I received an email from someone who pointed out that he and his wife were initially confused by this statement:

“Those who say that you technically need not believe in the death, resurrection, or deity of Christ to be born again, are not saying that there could be the gift of eternal life apart from these truths. What they are saying is that these things should lead people to faith in Christ.”

The part that confused them was the underlined part.

They thought I was saying contradicting what I had just said in the first part of the sentence. In other words, they thought I was saying that while technically one need not believe in Jesus’ death, resurrection, and deity to be born again, in reality he did.

After reading it several times they concluded, correctly, that what I meant was this: while believing those things are not conditions of eternal life, no one would have eternal life if those things were not indeed true.

Here is how the emailer suggested I could have written the underlined portion more clearly:

It would have been better to err on the side of being more explicit like: “…are not saying that there could be the gift of eternal life if these things had not actually occurred or been true.”

I agree with him. HIs rewrite is clearer that what I wrote. Mea culpa.

Here is my point: there is a difference between what we must believe to be born again and what must be true in order for us to be born again. Everyone in this debate agrees with that. For example, while there could be no salvation if Jesus had been born in Jerusalem, no one says that to be born again a person must believe He was born in Bethlehem.

So, my view, Yes, one must be in the eternality of the gift that the Lord Jesus gives to the believer, and No, one need not believe the five essentials, indeed says that the substitutionary death, bodily resurrection, and full deity of the Lord Jesus are all essential truths in the sense that if they were not true, no one would be able to have eternal life. However, they are not essential truths in the sense that one must believe them in order to be born again.

I hope that makes sense.

Today I received the following two questions from a reader of our blog:

• Isn’t it possible for a person to believe that Jesus is the Guarantor of everlasting life and still be unsaved? Believing that Jesus is the Guarantor of everlasting life does not effectively activate the substitutionary atonement, does it?

Yes, it is possible to believe that Jesus is the Guarantor of everlasting life and still not be born again. What is left out of that statement is to whom does Jesus guarantee everlasting life? Someone who believes that He is the Guarantor of everlasting life to all who persevere in faith and good works is not born again (unless at some point in the past he believed that Jesus guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him).

Yet a person who believes that Jesus guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him cannot be lost. Jesus says, “He who lives and believes in Me shall never die” (John 11:26).

Concerning substitutionary atonement, this question surfaces what Zane Hodges considered to be a major flaw in the thinking of many Free Grace people. Substitutionary atonement is universal. Jesus died for ALL. There is not a single person who has ever lived or who ever will live who needs to activate substitutionary atonement.

Substitutionary atonement is not like a credit card that one must call up to activate. Jesus completely removed the sin barrier for all when He died on the cross for our sins as our substitute. John the Baptist said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). The world is the same world as in John 3:16. Everyone Jesus died for, which is everyone, has had his sins taken away. The apostle John said the same thing in 1 John 2:2, that Jesus is the propitiation not only for our sins, but also for the whole world. Jesus’ death has satisfied the Father about the sin problem. No one’s sins bar him from eternal life.

The shed blood of Christ makes everyone savable, but it doesn’t save anyone. To be born again a person must believe in Jesus for eternal life (John 3:16-18; 5:24; 6:35; Eph 2:8-9; 1 Tim 1:16).

The Cross of Christ, of course, has many benefits which are not universal. For example, 1 John 1:7 says that the blood of Jesus only cleanses, in terms of fellowship forgiveness, believers who are walking in the light. Believers who are not walking in the light are not cleansed by the blood of Christ on a moment by moment basis.

At the Great White Throne Judgment no one will be condemned on the basis of their works (Rev 20:11-13). The basis of condemnation is that a person’s name is not in the Book of Life (Rev 20:15). Failure to believe in Jesus dooms a person to eternal condemnation, the second death (John 3:18; Rev 20:14).

