Parable of the Soils
Believers Who Fall Away
"They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away."
"Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have."
These two verses are from Luke chapter eight, verses 13 and 18. The first is part of Christ's explanation of the parable of the soils (or sower and the seed), dealing with the shallow ground hearer. The second is a summation, I believe, of the entire parable. It tells us what is the chief lesson in the parable. "Take heed how you hear" means "take heed how you receive and respond to the sowing of the seed to your heart."
In discussions about salvation, this parable is extremely important. Several major issues in soteriology come into intense discussion in the parable.
Who are the saved and the lost? What distinguishes the saved from the lost? What is it to be saved? When is one saved, or is a child of the kingdom? Did any saved lose their salvation? If so, which hearers?
Is The Shallow Ground Hearer Saved?
Clearly, as Jesus said, those who "receive" the "seed," that is, those who hear, understand, believe, and obey the "word," are they who shall be "saved." This is discovered by what Jesus said about the wayside hearer, the one who rejected the seed outright. He dismissed the word, failing to heed, understand, believe, or obey the word, and all this "lest they should believe and be saved." (8:12)
However, the shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yea, even to have initially "received the word with joy." Many believe this is enough to pronounce the shallow ground hearer a "saved" person, a genuine "child of the kingdom."
Yet, even though this shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yet he is never said to have been "saved." It is clear that he progressed further than the wayside hearer, for he both "understood" and "believed" the word. Yet, he was never truly converted, as I shall demonstrate.
Why Lost?
How do we know that the shallow ground hearer was never actually "saved"?
First, his heart condition is contrasted with that of the "good ground" hearer, who's heart was "good" and "honest." Thus, his heart was not "good," being like the soil to which it corresponds, being "shallow" or "rocky," lacking sufficient depth.
Such soil represents a sinner not properly prepared in heart by grace. People who "believe" and "rejoice" at the preaching of the gospel without a prepared heart, and prevenient grace, and without having "root" in themselves, and without honesty of heart, do not experience real salvation. I will give examples of these shallow ground hearers later.
Second, the terms descriptive of him indicate his lack of salvation. He is "shallow," and "rootless," and without "patience" (perseverence). His "believing" is, therefore, "shallow" and "without foundation." His "believing" is not "rooted," either in himself, or in truth, or in Christ. His "shallowness" is exhibited in the words describing him and his faith, such as "for a while believe," and "for a while endure." He is temporary, quick to start, and quick to tire.
Third, the things he is said to lack indicate he is not saved. Already it has been observed how he lacked goodness and honesty of heart, not being "good soil." Also, how he lacked "depth" or "root in himself," and how he was deficient in "stick-to-itiveness." The shallow or stony soil "lacked moisture," or the Holy Spirit.
Third, the "engrafted word" is to be received "with meekness" James 1: 21 KJV) but the shallow ground hearer receives the word not so.
Fourth, the shallow ground hearer represents that precipitate or hasty disciple whom Jesus warned against, as I shall show shortly in the examples of shallow ground hearers in the scriptures.
Fifth, none of these shallow ground hearers produce "fruit," for they soon die before growing to sufficient maturity, as a plant, to produce fruit.
Sixth, truly saved people, like the Bereans, have "received the word with all readiness of mind," being prepared in heart (soil) for the reception of the word.
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17: 11 KJV)
Some translations say, of the good ground hearer, that his heart is "honest" or "noble."
True believers "receive" the word with deep "joy," not with superficial joy.
"For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance...And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost." (I Thess. 1: 5, 6 KJV)
"...when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." (2: 13)
Not only do true believers receive the word with joy, but with soul affliction, or with conviction of sins, and also receive it "with power." It is not human emotional joy, but joy "of the Holy Ghost." The shallow ground hearer receives the word as the word of men, without deep "assurance."
Finally, the shallow ground hearer did not have a pentitent heart to accompany his believing, for the soil was not ploughed or "broken up" by the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction.
Now that it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was not saved, being a hypocrite or imposter, let us take notice of how Christ says that he
1. "Perseveres" (endures) only a short while, as a shallow rooted plant endures the heat of the sun very little.
2. "Believes" only for a short while, for he is said to "Fall away." The Greek word ("aphistēmi") means to depart or to withdraw.
Now, if it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was never really converted, but was deceived, then what does it mean for him to "fall away"? Those who contend that a real believer may lose salvation argue that such terms as "depart," "fall," "apostasize," etc., can never be used to refer to pretenders but can only be said of those who have been truly saved. It is much the same argument made regarding the many warnings given in scripture to professing servants of God. Are they meaningless warnings? Do they speak of real threats to real Christians, regarding keeping saved?
This is a question dealing with "implication." Do the above words imply that one has genuine salvation? When the shallow ground hearer/believer "fell away" or departed from the faith, does this imply that he was actually saved? Is he "departing" or "removing" from real or pretended salvation?
One can see why those who make this argument are keen on insisting that the shallow ground hearer was actually saved. They must make him a genuine born again Christian for he "fell away," and only genuinely saved people "fall away." On the other hand, if I have proven that the shallow ground hearer was never truly converted, then the argument that the words "fall away" can only refer to the genuinely saved, is false.
Besides, Christ speaks of those in the judgment day, in the verse cited at the heading, who have "taken away" what they only "seem" to have, not what they actually have. Again, those who say words such as "take away" can only refer to taking away what one actually possesses, must disagree with Christ.
A. W. Pink said:
"In His interpretation the Lord Jesus explained the different soils as representing various classes of those who hear the Word. They are four in number, and may be classified as hard-hearted, shallow-hearted, half-hearted, and whole-hearted."
(The Prophetic Parables of Matthew 13 - Chapter 1 - "The Parable of the Sower")
See here
Sep 29, 2009
Sep 27, 2009
Bruce Oyen on Lumpkin's Book
Having now read several chapters in Peter Lumpkin's 2009 book against booze, titled, "Alcohol Today: Abstinence In An Age Of Indulgence," published by Hannabal Books, I want to recommend it to others as a "must read" book.
Let me do so by quoting Jerry Vines's endorsement of the book. Vines was twice President of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Vines wrote: "Dr. Peter Lumpkins has dropped a bombshell in the current climate of laxity relative to Christians and alcohol. This excellent book is a thorough, thoughtful, scholarly presentation of the arguments for total abstinence. Good scholarship relative to the total abstinence position is available, but much of it is from older writers. This current work will be a valuable resource for pastors and churches wanting to lift high the standards of holiness and right conduct among their members."
See it at www.hannabalbooks.com. The phone number is 1-800-747-0738. The books costs less than $20. It is 172 pages long.
Let me do so by quoting Jerry Vines's endorsement of the book. Vines was twice President of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Vines wrote: "Dr. Peter Lumpkins has dropped a bombshell in the current climate of laxity relative to Christians and alcohol. This excellent book is a thorough, thoughtful, scholarly presentation of the arguments for total abstinence. Good scholarship relative to the total abstinence position is available, but much of it is from older writers. This current work will be a valuable resource for pastors and churches wanting to lift high the standards of holiness and right conduct among their members."
See it at www.hannabalbooks.com. The phone number is 1-800-747-0738. The books costs less than $20. It is 172 pages long.
Two Deadly Snakes
Two Deadly Snakes
By Bruce Oyen, September, 2009
Two deadly snakes are slithering on the ground. They want more victims, and don't care where they're found
They will sneak up on you with their awful bite. It might be in daylight, or in the dark of night.
These snakes look friendly, like a family pet. But their bite is deadly, as deadly as it can get.
These snakes are booze and gambling, a very dangerous pair. They can take a good man and leave him in despair.
They can ruin your friendships, and your family, too. They can ruin your character and leave you feeling blue.
They can take your wealth and give you poverty. They can take your health and give you misery.
They can take your faith and turn it into doubt. They can take your happiness and turn it inside out.
There are many bad things these two snakes can do. So, don't let booze and gambling get a bite on you.
Stay a long way from them, though harmless they seem to be. If you see them tell them, "Get away from me!"
By Bruce Oyen, September, 2009
Two deadly snakes are slithering on the ground. They want more victims, and don't care where they're found
They will sneak up on you with their awful bite. It might be in daylight, or in the dark of night.
These snakes look friendly, like a family pet. But their bite is deadly, as deadly as it can get.
These snakes are booze and gambling, a very dangerous pair. They can take a good man and leave him in despair.
They can ruin your friendships, and your family, too. They can ruin your character and leave you feeling blue.
They can take your wealth and give you poverty. They can take your health and give you misery.
They can take your faith and turn it into doubt. They can take your happiness and turn it inside out.
There are many bad things these two snakes can do. So, don't let booze and gambling get a bite on you.
Stay a long way from them, though harmless they seem to be. If you see them tell them, "Get away from me!"
Sep 24, 2009
A Whore's Theology
"So she caught him, and kissed him, and with an impudent face said unto him, I have peace offerings with me; this day have I payed my vows. Therefore came I forth to meet thee, diligently to seek thy face, and I have found thee." (Proverbs 7: 13-15 JV)
"She was properly hvdq, "a holy" religious harlot, as the word sometimes signifies." (John Gill in his commentary)
"Her profession of piety. She had been to-day at the temple, and was as well respected there as any that worshipped in the courts of the Lord. She had paid her vows, and, as she thought, made all even with God Almighty, and therefore might venture upon a new score of sins. Note, The external performances of religion, if they do not harden men against sin, harden them in it, and embolden carnal hearts to venture upon it, in hopes that when they come to count and discount with God he will be found as much in debt to them for their peace-offerings and their vows as they to him for their sins. But it is sad that a show of piety should become the shelter of iniquity (which really doubles the shame of it, and makes it more exceedingly sinful) and that men should baffle their consciences with those very things that should startle them. The Pharisees made long prayers, that they might the more plausibly carry on their covetous and mischievous provisions. The greatest part of the flesh of the peace-offerings was by the law returned back to the offerers, to feast upon with their friends, which (if they were peace-offerings of thanksgiving) was to be all eaten the same day and none of it left until the morning, Lev. 7:15. This law of charity and generosity is abused to be a colour for gluttony and excess: "Come," says she, "come home with me, for I have good cheer enough, and only want good company to help me off with it." It was a pity that the peace-offerings should thus become, in a bad sense, sin-offerings, and that what was designed for the honour of God should become the food and fuel of a base lust. But this is not all." (Matthew Henry's Commentary)
Religion is often an invention to justify sin. There are many examples of this in the world. The pagan religions generally practiced lewd sexual practices of the worst sort. The Romish religion has also promoted sin through the "sale of indulgences."
There is a debate over whether the Calvinist doctrine of "eternal security" of the believer ("once saved always saved") promotes licentiousness. Likewise, whether the Arminian doctrine of "apostasy" ('losing salvation') promotes it.
The Arminian avows that "once saved always saved" promotes carelessness about sin. It is said that some people who believe in "eternal security" use it as an excuse for committing sin. After all, if I cannot lose my salvation, then I can commit any sin and it will not cause me everlasting harm. So goes the argumentation of the Arminian.
On the other hand, here is an Arminian who believes he loses salvation every time he sins, or temporarily falls, but who also believes that he can "make it right" afterward, by simply confessing his sins. He says to himself, in temptation - "I know it is sin, but I also know I can confess it afterward and get converted again."
So, the debate will go on as to which religion, which doctrine, promotes sin doing, and which discourages it.
