people to obedience and growth. It's not an either / or. The key is to be sensitive to everything the New Testament says about this, and not to ignore aspects of the whole revelation. Christ for us and the Spirit working within us are both aspects of that revelation.

Our experiences do vary, don't they?

Well, that's why we can't base our conviction of conversion on our own Christian experience. I don't remember the exact date I was "saved." For some, it's a terrific change from a very free-wheeling lifestyle; for others, its gradual, but for both there is the basic principle of new life which leads them to turn from their sins and follow Christ

The experiences differ, but the divine gift of the new birth we all share in common.

Sure. I want to back up a bit and say something about the subjectivism ofso much of modem views on this subject Again, since Finney and others, the emphasis has fallen on an emotional plea for people to respond. There's just an awefullot of em­ phasis on doing something or feeling some­ thing. Then you start reading their books on sanctification and the emphasis there, too, falls on the individual, his needs, the meth­ ods he can follow in order to be fuled with the Spirit, or what have you. Formulas have replaced the focus on the historical work of Christ When he died, he secured the salva­ tion, new birth, and sanctification of his people. He didn't just purchase our justifi­ cation and then leave everything else up to us. In Scripture I see the indicative and the imperative: Christ has done something for us (indicative); therefore, let us live like those who have been crucifIed with Christ (imperative). The genius of the New Testa­ ment is to make the whole system flow out of the objective work of Christ for us.

If there is so much imbalance, how can we as Reformation Christians avoid the other extreme of so emphasizing the covenantal and objective character of the new birth and this new life that we lose any sense of the genuine excitement of conversion.

Balance comes by getting an increasingly better grip on the New Testament doctrines, not by simply taking a mediating position between an objective

The "Jesus Is The Answer" bumper stickerhas elicited thereply ofnon-Christians, "So What's The Question?" Do we so emphasize the decision without offering an adequate explanation of the issues about which they are deciding?

Ifpopular evangelists, as they 're called, were really to explain, for instance Luke 14, when Jesus called people to deny themselves and think long and hard about whether they are prepared for an uphill battle, I think they would lose their audience. Coming toChrist isn't just having your sins washed away and being happy; it's a matteroffollowing Christ and sharing in his sufferings. People are being called upon to make a decision for Christ without even knowing much about what this salvation is or how it takes place.

Do I save myself? Does God save me? Is it something in between? Because the content is shallow, often the duration ofthe so-called "conversion" is short-lived as well.

When Jesus was asked, "What must we do to do the works God requires?", he an­ swered "TIns is the work of God--that you believe in the One he has sent." In other words, they wanted a method. But Jesus Christ tells them that they must understand that salvation is not their doing at all. This is essential information for them to know be­ fore they can be expected to accept anything or make any decision. Evangelism which gives "converts" the impression that they are saved by their own activity is sureto produce spurious experiences which cannot last for very long.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

•

13

,

nlodernREFORMATION

Luther and Conversion

RICHARD all..BERT •

DlRECfOR OF RESEARCH

"To be converted to God means to believe in Christ to believe that He is our mediator and that we haveetema1life through Him." f'N 52, 617). So said Luther in a sermon in 1534. Thedoctrineofconversion was of the utmost importance to Luther. It was nearly as central to his theology as the doctrine of justification. And, as with the doctrine of justification, Luther had to contend with many misconceptions about conversion. His words are particularly relevant to us today because so many of those misconceptions are again the norm, even in Protestantism.

The first misconception that Luther warns us about is the notion, so common in much of what passes for preaching today with its altar calls and pleas for people to make a decision for Christ, that conversion is something that we must do; it is our work (see How Did We Get Here? on page 8). CommentingonJohn3:3,Lutherreminds us that, "Man's own merit or holiness can contribute nothing toward getting out of the old birth of flesh and blood or achieving the new birth. Man is not born again of his own choice and idea." f'N 21, 535). Luther excludes all notions of "God has done His part, now you must do yours," or, "God cast His vote for you, Satan cast his against you and you have to cast the deciding vote." No, for Luther conversion is solely the work of God. All human efforts are excluded.