When we talk with someone we should not say something like this:

God became a man named Jesus, lived a perfect life, died on the cross for our sins, and if you believe that He died on the cross for you, then His blood will cover your sins…

Instead, we should say,

God became a man named Jesus, lived a perfect life, died on the cross for our sins, with the result that our sins are no longer a barrier between us and God. You don’t need to deal with your sins in any way. In onder to be born again, you don’t need to turn from them. You don’t need to clean up your life. You can come just as you are because of the blood of Christ. Isn’t that good news? All you need to do to have eternal life is to believe in Jesus for it. He said, “He who believes in Me has everlasting life” (John 6:47). Because of Calvary, it really is that simple.

(Note: Of course it is appropriate to tell the unbeliever that our sins are death-dealing, whether we are believers or not, and that we must turn from our sins in order to avoid the consequences here and now of our sins. But we must not give unbelievers the impression that they need to do something in order for Jesus’ substitutionary death to count for them. It already counts for them in terms of making them savable.)

I received an email from a reader about John 8:51. The following is my reply:

I take it that “keep My word” has different meaning depending on the context. In John 14:23, I see this as obeying His commands (cf. 14:15).

But in John 8:51, a different context, I take “keeps My word” as a synonym for believing in Him. I will paste in my discussion of John 8:51 from our upcoming one-volume NT commentary:

8:51. In light of the rest of the Fourth Gospel, it is evident that the expression keeping Jesus’ word refers to belief in His promise to give eternal life to all who believe in Him for it (3:16; 5:24; 6:47). The verb keep (tereo„) means “to observe” or in this context “to accept” (cf. v 8:46).
The expression “he shall never see death” refers to spiritual, not physical, death (cf. John 11:26). Except for believers alive at the Rapture of the Church, all believers will die physically. However, no believer will experience (= see) spiritual death since the life Jesus gives is everlasting.

Warmly,

Bob

I received an email from a seminary professor commenting on my statement that angels don’t have eternal life, but have an eternal relationship with God. While that is true, I had actually said that before Lucifer led the rebellion, all the angels had an eternal relationship with God.

My seminary professor friend pointed out that if it had been an eternal relationship then it could not be lost. He is right. None of the angels had an eternal relationship with God before the fall. I should have said that they had a relationship with God which could become an eternal relationship if they didn’t rebel against God.

Of course, after the rebellion of one-third of the angels there is every reason to believe that the unfallen angels gained an eternal relationship with God. That is, God sealed them so that no further rebellions could or would occur.

The way God has dealt with angels is similar to but different than angels. It is similar in that humans too had a relationship with God before they fell. If they had not fallen, then they would have gained an eternal relationship with God (but not eternal life).

But unlike angels, God made provision for humans to be redeemed from their fallen state. He sent His Son to die, not for Lucifer and his minions, but for Adam and Eve and their descendants. Once Lucifer and his cohorts fell, there was no way back, no way of redemption. But for humans, the fall signaled the marvelous outpouring of God’s love and grace that made eternal life possible for all who simply believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

I received a question via email from someone who’s been reading articles on our website. The questions are very timely, thus I share them and my answers.

The questions:

You mention in several places in articles on the GES website that the phrase “believe in Jesus” means to believe that Jesus guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him for it.

If I’ve misquoted you I do apologize.

The part of this definition that I struggle with is that the phrase being defined (”believe in Jesus”) is also part of the definition “…all who simply believe in Him for it.” For some reason, I can’t wrap my head around that because I end up still asking the question, what does “believe in Jesus” or “believe in Him” mean?

So:

1. Is there a way that you can rephrase that definition of “believe in Jesus” that might make more sense to me? I do well with analagies as well.

2. Would you feel comfortable confirming that Charles Stanley’s definition in his Eternal Security book is valid for what one needs to believe to become a child of God? “Specifically, salvation comes to the individual when that person places trust in Christ’s death on the cross as the complete payment for sin.” (p.26)

My answers:

1. Let’s say when you were 10 your Mom was a stay at home homemaker and then your Dad lost his job. Then your Dad said to you and your 5 brothers and sisters, “I promise that whichever of you believe in me will be placed on a trust fund that will enable him to maintain this standard of living his entire life. But those of you who don’t believe me will leave this home at age 18 with no trust fund and no inheritance.” What would that mean? Is there any mystery there?

