The Case of the Thief on the Cross

In debates I have had with ministers of the "Church of Christ" over whether water baptism is essential to being saved (they affirming that it is and I affirming that it is not), I have, like other apologists, brought up the case of the thief on the cross who was saved by a penitent faith alone without being baptized and without any good works. The rebuttal to this argument has always been to say that the thief on the cross died before the new covenant came into effect and water baptism is a requirement for salvation through the new covenant. They cite the words from the book of Hebrews where the writer says that it is after the death of the testator that a testament is of force. (Heb 9: 16-17) So they argue that since the thief died before the new covenant, he had to be saved by the old covenant. There are, however, several reasons why this rebuttal doesn't "hold water." 

First, Jesus, the "testator" died before the thief. The thieves had their legs broken in order to hasten their death. When the Roman soldier came to Jesus to break his legs, he saw that he was already dead and even pierced his side to confirm it. When blood and water came out of the side as a result, it was proof that he had indeed already died. So, Jesus died before the thief died and so the new testament was in effect at the time when the thief died.

Second, these same ministers will say that when Jesus said to Nicodemus "you must be born of water and of the Spirit" that "born of water" means born by means of water baptism. This was about three years before his death and the official beginning of the new covenant. Why would Christ be telling Nicodemus how to be born again or saved three years into the future? Likewise, when we read that John the Baptist preached "baptism of repentance for remission of sins" (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3) these same ministers will say that this means that baptism in water was the way sins were remitted or forgiven and yet this too was three years before the death of Christ. So, the argument that the thief on the cross did not need to be baptized because he lived and died before the new covenant (testament) came into force is negated by their own admission.

Third, no one prior to the coming of Christ was saved by the law, by the old covenant. That is the teaching of the book of Hebrews. They were saved by the new covenant even before its ratification. That is why the new covenant is called the "everlasting covenant." (Heb. 13: 20)

One "Church of Christ" apologist in response to the case of the thief on the cross wrote: "there is not one single shred of scripture anywhere in all of the Bible which says this thief was not baptized." (See here)

Of course you would expect such a reply from those who say water baptism is essential to salvation. He has to affirm that the man had been saved in the past and had been baptized, then had lost his salvation, and then obtained it again shortly before he died on the cross. But, the prima facie evidence is that the thief had never been saved, never had believed in Christ nor was ever baptized. When the thief was first put on the cross he railed on Christ just as the other thief. Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32 state that both of them reviled Christ. Sometime after this however we see a change in him, we see him experiencing contrition and repenting and expressing faith in the lordship and kingship of Christ. 

The same writer said further:

"During his personal ministry, Jesus possessed the authority to forgive men’s sins personally and directly...While Jesus was alive on earth he had the authority to forgive sins. At the time of his death, however, his authority to forgive sins was transferred to His testamentary “will” (Hebrews 9:15-17). And the terms of that covenant specify baptism as a condition for the forgiveness of sin (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21, etc.). What that means is that While Jesus was alive on earth, He had the authority to forgive sins directly. Jesus is not alive on earth anymore. He has been resurrected and now lives in heaven. What He left behind was His new Testament or new Covenant. This new covenant specifies how sin is to be forgiven. The thief had his sins forgiven before Christ died on the cross. It is not possible today for anyone to be forgiven of their sins by Jesus Christ before He died on the cross. Whether or not the thief was baptized or not really makes no difference to us at all."

I am amazed at this line of argument. Jesus lost his power to forgive sins directly apart from water baptism? Where is that in scripture? The scriptures he references do not say it. He argues that since the new covenant came into effect upon the death of Christ no one can be saved who is not baptized and Christ cannot forgive anyone who is not baptized. Incredible! While he was here on earth baptism was for the remission of sins, was essential for being born again (i.e. "born of water"), but Christ could remit sins and people could be born again without it? It is ironic that these ministers of the "Church of Christ" could argue this way seeing one of their mottos is "we speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where it is silent." Surely the minister we are examining is speaking where the Bible does not speak and is adding to the word of God.

