Category Archives: salvation

The relationship between holiness and sin

Leave a reply

I want to use The Kitchen for its intended purpose for a few days. This is a testing ground for half-baked thoughts, so I want to present something more as a proposition than a proclamation.

I’ve been thinking a lot about man’s relationship to God, especially in light of ideas presented by N.T. Wright. (Jay Guin has been resuming some of Wright’s thoughts while discussing one of Wright’s latest books)

My basic thought is this: God wants man to live with Him forever. However, nothing sinful can survive in the presence of God, much as darkness cannot remain in the presence of light. Therefore all sin must be removed for man to be able to live with God.

I’ve moved away from the basic “sin demands a price” way of looking at salvation and see it more as “holiness eradicates sin.”

I’ll try and flesh out those ideas a bit, but I wanted to lay out the basic idea. Maybe someone can totally refute it before I waste too much time trying to explain it.

Sinners in need of grace

Leave a reply

seekingIt’s becoming popular these days to leave sin out of the presentation of the good news of Jesus. Let’s talk about Kingdom. Let’s talk about becoming a member of the people of God. Let’s talk about taking part in the restoration of all things.

But let’s don’t talk about sin. That seems to be the spirit of the day.

As I’ve said before, it’s one of the usual pendulum swings that we get regarding theology and Christian living. One generation emphasizes one thing, so a later generation feels the need to reject that one thing and go to the other extreme. That’s the very tendency we have to fight against.

Many car wrecks occur due to what is called oversteering. It’s an overreaction to a situation that calls for a correction in steering. The panicked driver turns the wheel sharply, worsening the situation rather than helping. Instead of running off onto the shoulder, they veer across the center lane into a headon collision. Instead of sliding on the ice, they throw their car into an out-of-control spin. Instead of hitting a road hazard, the driver throws their car sideways across several lanes of traffic.

Overcorrection in the church is no better. Removing judgment and sin from our vocabulary is not the way to respond to a perceived overemphasis of those themes. Let’s talk about the Kingdom and Kingdom values and restoring a fallen world, but let’s not forget that the Bible teaches that each of us needs the forgiveness of sin.

We will never reach a lost world if we don’t admit that world is lost. We will never reach a lost world if we don’t admit that we were lost until God’s grace reached us. We will never reach a lost world if we delete sin from our vocabulary.

Describing our salvation

Leave a reply

One reason that people use the phrase “faith alone” when talking about salvation is a reaction to the idea that people somehow earn salvation by doing certain things. In the same way, people in my fellowship often reject the phrase “faith alone” out of a desire to emphasize the role of baptism in salvation.

Some of the discussion is mere semantics. Some reflects essential heart issues behind the words. Let me lay out some thoughts on the subject in general:

  • We are saved by the grace of God. We do not earn salvation, deserve salvation, nor anything of the sort. Salvation is a free gift from God.
  • Only God will ultimately decide who is saved and who is not. Modernism makes us want to be able to define everything in terms of lists, formulas, steps, and procedures. My list is short: God saves.
  • Salvation comes to us through Jesus Christ. I think Jesus’ words leave little wiggle room. If we believe in him, then we have to believe that he is the only way to the Father.
  • We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ.
  • The word faith in the New Testament can usually be translated as faithfulness; it is not mere intellectual belief. It is a choice to believe and live in accordance with that belief.
  • The Bible includes a number of things within what I call the faith response. These include repentance, confession, and baptism. Our ongoing response must be a life of love toward others; the Bible makes it clear that no one is saved without love.
  • Someone who refuses to do the things that God tells us to do cannot be seen as having faith. I compare it to someone who says they believe in their doctor. That doesn’t mean they believe their doctor really is certified to practice medicine (though that’s included). It means they trust and follow their doctor’s indications. In the same way, if we don’t want to do what God says, we don’t have faith in him.
  • I hesitate to qualify anything as “essential” for salvation. God can save anyone. He can save everyone. He is God. As someone once said, the Bible wasn’t written to tell God what he has to do.
  • Salvation is by faith through grace.

Not an exhaustive list, but enough to show you some of my thinking on the subject.

James versus Paul regarding faith and works

Leave a reply

One major problem with stating that we are saved by faith alone is that the Bible never says that, at least not directly. The only statement made about “faith alone” is negative:

“You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24)

Oops!

Does James really contradict Paul? I mean Paul says things like:

“For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.” (Romans 3:28)
“However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.” (Romans 4:5)
“So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.” (Romans 11:5–6)
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8–9)

Yet James insists that faith is insufficient:

“In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.” (James 2:17–19)

I think James and Paul are using words differently, as biblical writers often do. When Luke speaks of “apostles,” he almost always means the Twelve. When Paul speaks of “apostles,” he is usually referring to those sent out by the church as evangelists.

When James speaks of a faith that even demons have, he’s not speaking of the saving faith that Abraham had. When Paul talks about faith, it’s an active, obedient faith. James is addressing the lifestyle we live as a Christian; Paul is talking about how we achieve justification.

Using James’ terminology, we can’t be saved by faith alone; we also need works. Using Paul’s terminology, works have nothing to do with our salvation; it all depends on faith.

IF we understand how each author uses the words they use, we’ll see there’s no real conflict between their ideas.

Faith alone and the response of faith

Leave a reply

Yesterday I asked these questions:

Do you think that most people think “faith alone” excludes the thing the commenter mentions? Or do most people think that saving faith includes a certain response?

The commenter I referred to had listed “repentance, confession, baptism, or anything else.” I would argue that I have yet to meet anyone who felt that “faith alone” didn’t require some response. Most base that belief on verses like Romans 10:9

“That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved”

I’ve generally heard it taught that there needs to be some response, be it a praying of the sinner’s prayer or a public confession of faith. Few would believe in salvation of an unrepentant person. Believing in Jesus involves some change, some response.

Where the debate comes in, in my experience, is what form that response needs to take. I’m among those who believes that the biblical response includes immersion; that view is not held by all, and is, in fact, rejected by many.

Is a faith that doesn’t respond truly faith? If you strictly believe that it is, then your view of “faith alone” excludes the need for the things listed above. If you feel that faith that doesn’t respond is sterile, then I would guess “faith alone” doesn’t mean “intellectual assent alone” to you.

I want to keep unpacking these ideas. What are your thoughts on the subject?