The following message was delivered
on July 19, 1992, in the adult Sunday school class of the Trinity
Baptist Church in Montville, New Jersey. Now, as the vast majority of
you know, this adult class is presently in what we might call
a transition period as to the subject matter of the class.
We've completed a 13-week series of studies under Pastor Nichols'
leadership that we have called a pre-membership class. And in the fall, we propose to
take off in at least two directions, probably concurrently. One will
be a post-membership class, and the other will be class sessions
taken up with a study of the proposed revisions to our church
Constitution, that you may be well instructed in what your
elders are proposing, that this will in no way be a kind of shoe-in
affair, but indeed will grow out of mutual wrestling with
the Word of God in these areas where we presently believe God
has given us, if not further light, clearer light on some
of the old paths that we have walked for many years together. And meanwhile, we're seeking
to use the relatively disrupted summer weeks with people going
and coming on holidays and visitors among us to address miscellaneous
but crucial issues vital to our life together, but not necessarily
needing any kind of consecutive framework of instruction in order
to be profitable. And in the light of these facts,
I plan to do today essentially what I was privileged to do at
the Aurelia Baptist Fellowship last Lord's Day when I ministered
in the adult class Sunday morning and again Sunday evening. Preparation
for that day forced me to wrestle with an old issue in a new way
And as I've reflected upon that issue, and the help I believe
God gave me in wrestling with it, I do believe, and so do my
fellow elders after discussing it with them, that it would be
unto general edification were we to take this entire Lord's
Day of July the 19th to focus our attention upon one central
subject. And that subject is this, the
relationship between saving faith in Christ and a life of obedience
to Christ. Now that is the very heart of
the issue that will be addressed in the Sunday school class this
morning, in the ministry of the word, and it will be tied in
with the manifesto this morning, and then in a more pastoral way
will take roots of practical explanation and application in
the evening service, God willing. Now in our day, this issue that
we're to address is identified in different circles by different
terminology. Some would describe it as the
Lordship salvation issue. Others would describe it as the
Christ as Savior, Christ as Lord debate. Others would put it under
the terminology of the question, can a person be truly saved but
not surrender to Jesus Christ? And so in the class this morning,
I will be much more didactic or instructive, giving out a
number of facts making necessary distinctions and marking out
necessary boundaries of our concern. Then, in the morning ministry
and in the evening ministry, we'll park down on many pivotal
texts by way of exposition, proclamation, and application. In other words,
I'm going to follow the pattern which the Apostle Paul followed
in 1 Corinthians chapter 10. This is the biblical warrant
for the manner in which I've mapped out the material for today's
ministry in the Word of God. The Apostle Paul has been dealing
with the very vexing but vital subject of Christian liberty
in 1 Corinthians chapters 8, 9, and now on into chapter 10. And in the development of his
argument, he begins chapter 10 with these words, For I would
not, brethren, have you ignorant. And then he reiterates some facts
of Old Testament biblical history. I would not, brethren, have you
ignorant that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed
through the sea. and were all baptized unto Moses
in the cloud and in the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual
food, and did all drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank
of a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ,
howbeit With most of them, God was not well pleased, for they
were overthrown in the wilderness." Now isn't that a marvelously
devotional section? All these wonderful insights
and warm, hearty applications to the heart. You say, Pastor,
you must have read a different section than the one I heard.
No, this is dry as dust history. Isn't it? Paul says there are
certain things concerning which I do not want you to be ignorant.
If you don't have these facts in your head, I want to put them
there. If they are there, I want you
to stir them up from the dusty file drawers of the basement
and set them before your eyeballs on the wall of your living room.
He deals in what we would call purely didactic material. He does not come to the hortatory,
that is, exhortation, practical application, until verse 6. Now
these things were our examples to the intent that we should
not lust. Now he begins to preach and exhort.
Verse 7. Neither be idolaters. Verse 8.
Neither commit fornication. Verse 9. Let us not make trial
of the Lord. Verse 10. Neither murmur ye.
In other words, it is the reestablishment of the didactic, placing these
facts before the minds of the Corinthians that becomes the
necessary basis of meaningful, effectual exhortation. Now that's the framework I'm
following. What I'm going to give you in
the remainder of the class time this morning is going to be heavily
didactic. And frankly, there are some of
you that are mentally lazy. You only like it when the preacher's
working up a sweat and trying to work you into a spiritual
sweat. And frankly, some of you are spoiled rotten in this area.