"She was properly hvdq, "a holy" religious harlot, as the word sometimes signifies." (John Gill in his commentary)
"Her profession of piety. She had been to-day at the temple, and was as well respected there as any that worshipped in the courts of the Lord. She had paid her vows, and, as she thought, made all even with God Almighty, and therefore might venture upon a new score of sins. Note, The external performances of religion, if they do not harden men against sin, harden them in it, and embolden carnal hearts to venture upon it, in hopes that when they come to count and discount with God he will be found as much in debt to them for their peace-offerings and their vows as they to him for their sins. But it is sad that a show of piety should become the shelter of iniquity (which really doubles the shame of it, and makes it more exceedingly sinful) and that men should baffle their consciences with those very things that should startle them. The Pharisees made long prayers, that they might the more plausibly carry on their covetous and mischievous provisions. The greatest part of the flesh of the peace-offerings was by the law returned back to the offerers, to feast upon with their friends, which (if they were peace-offerings of thanksgiving) was to be all eaten the same day and none of it left until the morning, Lev. 7:15. This law of charity and generosity is abused to be a colour for gluttony and excess: "Come," says she, "come home with me, for I have good cheer enough, and only want good company to help me off with it." It was a pity that the peace-offerings should thus become, in a bad sense, sin-offerings, and that what was designed for the honour of God should become the food and fuel of a base lust. But this is not all." (Matthew Henry's Commentary)
Religion is often an invention to justify sin. There are many examples of this in the world. The pagan religions generally practiced lewd sexual practices of the worst sort. The Romish religion has also promoted sin through the "sale of indulgences."
There is a debate over whether the Calvinist doctrine of "eternal security" of the believer ("once saved always saved") promotes licentiousness. Likewise, whether the Arminian doctrine of "apostasy" ('losing salvation') promotes it.
The Arminian avows that "once saved always saved" promotes carelessness about sin. It is said that some people who believe in "eternal security" use it as an excuse for committing sin. After all, if I cannot lose my salvation, then I can commit any sin and it will not cause me everlasting harm. So goes the argumentation of the Arminian.
On the other hand, here is an Arminian who believes he loses salvation every time he sins, or temporarily falls, but who also believes that he can "make it right" afterward, by simply confessing his sins. He says to himself, in temptation - "I know it is sin, but I also know I can confess it afterward and get converted again."
So, the debate will go on as to which religion, which doctrine, promotes sin doing, and which discourages it.
"Broken" or "Given"?
"And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me." (Luke 22: 19 KJV)
"And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me." (I Cor. 11: 24)
Did Paul quote Jesus accurately when he used (in the Textus Receptus) the word "broken" instead of "given"?
A. T. Robertson wrote:
"Klwmenon (broken) of the Textus Receptus (King James Version) is clearly not genuine. Luke (Luke 22:19) has didomenon (given) which is the real idea here. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not broken (John 19:36). The bread was broken, but not the body of Jesus." (Word Pictures)
What can those who think the "Textus Receptus" is inspired do with this discrepancy?
"And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me." (I Cor. 11: 24)
Did Paul quote Jesus accurately when he used (in the Textus Receptus) the word "broken" instead of "given"?
A. T. Robertson wrote:
"Klwmenon (broken) of the Textus Receptus (King James Version) is clearly not genuine. Luke (Luke 22:19) has didomenon (given) which is the real idea here. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not broken (John 19:36). The bread was broken, but not the body of Jesus." (Word Pictures)
What can those who think the "Textus Receptus" is inspired do with this discrepancy?
Sep 22, 2009
1689 LBC on Perseverance
London Baptist Confession of 1689
2. "This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the 1) immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the 2) free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon 3) the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and 4) union with him, 5) the oath of God, 6) the abiding of his Spirit, and 7) the seed of God within them, and 8) the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof." (Chapter 17. - The Perseverance of the Saints)
Note: numbering of items by me - SG
2. "This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the 1) immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the 2) free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon 3) the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and 4) union with him, 5) the oath of God, 6) the abiding of his Spirit, and 7) the seed of God within them, and 8) the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof." (Chapter 17. - The Perseverance of the Saints)
Note: numbering of items by me - SG
Christians and Falling
William Secker said:
"Though Christians be not kept altogether from falling, yet they are kept from falling altogether."
Taken from here
"For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief." (Proverbs 24: 16 KJV)
"The righteous also shall hold on his way, and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger." (Job 17: 9 KJV)
Syllogism
1. The truly saved ('righteous') shall persevere ('hold on his way').
2. John, a professing saved/righteous man, did not persevere ('hold on his way').
3. John was not saved/righteous.
"Though Christians be not kept altogether from falling, yet they are kept from falling altogether."
Taken from here
"For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief." (Proverbs 24: 16 KJV)
"The righteous also shall hold on his way, and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger." (Job 17: 9 KJV)
Syllogism
1. The truly saved ('righteous') shall persevere ('hold on his way').
2. John, a professing saved/righteous man, did not persevere ('hold on his way').
3. John was not saved/righteous.
Sep 21, 2009
Eternal Security Debate
As previously announced, John Gentry of the Galena, Indiana "Church of Christ," and I will have our second debate on "eternal security," or "once saved always saved" (OSAS) on Thursday November 5th and Friday November 6th at 7 PM. It will be held on the campus of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. I will announce the specific place on campus in a few days when I receive official confirmation from SBTS.
The proposition for Thursday Night
The Scriptures teach that a child of God, one saved by the blood of Christ, can so sin as to be eternally lost in hell.
Affirm: Gentry
Deny: Garrett
The proposition for Friday Night
The Scriptures teach that a child of God, one saved by the blood of Christ, cannot so sin as to be eternally lost in hell.
Affirm: Garrett
Deny: Gentry
When John and I were discussing propositions through e-mail exchanges, I said "I have no problem with the propositions you offered on the eternal security topic, although I would have worded it differently. But, we won't squabble over semantics." It is not technically "apropos" to affirm a negatively worded proposition. But, I decided it was not worth the squabble and is the opposite of his proposition.
I am preparing the material for the debate and am looking forward to it. I pray God gives us a safe journey to the debate. Dr. Griffin is planning to go with me and be my moderator and some other brethren from the local area may be also going.
It is my hope to be able to spend some time in the SBTS library hunting for info for my historical studies on the Hardshell Baptists.
The proposition for Thursday Night
The Scriptures teach that a child of God, one saved by the blood of Christ, can so sin as to be eternally lost in hell.
Affirm: Gentry
Deny: Garrett
The proposition for Friday Night
The Scriptures teach that a child of God, one saved by the blood of Christ, cannot so sin as to be eternally lost in hell.
Affirm: Garrett
Deny: Gentry
When John and I were discussing propositions through e-mail exchanges, I said "I have no problem with the propositions you offered on the eternal security topic, although I would have worded it differently. But, we won't squabble over semantics." It is not technically "apropos" to affirm a negatively worded proposition. But, I decided it was not worth the squabble and is the opposite of his proposition.
I am preparing the material for the debate and am looking forward to it. I pray God gives us a safe journey to the debate. Dr. Griffin is planning to go with me and be my moderator and some other brethren from the local area may be also going.
It is my hope to be able to spend some time in the SBTS library hunting for info for my historical studies on the Hardshell Baptists.
Sep 17, 2009
Uprooted Trees
"Every tree that my Father has not planted will be uprooted." (Matt 15:13)
These words also conversely imply that those "planted" or "rooted" by God and in God are the only ones not to be "pulled up" or "uprooted."
Syllogism
1. Whoever is uprooted has not been rooted by God
2. John was uprooted after his profession of Christ
3. John was not rooted by God
These words also conversely imply that those "planted" or "rooted" by God and in God are the only ones not to be "pulled up" or "uprooted."
Syllogism
1. Whoever is uprooted has not been rooted by God
2. John was uprooted after his profession of Christ
3. John was not rooted by God
Sep 16, 2009
Spurgeon on Heb. 6: 4-6
"We come to this passage ourselves with the intention to read it with the simplicity of a child, and whatever we find therein to state it; and if it may not seem to agree with something we have hitherto held, we are prepared to cast away every doctrine of our own, rather than one passage of Scripture."
"In order to make them persevere, if possible, he shows them that if they do not, they must, most certainly be lost; for there is no other salvation but that which God has already bestowed on them, and if that does not keep them, carry them forward, and present them spotless before God, there cannot be any other. For it is impossible, he says, if ye be once enlightened, and then fall away, that ye should ever be renewed again unto repentance."
"We shall, this morning, answer one or two questions. The first question will be, Who are the people here spoken? Are they true Christians or not? Secondly, What is meant by falling away? And thirdly, What is intended, when it is asserted, that it is impossible to renew them to repentance?
First, then, we answer the question, WHO ARE THE PEOPLE HERE SPOKEN OF? If you read Dr. Gill, Dr. Owen, and almost all the eminent Calvinistic writers, they all of them assert that these persons are not Christians. They say, that enough is said here to represent a man who is a Christian externally, but not enough to give the portrait of a true believer. Now, it strikes me they would not have said this if they had had some doctrine to uphold; for a child, reading this passage, would say, that the persons intended by it must be Christians. If the Holy Spirit intended to describe Christians, I do not see that he could have used more explicit terms than there are here. How can a man be said to be enlightened, and to taste of the heavenly gift, and to be made partaker of the Holy Ghost, without being a child of God? With all deference to these learned doctors, and I admire and love them all, I humbly conceive that they allowed their judgments to be a little warped when they said that; and I think I shall be able to show that none but true believers are here described.
And now we answer the second question, WHAT IS MEANT BY FALLING AWAY?
"We must remind our friends, that there is a vast distinction between falling away and falling. It is nowhere said in Scripture, that if a man fall he cannot be renewed; on the contrary, "the righteous falleth seven times, but he riseth up again;" and however many times the child of God doth fall, the Lord still holdeth the righteous; yea, when our bones are broken, he bindeth up our bones again, and setteth us once more upon a rock."
"But some one says, "What is falling away?" Well, there never has been a case of it yet, and therefore I cannot describe it from observation; but I will tell you what I suppose it is. To fall away, would be for the Holy Spirit entirely to go out of a man-for his grace entirely to cease; not to lie dormant, but to cease to be-for God, who has begun a good work, to leave off doing it entirely-to take his hand completely and entirely away, and say, "There, man! I have half saved thee; now I will damn thee." That is what falling away is. It is not to sin temporarily. A child may sin against his father, and still be alive; but falling away is like cutting the child's head off clean. Not falling merely, for then our Father could pick us up, but being dashed down a precipice, where we are lost for ever. Falling away would involve God's grace changing its living nature. God's immutability becoming variable, God's faithfulness becoming changeable, and God, himself being undeified; for all these things falling away would necessitate."
"These people, moreover, had tasted the heavenly gift; and though they had been pardoned and justified, yet pardon through Christ and justification were not enough (on this supposition) to save them. How else can they be saved? God has cast them away; after he has failed in saving them by these, what else can deliver them?"
"Again, beloved, think what it would necessitate to save such a man. Christ has died for him once, yet he has fallen away and is lost; the Spirit has regenerated him once, and that regenerating work has been of no use. God has given him a new heart (I am only speaking, of course, on the supposition of the Apostle), he has put his law in that heart, yet he has departed from him, contrary to the promise that he should not; he has made him "like a shining light," but he did not "shine more and more unto the perfect day," he shone only unto blackness. What next? There must be a second incarnation, a second Calvary, a second Holy Ghost, a second regeneration, a second justification, although the first was finished and complete-in fact, I know not what. It would necessitate the upsetting of the whole kingdom of nature and grace, and it would, indeed, be a world turned upside down, if after the gracious Saviour failed, he were to attempt the work again."