If your Dad had a way of gauging whether you believed him or not, and if he meant what he said, then if you believed him, you would get the trust fund and would be set for life. If you didn’t, you wouldn’t get that trust fund. When you hit age 18, you’d be on your own, with no inheritance and no trust fund. The same with your brothers and sisters.

Now there are lots of things the Dad isn’t promising: lifetime health, a happy marriage, emotional well being, well-adjusted children of your own, etc. But he is promising a trust fund that will keep you financially secure for life if you believe in him for it.

Jesus promises something, eternal life, to the one who believes in Him. He also promises that the one who does not believe in Him will be condemned eternally. Clearly He means that the person must believe in Him for that life.

2. If a person believes that Jesus died on the cross for his sins, he should also believe that He guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him. Yet it is possible that he believes that and yet does not believe that by faith in Jesus he has eternal life. If so, then he doesn’t believe in Jesus in the Biblical sense.

Let’s go back to the illustration about your Dad. Let’s say you believe your Mom and Dad had worked hard and you know he and your Mom have saved $20 million. And let’s say you believe that that is enough money for you and your brothers and sisters and parents to live on comfortably for the rest of your lives even if neither Mom or Dad or any of the kids worked again. Yet you’ve also heard about lottery winners who’ve blown more than $20 million in less than three years. So let’s say you don’t believe your Dad. You fear your family may be evicted from your home and you may go hungry and there won’t be any trust fund. Well, do you believe your Dad? No. You are not convinced your Dad will follow through on his promise. It is possible to believe that someone has done what was necessary for you to be saved, in this case from financial ruin, and yet not believe the person will deliver on His promise.

Now as a ten year old you might not know that your parents had saved lots of money, especially if you lived frugally in a modest home and your parents didn’t talk about how much money they had. But if you knew your Dad was trustworthy, then you’d believe him even if you didn’t know all the facts.

Again, anyone who believes that Jesus took away the sin of the world by shedding His blood on the cross should also believe that He guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him. But, sadly, there are millions and millions today who believe the former but not the latter.

Warmly,

Bob

Today I received the following email:

Here is my reply:

Eternal life is not eternal existence. Eternal life is both a matter of quantity (eternal) and quality (that is, there can be range of fullness of this life). But the life is Jesus’ life. He is the life (John 11:25-27; 14:6). When we believe in Him we have His life.

The unbeliever is said in Scripture to experience “the second death” (Rev 20:6). The first death is physical death. The second death is spiritual death, spiritual separation from God and His kingdom forever.

Yes, unbelievers are tormented forever in the lake of fire (Rev 14:11). But no, they never had and never will have eternal life.

Here’s something that Zane Hodges suggested to me that I found helpful. There is no indication anywhere in the Bible that unfallen angels have eternal life (or that fallen angels once had it). They will live forever, and even live forever with God. But it is highly unlikely that they have eternal life. Why? Because eternal life is for those who believe in Jesus for it according to what the Lord Jesus and His apostles. Yet angels were created with an eternal relationship with God, but one that could be lost. They didn’t ever believe that their continued relationship with God was dependent on believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. When Satan and one-third of the angels fell, they forfeited their eternal relationship with God. But they didn’t lose eternal life. Eternal life can’t be lost. (BTW, once the angels fell, God made it so that no more angels could or would fall. Thus unfallen angels are now eternally secure, even though they do not have eternal life.)

Another thing Zane suggested is that Jesus Himself does not have eternal life. Nowhere do we read that kind of language in the Bible. Rather, He is eternal life. That is what we read over and over again in the NT. We, on the other hand, are not, and never will be, eternal life. We have it. But He is it.