Whenever the preacher is not so preaching as to be carried
out in his own energy and spiritual and mental zeal as to carry you
along, you sit back and you nod, and if you don't fall asleep
physically, you fall asleep mentally. Now some of you have got to learn
to stop that, or you're going to be arrested in your spiritual
growth. I don't say that to scold you.
I'm not nasty in my spirit. I've never felt sweeter in a
whole month. The Lord is blessing the medication
that has been giving me chronic sinus headaches. And as best
I'm in touch with my philometer, I haven't felt sweeter in a long
time. But I am speaking facts. And
so I'm urging you not to resent the fact that this morning will
be heavily didactic. because we have apostolic precedent
for what I'm doing. Yes, I want to come to the verse
6 and following. I do desire and by God's help
I will come to the exhortation and to the admonition and to
the entreaty but this morning is heavily didactic in order
that we might have a clear conception of the issue that is before us
today namely the relationship between saving faith in Christ
and a life of obedience to Christ now with this introduction beneath
and behind us let us take up our subject this morning and
if you'd like a subtitle Are subject the relationship between
saving faith in Christ and a life of obedience to Christ or some
biblical perspectives on the Lordship Salvation controversy. First of all then take up with
me the necessity for addressing this issue. If I'm not doing
this out of a cranky spirit or out of lack of something else
to do, pray tell, why have I chosen to take up this subject for an
entire Lord's Day? Well, I give you two basic reasons.
Number one, because of the widespread confusion, current discussion
and debate on this issue. There is widespread confusion
and there is current discussion and very heated debate on this
issue in broad evangelical circles. I hold in my hands two very popular
evangelical books. One by Dr. John MacArthur, The
Gospel According to Jesus, which was published in 1988. It has
a foreword by Dr. James Packer, and also an excellent
preface by James Montgomery Boyce. And both of these men say that
this book addresses perhaps what is the greatest weakness in mainline
evangelicalism today. For example, listen to Dr. Boyce.
In this book, MacArthur is not dealing with some issues or issues
external to the faith, but with the central issue of all, namely,
what does it mean to be a Christian? His answers address themselves
to what I consider to be the greatest weakness of contemporary
evangelical Christianity in America. And on the book jacket, similar
comments from R.C. Spruill and from a David Hawking,
Radio Bibles teacher of the Biola Bible Hour. Then a year later,
in 1989, Dr. Charles Ryrie, formerly a professor
at Dallas Theological Seminary, came up with a book, and the
copyright is 1989, and it has a foreword by Warren Wiersbe,
for years, pastor of the historic Moody Bible Institute, Bible
teacher on the back to God hour that reaches literally millions
of people around the world every day, and In the book jacket,
we read this. Dr. Ryrie answers key and practical
questions such as, what exactly is the gospel? Can a born-again
Christian be carnal? And if so, how long? Can a person
accept Christ as Savior without acknowledging Him as Lord? Must
repentance precede faith? and Warren Weardsby, and Erwin
Lutzer, present pastor of the historic Moody Bible Church.