"There is one idea which has occurred to us. It has struck us as a singular thing, that our friends should hold that men can be converted, made into new creatures, then fall away and be converted again. I am an old creature by nature; God creates me into a new thing, he makes me a new creature. I cannot go back into an old creature, for I cannot be uncreated. But yet, supposing that new creatureship of mine is not good enough to carry me to heaven. What is to come after that? Must there be something above a new creature-a new creature. Really, my friends, we have got into the country of Dreamland; but we were forced to follow our opponents into that region of absurdity, for we do not know how else to deal with them."
"And one thought more. There is nothing in Scripture which teaches us that there is any salvation, save the one salvation of Jesus Christ-nothing that tells us of any other power, super-excellent and surpassing the power of the Holy Spirit. These things have already been tried on the man, and yet, according to the supposition, they have failed, for he has fallen away. Now, God has never revealed a supplementary salvation for men on whom one salvation has had no effect; and until we are pointed to one scripture which declares this, we will still maintain that the doctrine of the text is this: that if grace be ineffectual, if grace does not keep a man, then there is nothing left but that he must be damned. And what is that but to say, only going a little round about, that grace will do it? So that these words, instead of miltating against the Calvinistic doctrine of final perseverance, form one of the finest proofs of it that could be afforded."
Final Perseverance
March 23, 1856
by C. H. SPURGEON(1834-1892)
See here
"In order to make them persevere, if possible, he shows them that if they do not, they must, most certainly be lost; for there is no other salvation but that which God has already bestowed on them, and if that does not keep them, carry them forward, and present them spotless before God, there cannot be any other. For it is impossible, he says, if ye be once enlightened, and then fall away, that ye should ever be renewed again unto repentance."
"We shall, this morning, answer one or two questions. The first question will be, Who are the people here spoken? Are they true Christians or not? Secondly, What is meant by falling away? And thirdly, What is intended, when it is asserted, that it is impossible to renew them to repentance?
First, then, we answer the question, WHO ARE THE PEOPLE HERE SPOKEN OF? If you read Dr. Gill, Dr. Owen, and almost all the eminent Calvinistic writers, they all of them assert that these persons are not Christians. They say, that enough is said here to represent a man who is a Christian externally, but not enough to give the portrait of a true believer. Now, it strikes me they would not have said this if they had had some doctrine to uphold; for a child, reading this passage, would say, that the persons intended by it must be Christians. If the Holy Spirit intended to describe Christians, I do not see that he could have used more explicit terms than there are here. How can a man be said to be enlightened, and to taste of the heavenly gift, and to be made partaker of the Holy Ghost, without being a child of God? With all deference to these learned doctors, and I admire and love them all, I humbly conceive that they allowed their judgments to be a little warped when they said that; and I think I shall be able to show that none but true believers are here described.
And now we answer the second question, WHAT IS MEANT BY FALLING AWAY?
"We must remind our friends, that there is a vast distinction between falling away and falling. It is nowhere said in Scripture, that if a man fall he cannot be renewed; on the contrary, "the righteous falleth seven times, but he riseth up again;" and however many times the child of God doth fall, the Lord still holdeth the righteous; yea, when our bones are broken, he bindeth up our bones again, and setteth us once more upon a rock."
"But some one says, "What is falling away?" Well, there never has been a case of it yet, and therefore I cannot describe it from observation; but I will tell you what I suppose it is. To fall away, would be for the Holy Spirit entirely to go out of a man-for his grace entirely to cease; not to lie dormant, but to cease to be-for God, who has begun a good work, to leave off doing it entirely-to take his hand completely and entirely away, and say, "There, man! I have half saved thee; now I will damn thee." That is what falling away is. It is not to sin temporarily. A child may sin against his father, and still be alive; but falling away is like cutting the child's head off clean. Not falling merely, for then our Father could pick us up, but being dashed down a precipice, where we are lost for ever. Falling away would involve God's grace changing its living nature. God's immutability becoming variable, God's faithfulness becoming changeable, and God, himself being undeified; for all these things falling away would necessitate."
"These people, moreover, had tasted the heavenly gift; and though they had been pardoned and justified, yet pardon through Christ and justification were not enough (on this supposition) to save them. How else can they be saved? God has cast them away; after he has failed in saving them by these, what else can deliver them?"
"Again, beloved, think what it would necessitate to save such a man. Christ has died for him once, yet he has fallen away and is lost; the Spirit has regenerated him once, and that regenerating work has been of no use. God has given him a new heart (I am only speaking, of course, on the supposition of the Apostle), he has put his law in that heart, yet he has departed from him, contrary to the promise that he should not; he has made him "like a shining light," but he did not "shine more and more unto the perfect day," he shone only unto blackness. What next? There must be a second incarnation, a second Calvary, a second Holy Ghost, a second regeneration, a second justification, although the first was finished and complete-in fact, I know not what. It would necessitate the upsetting of the whole kingdom of nature and grace, and it would, indeed, be a world turned upside down, if after the gracious Saviour failed, he were to attempt the work again."
"There is one idea which has occurred to us. It has struck us as a singular thing, that our friends should hold that men can be converted, made into new creatures, then fall away and be converted again. I am an old creature by nature; God creates me into a new thing, he makes me a new creature. I cannot go back into an old creature, for I cannot be uncreated. But yet, supposing that new creatureship of mine is not good enough to carry me to heaven. What is to come after that? Must there be something above a new creature-a new creature. Really, my friends, we have got into the country of Dreamland; but we were forced to follow our opponents into that region of absurdity, for we do not know how else to deal with them."
"And one thought more. There is nothing in Scripture which teaches us that there is any salvation, save the one salvation of Jesus Christ-nothing that tells us of any other power, super-excellent and surpassing the power of the Holy Spirit. These things have already been tried on the man, and yet, according to the supposition, they have failed, for he has fallen away. Now, God has never revealed a supplementary salvation for men on whom one salvation has had no effect; and until we are pointed to one scripture which declares this, we will still maintain that the doctrine of the text is this: that if grace be ineffectual, if grace does not keep a man, then there is nothing left but that he must be damned. And what is that but to say, only going a little round about, that grace will do it? So that these words, instead of miltating against the Calvinistic doctrine of final perseverance, form one of the finest proofs of it that could be afforded."
Final Perseverance
March 23, 1856
by C. H. SPURGEON(1834-1892)
See here
Sep 15, 2009
OSAS in I John
"Once Saved Always Saved" doctrine in I John.
Let us look at some verses in the Apostle John's first general epistle as it deals with the perseverance of believers.
"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (I John 2: 3, 4 KJV)
This is similar to other verses by John, Jesus, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews. It states, in the form of a premise, this proposition, "we are genuinely saved now if in the future we persevere" (where "keep his commandments" = "perseverance"). It also states the adverse proposition - "he who does not persevere in the future was not saved in the past," but was a "liar," that is, a deceived one, a masked one, a hypocrite. We can put these apostolic propositions into formal syllogistic structure as follows.
1. John was saved in the past if he perseveres in the future.
2. John did not persevere in the future.
3. John was not saved in the past. (was a "liar" or imposter)
"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
They went "out" tells us that these apostates were once professing Christians "in" external fellowship with the apostolic churches, but that they had never been truly or actually joined in heart, faith, and spirit, with those churches, and this is why the Apostle quickly says "but they were not of us," meaning they were not genuinely "of" us, though they were "of" us formally or externally. John says he knows that these apostates were not really "of us," or "one with us," for he believes firmly that their departure from the apostolic churches revealed their hypocrisy, and the fact that they were never truly one with them, or truly converted. John gives us a proposition that says "if they had been of us, they would have continued." The statement - "they went out from us, but they were not of us" is the conclusion of the syllogism furnished by the Apostle John. Here is the Apostle's syllogism.
1. If they had genuinely been saved ("of us"), they would have persevered ("continued").
2. They did not persevere.
3. They had not been genuinely saved.
"And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure." (I John 3: 3 KJV)
"Every man," that is a universal. "Hath this hope," that is, this Christian hope, springing from faith. "Purifieth himself," that is, he perseveres. He does not lose salvation. Once saved always saved is taught in many scriptures as this one and is stated very plainly.
If some who genuinely have the Christian hope fail to persevere and are finally lost, then how could the Apostle John's statement be true? Would he not say it thusly - "and some of those who have this hope purify themselves"?
Syllogism
1. Whoever is now saved now ("hath this hope") continuously purifies himself (perseveres).
2. John did not continuously purify himself.
3. John was not saved.
"...whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." (3: 6)
Notice how "sinneth" is a present tense participle, denoting action on going in the present, from a point in the past, while "hath not seen" is perfect tense. The Apostle clearly affirms again the proposition that "whoever does not persevere, has never been saved."
Syllogism
1. Whoever does not persevere (practices sin) has never been saved ("known" or "seen" him).
2. John did not persevere.
3. John was never saved.
"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (3: 9)
The word "commit" is present tense, linear, speaking of ongoing action, or lifestyle. We can substitute the word "persevere" for the word "commit."
Syllogism
1. Whoever is born of God perseveres (by not practicing sin).
2. John did not persevere.
3. John was not born of God.
"We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death." (3: 14)
Syllogism
1. Whoever has passed from death unto life loves the brethren.
2. John does not love the brethren.
3. John has not passed from death unto life.
"My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him." (3: 18, 19)
Clearly John shows that he 1) Is aware of the presence of unsaved professing believers, who do all "in word" but not in "deed" or in "truth," or really, and 2) that genuinely converted people love in deed as well as in word. Thus, we can structure another syllogism based upon the premises and conclusions of the Apostle.
Syllogism
1. Those who are "of the truth," or genuinely saved, love in deed and in truth.
2. John loved in word only, and not in deed.
3. John was not "of the truth," or genuinely saved.
"If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" (3: 20)
Again, "loveth" is present tense, linear, and refers to ongoing action or lifestyle.
Syllogism
1. He that loves God loves his brother continuously (perseveres).
2. John did not love his brother continuously.
3. John did not love God.
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him." (5: 1)
Again, "believeth" and "loveth" are present tense, denoting continuity, while "is born" is perfect tense. Thus the proposition of the Apostle is this - "whoever is continuing in faith (persevering), has been born of God."
Syllogism
1. He that continues believing has been born of God.
2. John does not continue believing.
3. John was not born of God.
"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." (5: 18)
Again, "sinneth" is present tense, denoting ongoing action, of the practice of sin. "Is born" is perfect tense, "has been born." The Apostle's proposition is - "whoever is practicing sin has not been born again."
Syllogism
1. Whoever continues practicing sin has not been born of God.
2. John continued to practice sin.
3. John was not born of God.
Clearly John taught once saved always saved, that all the genuinely converted will persevere.
Let us look at some verses in the Apostle John's first general epistle as it deals with the perseverance of believers.
"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (I John 2: 3, 4 KJV)
This is similar to other verses by John, Jesus, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews. It states, in the form of a premise, this proposition, "we are genuinely saved now if in the future we persevere" (where "keep his commandments" = "perseverance"). It also states the adverse proposition - "he who does not persevere in the future was not saved in the past," but was a "liar," that is, a deceived one, a masked one, a hypocrite. We can put these apostolic propositions into formal syllogistic structure as follows.