I would hate to be somewhere dying and praying to God to forgive me of my sins, and repenting and believing and confessing, and not able to be baptized! Here is what the apostles taught:

“To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.” (Acts 10: 43 nkjv)

Here faith alone is declared to be the only condition for forgiveness. Of course, true faith always has repentance joined to it and is why we speak of penitent faith. It also shows that Christ still could forgive sin to those who believe after he ascended to heaven.

Justification By Works is Not in God's Sight?

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." (James 2: 21-24 nkjv)

I believe that a sinner is saved and justified when he penitently believes in Christ and the Gospel. I do not think he is lost until he is baptized in water nor that his faith does not save until he has added good works to it. The thief on the cross was saved while dying on the cross beside Christ when he placed his faith in Christ and petitioned Christ by saying "remember me when you come into your kingdom." (Luke 23:42) He did not live long enough to be baptized nor to have any good works. Yet, he was saved and justified by a penitent faith alone. Many likewise have been saved in their dying hours but who did not live long enough to do good works or bear fruit. 

Theologians debate whether James contradicted Paul on the question of how condemned sinners come to be justified. Paul plainly says a man is justified by faith apart from works of law keeping. (Rom. 3: 28; 4: 5) This is a frequent declaration of ministers of the word. For instance, Paul said the following in one of his sermons:

"Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses." (Acts 13: 38-39 nkjv)

Notice that Paul did not say "everyone who believes and is baptized and does good works is justified." If good works were essential for justification, then Paul would have done great harm in telling people that justification was sure to all who simply believe.

With these preliminary comments before us, let us ask how theologians who believe justification is sure to all who believe apart from works of law keeping explain what James means when he says sinners are justified by works and not by faith alone. Does he contradict Paul? On the surface it does seem so. How can both be right? That is the difficulty facing Bible expositors. 

Many theologians who believe that faith alone justifies (based upon the words of Paul as stated in the above texts) will often say that Paul is talking about justification before the eyes of God and the law but James is talking about justification before the eyes of men. The "Primitive Baptists" (who I was once a part of) teach that there are three ways a person is justified. They say justification in the "eyes of God" or "court of his law," occurs apart from faith, either before the world began (or from eternity) or when Christ died on the cross. They then say that justification by faith is what occurs in the "court of conscience" and in their own eyes, being the time when a believer comes to realize his justified condition. They argue that justification by faith is not a necessary condition for eternal justification in the eyes of God. 

Finally, they teach (like other theologians) that justification by works by the believer justifies in the "court of public opinion" or before "the eyes of men." So Dr. R.C. Sproul said in his book "Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification": “Our works ‘justify’ our claim to faith in the eyes of human beholders. Such ‘justification’ or vindication is not necessary for God.” (pg. 199-200)

Other theologians who believe in justification by faith alone will likewise say that the justification by works that James speaks of is a "justification before men," meaning it is by works that we show to others that we are truly what we profess to be, i.e. believers in Christ. Now, I do not doubt that there is some truth in this and is evident from some things James says in the text. Such as:

- "if someone says he has faith but does not have works"

- "Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works

- "Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?"

- "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only"

So, yes, our works of righteousness do prove or demonstrate to others that our faith in Christ is real, not fake, not superficial, not mere mental assent. So, it is true that our works justify us and our faith in the eyes of others, whether they are our neighbors or brothers in the church. But, we must not exclude being justified in God's eyes. We must be careful, when fighting extremes, not to go to extremes ourselves as a result. It is an extreme to say that justification by works of faith excludes justification in the eyes of God. We know that is true from what God says to Abraham when Abraham was in the act of sacrificing his son. The record says:

"And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” (Gen. 22: 12 nkjv)