"But don't I have to do something frrst before God will work in me, even if it's only to ask Him in?" Luther anticipated this question when he said in another sermon: "But do you ask: How must one begin to become pious, or what must one do to move God to begin to work in us? Answer: Indeed! Do you not hear that in you there is no doing and no beginning toward becoming pious, just as increase and completion are not in your power? God alone begins, furthers, and completes the change. Whatever you begin is sin and remains sin, no matter how pretty it may appear to be. You can 40 nothing but sin, no matter what you do. Therefore the 14

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

teaching ofall schools and monastaries is a deception, because they teach people to begin to pray, do good works, found, give, sing, become spiritual, and thereby to seek the grace of God..."

This is what is meant by "Thy King cometh." You do not seek Him; He seeks you. For you do not find Him; He fmds you. For the preachers come from Him, not from you. Their sermon comes from Him, not from you. YourJaithcomesfrom Him, not from you. And everything that works faith within you comes from Him and not from you. You should, therefore,

We can seewhy the topic of conversion was so important and central to l uther's theology. To understand it in any other way... is to have the wrong way of conversion. see clearly enough that if He does not come, you are left outside; and where there is no Gospel, there is no God but only sin and perdition, regardless of what the "free will" does, suffers and performs, or how it lives. Therefore whatever you do, do not ask where (how) a man must begin to become pious. There is no beginning except where the King comes and is preached." f'N 10 I, 2, 29f).

To such a sermon you might respond, "But I have a free will. And if I can do nothing toward my conversion, then are you saying that I'm converted against my will?" No. "Then my willingness to be con verted is the reason I'm converted." This is another misconception, and Luther answers, "Decidedly not! The will does nothing. It is rather the substance in which

the Holy Spirit works also in those who resist, as in Paul. But working on the will of him who resists He move the will toconsent" f'N-T 5, No. 5189). This is conversion according to Luther. This change from resisting to consenting is not something that happens so that I can decide to convert; it is conversion itself. IfI am willing itis because I have already been converted.

The last misconception that Luther helps us to correct, is how, or what means the Holy Spirit uses to work this conversion in us. As in Luther's day, there are many today who want us to believe that the Holy Spirit comes to us and works conversion in us directly.

However, as Luther points out, ''The Holy Spirit draws us through the ministry of the Word when He pleases. Therefore the spoken Word is always to be held in high esteem, for those who despise the spoken Word are presently made heretics." f'N -T 5,No. 5191).

This is why Luther, and those who follow in the tradition of the Reformation, have emphasized the need for sound preaching. For Luther this means that you must first clearly present the law in its full rigor, with all the demands it places on us and then you clearly present the gospel in all its sweetness showing us how God has done all for our salvation. This is because, as Luther put it: "It is necessary, if you would be converted, that you become terrified, that is, that you have an alarmed and trembling conscience. Then, after this condition has been created, you mustgrasp theconsolatin that comes not from any work of your own, but from the work of God. He sent His Son Jesus Christ into this world in order to proclaim to terrified sinners the mercy of God. This is the way coversion is brought about; other ways are wrong ways." f'N 40 11,440).

We can see now why the topic of conversion was so important and so central to Luther's theology. To understand conversion in any other way than the biblical one set forth here by Luther, is to have a wrong way of conversion. And to have a wrong way of conversion is to have no way of conversion at all. We would do well to remember this as we evangelize the lost in the hopeofconversion , and as we teach them how to view their conversion afterwards.

, modernREFORMATION

Continuedfrom Boring on Page 12

they decided to follow Jesus. Our society is given to conversionism: self-help cures, self-improvement programs with cheerful testimonies and "before" and "after" photos.

Dramatic contrasts and sensational reports, while calculated to bring glory to God, often bring glory to those who had the sense to turn their life around. To be sure, "God has no grandchildren," as Billy Graham wisely said. And there is a danger of so emphasizing the covenantal aspect that children are not encouraged to develop their own relationship with God. But the guardrail must also be raised against the opposite and more general danger in evangelicalism: individualistic and triumphalistic visions which rob God of his glory and his people of their comfort and assurance.

So then, to queries concerning our salvation, we ought to reply: 1. When? Before creation, at the cross, in my lifetime, and in the future. Let this replace, "On July 10, 1965, during the eighth verse of 'Just As I Am,' when Brother Fred held a revival at our church."

2. How? By God's electing grace, redeeming grace, calling, justifying, and sanctifying grace, and by his glorifying

Continuedfrom Luther on Page 9 deserving of salvation than others. Luther would have none ofit. The onl y credit man could receive was for his own damnation.

All glory, honor and credit for the salvation of the saved belonged to God who could save us in spite of our wills.