I hope this helps.

Our goal is to start typesetting our 1000-page NT commentary on July 1st. June was set aside to load in changes the authors made during the proofing of their manuscripts in May.

Well, we have received the changes back from some of the authors and we await the changes from others. So now in June we are loading in the changes we have received as we await others. It still looks hopeful that can have most if not all of the changes in house by the end of the June, and most loaded in as well. We can always begin typesetting even as we finishing loading in changes.

Right now I am finishing my commentary on Titus and am cutting down my commentary on John, which was way over the maximum word count. I now have cut it to the bone and it is still 11,669 words over. Since John is so important, we may let it be over by 9,900 words or so. But to do that, others need to be come in under the maximum limit. Fortunately several of mine are way under, and several of the other authors are too. (Of course, Zane’s commentary on 2 Peter is over by 3,000, having been cut down from being over by 28,000! And his commentary on James is over by a similar amount after having been cut down a lot in several stages. So, the trick is balancing it all out so we end up with a commentary of reasonable size.)

Our plan is to send the typeset manuscripts back to the authors in the first half  of August for one final proofing. Then in the second half of August we plan to load in all the changes and then hopefully send the book off to the printer by August 31. If so, we should have it in print by late October.

This project started 19 years ago in 1990. I wrote the first draft of my commentary on John then. It has been a massive project. I still find it hard to believe we are nearing the end. But we are so close now I can see the end in sight. We would appreciate your prayers that we do a great job finalizing things.

BTW, Kyle is having back surgery (his third in three summers) on June 9th. They will fuse the bottom four or five vertebra and put in a titanium cage to stabilize them. Please pray for his surgery and his recovery.

Luke 8:11-15 is Jesus’ explanation of the Parable of the Four Soils. He follows with some applicational comments in Luke 8:16-18.

A while back I noticed some amazing parallels between Luke 8:11-18 and the Parable of the Minas in Luke 19:11-27. Here are some that make me think the Lord intentionally linked these:

1. Luke 8:18 is almost identical to Luke 19:26. (This is what lead me to see the connections.)
2. Each deals with four types of people: 1) unbelievers (Luke 8:12 & Luke 19:14, 27), 2) believers who are not faithful (Luke 8:13 & Luke 19:20-26), 3) believers who are faithful and who persevere, but who are half-hearted in their service (Luke 8:14 & 19:18-19), and 4) believers who are wholehearted in their service to the end (Luke 8:15 & Luke 19:16-17).
3. Both accounts make it clear, to the person who understands and believes John 3:16, that salvation is a free gift by faith alone in Jesus Christ, but that rewards are earned by work done for the Savior.
4. Both see a future day when the Savior will judge His servants.
5. Both see focusing on the Lord’s return as vital to successful service.

Sadly so many people see the Four Soils as illustrating three types of unbelievers (Soils 1, 2, and 3) and one type of believer. They ignore or explain away the fact that the second soil “believed for a time” and the in verse 12 the Lord says that the reason Satan snatches away the seed is “lest they should believe and be saved.” Clearly the people in verse 12 believe and hence they are saved.

Sadly so many people argue that the third servant in the Parable of the Minas represents an unbeliever. Yet he is called a servant. He is given a stewardship. He is judged with believers. And he is clearly in a different group than the unbelievers (see Luke 19:27).

Finally, here is another way to show how I see the two passages linked:

1. The wayside soil (on the path) is equal to those enemies of Jesus (representing unbelieving Israel).
2. The rocky soil is equal to the third servant who buries his mina. He is actually called a wicked servant.
3. The weedy soil is equal to the second servant who only comes back with five minas. He is not called a wicked or a good servant. He is not told, “Well done, good servant,” like the first servant. Compare Luke 19:17 and Luke 19:19. He just hears, “You also be over five cities.”
4. The good soil is equal to the good servant. This is the one who hears, “Well done, good servant” and who receives authority over ten cities.