Some of you hear the program Sunday night, Songs in the Night
over WFME, a lovely Lord's Day evening sort of meditative, reflective
program. Earl Rademacher, a former classmate
of mine from many years ago, who is president of Western Seminary
in Portland, And they say this book will be enthusiastically
welcomed by those of us who are concerned about the present confusion
that exists regarding the content and terms of the gospel message. Rademacher says Ryrie's lucid
handling of the relevant scriptures will go a long way to eliminating
the fog around the question of what is the gospel. And these
men are on both sides of the poles of the issue. MacArthur
asserting that in saving faith there is a germ of commitment
to Christ that will necessarily and inevitably lead to a life
of basic obedience to Christ and if there is no obedience
to Christ there is no genuine faith in Christ. Ryrie's answer
is just the opposite that not only is it possible but in many
cases it is actually true that sinners truly believe upon Christ
to the saving of their souls and have not yet decided the
issue shall I bow to the authority of Christ and be prepared to
live by the rule and the way of Christ Now I say there is
widespread confusion, current discussion and debate on the
issue, and since the devil establishes and maintains his kingdom by
error and by lie, John 8, 44, year of your father the devil,
the lust of your father it is your will to do. He was a murderer
from the beginning and abode not in the truth, he is a liar,
and the father of it If we are concerned about the dismantling
of the kingdom of Satan and the establishment of the kingdom
of our Lord Jesus Christ, we cannot be indifferent to error. Because according to Ephesians
6, the devil works not just through things that are patently erroneous,
but Paul uses the terminology through the wiles of error. I'm sorry, Ephesians chapter
4, you have the wiles of the devil in Ephesians 6, and the
wiles of error. And it is not the will of God
for His people to be vacillating on matters where there is discussion,
debate, confusion, within which the leaven of error works, either
to the erosion of the strength of the kingdom of Christ, or
to the maintenance of the kingdom of the Prince of Darkness. Therefore,
in Ephesians chapter 4, among the many purposes for which God
gives to his church, pastors and teachers, one of them is
explicitly underscored in verse 14. He gives pastors and teachers,
verse 11, and then you have a string of purposes mentioned, and one
of them is these. In order that we may no longer
be children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every
wind of teaching by the slight of men in craftiness after the
wiles of error. But speaking truth in love may
grow up in all things unto him who is the head, even Christ."
So here we are told that true Christian maturation comes in
a way of speaking truth in love, being established in the truth,
so that you as an ordinary believer could pick up Charles Ryrie's
book and have sufficient biblical discernment and Bible knowledge
to see the errors that oft times are passed with an exegetical
and theological sleight of hand. Now I am not saying a thing about
the man's moral character. Make that very plain. I am not
slandering his moral character. I am not in any way imputing
anything evil to the man's motives. But looking at what he has embalmed
in printer's ink in the light of the Word of God, it is a deflection
from the teaching of Holy Scripture. And furthermore, one of the tasks
that God has given to us as elders is clearly defined in Titus chapter
1. It is a twofold task in the handling
of the faithful Word of God Notice Titus 1 in verse 9. The requirement
for anyone who aspires to the eldership is this. He must hold
to the faithful or trustworthy word which is according to the
teaching. We are not originators of truth.
We do not traffic in novelties. We are to be known as trustworthy
men who hold to the teaching, and we must have an ability both
intellectually, morally, and in terms of our ability to communicate
to others. The word must be able involves
all three things. It involves the head, intellectual
grasp, the heart, moral courage, and love, and the mouth. the
ability to set forth these things clearly and notice the two prongs,
that he may be able both to exhort, to encourage, to impel, to motivate
in the realm of sound or healthy teaching and to convict. The word convict means to bring
something to the test and show it to either be guilty or false. It goes beyond merely reproving. It means so to reprove as to
convince the jury of the undefiled conscience of another that what
you are pointing out as error is error. And gainsayer is a
word we don't use, comes from two Greek words, anti-lego. That is, against and speak. We
are to be able to bring those who speak against the truth into
the court of an unbiased, unseared conscience that loves the truth
and send the criminal out with the sentence of guilty over his
head. That's the task of an elder.
to exhort in the healthy teaching and to convict the gainsayer. So it's necessary to address
this issue because of the widespread confusion, current discussion
and debate on this particular issue. But then there's a second
reason and that is because of the crucial nature and critical
importance of this issue. the crucial nature and critical
importance of this issue. You see, the issue is not whether
there is some future in Palestine for the Jewish nation. Now that
has many ramifications. Your view of that will affect
how you understand many passages of the Word of God. But may I
say it reverently, it is not a matter of heaven and hell.
unless you tell Jews you don't need to repent and believe you
just wait and when Messiah comes you'll get a second choice that's
to damn them by a lie but apart from those extreme applications
there are many questions concerning which good and godly Christians
differ and they must continue to wrestle with these issues
so that more and more we come to the unity of the faith but
they are not issues of life and death they're not issues of heaven
and hell But this issue, this issue we're addressing today,
the relationship between saving faith in Christ and the life
of obedience to Christ, this is a matter of life and of death. This is a matter of eternal importance. And the men who have commented
on Dr. MacArthur's book understand this. This is why, for example,
R.C. Sproul says, John MacArthur provides
a much-needed biblical refutation of the false dichotomy between
Savior and Lord that threatens evangelical theology. And as you will see in reading
Ryrie's book, he likewise believes it's a matter of life and death.