Is it not strange that many who call themsel ves Protestant teach that a person is saved by doing that which Luther, the father ofProtestantism, declared that a lost person could not do? Is it not even stranger that the type of conversion experience which evangelicals take to be the litmus test of genuine Christianity is based on the doctrine of free will, a doctrine which Erasmus had to defend against Luther, against Protestantism, and against the gospel which had just been rediscovered? \,

True Reformation If the gospel had not been rediscovered

grace (Rom.8:29-39). This can take the place of, "By raising my hand, going forward during the altar call, and praying the prayer after Brother Fred."

3. Where? In the church, where the proclamation of the Word and the administration of the sacraments (baptism and the Lord's Supper) unite me to Christ and to his people. This is a more biblical response than, "In the privacy of my own heart."

4. From What? From the guilt and control ofour sins in this life, and from the presence of sin in the next. This stands in the place of, "Lack of self-esteem, unhappiness, addictions, sickness, etc."

This is part of the problem in our calls to conversion. We spend more time trying to manipulate and persuade people to "make a decision" than trying to explain what it is about which they are deciding. Onepopular Christian bumper sticker in southern California cheers, "Jesus is the answer!", to which unbelievers have replied with their own sticker: "If Jesus is the answer, what's the question?"

5 . Why? In the words of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, "to glorify God and enjoy him forever." Let this replace, "So I could enjoy the happiness ofthe victorious Christian life," orother explanations which have oneself at the center.

Let us, therefore, honor conversion not only as an ev~nt of turning from sin to Christ, but as a life-long struggle to inherit the promised land. That heavenly home is already promised: it's unconditional.

Regardless of how unimpressive our experiences of growth, zeal, and spiritual success, God has promised this land to all who have placed their faith in Christ alone.

But, like the Israelites who wandered in the wilderness, we too must endure the pressures and pains before we may enjoy the reality which the promise offers. Let us long for greater and deeper conversion by casting a skeptical eye on approaches which make radical conversion and instant change in behavior and personality a mark of a genuine new birth. While the new birth (our spiritual resurrection) is instantaneous and is not the product of our cooperation, conversion is a marathon in which we struggle earnestly, and the crown of life awaits us at the finish line.

Instead of constantly measuring our conversion experiences by comparing ourselves to others, or despairing because the radical nature of our initial conversion is followed by the mundane struggles of the Christian life, "let us run with perseverence the race marked out for us.

Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith" (Heb.12:1-2).

by a man who had tried to make his peace with God through every program of repentance, religious experience, and personal relationship with God, it might be harder to see how today' s born again Christianity is a deviation from the gospel.

Today's evangelicals have been taught to believe that the chief threats to genuine faith are lack ofconsecration and formality.

A dead church, in popular terms, is a congregation of pew-warmers submitting to the ordinances of cold ritual. Perhaps.

But the opposite is not true. Sincerity and resolve, vibrancy and warmth, are not the marks of life. On religious television we often view packed churches and excited crowds. The preachers gain credence because they promote becoming born again.

Many of these same individuals have been shown to teach erroneous and blasphemous doctrines. They have been shown to be far from any clear understanding ofthe Gospel.

We can have sincerity and resol ve, vibrancy

and warmth, and still not know God through the gospel of Christ crucified.

True reformation will not mean an end to evangelistic enterprises, but it will change the focus. It will involve preaching faith into people's hearts, not pressuring them to make a decision which they cannot make.

Abandoning the doctrine of free will does not mean fatalism, but hope. We know that our wills are sinful, because they desire to escape wrath, so we think they will lead us correctly. We are not so certain that God, left to himself, will do the same for us.

Take heart, Christian! Our sinful wills are our worst enemy; God is not! God willed to save you when you were still hostile to him. How much more, having been reconciled, will he want to do more for your sal vation than you could ever think to do? True reformation, therefore, will not destroy evangelism, but will assist in bringing true gospel preaching to Christians who are weary ofthe gospel of will-power.

JANUARY~BRUARY1~2

•

15

fno ernREFORMATION

FROM THE SUBLIME TO THE RIDICULOUS

ATale of Two Gospels

George Whitefield

Billy Sunday

It was of George Whitefield (1714-70) that John Wesley asked, "Has any man led more thousands of souls to the Saviour than this man?". A Church of England evangelist, Whitefield assisted Edwards and the Temlants in the Great A wakening in the American colonies. Typical evangelistic sermons preached by Whitefield drew tens of thousands to city malls and parks, with such titles as, "Christ the Believer's Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption," "TheLordOurRighteousness," "The Seed of the Woman and the Seed of the Serpent," and other discourses on the history of redemption.