1. John was saved in the past if he perseveres in the future.
2. John did not persevere in the future.
3. John was not saved in the past. (was a "liar" or imposter)
"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
They went "out" tells us that these apostates were once professing Christians "in" external fellowship with the apostolic churches, but that they had never been truly or actually joined in heart, faith, and spirit, with those churches, and this is why the Apostle quickly says "but they were not of us," meaning they were not genuinely "of" us, though they were "of" us formally or externally. John says he knows that these apostates were not really "of us," or "one with us," for he believes firmly that their departure from the apostolic churches revealed their hypocrisy, and the fact that they were never truly one with them, or truly converted. John gives us a proposition that says "if they had been of us, they would have continued." The statement - "they went out from us, but they were not of us" is the conclusion of the syllogism furnished by the Apostle John. Here is the Apostle's syllogism.
1. If they had genuinely been saved ("of us"), they would have persevered ("continued").
2. They did not persevere.
3. They had not been genuinely saved.
"And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure." (I John 3: 3 KJV)
"Every man," that is a universal. "Hath this hope," that is, this Christian hope, springing from faith. "Purifieth himself," that is, he perseveres. He does not lose salvation. Once saved always saved is taught in many scriptures as this one and is stated very plainly.
If some who genuinely have the Christian hope fail to persevere and are finally lost, then how could the Apostle John's statement be true? Would he not say it thusly - "and some of those who have this hope purify themselves"?
Syllogism
1. Whoever is now saved now ("hath this hope") continuously purifies himself (perseveres).
2. John did not continuously purify himself.
3. John was not saved.
"...whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." (3: 6)
Notice how "sinneth" is a present tense participle, denoting action on going in the present, from a point in the past, while "hath not seen" is perfect tense. The Apostle clearly affirms again the proposition that "whoever does not persevere, has never been saved."
Syllogism
1. Whoever does not persevere (practices sin) has never been saved ("known" or "seen" him).
2. John did not persevere.
3. John was never saved.
"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (3: 9)
The word "commit" is present tense, linear, speaking of ongoing action, or lifestyle. We can substitute the word "persevere" for the word "commit."
Syllogism
1. Whoever is born of God perseveres (by not practicing sin).
2. John did not persevere.
3. John was not born of God.
"We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death." (3: 14)
Syllogism
1. Whoever has passed from death unto life loves the brethren.
2. John does not love the brethren.
3. John has not passed from death unto life.
"My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him." (3: 18, 19)
Clearly John shows that he 1) Is aware of the presence of unsaved professing believers, who do all "in word" but not in "deed" or in "truth," or really, and 2) that genuinely converted people love in deed as well as in word. Thus, we can structure another syllogism based upon the premises and conclusions of the Apostle.
Syllogism
1. Those who are "of the truth," or genuinely saved, love in deed and in truth.
2. John loved in word only, and not in deed.
3. John was not "of the truth," or genuinely saved.
"If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" (3: 20)
Again, "loveth" is present tense, linear, and refers to ongoing action or lifestyle.
Syllogism
1. He that loves God loves his brother continuously (perseveres).
2. John did not love his brother continuously.
3. John did not love God.
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him." (5: 1)
Again, "believeth" and "loveth" are present tense, denoting continuity, while "is born" is perfect tense. Thus the proposition of the Apostle is this - "whoever is continuing in faith (persevering), has been born of God."
Syllogism
1. He that continues believing has been born of God.
2. John does not continue believing.
3. John was not born of God.
"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." (5: 18)
Again, "sinneth" is present tense, denoting ongoing action, of the practice of sin. "Is born" is perfect tense, "has been born." The Apostle's proposition is - "whoever is practicing sin has not been born again."
Syllogism
1. Whoever continues practicing sin has not been born of God.
2. John continued to practice sin.
3. John was not born of God.
Clearly John taught once saved always saved, that all the genuinely converted will persevere.
Sep 14, 2009
Elder (Dr.) John M. Watson
Wrote Elder Watson:
"When the Holy Spirit testifies of Christ, then comes the efficiency of preaching. John 15: 26.
Paul, however, does not affirm, like some of our modern innovators, that means or instrumentalities are not employed by the Lord in the divine plan of salvation; for he asks: "How shall they hear without a preacher?" Rom. 10: 14. Paul, it is true, preached the Gospel in word only, while the election of God was manifested in the power and assurance of the Holy Spirit imparted to his words; when received by the elect which apart from that power and assurance would have veen received in word only, as it really was by others not embraced in the divine election. I Thess. 1: 4." ("Old Baptist Test," pages 399, 400)
I have recently challenged two Hardshell elders to debate the history and errors of Hardshellism. At least one of them has visited and commented here in the Gadfly. I have not heard back from them, nor do I expect to.
The above comments from John Watson, a leading figure after the division over missions and means, in the 1830's, in the Nashville, Tennessee area, and an opponent of M. C. Howell and the missionary Baptist Church there, is important historical evidence about "who are the Primitive Baptists?" Clearly, Dr. Watson said that the "anti-means" brethren were "modern innovators," teaching a "Spirit alone" view of "regeneration" which their forefathers did not teach. These brethren, who promoted the "novel" view that affirm "regeneration" before, apart from, or without the use of the means of the gospel, were inventors of new doctrine, and were "ultra" or "hyper" in their views, and certainly not "primitive" nor "original."
"When the Holy Spirit testifies of Christ, then comes the efficiency of preaching. John 15: 26.
Paul, however, does not affirm, like some of our modern innovators, that means or instrumentalities are not employed by the Lord in the divine plan of salvation; for he asks: "How shall they hear without a preacher?" Rom. 10: 14. Paul, it is true, preached the Gospel in word only, while the election of God was manifested in the power and assurance of the Holy Spirit imparted to his words; when received by the elect which apart from that power and assurance would have veen received in word only, as it really was by others not embraced in the divine election. I Thess. 1: 4." ("Old Baptist Test," pages 399, 400)
I have recently challenged two Hardshell elders to debate the history and errors of Hardshellism. At least one of them has visited and commented here in the Gadfly. I have not heard back from them, nor do I expect to.
The above comments from John Watson, a leading figure after the division over missions and means, in the 1830's, in the Nashville, Tennessee area, and an opponent of M. C. Howell and the missionary Baptist Church there, is important historical evidence about "who are the Primitive Baptists?" Clearly, Dr. Watson said that the "anti-means" brethren were "modern innovators," teaching a "Spirit alone" view of "regeneration" which their forefathers did not teach. These brethren, who promoted the "novel" view that affirm "regeneration" before, apart from, or without the use of the means of the gospel, were inventors of new doctrine, and were "ultra" or "hyper" in their views, and certainly not "primitive" nor "original."
Sep 12, 2009
What An Offer!
"And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting." (Luke 18: 29-31 KJV)
What an offer from God to sinful, ungrateful, and undeserving men! What glorious promises to those who have devoted themselves to the "kingdom of God," and to king Jesus! Promises of lasting good, both now and forever!
The Reward of Christ
"And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth." (Rev. 11: 18 KJV)
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." (22: 12)
The "manifold more now in the present time" does not refer to earthly riches and station, but to the gift of salvation, and of the Holy Spirit, and all spiritual gifts and blessings.
Sinners who reject this loving offer "have no excuse," and will have no word of defense to utter against the goodness of God, in their condemnation, in the coming Day of Judgment.
What an offer from God to sinful, ungrateful, and undeserving men! What glorious promises to those who have devoted themselves to the "kingdom of God," and to king Jesus! Promises of lasting good, both now and forever!
The Reward of Christ
"And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth." (Rev. 11: 18 KJV)
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." (22: 12)
The "manifold more now in the present time" does not refer to earthly riches and station, but to the gift of salvation, and of the Holy Spirit, and all spiritual gifts and blessings.
Sinners who reject this loving offer "have no excuse," and will have no word of defense to utter against the goodness of God, in their condemnation, in the coming Day of Judgment.
The Begotten Persevere
"Every one who is believing that Jesus is the Christ, of God he hath been begotten, and every one who is loving Him who did beget, doth love also him who is begotten of Him." (I John 5: 1 Young's Literal Translation)
The text literally reads: "whoever believes (a present tense participle) that Jesus is the Christ has been born (a perfect tense participle) of God."
Syllogism
1. Whoever has believed in the past and who has even now the continuing effects of that act of believing, has been born of God.
2. John believed in the past but now has no continuing effects of that act of believing.
3. John has not been born of God.
"For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?" (I John 5: 4, 5 KJV)
Syllogism
1. Whoever is born of God, overcomes.
2. John does not overcome.
3. John was not born of God.
Syllogism
1. Faith that is begotten (created) by God, overcomes.
2. John's faith did not overcome.
3. John's faith was not begotten of God.
The text literally reads: "whoever believes (a present tense participle) that Jesus is the Christ has been born (a perfect tense participle) of God."
Syllogism
1. Whoever has believed in the past and who has even now the continuing effects of that act of believing, has been born of God.
2. John believed in the past but now has no continuing effects of that act of believing.
3. John has not been born of God.
"For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?" (I John 5: 4, 5 KJV)
Syllogism
1. Whoever is born of God, overcomes.
2. John does not overcome.
3. John was not born of God.
Syllogism
1. Faith that is begotten (created) by God, overcomes.
2. John's faith did not overcome.
3. John's faith was not begotten of God.
Sep 11, 2009
Presently Saved If...
"But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." (Hebrews 3: 6 KJV)
"For we are (or 'have been') made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end." (vs. 14)
These verses are often cited by those who believe that saved people may become lost. Their argument is that salvation is here promised only to those Christians who persevere, and that the words imply that some Christians will not persevere, and thus not be finally saved. Thus, they lost their salvation when they failed to persevere. Yet, these words do not imply that genuine converts can fail to persevere and lose salvation. They only affirm that perseverence is a proof of genuine conversion.
Future perseverance is proof of genuine conversion
That is, we are presently saved if in the future we remain loyal to Christ. Or, conversion is real only if it is followed by perseverance. Perseverance is the proof of initial salvation. Falling away is proof of false conversion.
The wording of the above verses in Hebrews is not - "and you will be saved (future indicative) if you (future indicative) persevere." It is rather - "you have been, and now are, really saved, if in the future you hold fast to Christ."
Syllogism
1. One was saved in the past if he perseveres in the future.
2. John did not persevere in the future.
3. John was not saved in the past.
Examples
1) We are (now) mortal, if (in the future) we die.
2) We are (now) strong, if (in the future) we climb the mountain.
3) We are (now) saved, if (in the future) we persevere.
4) We are (now) children of John, if (in the future) the DNA tests match.
5) We have begun well, if we end well.
6) We are (now) good ground hearers, if (in the future) we bring forth fruit with patience.
Failure to persevere is proof of hypocrisy and a lack of genuine conversion.
"If ye continue in my word, then are ye truly my disciples, and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:31, 32).
He set up a criterion by which true disciples might be distinguished.
"Jesus said unto them, if God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." (42)
"And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled...If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister..." (Colossians 1: 21-23 KJV)
"We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised." (Hebrews 6:11, 12 NIV)
These verses do not teach not that we are saved now because of a future act after salvation. Present salvation cannot be based upon acts that come after salvation. Events after salvation can only prove or demonstrate the reality of what was assumed.
We cannot, therefore say, "It is now raining, if tomorrow the sun is shining."
Those who persevere have been saved.
Those who do not persevere have not been saved.
If one does not persevere (hold fast), then he was not made a partaker of Christ. If he perseveres, he was (in fact) previously made a partaker of Christ.
Is it the case that only saved people "fall away" from salvation? Is it unscriptural to say of many false Christians that they "fell away"? Is it ever the case that the "good ground hearer" ever "fell away"? Which of the four hearers then "fell away"? Was it not the second and third hearers? The shallow ground hearers and the thorny ground hearers?