He said, if we take the posture that a person who is not fundamentally
yielded to Christ has no grounds to claim he is a child of God,
then we will either end up teaching you can lose your salvation or
we will undercut that man's right to a full assurance he's a Christian.
And I say, hallelujah. It ought to be undercut. No one
has the right to a full, unshaken assurance who is not living a
lifestyle of obedience to Jesus Christ. So it's of crucial importance
as we seek to examine ourselves, 2 Corinthians 13, 5, prove ourselves,
whether we are in the faith, and it's of crucial importance
in communicating the gospel to others. When we communicate the
gospel to others and people say, well, I see my need of Christ
and my need of forgiveness and acceptance with God. However,
I have a problem. And it's very interesting that
in Ryrie's book, he brings up such a problem. He's talking
hypothetically, at least with a particular student on campus. And he says this. Should the
worker on the college campus insist that a collegian who wants
to receive Christ hold off until he or she breaks off an immoral
relationship? Could such a person be saved
at the dorm meeting one evening and yet spend that same night
in the continuing adulterous relationship? Or could he or
she have two or three days to break off the relationship? Or
two weeks or several months? In the meantime, is that person
born again? Rye, we would answer yes. What
would you do? Person says, oh, I want to receive
Christ. But by the way, my girlfriend
and I are living together in the dorm room. Can I just forget
that issue for a while? Rye, we would say yes. You and
I would say, no fornicator shall enter the kingdom of heaven. Break off your fornication of
burning hell. This is a matter of life and
death. This is not a tempest in a theological teapot. So there's the necessity for
addressing the issue. Secondly, I want to help you
to identify the heart of the issue. Now, whenever you come
to matters of discussion and debate, because where there's
heat, there often is little light. The more heat there is, the less
light there is. And when you come into a debated issue, so
often, if the issue is found within this circle, The heat
that comes from strongly felt opinions can often act like sort
of misty clouds, and somewhere in there you see the dim outline
of what the particular issue is. Well, what I want to do is
to try to blow the clouds away and make the issue itself stand
out in bold relief. What precisely are we talking
about when we take up the subject of the relationship between saving
faith in Christ and a life of obedience to Christ. Or, as I
seek to give biblical perspectives on the Lordship controversy,
can we blow the smoke away and identify the real heart issues? Well, it's often helpful when
you're doing this to go negative and then positive. What are we
not dealing with? Then, what are we dealing with? And this is true of any kind
of theological formulation. If you read the old confessions
and creeds, they will say, in asserting something, not this,
not this, not this, but this, but this, but this, but this.
And that's helpful to precise thought. All right? What are
we not dealing with? Well, let me set before you three
things that we're not dealing with. Number one, It is not a
question of whether salvation is all of grace or whether it
is grace plus the merit of human endeavor. It is not a question
of whether salvation is all of grace or grace plus the merit
of human endeavor. Now it's at this point that Dr.
Ryrie greatly errs. Now that's a serious charge to
make, and I'm making it publicly, and it's going out on tape. I
make it responsibly. He says on page 18, and this
is not quoted out of context, but as the conclusion of seeking
to do this very thing, that is, to identify what grace is, and
Dr. Ryrie says this, human works
are like termites in God's structure of grace. We say amen. They start
small, but if unchecked, they can bring down the entire structure.