The following is an excerpt from "The Lord Our Righteousness." Pay special attention to the doctrinal literacy Whitefield expected of his hearers:

We come now to the contrast in the form of the ex-baseball player-turned-evangelist, Billy Sunday (1863-1935). In the tradition of Wesley, Bellamy, and Finney rather than Edwards, Whitefield, and Spurgeon, Sunday defended his lavish lifestyle with the justification that he was more efficient than any living evangelist, guaranteeing results at two dollars per soul.

Today'srevivalists,includingthewidely-respectedandrightly admired Billy Graham, view themselves as successors to Finney and Sunday. But notice the shift from a God-centered, Christcentered, gospel-centered message evident in Edwards and Whitefieldtoamoralisticcrusade-mentalitywhichismemorialized in Billy Sunday's most famous "evangelistic" sermon, titled simply, "Mr. Sunday's Famous 'Booze' Sermon.":

"Whoeveris acquainted with the nature ofmankind in general, or the propensity of his own heart in particular, must acknowledge that self-righteousness is the last idol that is rooted out of the heart: being once born under a covenant of works, it is natural for us all to have recourse to a covenant of works for our everlasting salvation ...We cry outagainst popery, and that very justly; but we are all Papists; at least, I am sure, we are all Arminians by nature; and therefore, no wonder so many natural men em brace that scheme. It is true, we disclaim the doctrine of merit, are ashamed directly to say we deserve any good at the hands ofGod; tberefore, as tbeapostleexcellently well observes, 'we go about,' we fetch a circuit, 'to establish a righteousness ofour own,' and, like the Pharisees ofold, 'will not wholly submit to that righteousness which is of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. ' This is the sorest, though, alas! the most common evil that was ever yet under the sun. An evil that in any age, especially in these dregs of time wherein we live, cannot be sufficiently inveighed against. For as it is with the people, so with the priests; and it is to be feared, even in those places, where once the truth, as it is in Jesus, was eminently preached, many ministers are so degenerated from their pious ancestors that the doctrines of grace, especially the personal, all-sufficient righteousness of Jesus, is all but too seldom, too slightly mentioned."

"Here we have one of the strangest scenes in all the Gospels.

Two men, possessed of devils, confront Jesus, and while the devils are crying out for Jesus to leave them, he commands the devils to come out, and the devils obey the command of Jesus.

The devils ask permission to enter into a herd of swine feeding on the hillside. This is the only record we have of Jesus ever granting the petition of devils, and he did it for the salvation of men. Then the fellows that kept the hogs went back to town and told the peanut-brained, weasel-eyed, hog-jowled, beetle­ browned, bull-necked lobsters that owned the hogs that 'a long-haired fanatic from Nazareth named Jesus has driven the devils out of some men and the devils have gone into the hogs, and the hogs into the sea, and the sea into the hogs, and the whole bunch is dead.

And then the fat, fussy old fellows came out to see Jesus and said that he was hurting their business. A fellow says to me, 'I don't think Jesus Christ did a nice thing.' You don't know what you're talking about Down in Nashville, Tennessee, I saw four wagons going down the street and they were loaded with stills, and kettles, and pipes. What's this?' I said. 'United States revenue officers, and they have been in the moonshine district and confiscated the illicit stills, and they are taking them down to the government scrap heap.' Jesus Christ was God's revenue officer... .! am a temperance Republican down to my toes."

The great evangelist continued his call to Christ by explaining concepts like imputation and the active and passive obedience of Christ. It was neither ignored as "ivory tower" speculation, nor defended in that sty Ie. Whitefield was convinced that this was the gospel, nota theological implication which serious Bible students should understand, but the heart of the Christian message which one could not deny without forfeiting eternal life:

Sunday then proceeds to answer the following questions in the following points: (1) Interest in Manhood (masculinity was part of Sunday's gospel); (2) Does the Saloon Help Business?; (3) The Parent of Gimes; (4) The Economic Side; (5) Tragedies Born of Drink; (6) More Economics; (7) The American Mongoose; (8) The Saloon a Coward; (9) God' s Worst Enemy; (10) The Gin Mill; (11) A Chance for Manhood, and so on.