Eternal life is a free gift received by faith alone in Christ alone.

Eternal rewards are earned by what we do. What we do will be determined by how we heed the Word of God: “Take heed how you hear,” the Lord said after the Parable of the Four Soils (Luke 8:18).

Free Grace theology is not a license to sin. It is a call to faithfulness in light of the Lord’s soon return and our judgment then to determine our degree of reward.

Experiences are powerful. We all enjoy positive experiences. We love to remember and relive those experiences. We seek to order our lives in obedience to God so that our future experiences will be positive ones for ourselves and our loved ones.

There is, however, a long-recognized danger associated with experiences. We may, if we are not very careful, evaluate truth claims based on our experience, rather than the evidence.

For example, Galileo claimed that his observations of the sky revealed that the earth revolved around the sun. Today that is a hardly a bold claim. But in that day everyone believed and the Catholic Church taught as dogma that the sun revolved around the earth. Thus no one was even willing to look at his evidence. Everyone’s experience told them he was wrong. They could look and see the sun rise and the sun set. Case closed.

Ask a Charismatic how he knows the gift of tongues is for today and he will point to his experience. He speaks in tongues and it makes him feel more in love with the Lord Jesus. Thus the gift of tongues must be for today. He might be hardpressed to show this from the Bible. But he has had an experience.

Ask a contemplative how he knows that emptying his mind and focusing on one word (Eastern meditation) is a Biblically correct practice, he will point to how he feels after he does this. He will point to how much more he loves Jesus now than before he began the practice.

But what if the Bible teaches that the sign gifts have passed away and that Biblical meditation is thinking about Scripture, not about clearing one’s mind and having a one-word mantra? What if those practices are part of counterfeit spirituality? What if those practices actually displease God? Are we willing to give up enjoyable practices if we see from Scripture that they displease God? Or do we cling to our experience no matter what the Bible says?

Biblical interpretation requires that we check our experiences at the door. Here is how I learned the balance in seminary: We evaluate our experiences in light of what the Scriptures say. We do not evaluate the Scriptures in light of what our experiences say. Thus if my experience can be shown to be clearly contrary to Scripture, I need to give up that experience.

This even impacts our view of what a person must do to be born again. Do not many people follow their experience in this regard? For example, how does a Church of Christ person know that to be saved a person must believe in Jesus, obey Him, confess their sins, be baptized by immersion for the forgiveness of his sins, and repent of all his known sins? He knows that is so because when he was a child or teen or adult he did those things and as he came up from the water, he felt different. And immediately his life began to change.

Even Free Grace people can unwittingly do this. We might think back to when we were born again and what we believed at that time. If at that time we didn’t believe, for example, in the Rapture, then we may conclude that believing in the Rapture is not a condition of eternal life. But what do the Scriptures say? If the Scriptures taught that belief in the Rapture is a condition of eternal life (of course, they do not), then we would simply have to revise our understanding of when we were born again.

“When I was born again, I believed I could lose my salvation. So believing once saved always saved is not a condition of eternal life. ”

“But,” I ask this Baptist who now does believe in OSAS (once saved always saved), “How do you know you were saved at that point and not later when you believed that you were saved once and for all by faith in Jesus?”

At this point my friend points to how his life changed at that point.

But what is that? Experience. Oops. My general response to him is that we do not evaluate Scripture based on experience.

My specific response to him is that God works mightily in the lives of unbelievers. Unbelievers can experience major life change and it can be related to Jesus and Christianity. But it isn’t until the unbelievers believes the truth of John 3:16 that he is born again. Cornelius (Acts 10) is a case in point.

My hope is that we in the Free Grace movement eliminate experience as a guide to what the Scriptures teach. The Scriptures speak for themselves. The Scriptures tell us what to believe. We do not tell the Scriptures what they must teach. May we be like the unbelieving Jews in Berea who searched the Scriptures daily to see if what they were being taught by the apostle Paul was true or not (Acts 17:11). Search the Scriptures.