We say Amen. And what are such works? Anything
I can do to gain any amount of merit, little or much. We say
Amen. Water baptism could be one such
work, if I view it not as an important or even necessary result
of being saved, but as a requisite to be saved. We say Amen. It is a work even if I insist
it is God who gives me the desire to want to be baptized that I
might be saved. The same is true for surrender. If surrender is something I must
do as a part of believing, then it is a work and grace has been
diluted to the extent to which I actually do surrender. So to
make sure that the believing Professed convert does not mix
grace and works. Tell him surrender has nothing
to do with your saving response to Christ. And he asserts that
if we insist to the sinner, you must surrender to the Christ
whom you receive, that the very essence of faith is the whole
heart going out to the whole Christ without reservation. We are letting loose a whole
herd of termites to erode the foundation of salvation by grace. No dear people, no one believes,
I trust more firmly than we do, that salvation is all of grace
from its origin to its consummation. In its origin, it's all of grace,
2 Timothy 1.9, who hath saved us and called us with a holy
calling, not according to our works, but according to his own
purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ before times
eternal. We say our salvation comes out
of the hidden mountains in eternity of God's gracious, free, sovereign
election. And then in its ground, it is
all of grace. Romans 6.23, the wages, that's
commercial language, the wages, sin pays is death. But the free
gift of God, it's in that family of the words of grace. The free
gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ, our Lord. And in
its conferral, it's all of grace. We heard that so beautifully
opened up when Pastor Donnelly was here, Galatians 1 15, when
it pleased God who separated me from my mother's womb and
called me by His grace. And as it has its taproots in
grace, its grounds in grace, its conferral in grace, when
we stand with Christ in glory, then the ancient prophecy will
be fulfilled. They shall bring forth the topstone
thereof, saying grace, grace, grace unto it. So that's not
the issue. of whether or not salvation is
all of grace, or grace plus the merit of our surrender, the grace
plus the resolution of our hearts to follow Christ. That is not
the issue. Furthermore, secondly, it is
not a matter of how much a person must know
of the Lordship of Christ in order to be genuinely converted.
Now we've already covered that. a few weeks ago in our series
on conversion. It is not a question of how much
a person must actually know of the Lordship of Christ at the
point of being converted. Are we saying that unless a person
has heard a very clear sermon on the fact that subsequent to
the resurrection, Jesus has been made Lord in Christ, he has been
eternally Lord in the dignity and glory of the second person
of the Godhead, he is now the messianic Lord upon his throne,
and to embrace Him as Savior is to bow to Him as Savior. Are
we saying that all of those things must be clearly in the head before
a person can truly be saved? Absolutely not. We've established
that from the Scripture, the amount of truth the Spirit of
God may use to save a man is God's business. And you have
the clear example of Apollos in Acts 18. All he knew, cognitively,
was the content of the gospel up to the point of John the Baptist's
death. He did not hear that Christ died
for our sins. He had heard he would be the
Lamb. He was the Lamb. But precisely how the Lamb would
take away the sin of the world. He had not heard of the descent
of the Spirit. But he was a truly converted
man, truly submissive to the Lordship of Christ. And when
Priscilla and Aquila took him aside, showed him the way of
God more perfectly, he showed the disposition of his heart,
not by defending his ignorance, but by welcoming the new truth.
So it's not a question of saying, unless people have heard about
the Lordship of Christ and were pressed clearly and distinctly
in their conversion complex with the necessity of yielding to
Christ as Lord, then we're reckoning all such people to be unsaved.
No, that is not the issue. Thirdly, it is not a question,
hear me carefully now, it is not a question, and Ryrie makes
hay over this issue, it is not a question of whether or not
true Christians may and do manifest practical denials of the Lordship
of Christ. It's not a question of whether
or not true Christians may and do manifest practical denials
of the Lordship of Christ. In a very real sense, every time
I sin, I deny the Lordship of Christ. If I covet, I deny his
Lordship over my heart's affections. If I say an angry word, I deny
his lordship over my tongue. If I fail to do what he's commanded
me to do, in loving my wife as Christ loved the church, putting
her concerns first, I'm denying his lordship over my marital
affections. So it's not a question as to
whether or not true Christians may and actually do deny the
Lordship of Christ in one or another area. This is just another
way of saying true Christians may and do sin. And 1 John 1
8-10 makes that abundantly clear that if anyone denies that, the
truth is not in them. If any man say I have no sin. He's a liar. The truth is not
in him. If we confess our sins, he's faithful and just to forgive
us. We are not saying that a Christian cannot fall into a pattern of
sin and remain for a period of time under the horrible influence
of those sins. The Bible records the backsliding
of David. The Bible records the backsliding
of the Apostle Peter. So full of prejudice was he that
God had to give him a vision, repeated twice? It was repeated
twice. Three times he gave the vision,
but it was repeated twice. Alright? Three times he had the
vision. It was given and repeated twice
to break down his prejudice to get him to go eat with a Gentile
dog and his family. Years later, what happened? Paul
had to rebuke him to his face, because when the Jewish people
came up to where Paul and Barnabas were, Peter drew back from social
intercourse with them, and Paul had to rebuke Peter. He backslid
in an area where God had such clear dealings. Does that mean
Christ was not his Lord? Of course not. But in that particular
area, he was denying, in a practical way, the Lordship of Christ.