This was an evangelistic sermon, but there is the conspicuous

Please turn to Whitefield on Page 17 16

•

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1992

Please turn to Sunday on Page 17

- modernREFORMATI)N

Continuedfrom Whitefield on Page 16

~

Continuedfrom Sunday on Page 16

"Suppose I told you that you must intercede with saints, for them to intercede with God for you; would you not say then that I was justly reputed a popish missionary? Suppose I went a little more round about,and told you that the death of Christ was not sufficient, without our death being added to it; that you must die as well as Christ, join your death with his, and then it would be sufficient. Might you not then, with holy indignation, throw dust in the air and justly call me a 'setter forth of strange doctrines?'

And now then, if it be not only absurd, but blasphemous to join the intercession of saints with the intercession of Christ, as though his intercession was not sufficient; or our death with the death of Christ, as though his death was not sufficient: judge ye, if it be not equally absurd, equally blasphemous, to join our obedience, either wholly or in part, with the obedience of Christ, as if that were not sufficient. And if so, what absurdities will follow the denying that the Lord, both as to his acti ve and passi ve obedience, is our righteousness! If there be no such thing as the doctrine of an imputed righteousness, those who hold it and bring forth fruit unto holiness are safe: but if there be such a thing (as there certainly is) what will become of you who deny it? It is not a difficult matter to determine. Your portion must be in the lake of fire and brimstone forever and ever. Since you will rely on your works, by your works you shall be judged. They shall be weighed in the sanctuary; and they will be found wanting.

Therefore, by your works shall you be condemned, and you, being out of Christ, shall find God, to your poor wretched souls, a consuming fire."

Today, this kind of preaching would be considered too theological. "We need to preach the simple gospel," people say, so we reduce the great plan of salvation to the trivial and replace the power of the gospel with the power of manipulation. The simple gospel is "the Lord our righteousness" and genuine conversions cannot be secured apart from that message.

absence of the evangel. It is not even the case that the gospel is confused with moralistic appeals; there is nothing to confuse!

There is no gospel to be found at all in this sermon, and yet it is Sunday's most famous evangelistic sermon.

In the sermon, Sunday consigns to hell not only those who drink alcoholic beverages themselves; but even those abstainers who fail to support prohibition: "Did you vote for the saloon?" he asks, to which the reply is given, "Yes." "Then you shall go to Hell," Sunday concludes. "If you vote for the dirty business you ought to go to Hell as sure as you live, and I would like to fire the furnace." But Sunday also preached a sermon explaining conversion: "What does · converted mean? It means completely changed ... Matthew stood in the presence ofChrist; he realized what it would be to be without Christ, to be without hope, and it brought him to a quick decision. How long did that conversion take? And you tell me you can't make an instant decision to please God? The decision of Matthew proves that you can. He ceased to do evil and commenced to do good. You can be converted just as quickly as Matthew was."

In this sermon, Sunday does refer to the cross and Christ's substitutionary atonement (at least, he did not deny that doctrine, as Finney had done); nevertheless, conversion is the subject, not Christ, as it was with Whitefield. Following Finney, Sunday declared, "I believe there is no doctrine more dangerous than to convey the impression that a revival is something peculiar in itself and cannot be judged by the same rules of causes and effects as other things."

Thus, revivalism since the Second Great Awakening consistently declared its independence from the concept of conversion as a supernatural gift of divine grace. Sinners converted themselves, as Martin Marty writes, "accenting what a person had to achieve all alone, almost by an act of will."

If Spurgeon Could See Us Now...

The famous Baptist evangelist, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892), complained about the effects of Finney-style revivalism even in Britain, where Spurgeon, aCalvinist, pastored the world's largest independent church. One century after his death, this great Christian leader might find his words, if anything, too weak: Sometimes we are inclined to think that a very great portion of modern revivalism has been more a curse than a blessing, because it has led thousands to a kind of peace before they have known their misery; restoring the prodigal to the Father's house, and never leading him to say, 'Father, I have sinned.' How can he be healed who is not sick? or he be satisfied with the bread oflife who is not hungry? The old-fashioned sense of sin is despised, and consequently religion is run up before the foundations are dug out. Everything in this age is shallow. Deep­ sea fishing is almost an extinct business so far as men's souls are concerned. The consequence is that men leap into religion, and then leap out again. Unhumbled they came to the church, unhumbled they remained in it, and unhumbled, they go from it.

From "The Sword and Trowel," 1882

JANUARY~BRUARYIW2

•

17