"By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain." (I Cor. 15: 2 KJV)
The Apostasy crowd promotes this proposition - "failure to persevere, after becoming a Christian, proves that one was truly saved," was a member of Christ's house, or a partaker of Christ. How contrary to the verses cited above!
Though a genuine child of God may lose many things, he cannot lose his standing with God in Christ. He may fall from some truth, or embrace certain errors, and may fall into temptation and sin, and lose joy, peace, and blessings, but he can never so fall as to be unrecoverable. In fact, the scriptures tell us that God takes the responsibility upon himself to see that they do not fall finally, completely, or totally. He will guarantee their return, their repentance, and their restoration.
"For we are (or 'have been') made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end." (vs. 14)
These verses are often cited by those who believe that saved people may become lost. Their argument is that salvation is here promised only to those Christians who persevere, and that the words imply that some Christians will not persevere, and thus not be finally saved. Thus, they lost their salvation when they failed to persevere. Yet, these words do not imply that genuine converts can fail to persevere and lose salvation. They only affirm that perseverence is a proof of genuine conversion.
Future perseverance is proof of genuine conversion
That is, we are presently saved if in the future we remain loyal to Christ. Or, conversion is real only if it is followed by perseverance. Perseverance is the proof of initial salvation. Falling away is proof of false conversion.
The wording of the above verses in Hebrews is not - "and you will be saved (future indicative) if you (future indicative) persevere." It is rather - "you have been, and now are, really saved, if in the future you hold fast to Christ."
Syllogism
1. One was saved in the past if he perseveres in the future.
2. John did not persevere in the future.
3. John was not saved in the past.
Examples
1) We are (now) mortal, if (in the future) we die.
2) We are (now) strong, if (in the future) we climb the mountain.
3) We are (now) saved, if (in the future) we persevere.
4) We are (now) children of John, if (in the future) the DNA tests match.
5) We have begun well, if we end well.
6) We are (now) good ground hearers, if (in the future) we bring forth fruit with patience.
Failure to persevere is proof of hypocrisy and a lack of genuine conversion.
"If ye continue in my word, then are ye truly my disciples, and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:31, 32).
He set up a criterion by which true disciples might be distinguished.
"Jesus said unto them, if God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." (42)
"And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled...If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister..." (Colossians 1: 21-23 KJV)
"We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised." (Hebrews 6:11, 12 NIV)
These verses do not teach not that we are saved now because of a future act after salvation. Present salvation cannot be based upon acts that come after salvation. Events after salvation can only prove or demonstrate the reality of what was assumed.
We cannot, therefore say, "It is now raining, if tomorrow the sun is shining."
Those who persevere have been saved.
Those who do not persevere have not been saved.
If one does not persevere (hold fast), then he was not made a partaker of Christ. If he perseveres, he was (in fact) previously made a partaker of Christ.
Is it the case that only saved people "fall away" from salvation? Is it unscriptural to say of many false Christians that they "fell away"? Is it ever the case that the "good ground hearer" ever "fell away"? Which of the four hearers then "fell away"? Was it not the second and third hearers? The shallow ground hearers and the thorny ground hearers?
"By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain." (I Cor. 15: 2 KJV)
The Apostasy crowd promotes this proposition - "failure to persevere, after becoming a Christian, proves that one was truly saved," was a member of Christ's house, or a partaker of Christ. How contrary to the verses cited above!
Though a genuine child of God may lose many things, he cannot lose his standing with God in Christ. He may fall from some truth, or embrace certain errors, and may fall into temptation and sin, and lose joy, peace, and blessings, but he can never so fall as to be unrecoverable. In fact, the scriptures tell us that God takes the responsibility upon himself to see that they do not fall finally, completely, or totally. He will guarantee their return, their repentance, and their restoration.
The Thorny Ground Hearer
"And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it."
"And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection." (Luke 8: 7, 14 KJV)
Mark adds, “and the lust of other things.” (Mark 4:19)
Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr. wrote:
"Two twentieth century commentators that I admire misinterpreted “the seed among thorns” in the Parable of the Sower. Out of respect for the otherwise good work of these men, I am not giving their names. But I will quote them to show how the interpretation of this part of the parable went wrong in the twentieth century. (The other parts too - SG) The first one said, “The seed that fell among thorns represents those who hear the word and receive it. Such people are evidently saved, but their lives do not bring forth good fruit for the Master.” The other commentator said, “Time absorbing interests…in anything other than the kingdom of God will prevent the believer from bringing any fruit to perfection.” Both of these good men are wrong when they call those represented by the “seed among thorns” “saved” and “believers.” The truth is that the seed which falls among thorns represents unbelievers who are not saved!
The old commentators like Matthew Poole; Matthew Henry; John Gill; John Trapp; John Peter Lange; and Jamieson, Fausset and Brown said that the thorny ground represents people who were never truly converted. For instance, John Trapp said, “Their hearts [remained] fastened to earthly [things], they proved also unfruitful…[they] fell short of heaven” (John Trapp, A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, Tanski Publications, 1997 reprint, volume V, pp. 176-177).
The old commentators said that the thorny ground hearers were not saved. Dr. McGee followed these old commentators when he said, “These three types of soil do not represent three types of believers – they are not believers at all! They have heard the word, and only professed to receive it” (J. Vernon McGee, Th.D., Thru the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983, volume IV, p. 73)." (emphasis mine - SG)
I am fairly confident that Dr. Hymers is correct about the novelty of the view that makes either the shallow or thorny ground hearers to be genuine disciples. I have myself stated that one of the many things that the Campbellites and Hardshells, the infamous historical schismatic "twins," per B. H. Carroll, had in common, was their error regarding the parable of the soils. Both took novel views. It may be true that the twentieth century gave prominence to these novel and erroneous views, but they had been uttered by some in the nineteenth century, by Campbellites and Hardshells. Both Campbellites and Hardshells now both confess that the shallow and thorny ground hearers were genuine disciples who had been regenerated or born again.
See here for the full article by Dr. Hymers
This hearer or receiver of the word may be called "suffocated," or "stifled," or "stunted." He brings "no fruit to perfection," thus may be also styled "fruitless."
In true believers, the word or seed takes deep root, which is necessary for growth of fruit, so the prophet spoke of taking "root downward," and bearing "fruit upward." (Isaiah 37: 31 KJV) Without sufficient growth downward, in the root system, there will be no final fruit, though there may be "budding" and "blossoming." The thorny ground hearer, like the shallow ground hearer, does not have the seed to take deep root within his soul. It is superficially received.
"But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience." (Luke 8: 15 KJV)
The introductory word "but" is meant to introduce a "contrast." The good ground hearer is unlike the wayside, shallow, or thorny ground hearer. Whereas the good ground hearer "keeps" the word and "brings forth fruit with patience (perseverence)," the others do not. All three others were "fruitless." Some sprouted, became plants, and yet, like the "fig tree" that Jesus "cursed," had "leaves" but no "fruit." The thorny ground hearer did not "keep" the word nor did he bring forth lasting fruit.
Christians in Appearance Only
Jesus said that we should "not judge according to the appearance." (John 7: 24 KJV) Things are not always as they seem. There are those who "appear" to be "sheep," having on sheep clothing, but who are inwardly, secretly, "ravening wolves." (Matt. 7: 15 KJV) He also spoke of the religious leaders of the Jews as being "whitewashed" (Matt. 23: 27; Acts 23: 3 KJV). They were "outwardly," in "appearance," holy people, but inwardly they were utterly filthy.
Jesus said of the religious imposters:
"If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin." (John 15: 22 KJV)
And, in the context of explaining the parable of the soils, Jesus said:
"For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad." (Luke 8: 17 KJV)
It is clear that these two verses of instruction and warning concern those who "look like" they are genuine servants and holy people of God, or genuine saints. What has been "hidden" and kept "secret," by these hypocrites and pretenders, is their true identity. Notice these verses and how they show Jesus unmasking the hypocrites.
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Matt. 23: 25-28 KJV)
Thus, when Jesus speaks of that final revelation of the hypocrites, in the day of judgment, he alludes directly to the hypocrites in the parable, the ones who became believers externally, but not inwardly, the ones who were only believers in "appearance," but not in reality.
Thorny ground is deceptive ground. It looks good and clean, appearing on the surface to be good ground. The only way to discover its true quality is to dig into it to discover its depth and suitableness for farming.
The Greek word for “choke” means to be “suffocated by drowning or overgrowth” (Strong). In Mark 4:7, the Greek word is different, meaning to be “completely suffocated by crowding.” W. E. Vine says the word in Mark “gives the idea of choking together with crowding.”
Examples of Thorny Ground Hearers
1. Annanias and Sapphira (Acts 5: 1-10)
2. Demas (II Tim. 4: 1)
3. Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8: 9-24)
4. Laodacean Believers (Rev. 3: 14-22)
5. Hymenaeus and Alexander (I Tim. 1: 19, 20)
6. Judas (John 12: 6)
Though the term "falling away" is not used with reference to the thorny ground hearer, this does not mean that there is no kind of "falling" experienced by him. The shallow ground hearer "departs" from the faith, giving heed to heresies of every kind, such as "Hymenaeus and Alexander" who denied the Christian creed. (I Tim. 1: 19, 20) The thorny ground hearer rather denies the faith by worldly living. In fact, the thorny ground hearer represents the careless Christian. The thorny ground hearer is one who "professes to know God (and Christ), but in works deny him." (Titus 1: 16)
The Slothful Christian
The thorny ground hearer is not only a fruitless professing Christian, but he is a slothful one. He is described in these verses.
"I went past the field of a sluggard, past the vineyard of someone who has no sense; thorns had come up everywhere, the ground was covered with weeds, and the stone wall was in ruins. I applied my heart to what I observed and learned a lesson from what I saw: a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest--and poverty will come on you like a thief and scarcity like an armed man." (Proverbs 14: 30-34)
"The way of the sluggard is blocked with thorns, but the path of the upright is a highway." (Proverbs 15:19)
"Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned." (Hebrews 6:7-8)
Warnings against riches are given to Christians (I Tim. 6) in order that they might not become thorny ground hearers.
We conclude therefore that the thorny ground hearer, like the shallow ground hearer, was never truly saved initially and this was revealed by the lifestyle that followed the professed conversion.
"And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection." (Luke 8: 7, 14 KJV)
Mark adds, “and the lust of other things.” (Mark 4:19)
Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr. wrote:
"Two twentieth century commentators that I admire misinterpreted “the seed among thorns” in the Parable of the Sower. Out of respect for the otherwise good work of these men, I am not giving their names. But I will quote them to show how the interpretation of this part of the parable went wrong in the twentieth century. (The other parts too - SG) The first one said, “The seed that fell among thorns represents those who hear the word and receive it. Such people are evidently saved, but their lives do not bring forth good fruit for the Master.” The other commentator said, “Time absorbing interests…in anything other than the kingdom of God will prevent the believer from bringing any fruit to perfection.” Both of these good men are wrong when they call those represented by the “seed among thorns” “saved” and “believers.” The truth is that the seed which falls among thorns represents unbelievers who are not saved!
The old commentators like Matthew Poole; Matthew Henry; John Gill; John Trapp; John Peter Lange; and Jamieson, Fausset and Brown said that the thorny ground represents people who were never truly converted. For instance, John Trapp said, “Their hearts [remained] fastened to earthly [things], they proved also unfruitful…[they] fell short of heaven” (John Trapp, A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, Tanski Publications, 1997 reprint, volume V, pp. 176-177).