Notice that God says "now I know," or now I see, that you fear me genuinely and that your faith in me is real. He does not say "now everyone will know" that you are the real thing. Of course, no one else was present except Isaac. So, the only way for others to see and know that Abraham was justified by works is for someone to tell you the story of his test of faith. Gill's commentary says: 

"he knew full well beforehand what would be the consequence of such a trial of him; but this is said after the manner of men, who know things with certainty when they come to pass, and appear plain and evident: or this may be understood of a knowledge of approbation, that the Lord now knew, and approved of the faith, fear, love, and obedience of Abraham, which were so conspicuous in this affair, see Psalm 1:6; Saadiah Gaon (i) interprets it, "I have made known", that is, to others; God by trying Abraham made it manifest to others, to all the world, to all that should hear of or read this account of things, that he was a man that feared God, loved him, believed in him, and obeyed him, of which this instance is a full and convincing proof..."

Of course it is true that God knew beforehand what Abraham would do. So, the words "now I know" must be considered and interpreted in that context. But, it is clear that the justification was in the eyes of God and not merely in the eyes of others. I don't think James intended to convey the idea that the justification of Abraham by works excluded being justified "before God." The above text in Genesis 22: 12 shows this to be true. Further, we must remember that it is not the faith of Abraham that is justified but Abraham himself. The text says "was not our father Abraham justified by works..." 

Further, being justified by faith is before God, before his court, before his eyes and James says being justified by works is likewise a justification before God. You cannot reasonably say that the justification that is by faith is before God and the justification by works if not before God. When James says "you see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only" he shows that he is speaking of the same justification that is also by faith.

So, since we know that God's declaration to Abraham "now I know" does not mean simple knowledge of the fact for God has foreknowledge of all things. So, in what sense did the Lord "know" by Abraham's obedient act that he truly feared and believed God? Gill, in the above commentary, gives several possible ways to answer that question. He says it may be a way God is condescending to speak as if he were a man, speaking anthropomorphically or anthropopathically, "after the manner of men," and is thus not to be taken literally. He also says the words may be "understood of a knowledge of approbation" which I think is quite right, and is the view of John Calvin in his commentary, who said the words "may be understood of a knowledge of approbation." I don't think the view of Gaon, who said that the words "now I know" mean "I have made known to others," is correct. I think the meaning of God's words may be understood to mean --

- now you have finally proven yourself to me, proved to me that your faith or fear was not a pretense

- now I know by your actions and not by your mere words or by my foreknowledge of your actions

- now it is evident to me (evidentiary knowledge)

- now I acknowledge (declare my knowledge)

- now I know officially and declaratively

For instance, a math teacher might say, “Let’s see if we can find the square root of 49,” and then, after demonstrating it, declare, “Now we know that it is 7,” even though he knew from the beginning what the answer was. The Lord knew and foreknew that Job would hold firm to his faith when Satan called Job's faith into question. However, the Lord allowed Satan to put Job to the test. After all the various evils that the Lord suffered Satan to bring upon Job, Job held firm and so the Lord could have said to Satan -- "we now see or know that I was right." 

Wrote one unknown author at Biblehub web site (emphasis mine):

"God speaks as a judge rendering a verdict in real time so that finite creatures grasp the seriousness and public nature of the test. Divine omniscience is thus uncompromised; instead, God communicates in the language of courtroom certification...“Now I know” functions like a royal seal: the servant has been weighed and publicly vindicated. The Hebrew idiom parallels Deuteronomy 8:2, “to humble you and test you so that He would know what was in your heart.” The knowledge is relational-forensic: the sovereign Judge announces the verdict."