So that's not the issue. And it's a shame that someone
who should know better, as Dr. Ryrie really makes a straw man
out of that issue. Well then, what precisely is
the issue? If that is not the issue, that's
the negative, what is the nub of the issue in this whole discussion
of the relationship between saving faith and a life of obedience
to Christ, or in trying to gain accurate perspectives on the
Lordship controversy, what is the heart of the issue? Well,
according to my pressed light, I trust this will help you. I
want to couch it in three questions. Number one, can a sinner truly
embrace Christ as his Savior while consciously, willfully,
refusing to submit to Christ as the ruler and the governor
of his life. Can a sinner truly embrace Christ
as his Savior while consciously, willfully, refusing to submit
to Christ as the ruler and the governor of his life. Can a rebel find pardon for his
rebellion and thereby be ready to go to heaven while still purposing
to pursue the very life of rebellion that makes him deserve hell? Can a sinner stretch out one
hand to take the benefits of the cross of Christ while the
other hand is clenched in a fist of defiance, saying, I will not
bow to the rule, to the crown, and to the scepter of Christ.
That is the issue. That's the issue. By nature,
we all have two clenched fists. Romans 8, 7. Carnal mind is enmity
against God. It is not subject to the law
of God. The language of every native heart finding expression
in both fists is, we will not have this man to reign over us. And the question is this, can
a sinner who gets scared of where that's going to take him, A sinner
who gets concerned that it's leading him to death and destruction
and hears that Christ is born the sins of men, and if people
will trust in Him, they will be forgiven of all of the just
consequences of that life of rebellion. Can the rebel lay
hold of a pardon in Christ with this hand? Well, he's got to
clench this before Christ with this. That's the question. Second
question. Does anyone have biblical grounds
to claim he is a true believer in Christ while he is not consciously
pursuing a life of obedience to God in conformity to Christ? Does anyone have biblical grounds
to claim he is a true believer in Christ while he is not pursuing
a life of obedience to God and conformity to Christ. That's the question. Can I say
Christ is my Savior because I believe in Him, but Christ is not my
Master whose will and purpose I am pursuing from the heart? Or to state the question differently,
now we look at it from God's standpoint, this is the psychology
of the disposition of the sinner's heart in faith and discipleship. But now looking at it from God's
standpoint, here's the nub of the issue. Does God truly regenerate
sinners, giving them the ability to come to Christ in faith for
pardon, while leaving them in a perpetual
disposition of rebellion to Christ as to his government over them.
That's the question. Does God truly regenerate sinners,
giving them the ability to come to Christ in faith for pardon? And the Bible does teach that
faith is the gift of God. And the first motions of regenerating
grace are repentance and faith. The question is this then, does
God change the heart and draw the sinner, John 6, 44, no man
can come to me except the Father which has sent me draw him, and
in the drawing of the Father does he give the sinner the ability
to come to Christ in faith for pardon. while bypassing imparting
to the sinner a disposition gladly to submit to Christ for government
and for rule. That's the nub of the question. In other words, does God make
his beloved Son and all the preciousness of his work upon the cross a
minister of sin? That's the question. And if God
only gave a sinner in his drawing work a disposition to come to
Christ for pardon, without changing his disposition of rebellion
to Christ, Almighty God makes the blood of His Son a minister
of unrighteousness and its blasphemy. Do you see the issue? I can't read you. Do you see the issue? That's
the issue. And don't let any other smoke
cloud... Oh yeah, but what about Lot?
Well, yes, what about... Don't let smoke get in your eyes.
Just ask this question. Do you believe no sinner can
come except the Father draw him? John 6, 44. Yes. Well, when the
Father draws, what is the disposition He imparts? Just the disposition
to reject all works, righteousness, and trust only in Christ for
salvation and pardon, and righteousness and acceptance? Does God do something
with that disposition of the clenched fist and the determination
to be my own boss? What does God do? That's the
question. What does God do? Perhaps the
best way to summarize it is in a way that I found helpful years
ago, and I'm going to have to hasten because the clock is coming
up on the time to quit. To summarize, the heart of the
issue is this. Are the benefits of the cross
of Christ and the implications of the crown of Christ inseparably
joined in the salvation of Christ? That's the issue. Are the benefits
of the cross of Christ and the implications of the crown of
Christ inseparably joined in the salvation of Christ? Or are
they separate? Can we take them as we choose?