The old commentators said that the thorny ground hearers were not saved. Dr. McGee followed these old commentators when he said, “These three types of soil do not represent three types of believers – they are not believers at all! They have heard the word, and only professed to receive it” (J. Vernon McGee, Th.D., Thru the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983, volume IV, p. 73)." (emphasis mine - SG)
I am fairly confident that Dr. Hymers is correct about the novelty of the view that makes either the shallow or thorny ground hearers to be genuine disciples. I have myself stated that one of the many things that the Campbellites and Hardshells, the infamous historical schismatic "twins," per B. H. Carroll, had in common, was their error regarding the parable of the soils. Both took novel views. It may be true that the twentieth century gave prominence to these novel and erroneous views, but they had been uttered by some in the nineteenth century, by Campbellites and Hardshells. Both Campbellites and Hardshells now both confess that the shallow and thorny ground hearers were genuine disciples who had been regenerated or born again.
See here for the full article by Dr. Hymers
This hearer or receiver of the word may be called "suffocated," or "stifled," or "stunted." He brings "no fruit to perfection," thus may be also styled "fruitless."
In true believers, the word or seed takes deep root, which is necessary for growth of fruit, so the prophet spoke of taking "root downward," and bearing "fruit upward." (Isaiah 37: 31 KJV) Without sufficient growth downward, in the root system, there will be no final fruit, though there may be "budding" and "blossoming." The thorny ground hearer, like the shallow ground hearer, does not have the seed to take deep root within his soul. It is superficially received.
"But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience." (Luke 8: 15 KJV)
The introductory word "but" is meant to introduce a "contrast." The good ground hearer is unlike the wayside, shallow, or thorny ground hearer. Whereas the good ground hearer "keeps" the word and "brings forth fruit with patience (perseverence)," the others do not. All three others were "fruitless." Some sprouted, became plants, and yet, like the "fig tree" that Jesus "cursed," had "leaves" but no "fruit." The thorny ground hearer did not "keep" the word nor did he bring forth lasting fruit.
Christians in Appearance Only
Jesus said that we should "not judge according to the appearance." (John 7: 24 KJV) Things are not always as they seem. There are those who "appear" to be "sheep," having on sheep clothing, but who are inwardly, secretly, "ravening wolves." (Matt. 7: 15 KJV) He also spoke of the religious leaders of the Jews as being "whitewashed" (Matt. 23: 27; Acts 23: 3 KJV). They were "outwardly," in "appearance," holy people, but inwardly they were utterly filthy.
Jesus said of the religious imposters:
"If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin." (John 15: 22 KJV)
And, in the context of explaining the parable of the soils, Jesus said:
"For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad." (Luke 8: 17 KJV)
It is clear that these two verses of instruction and warning concern those who "look like" they are genuine servants and holy people of God, or genuine saints. What has been "hidden" and kept "secret," by these hypocrites and pretenders, is their true identity. Notice these verses and how they show Jesus unmasking the hypocrites.
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Matt. 23: 25-28 KJV)
Thus, when Jesus speaks of that final revelation of the hypocrites, in the day of judgment, he alludes directly to the hypocrites in the parable, the ones who became believers externally, but not inwardly, the ones who were only believers in "appearance," but not in reality.
Thorny ground is deceptive ground. It looks good and clean, appearing on the surface to be good ground. The only way to discover its true quality is to dig into it to discover its depth and suitableness for farming.
The Greek word for “choke” means to be “suffocated by drowning or overgrowth” (Strong). In Mark 4:7, the Greek word is different, meaning to be “completely suffocated by crowding.” W. E. Vine says the word in Mark “gives the idea of choking together with crowding.”
Examples of Thorny Ground Hearers
1. Annanias and Sapphira (Acts 5: 1-10)
2. Demas (II Tim. 4: 1)
3. Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8: 9-24)
4. Laodacean Believers (Rev. 3: 14-22)
5. Hymenaeus and Alexander (I Tim. 1: 19, 20)
6. Judas (John 12: 6)
Though the term "falling away" is not used with reference to the thorny ground hearer, this does not mean that there is no kind of "falling" experienced by him. The shallow ground hearer "departs" from the faith, giving heed to heresies of every kind, such as "Hymenaeus and Alexander" who denied the Christian creed. (I Tim. 1: 19, 20) The thorny ground hearer rather denies the faith by worldly living. In fact, the thorny ground hearer represents the careless Christian. The thorny ground hearer is one who "professes to know God (and Christ), but in works deny him." (Titus 1: 16)
The Slothful Christian
The thorny ground hearer is not only a fruitless professing Christian, but he is a slothful one. He is described in these verses.
"I went past the field of a sluggard, past the vineyard of someone who has no sense; thorns had come up everywhere, the ground was covered with weeds, and the stone wall was in ruins. I applied my heart to what I observed and learned a lesson from what I saw: a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest--and poverty will come on you like a thief and scarcity like an armed man." (Proverbs 14: 30-34)
"The way of the sluggard is blocked with thorns, but the path of the upright is a highway." (Proverbs 15:19)
"Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned." (Hebrews 6:7-8)
Warnings against riches are given to Christians (I Tim. 6) in order that they might not become thorny ground hearers.
We conclude therefore that the thorny ground hearer, like the shallow ground hearer, was never truly saved initially and this was revealed by the lifestyle that followed the professed conversion.
Sep 10, 2009
Believers Who Fall Away
"They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away."
"Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have."
These two verses are from Luke chapter eight, verses 13 and 18. The first is part of Christ's explanation of the parable of the soils (or sower and the seed), dealing with the shallow ground hearer. The second is a summation, I believe, of the entire parable. It tells us what is the chief lesson in the parable. "Take heed how you hear" means "take heed how you receive and respond to the sowing of the seed to your heart."
In discussions about salvation, this parable is extremely important. Several major issues in soteriology come into intense discussion in the parable.
Who are the saved and the lost? What distinguishes the saved from the lost? What is it to be saved? When is one saved, or is a child of the kingdom? Did any saved lose their salvation? If so, which hearers?
Is The Shallow Ground Hearer Saved?
Clearly, as Jesus said, those who "receive" the "seed," that is, those who hear, understand, believe, and obey the "word," are they who shall be "saved." This is discovered by what Jesus said about the wayside hearer, the one who rejected the seed outright. He dismissed the word, failing to heed, understand, believe, or obey the word, and all this "lest they should believe and be saved." (8:12)
However, the shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yea, even to have initially "received the word with joy." Many believe this is enough to pronounce the shallow ground hearer a "saved" person, a genuine "child of the kingdom."
Yet, even though this shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yet he is never said to have been "saved." It is clear that he progressed further than the wayside hearer, for he both "understood" and "believed" the word. Yet, he was never truly converted, as I shall demonstrate.
Why Lost?
How do we know that the shallow ground hearer was never actually "saved"?
First, his heart condition is contrasted with that of the "good ground" hearer, who's heart was "good" and "honest." Thus, his heart was not "good," being like the soil to which it corresponds, being "shallow" or "rocky," lacking sufficient depth.
Such soil represents a sinner not properly prepared in heart by grace. People who "believe" and "rejoice" at the preaching of the gospel without a prepared heart, and prevenient grace, and without having "root" in themselves, and without honesty of heart, do not experience real salvation. I will give examples of these shallow ground hearers later.
Second, the terms descriptive of him indicate his lack of salvation. He is "shallow," and "rootless," and without "patience" (perseverence). His "believing" is, therefore, "shallow" and "without foundation." His "believing" is not "rooted," either in himself, or in truth, or in Christ. His "shallowness" is exhibited in the words describing him and his faith, such as "for a while believe," and "for a while endure." He is temporary, quick to start, and quick to tire.
Third, the things he is said to lack indicate he is not saved. Already it has been observed how he lacked goodness and honesty of heart, not being "good soil." Also, how he lacked "depth" or "root in himself," and how he was deficient in "stick-to-itiveness." The shallow or stony soil "lacked moisture," or the Holy Spirit.
Third, the "engrafted word" is to be received "with meekness" James 1: 21 KJV) but the shallow ground hearer receives the word not so.
Fourth, the shallow ground hearer represents that precipitate or hasty disciple whom Jesus warned against, as I shall show shortly in the examples of shallow ground hearers in the scriptures.
Fifth, none of these shallow ground hearers produce "fruit," for they soon die before growing to sufficient maturity, as a plant, to produce fruit.
Sixth, truly saved people, like the Bereans, have "received the word with all readiness of mind," being prepared in heart (soil) for the reception of the word.
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17: 11 KJV)
Some translations say, of the good ground hearer, that his heart is "honest" or "noble."
True believers "receive" the word with deep "joy," not with superficial joy.
"For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance...And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost." (I Thess. 1: 5, 6 KJV)
"...when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." (2: 13)
Not only do true believers receive the word with joy, but with soul affliction, or with conviction of sins, and also receive it "with power." It is not human emotional joy, but joy "of the Holy Ghost." The shallow ground hearer receives the word as the word of men, without deep "assurance."
Finally, the shallow ground hearer did not have a pentitent heart to accompany his believing, for the soil was not ploughed or "broken up" by the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction.
Now that it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was not saved, being a hypocrite or imposter, let us take notice of how Christ says that he
1. "Perseveres" (endures) only a short while, as a shallow rooted plant endures the heat of the sun very little.
2. "Believes" only for a short while, for he is said to "Fall away." The Greek word ("aphistēmi") means to depart or to withdraw.
Now, if it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was never really converted, but was deceived, then what does it mean for him to "fall away"? Those who contend that a real believer may lose salvation argue that such terms as "depart," "fall," "apostasize," etc., can never be used to refer to pretenders but can only be said of those who have been truly saved. It is much the same argument made regarding the many warnings given in scripture to professing servants of God. Are they meaningless warnings? Do they speak of real threats to real Christians, regarding keeping saved?
This is a question dealing with "implication." Do the above words imply that one has genuine salvation? When the shallow ground hearer/believer "fell away" or departed from the faith, does this imply that he was actually saved? Is he "departing" or "removing" from real or pretended salvation?
One can see why those who make this argument are keen on insisting that the shallow ground hearer was actually saved. They must make him a genuine born again Christian for he "fell away," and only genuinely saved people "fall away." On the other hand, if I have proven that the shallow ground hearer was never truly converted, then the argument that the words "fall away" can only refer to the genuinely saved, is false.
Besides, Christ speaks of those in the judgment day, in the verse cited at the heading, who have "taken away" what they only "seem" to have, not what they actually have. Again, those who say words such as "take away" can only refer to taking away what one actually possesses, must disagree with Christ.
Received the Word with Joy
Do some sinners receive the gospel "with joy" and "believe" it and yet are not converted? Yes, and the shallow ground hearer depicts him. Notice these words of Jesus to some Jews who had not accepted Christ.
"He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light." (John 5: 35 KJV)
Shallow Ground Hearer #1 - The Precipitate Disciple
"And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head." (Luke 9: 57, 58 KJV)
"And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? (or has "root in himself" - SG) Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish. Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able (or has "root in himself" - SG)with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14: 27-33)
In both of these examples, the "hasty" or "precipitate" disciple is the one who corresponds to the shallow ground hearer.
Other Examples
Example #2 - Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8: 9-24)
Example #3 - Forgetful Hearer (James 1: 21-25)
Example #4 - Vain Believers (I Cor. 15: 1, 2)
Example #5 - Chief Rulers (John 12: 42)
Example #6 - Temporary Followers (John 6: 65-67)
Example #7 - Fruitless Branches (John 15: 1-5)
A. W. Pink said:
"In His interpretation the Lord Jesus explained the different soils as representing various classes of those who hear the Word. They are four in number, and may be classified as hard-hearted, shallow-hearted, half-hearted, and whole-hearted."