"Job 1–2 portrays a heavenly council that observes human fidelity. Genesis 22 shares that motif. The test is not for God to learn facts but for angelic, demonic, and human witnesses to see faith enacted. As Gregory of Nazianzus phrased it, “God knows, but He wants us to know that He knows.” The phrase marks the moment that faith passes from potential to enacted reality." (See here)

Some of those who believe that sinners are justified by faith alone (a Doctrine I also believe) and argue that the justification by works that James talks about is "before the eyes of men and not before the eyes of God" will cite the following words from Paul to sustain that argument: 

"What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” (Rom. 4:1-3 nkjv)

So, how are we to reconcile the above statement with Genesis 22: 12, and other arguments I have presented above, where it is clear that being justified by works (which James speaks about) is indeed "before God." I believe that when Paul speaks of justification by works he is speaking of works done without faith, the kind of works of which the Pharisees and Sadducees boasted about. When these self-righteous people asked the Lord Jesus Christ -- "what shall we do that we might work the works of God" Jesus said -- "this is the work of God that you believe in him whom he has sent." (John 6: 28-29) He said this because he knew that not only is the proposition true that says "faith without works is dead" but so too is the proposition true that says "works without faith are dead." So, not only do we recognize "dead faith" but also "dead works." (Heb. 6:1; 9:14) The same Book of Hebrews author said: 

"But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." (11:6 nkjv)

And, the apostle Paul also said elsewhere: "for whatever is not from faith is sin." (Rom. 14: 23)

The word "justified" may mean "proven to be right." By this meaning we may even speak of God being justified. So Paul uses the word in this sense when he writes the following, citing the words of David in Psalm 51:4:

"Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written: “That You may be justified in Your words, And may overcome when You are judged.” (Rom. 3:4 nkjv)

We also see where God is justified in his words in this text:

"And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John." (Luke 7: 29 kjv)

I contend that Abraham was justified in his words expressing faith in God, i.e. his confession was shown to be right, and thus he was justified. In this sense every good work done out of true faith justifies us in our words of allegiance to the Lord. Good works done in faith are the results of having been created in Christ Jesus. (Eph. 2: 10) Where there is genuine faith, there will generally be good works to follow. There are exceptions to this however as I have shown in the case of the thief on the cross or in the case of all genuine deathbed repentance. There is simply no time left on earth for good works to follow.

Dr. John Piper on "Partial Regeneration"

 

We must ask the same thing of Dr. John Piper, Dr. James White, etc., i.e. where does the Bible teach a partial regeneration, one that excludes evangelical faith and repentance, or conversion? I wrote an article on this statement by Piper (here). Piper says a person is regenerated or born again before he "believes" in Christ, before he "comes" to Christ, before he "receives Christ," before he "repents" and "turns to God," before he is converted from false religion and false gods, yea, even before he is convicted of sin. Is he not the one then who believes in a partial regeneration? A regeneration that does not include conversion is no regeneration at all. Where in the Bible are men said to be born again before or apart from being converted?

Not only is Piper the one who believes in a very restricted or partial regeneration, but he believes a person is regenerated before he is justified or forgiven of sins! Imagine that! He says justification comes after faith but regeneration occurs before faith and thus we have regenerated people who are still condemned. Not only that, but unconverted people are still in their sins. What saith the scriptures?

"Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord." (Acts 3:19 nkjv)

So, if a person was regenerated before he repented or was converted, then he was regenerated yet while unforgiven. 

Piper believes that sinners are justified by faith, and in that he is correct. But, when he says people are regenerated before faith he has an odd character, one who is regenerated but not justified. Now, who is it that really believes in a partial regeneration?

Prevenient Grace (17)

I begin this chapter with the following words from one of the leaders of the newly formed "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist church (1830s), a Hyper Calvinist denomination, with few exceptions. I do this because many brethren of that sect read this blog and I want them to know that some of their founding fathers did not deny prevenient grace or preparatory works of God that come before a sinner is born again. One such person was Elder (Dr.) John M. Watson, author of "The Old Baptist Test" (1858 first edition). In that book he wrote (emphasis mine):

"Means admit of a similar exposition. The Lord has gone out before us also in them. He not only gave us His Gospel, but ordained means by which it would become savingly efficacious to all His chosen. Isa. 55: 11...So we may say of Gospel means, without the power of God they never prevail over the hearts of sinners; but means in His power, whether great or small, in our estimation, are always efficacious. He derives no strength or advantage from them as adjuncts to His work. He employs them because it is His will to do so. Eph. 1: 11." (page 357)