Can we have them in installments? That's the issue. Well, in closing
now, having tried to convince you that this is no tempest in
a teapot, it is pastorally and personally necessary to address
the issue, having tried to identify the heart of the issue negatively
and positively, now very quickly so that you'll be aware of these
things, what are the necessarily related issues? Well, the necessarily
related issues are three, and I only have time to give you
the headings. Number one, can a man be a true believer and
not a fundamentally committed disciple? That's a necessarily
related issue, and that will come up in discussion. In certain
circles, you will be told this. It costs you nothing to be a
believer. It will cost you everything to
be a disciple. But very interestingly, what
is the Great Commission? We are to go out and among all
the nations make what? Make disciples. Baptizing them,
then teaching them to observe. The implication being, discipleship
is not an advanced stage of spiritual graduate school, To be a true
disciple is to be a true believer. Now the Bible speaks of false
believers and false disciples. I'm fully aware of that. But
in terms of true believer and committed or true disciple, that's
why I use the adjectives. Can a man be a true believer
and not a true committed disciple? That's a related issue. And how
you answer this question, this larger question of faith in Christ,
and obedience to Christ, so you will answer this question. Second
related issue, is there such a thing as a carnal Christian,
perpetually, fundamentally, unchanged in his moral nature? The whole
concept of the carnal Christian is, carnal is used as a dominant
descriptive adjective. You say of a certain person,
he's a generous Christian. Generosity is his dominant characteristic. He's a joyful Christian. He's
a serious Christian. He's an earnest Christian. You
use the words as a dominant descriptive adjective. Is there such a thing
as a carnal Christian? A true Christian, in whom the
dominant characteristic over the long haul is carnality. That's a very critical question.
Fiery answers? Yes. He said, oh, there'll be
some fruit. Must be some fruit. But the basic answer is there
can be precious little over precious long time and still be a Christian. MacArthur says, no way, Jose.
Both ain't right. And the Bible doesn't teach both.
And then the third related question is this. Can true faith be exercised,
divorced from repentance? Can true faith be exercised divorced
from repentance? And I tell you, it's pathetic.
I reread or read fully for the first time in preparation for
today, Ryrie's chapter on repentance. And I've heard, you've heard
me say that some people teach that repentance is basically
just a change of mind about Christ, where once you didn't look at
him and trust him, now you do. And that's all the repentance
required of in conjunction with the gospel. If you think that's
a straw dummy, listen, page 96 of Ryrie. Upon hearing and realizing
this, conviction overwhelmed the people. This is Acts 2. When
Peter said, repent, repent about what? Change your minds about
Jesus of Nazareth. Whatever you thought about him
before, or whoever you thought he was, change your mind now
and believe that he's God, your Messiah, who died and rose from
the dead. That repentance saves. And then he goes on to say that
repentance has nothing to do primarily with grief and sorrow
for sin except insofar as we're sorry we haven't accepted Christ.
And he goes on in this whole chapter. And so that's a related
issue. And his book proves it. He can't
address it without taking up that issue. So as you try to
think through this issue, dear people, remember it's not an
isolated issue surrounding this issue. that we're addressing,
God willing, throughout the day, is saving faith in Christ, an
exercise of the heart quickened by the spirit that leaves a man
indifferent to the commands of Christ, or does it make him fundamentally
a servant of Christ? The related issues will be, can
a man be a true believer and not a committed disciple? Can
a man be a perpetually carnal Christian? Can there be true
faith without true repentance? Well, that's 1 Corinthians 10,
1 to 5. I would not have you pick that.
God willing, in the next hour, there'll be much more exposition,
application, and I trust, comment upon critical passages, and may
the Lord bless these things to our hearts. Let's pray. Father,
we thank you that amidst confusion, debate, and discussion, we have
your word as a lamp to our feet. Help me as I seek to fulfill
my task as one of the elders in this assembly, that I may
not only teach in the healthy doctrine, but refute effectively
and convincingly the gainsayers, that this people will not be
tossed about by every wind of doctrine, but be rooted and grounded
in the truth as it is in Jesus. Hear our prayer and continue
to bless this day with your presence, we plead in Jesus' name. Amen.