(The Prophetic Parables of Matthew 13 - Chapter 1 - "The Parable of the Sower")
See here
The case of apostasy of the shallow ground hearer, and that of the thorny ground hearer, demonstrate a principle that believers in eternal security often assert. It asserts that the causes of apostasy of professing believers are to be traced to some defect in first conversion.
Apostasy reveals this previously unknown defect. Perseverence gives evidence of genuine salvation, of being a good ground hearer. Apostasy gives evidence of false salvation, of being a shallow or thorny ground hearer.
"Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have."
These two verses are from Luke chapter eight, verses 13 and 18. The first is part of Christ's explanation of the parable of the soils (or sower and the seed), dealing with the shallow ground hearer. The second is a summation, I believe, of the entire parable. It tells us what is the chief lesson in the parable. "Take heed how you hear" means "take heed how you receive and respond to the sowing of the seed to your heart."
In discussions about salvation, this parable is extremely important. Several major issues in soteriology come into intense discussion in the parable.
Who are the saved and the lost? What distinguishes the saved from the lost? What is it to be saved? When is one saved, or is a child of the kingdom? Did any saved lose their salvation? If so, which hearers?
Is The Shallow Ground Hearer Saved?
Clearly, as Jesus said, those who "receive" the "seed," that is, those who hear, understand, believe, and obey the "word," are they who shall be "saved." This is discovered by what Jesus said about the wayside hearer, the one who rejected the seed outright. He dismissed the word, failing to heed, understand, believe, or obey the word, and all this "lest they should believe and be saved." (8:12)
However, the shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yea, even to have initially "received the word with joy." Many believe this is enough to pronounce the shallow ground hearer a "saved" person, a genuine "child of the kingdom."
Yet, even though this shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yet he is never said to have been "saved." It is clear that he progressed further than the wayside hearer, for he both "understood" and "believed" the word. Yet, he was never truly converted, as I shall demonstrate.
Why Lost?
How do we know that the shallow ground hearer was never actually "saved"?
First, his heart condition is contrasted with that of the "good ground" hearer, who's heart was "good" and "honest." Thus, his heart was not "good," being like the soil to which it corresponds, being "shallow" or "rocky," lacking sufficient depth.
Such soil represents a sinner not properly prepared in heart by grace. People who "believe" and "rejoice" at the preaching of the gospel without a prepared heart, and prevenient grace, and without having "root" in themselves, and without honesty of heart, do not experience real salvation. I will give examples of these shallow ground hearers later.
Second, the terms descriptive of him indicate his lack of salvation. He is "shallow," and "rootless," and without "patience" (perseverence). His "believing" is, therefore, "shallow" and "without foundation." His "believing" is not "rooted," either in himself, or in truth, or in Christ. His "shallowness" is exhibited in the words describing him and his faith, such as "for a while believe," and "for a while endure." He is temporary, quick to start, and quick to tire.
Third, the things he is said to lack indicate he is not saved. Already it has been observed how he lacked goodness and honesty of heart, not being "good soil." Also, how he lacked "depth" or "root in himself," and how he was deficient in "stick-to-itiveness." The shallow or stony soil "lacked moisture," or the Holy Spirit.
Third, the "engrafted word" is to be received "with meekness" James 1: 21 KJV) but the shallow ground hearer receives the word not so.
Fourth, the shallow ground hearer represents that precipitate or hasty disciple whom Jesus warned against, as I shall show shortly in the examples of shallow ground hearers in the scriptures.
Fifth, none of these shallow ground hearers produce "fruit," for they soon die before growing to sufficient maturity, as a plant, to produce fruit.
Sixth, truly saved people, like the Bereans, have "received the word with all readiness of mind," being prepared in heart (soil) for the reception of the word.
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17: 11 KJV)
Some translations say, of the good ground hearer, that his heart is "honest" or "noble."
True believers "receive" the word with deep "joy," not with superficial joy.
"For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance...And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost." (I Thess. 1: 5, 6 KJV)
"...when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." (2: 13)
Not only do true believers receive the word with joy, but with soul affliction, or with conviction of sins, and also receive it "with power." It is not human emotional joy, but joy "of the Holy Ghost." The shallow ground hearer receives the word as the word of men, without deep "assurance."
Finally, the shallow ground hearer did not have a pentitent heart to accompany his believing, for the soil was not ploughed or "broken up" by the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction.
Now that it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was not saved, being a hypocrite or imposter, let us take notice of how Christ says that he
1. "Perseveres" (endures) only a short while, as a shallow rooted plant endures the heat of the sun very little.
2. "Believes" only for a short while, for he is said to "Fall away." The Greek word ("aphistēmi") means to depart or to withdraw.
Now, if it has been established that the shallow ground hearer was never really converted, but was deceived, then what does it mean for him to "fall away"? Those who contend that a real believer may lose salvation argue that such terms as "depart," "fall," "apostasize," etc., can never be used to refer to pretenders but can only be said of those who have been truly saved. It is much the same argument made regarding the many warnings given in scripture to professing servants of God. Are they meaningless warnings? Do they speak of real threats to real Christians, regarding keeping saved?
This is a question dealing with "implication." Do the above words imply that one has genuine salvation? When the shallow ground hearer/believer "fell away" or departed from the faith, does this imply that he was actually saved? Is he "departing" or "removing" from real or pretended salvation?
One can see why those who make this argument are keen on insisting that the shallow ground hearer was actually saved. They must make him a genuine born again Christian for he "fell away," and only genuinely saved people "fall away." On the other hand, if I have proven that the shallow ground hearer was never truly converted, then the argument that the words "fall away" can only refer to the genuinely saved, is false.
Besides, Christ speaks of those in the judgment day, in the verse cited at the heading, who have "taken away" what they only "seem" to have, not what they actually have. Again, those who say words such as "take away" can only refer to taking away what one actually possesses, must disagree with Christ.
Received the Word with Joy
Do some sinners receive the gospel "with joy" and "believe" it and yet are not converted? Yes, and the shallow ground hearer depicts him. Notice these words of Jesus to some Jews who had not accepted Christ.
"He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light." (John 5: 35 KJV)
Shallow Ground Hearer #1 - The Precipitate Disciple
"And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head." (Luke 9: 57, 58 KJV)
"And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? (or has "root in himself" - SG) Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish. Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able (or has "root in himself" - SG)with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14: 27-33)
In both of these examples, the "hasty" or "precipitate" disciple is the one who corresponds to the shallow ground hearer.
Other Examples
Example #2 - Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8: 9-24)
Example #3 - Forgetful Hearer (James 1: 21-25)
Example #4 - Vain Believers (I Cor. 15: 1, 2)
Example #5 - Chief Rulers (John 12: 42)
Example #6 - Temporary Followers (John 6: 65-67)
Example #7 - Fruitless Branches (John 15: 1-5)
A. W. Pink said:
"In His interpretation the Lord Jesus explained the different soils as representing various classes of those who hear the Word. They are four in number, and may be classified as hard-hearted, shallow-hearted, half-hearted, and whole-hearted."
(The Prophetic Parables of Matthew 13 - Chapter 1 - "The Parable of the Sower")
See here
The case of apostasy of the shallow ground hearer, and that of the thorny ground hearer, demonstrate a principle that believers in eternal security often assert. It asserts that the causes of apostasy of professing believers are to be traced to some defect in first conversion.
Apostasy reveals this previously unknown defect. Perseverence gives evidence of genuine salvation, of being a good ground hearer. Apostasy gives evidence of false salvation, of being a shallow or thorny ground hearer.
Sep 7, 2009
The Gap in Time
Is there a "gap in time" between "regeneration" (born again) and conversion (coming to faith and repentance)? Some "Reformed" Calvinists, such as James White, R. C. Sproul, etc., strongly affirm that they do not believe there is any such character as a "regenerated unbeliever," even though they believe "regeneration precedes faith."
I have previously shown how some indeed, besides the Hardshells, like Wayne Grudem, do put a "gap in time" between regeneration and conversion. See here
Here are some questions for all those who say that regeneration precedes faith.
1. If the making of the soil/heart "good," in the parable of the soils, denotes "regeneration," then how much time elapses between making the soil good and the sowing of the seed?
2. If regeneration corresponds to conception, and conversion corresponds to birth, then how much time elapses between conception and birth?
3. If infants in the womb are regenerated, then how much time elapses between regeneration and faith?
4. If regeneration is coming to life, while faith is breathing, then how much time elapses between being alive and breathing?
5. If regeneration is "drawing," and faith is "coming," then how much time elapses between being drawn and coming?
6. If regeneration was Lydia's "heart" being "opened," and her conversion was her "giving attention" to Paul's message, then how much time elapsed between the two?
7. If regeneration is the giving of spiritual "ears," then how much time elapses before one hears?
8. If regeneration is the giving of spiritual "eyes," then how much time elapses before one sees?
9. If regeneration precedes justification, then how much time elapses between them?
I have previously shown how some indeed, besides the Hardshells, like Wayne Grudem, do put a "gap in time" between regeneration and conversion. See here
Here are some questions for all those who say that regeneration precedes faith.
1. If the making of the soil/heart "good," in the parable of the soils, denotes "regeneration," then how much time elapses between making the soil good and the sowing of the seed?
2. If regeneration corresponds to conception, and conversion corresponds to birth, then how much time elapses between conception and birth?
3. If infants in the womb are regenerated, then how much time elapses between regeneration and faith?
4. If regeneration is coming to life, while faith is breathing, then how much time elapses between being alive and breathing?
5. If regeneration is "drawing," and faith is "coming," then how much time elapses between being drawn and coming?
6. If regeneration was Lydia's "heart" being "opened," and her conversion was her "giving attention" to Paul's message, then how much time elapsed between the two?
7. If regeneration is the giving of spiritual "ears," then how much time elapses before one hears?
8. If regeneration is the giving of spiritual "eyes," then how much time elapses before one sees?
9. If regeneration precedes justification, then how much time elapses between them?
Hardshell "Regeneration"
Hardshell David Montgomery wrote:
"By the way, do you even REMEMBER when you were born? You don’t? So why would you think that you would have anything to do in getting born again? The fact is—you had nothing to do with it…you were totally passive…it was all done by God. You didn’t ask God to get born again nor did God ask you for permission. This is one major point where Primitive Baptists differ with many other denominations for most of them believe a doctrine where the sinner has some part in regeneration."
Does this sound familiar? Is it not the same kind of "logic" we hear from some "Reformed" Baptists? Is it not the same kind of argumentation and preaching that most varieties of Hyper Calvinism utter?
Does the fact that people do not "remember" their natural birth experience prove that they cannot know or remember when they were "born again"? The Hardshells seem to think natural birth and spiritual birth are, in every way, alike. Therefore, since people do not know when they were physically born, they cannot know when they were spiritually born. Yet, what do the Scriptures say? Did not Paul know when he was born again? Did he not know that it was on the Damascus Road? Could he not remember it? Surely he could. So, what does this do with Montgomery's argument?
Further, even though Montgomery and Hardshells want to make a strict analogy between natural and spiritual birth, in order to push their Hardshell idea of "new birth," they only want to do it selectively.