At the time Watson wrote these words he was fighting the Two Seed Baptists who were part of the anti-mission movement and who also called themselves "Primitive" or "Old School" or "Hardshell" Baptists. One of the errors that those Two Seeders taught was that God did not use the "means" of his word or of preaching the gospel to save sinners. That was not the original view of Baptists nor of the majority of the "Primitive Baptists" in their beginning. However, as time went on, the "no means" view became more and more popular.

Notice that Watson, in the above citation, said that "the Lord has gone out before us"? What did he mean by that? He meant that the Lord by his prevenient grace prepared sinners for the reception of the gospel. Or, to use a biblical expression, "to make ready a people prepared for the Lord," which is what John the Baptist did by his preaching. (Luke 1: 17) This going out of the Lord before conversion is an allusion to what God does in his providence in preparing sinners for salvation. Not only that, but Elder Watson also rightly recognized that the means themselves, such as the word of God or gospel, were instances of prevenient grace, as the Puritans taught, for the means of salvation precede salvation. If a sinner hears the word of God before he is saved by it, then that is an example of prevenient grace. That is what the apostle Paul meant when he said: "for the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us..." (Titus 2:11) By "the grace of God" Paul means the gospel. So John Gill in his famous commentary wrote (emphasis mine):

"by the grace of God is intended the doctrine of grace, the Gospel of the grace of God; called so, because it is a declaration of the grace of God, and of salvation by it: and is the means, in the hand of the Spirit, of conveying grace to the heart, and implanting it in it..."

To deny that there is any grace given before salvation, as do some Calvinists, especially the Hyper Calvinists and those who say regeneration precedes faith, is to deny that the word of God is a means of grace in saving sinners, which a lot of Hyper Calvinists do, such as the Hardshells and Paedo Baptists, such as theologian W.G.T. Shedd (1820-1894). In this post (here) I cited from his Dogmatic Theology, chapter 38 on "Regeneration" (available to read here), where he wrote:

"Seventh, regeneration is not effected by the use of means, in the strict signification of the term means. The Holy Spirit employs means in conviction, in conversion, and in sanctification, but not in regeneration." 

Watson wrote further, commenting upon Judges 4: 14, from which he obtained his belief about the Lord going out before the preacher. That text says -- "Is not the Lord gone out before thee? Judges iv, 14." Watson then says (emphasis mine):

"During twenty years Jabin mightily oppressed the children of Israel, and in their distress they cried unto the Lord, whom in their prosperity they had forgotten. Adversities awakened in them a sense of their dependence on God, and brought out from their hearts a strong cry unto Him for deliverance from the oppression of their enemies." (page 343)

Notice that God used "adversities" as means to "awaken" the people to their dependence on God and bring them to "cry unto him for deliverance." The old Puritans and Calvinists, and many Arminians too, taught that sinners being "awakened" to their lost and condemned condition and the danger their souls were in, their coming under "conviction of sin," their seeing that they were sick and in need of a physician such as Christ, preceded being healed or saved or regenerated by Christ. I wrote a series on this subject of "awakening." This third article (here) in the series gives you links to the others. It also gives links to the chapters I wrote on "Conviction of Sin" in my long series "The Hardshell Baptist Cult." 

Those Calvinists who deny any kind of prevenient grace are forced to push the experience of regeneration as far back as possible in God's dealings with a sinner. Thus, conviction of sin and awakening are seen as evidences of regeneration rather than steps to it. Thus they say the drawing and teaching of the Father is regeneration, rather than steps leading to it, and thus also must say that the "coming" to Christ that follows that drawing is not regeneration. However, it is clear that regeneration does not occur until a sinner has come to Christ and received him in believing in him. 

In the third article in that sub-series on "conviction of sin" I cited from Elder Wilson Thompson and his book "Simple Truth" (1821). Thompson is regarded by the Hardshell Baptists as one of their foremost leaders at the time of their formation, and yet he also taught preparatory acts of God that occur before salvation. I cited these words of Thompson:

"We shall now proceed to show what men may experience and not be under the work of the spirit of grace. He may feel all that weight of guilt which the law of God charges upon him; and yet not be a subject of the spirits operation, for the law is the ministration of condemnation and death."

He wrote further:

"When the law was given, the people of Israel were awfully alarmed, with the terrific sight, the mountain covered with fire and smoke, the shafts of death flying, so that if so much as a beast touched the mountain it was stoned, or thrust through with a dart, and the people were sore afraid, yet not under the work of the spirit, for they could unite in making a golden calf to worship. Men may experience very severe and bitter sensations under the sentence of the law, and mourn with aching and heavy hearts, under the ministration of condemnation and death, and all be like the mourning of the murderer that is condemned to be hanged for his crime; he mourns for the miseries that he is exposed to, and not for the heinous nature of his crime; this sort of mourning has self-love for its parent, the thundering of the law has affrighted it; the fears of hell terrify it; and the thoughts of death and judgment fill it with dismay; so when Paul reasoned of righteousness, temperance and judgment, Felix trembled. This sort of conviction leads men to act like Esau, who has sold his birth right; but when he saw that he was cut off thereby, he sought for a place of repentance in Isaac, but found none though he sought it carefully with tears; so men under this kind of conviction set about to seek for some place of repentance in God, by which the law of condemnation may be repealed, and its sentence revoked, and if they can imagine that they have prevailed on God to love them, and revoke the sentence of the law, upon conditions of what they have done, and what they now promise faithfully to do, they may conclude that they are christians, and upon their faithfully performing those conditions, all will be well with them; and thus they may have as much zeal for God as Israel had and no more according to knowledge than was theirs; in a word, if the fears of hell bears the greatest weight on the mind, we do not believe it to be the work of the spirit, or if our comforts are conditional, and depend on any thing done by us, or any of our faithful performances in future life, we do not believe it to be the work of the spirit; neither have we any right to believe, any thing to be the work of the spirit, but that which teacheth in the truth, and as we cannot pretend to show all the impressions that men may pass through, and not be under the work of the spirit; we shall in the third place proceed to speak of the impressions of those who are under the work of the spirit positively." (Simple Truth: Chapter 6)

As I have shown in previous chapters, if conviction of sin precedes regeneration, and is a preparation or step for it, then it is a case of prevenient grace. Jesus taught that people must first realize that they are sick and in need of a physician, or a condemned sinner in need of salvation, before they will avail themselves of the remedy which is Christ. That is what he meant when he said -- "they that are whole need not a physician but they who are sick." (Matt. 9:12; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31) It is also what he meant when he again spoke of the self-righteous Pharisees who thought not only that they were not spiritually sick but that they were such as "need no repentance." (Luke 15: 7) 

Thompson admits that people who are never saved, and thus never were of the elect, do come under conviction of sin, do come to realize that they are lost and justly condemned, and yet who never come to repentance nor come to Christ by faith and receive his salvation. So, the question is, was this conviction of sin an instance of the grace and mercy of God, even though it did not bring them to salvation?

Watson wrote further:

"Means admit of a similar exposition. The Lord has gone out; before us also in them. He not only gave us His Gospel, but ordained means by which it would become savingly efficacious to all His chosen. Isa. 55, 11. No sinner, so to speak, can even travel along here, only as the Lord goes before him." (page 357)

That is correct. The Gospel must be reported to a sinner before he can be saved. Further, providing such means of salvation is an act of grace, and a grace that precedes salvation, and so prevenient grace in this sense is scriptural. As I have stated in preceding chapters, I do not think the Arminian or Wesleyan or Catholic idea of prevenient grace is right for this reason: they think preceding grace enables a sinner to believe that gospel because it liberates the depraved sinner from the bondage of sin enough to free his will. Those Calvinists who say that regeneration precedes faith are operating from the same difficulty. Both think that a sinner must be given ability to believe before he can believe. The Arminian view says this ability is given before regeneration via prevenient grace via the gospel, the Hyper Calvinist says it is regeneration that gives the ability to believe and therefore occurs prior to faith.