For instance, in natural birth, one has both a father and mother. Yet, in Hardshell "new birth," one does not have a mother! There is no instrumental means, no gospel or church acting as the mother! If Montgomery and the Hardshells want to truly make natural birth like spiritual birth, then they would see that "the Spirit and the Bride say come," that one is Father and one is mother in new birth. (Rev. 22: 17)
Actually, it was the first Hardshell "founding fathers" who, more than Montgomery and neo-Hardshells, made spiritual birth to be totally like natural birth. They argued that there were clear stages in birth. First, there is conception, the actual implanting of the divine seed, or "regeneration," next followed by a time of hidden growth in the womb, or "conviction" of sin by the workings of the law, and then final deliverance from the womb, or salvation. In this paradigm, "regeneration" was by the "Spirit alone," apart from all means, God planting his seed, generating "life," while "conviction" represented the regenerated soul under conviction and struggling for relief, and finally the emergence of the child from the womb was represented as the time when the regenerated soul was converted. Many of the first Hardshells believed that all three stages were necessary for one to be "born again." Thus, they did not equate being "regenerated" with being "born again." They also saw themselves as spiritual "midwives" in bringing the regenerated soul to the full birth.
Montgomery continues:
"Some advocate the doctrine of “Gospel Regeneration” which teaches that a person has to believe the gospel in order to get born again. This cannot be true for how can a dead person believe anything? Consider the following analogy…"
"Sometimes as I wander among the graves, I think about the Resurrection and before too long, I’ll get to preaching, sometimes even out loud. Some of my best sermons have been preached at cemeteries. Now, if any one of those dead folks ever cried out “AMEN” then I am getting the heck out of there! (Sorry, seen too many zombie flicks). But that ainta gonna happen…why? Because they’re dead, dummy! Well, if a physically dead person can’t respond to the gospel, then it stands to reason that a spiritually dead person cannot respond as well. Spiritual life MUST precede any spiritual response just as physical life MUST precede any physical response. That just makes good horse sense."
When one reads this kind of argumentation from the Hardshells, one wonders if they have ever read of Ezekiel and the Valley of Dry Bones.
What is strange is the fact that many of today's "Reformed" Baptists often "pipe" the same tune.
Did all action follow the imparting of the breath of life to the dead in Ezekiel's vision? Did the bones not "move" and "shake" before "life" had "entered into" them?
What is strange is not that the dead are made to hear, believe, and follow the voice of Christ in the gospel, by the power of God, but how one can be spiritually "alive" and yet a rejecter of Christ and the gospel! How one can be a regenerated unbeliever! How one can be an unbeliever and yet be finally saved in heaven.
Montgomery wrote:
"Primitive Baptists believe in Holy Spirit Regeneration. The Holy Spirit comes down and kindles the pilot light in us. Where once was death and depravity is now life and righteousness."
Montgomery asserts that one does not believe in "Holy Spirit Regeneration" unless he believes that regeneration occurs apart from conversion, apart from the means of gospel truth, apart from faith and repentance. His theory, if true, would assert that regeneration is not of the Holy Spirit if the Spirit uses means.
He compares "regeneration" to the Holy Spirit "kindling" a "pilot light" in the sinner. This "pilot light" is then equated with spiritual "life" and "righteousness." It is absurd to think, however, that one can have "life" without having "Christ," and faith in Christ. It is difficult to think of a sinner being "regenerated" and having spiritual life, and yet who has not yet "come to" Christ. (See John 5: 40) According to Hardshellism, most pagans have been zapped with this "pilot light," though they reject him and his salvation. According to Hardshellism, most are zapped when they are infants in the womb. Thus, though unbelievers, and though the wrath of God abides upon them (John 3: 36), they are nevertheless "regenerated" because they have this "pilot light," this "ability" to be converted and come to faith and to Christ.
Montgomery wrote:
"Belief is a sign of life…it confirms that you have been born again, it is not the cause of regeneration but an effect of it."
If belief is a "sign of life," then there is no sign of "life" where there is no faith. Thus, one is dead without faith.
Also, what kind of "effect" is faith? A necessary and universal effect, like most "Reformed" Calvinists affirm, or only a slightly possible effect? How can he say it is an "effect" of regeneration when, according to Hardshellism, nearly all the regenerated remain evangelical unbelievers? What the scriptures teach is that faith is the medium of reception of Christ, life, righteousness, and salvation.
Montgomery wrote:
"So what if I am born again but do not believe the gospel? Go back and re-read this article, then read Romans 3:3, and then write your name 10,000 times and stop worrying about stuff like this. Believe is a wonderful thing and you should believe, it will bring you great happiness and joy to your life; but just as belief does not cause regeneration, unbelief does not cancel or annul it. God’s grace is not dependent on your obedience."
Here is the message of Hardshellism! Of the rankest Hyper Calvinism! Faith in Christ is not essential for salvation! The message is - "he that believes not shall be saved any way."
Citations from Montgomery are from his internet web site and article "Doctrine for Dummies--Part 2" and the section titled "Of Regeneration."
See here
At the end of this article David has a picture of an infant crying and angry, and this he gives as a picture of a sinner before "regeneration." He then has a picture of a smiling happy baby and this he gives as a picture of a sinner after "regeneration." Yet, according to historic Hardshellism, this is false. According to classical Hardshellism, "regeneration" does not make one happy, but sad, for it initiates "conviction" of sin, a sad and depressed state. It is not till one is "converted" to Christ that he becomes "happy."
"By the way, do you even REMEMBER when you were born? You don’t? So why would you think that you would have anything to do in getting born again? The fact is—you had nothing to do with it…you were totally passive…it was all done by God. You didn’t ask God to get born again nor did God ask you for permission. This is one major point where Primitive Baptists differ with many other denominations for most of them believe a doctrine where the sinner has some part in regeneration."
Does this sound familiar? Is it not the same kind of "logic" we hear from some "Reformed" Baptists? Is it not the same kind of argumentation and preaching that most varieties of Hyper Calvinism utter?
Does the fact that people do not "remember" their natural birth experience prove that they cannot know or remember when they were "born again"? The Hardshells seem to think natural birth and spiritual birth are, in every way, alike. Therefore, since people do not know when they were physically born, they cannot know when they were spiritually born. Yet, what do the Scriptures say? Did not Paul know when he was born again? Did he not know that it was on the Damascus Road? Could he not remember it? Surely he could. So, what does this do with Montgomery's argument?
Further, even though Montgomery and Hardshells want to make a strict analogy between natural and spiritual birth, in order to push their Hardshell idea of "new birth," they only want to do it selectively.
For instance, in natural birth, one has both a father and mother. Yet, in Hardshell "new birth," one does not have a mother! There is no instrumental means, no gospel or church acting as the mother! If Montgomery and the Hardshells want to truly make natural birth like spiritual birth, then they would see that "the Spirit and the Bride say come," that one is Father and one is mother in new birth. (Rev. 22: 17)
Actually, it was the first Hardshell "founding fathers" who, more than Montgomery and neo-Hardshells, made spiritual birth to be totally like natural birth. They argued that there were clear stages in birth. First, there is conception, the actual implanting of the divine seed, or "regeneration," next followed by a time of hidden growth in the womb, or "conviction" of sin by the workings of the law, and then final deliverance from the womb, or salvation. In this paradigm, "regeneration" was by the "Spirit alone," apart from all means, God planting his seed, generating "life," while "conviction" represented the regenerated soul under conviction and struggling for relief, and finally the emergence of the child from the womb was represented as the time when the regenerated soul was converted. Many of the first Hardshells believed that all three stages were necessary for one to be "born again." Thus, they did not equate being "regenerated" with being "born again." They also saw themselves as spiritual "midwives" in bringing the regenerated soul to the full birth.
Montgomery continues:
"Some advocate the doctrine of “Gospel Regeneration” which teaches that a person has to believe the gospel in order to get born again. This cannot be true for how can a dead person believe anything? Consider the following analogy…"
"Sometimes as I wander among the graves, I think about the Resurrection and before too long, I’ll get to preaching, sometimes even out loud. Some of my best sermons have been preached at cemeteries. Now, if any one of those dead folks ever cried out “AMEN” then I am getting the heck out of there! (Sorry, seen too many zombie flicks). But that ainta gonna happen…why? Because they’re dead, dummy! Well, if a physically dead person can’t respond to the gospel, then it stands to reason that a spiritually dead person cannot respond as well. Spiritual life MUST precede any spiritual response just as physical life MUST precede any physical response. That just makes good horse sense."
When one reads this kind of argumentation from the Hardshells, one wonders if they have ever read of Ezekiel and the Valley of Dry Bones.
What is strange is the fact that many of today's "Reformed" Baptists often "pipe" the same tune.
Did all action follow the imparting of the breath of life to the dead in Ezekiel's vision? Did the bones not "move" and "shake" before "life" had "entered into" them?
What is strange is not that the dead are made to hear, believe, and follow the voice of Christ in the gospel, by the power of God, but how one can be spiritually "alive" and yet a rejecter of Christ and the gospel! How one can be a regenerated unbeliever! How one can be an unbeliever and yet be finally saved in heaven.
Montgomery wrote:
"Primitive Baptists believe in Holy Spirit Regeneration. The Holy Spirit comes down and kindles the pilot light in us. Where once was death and depravity is now life and righteousness."
Montgomery asserts that one does not believe in "Holy Spirit Regeneration" unless he believes that regeneration occurs apart from conversion, apart from the means of gospel truth, apart from faith and repentance. His theory, if true, would assert that regeneration is not of the Holy Spirit if the Spirit uses means.
He compares "regeneration" to the Holy Spirit "kindling" a "pilot light" in the sinner. This "pilot light" is then equated with spiritual "life" and "righteousness." It is absurd to think, however, that one can have "life" without having "Christ," and faith in Christ. It is difficult to think of a sinner being "regenerated" and having spiritual life, and yet who has not yet "come to" Christ. (See John 5: 40) According to Hardshellism, most pagans have been zapped with this "pilot light," though they reject him and his salvation. According to Hardshellism, most are zapped when they are infants in the womb. Thus, though unbelievers, and though the wrath of God abides upon them (John 3: 36), they are nevertheless "regenerated" because they have this "pilot light," this "ability" to be converted and come to faith and to Christ.
Montgomery wrote:
"Belief is a sign of life…it confirms that you have been born again, it is not the cause of regeneration but an effect of it."
If belief is a "sign of life," then there is no sign of "life" where there is no faith. Thus, one is dead without faith.
Also, what kind of "effect" is faith? A necessary and universal effect, like most "Reformed" Calvinists affirm, or only a slightly possible effect? How can he say it is an "effect" of regeneration when, according to Hardshellism, nearly all the regenerated remain evangelical unbelievers? What the scriptures teach is that faith is the medium of reception of Christ, life, righteousness, and salvation.
Montgomery wrote:
"So what if I am born again but do not believe the gospel? Go back and re-read this article, then read Romans 3:3, and then write your name 10,000 times and stop worrying about stuff like this. Believe is a wonderful thing and you should believe, it will bring you great happiness and joy to your life; but just as belief does not cause regeneration, unbelief does not cancel or annul it. God’s grace is not dependent on your obedience."
Here is the message of Hardshellism! Of the rankest Hyper Calvinism! Faith in Christ is not essential for salvation! The message is - "he that believes not shall be saved any way."
Citations from Montgomery are from his internet web site and article "Doctrine for Dummies--Part 2" and the section titled "Of Regeneration."
See here
At the end of this article David has a picture of an infant crying and angry, and this he gives as a picture of a sinner before "regeneration." He then has a picture of a smiling happy baby and this he gives as a picture of a sinner after "regeneration." Yet, according to historic Hardshellism, this is false. According to classical Hardshellism, "regeneration" does not make one happy, but sad, for it initiates "conviction" of sin, a sad and depressed state. It is not till one is "converted" to Christ that he becomes "happy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)