John Owen, the great Calvinist theologian of the Puritan era, in his work titled "The Nature, Causes and Means of Regeneration" (available to read here), rejected the idea that power to believe must first be given before a sinner can believe. He said (emphasis mine):

"The Scripture says not that God gives us ability or power to believe only,—namely, such a power as we may make use of if we will, or do otherwise; but faith, repentance, and conversion themselves are said to be the work and effect of God. Indeed, there is nothing mentioned in the Scriptures concerning the communicating of power, remote or next unto the mind of man, to enable him to believe antecedently unto actual believing. A “remote power,” if it may be so called, in the capacities of the faculties of the soul, the reason of the mind, and liberty of the will, we have given an account concerning; but for that which some call a “next power,” or an ability to believe in order of nature antecedent unto believing itself, wrought in us by the grace of God, the Scripture is silent." 

I cited this in chapter eight of this series. How will theologians answer this question: "does a sinner believe in Christ and repent of sins because he has the ability to do so previously given to him?" The Arminian says yes, some saying sinners have this ability naturally, others, such as the classical Arminians such as John Wesley, say this ability is given to those who hear the gospel and experience some operations of the Spirit. Calvinists and Hyper Calvinists who teach the "born again or regenerated before faith" view likewise say that ability to believe and repent is given before believing and repenting. Both are wrong, as Owen and other Calvinists have stated. 

The power to believe and repent comes from without the sinner, not from within, coming from God himself, and is exerted when the Spirit and the word are in operation upon a sinner. So Paul says that the Thessalonians believed when the gospel came unto them in power and in demonstration of the Spirit. (I Thess. 1: 5) He also told the Ephesian believers that they were made believers by the working of God's mighty power. (Eph. 1: 19) 

In my series on Awakened Sinners I cited from Thomas Boston and his famous work "Human Nature In Its Fourfold State" where he said the following on "Regeneration" (which you can read here):

"Some have sharp convictions for a while: but these go off, and they become as careless about their salvation, and as profane as ever, and usually worse than ever; "their last state is worse than their first," Matt. 12:45. They get awakening grace—but not converting grace; and that goes off by degrees, as the light of the declining day, until it issues in midnight darkness."

He also wrote:

"There may be a wonderful moving of the affections in souls that are not at all touched with regenerating grace. When there is no grace, there may, notwithstanding, be a flood of tears, as in Esau, who "found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears," Heb. 12:17. There may be great flashes of joy; as in the hearers of the word, represented in the parable of the stony ground, who "with joy receive it," Matt. 13:20. There may be also great desires after good things, and great delight in them too; as in those hypocrites described in Isa. 58:2, "Yet they seek me daily, and delight to know my ways – they take delight in approaching to God."

"Awakening Grace" is prevenient or preceding grace; And, not all who are awakened or convicted of sin come to be saved. Thomas Boston was a Calvinist and yet he seems to have affirmed that regeneration precedes faith. I find that bewildering since he clearly put conviction of sin before regeneration and believed that many are convicted and obtain awakening grace but who are never regenerated. 

Elder J.R. Respass (1831-1895), a leader of the "Primitive Baptists" and editor of the periodical "The Gospel Messenger" (which was later edited and owned by Elder Sylvester Hassell), wrote the following about the parable of the sower and seed or of the four soils:

"Brother B.B. Stallings, of Humbolt, Tenn., writes us that some people in his section use this parable to teach the doctrine of "falling from grace;" but to our mind it teaches the opposite doctrine, or rather the absolute necessity of grace in the salvation of sinners. The Jews were well acquainted with sowing wheat and barley. They knew from experience that it was necessary to have the ground broken by the plowshare to raise it; and that, therefore, the Saviour was telling the truth when he taught them that grain sown by the way or road-side would be unfruitful, because men would walk on and tread it down, and the fowls would devour it; and that seed sown on stony, hard and unbroken land would yield nothing; because, though it sprang up quickly, it could take no root, and that when the hot sun necessary to its maturity should shine upon it, that it would be scorched, and soon wither away. They knew, also, that seed sown among thorns, in a briar patch, for instance, would make nothing, because the thorns would choke it. All these things they knew from natural experience as farmers or husbandmen. They knew that the land must be enclosed or fenced, cleared of thorns, bushes and briars, and be broken up before the seed was sown; enclosed from the fowls and the tread of men; cleared of thorns and briars that would choke it; and broken up so as to absorb and retain moisture, and the roots have depth of earth to strike down into the moisture when the hot sun poured down upon it. But, like people now, they did not perceive the truth when applied spiritually. No sensible Jewish farmer would have undertaken to make a crop of wheat otherwise than as taught by the Saviour in this parable. Nor would he have undertaken to break his land until the first or "former rain" was sent by the Lord upon it; because the land, especially in that country, by the dry, hot summer sun grew, like the sinner's heart, very hard, so that it could not be broken until softened by the first rain. But land softened by the rain, broken by the plow, enclosed from the fowls and cleared of thorns, and sown, will be unharmed by the fowls, the feet of men, the cares of the world or the heat of the sun, and will yield thirty, sixty and one hundred fold. Any thing short of this thorough preparation will be fruitless. So in the way-side, stony and thorny ground hearers the Saviour shows the lack of grace, rather than the falling from it. And another thing perhaps he taught, and that is, that the fault was not in the seed sown, or the word preached, but in the sinner's heart. "Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life."--John v. There were many of these kind or hearers in the Saviour's day as well as in this; and doubtless the Saviour spoke the parable for the comfort of his people then and his people now; that they should not be discouraged when they should see many, who had received the word with a temporary joy, turn back for love of the world, its honors or riches, or to escape persecution; that they should know that such professors had not received the word in a contrite and broken heart, and hence they neither understood it nor kept it. He asked his true disciples when many so-called disciples went back and walked no more with him on account of his hard and unpopular doctrine, "Will ye also go away?" but they answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life."--John vi. Thus the hot sun of trials and persecution that withered up the shallow letter hearers, only caused his good-ground hearers to take deeper root in Christ, making them feel more and more the necessity of Christ in their salvation; and thus they brought forth an hundred fold, whilst the others brought nothing to perfection. This briefly, Brother Stallings, is our understanding of Christ's teaching in the parable of the sower." (Written by John R. Respess in the GOSPEL MESSENGER, May 1885)

Notice the words "thorough preparation." He also sees the breaking of the soil to be the work of the law and which must precede the receiving of the seed before it can produce fruit. He does say that this law work, this conviction of sin, shows a lack of grace, but I assume he means a lack of saving grace, not a lack of common or prevenient grace. "Preparation" of the soil to receive the seed of the word must be seen as an instance of grace. He speaks of things that must be done to the soil "before the seed was sown" and these things must be good or bad. If good, if a means to a reception of the word and salvation, then an instance of preceding grace.

In the next chapter we will give a more thorough look at what the Puritan Calvinists had to say about divine preparations that precede actual salvation and are instances of common or prevenient grace.

Thank You Lord for Pruning & Chastening (4) Trials

"The refining pot is for silver and the furnace for gold, 

But the Lord tests the hearts" 

(Proverbs 17: 3

In this fourth and concluding article of this short series we will look at how God-sent trials are likewise things we, as children of God, ought to thank him for. That also is something that I am certain is not generally what most Christians thank God for. Of course, we must distinguish between trials that God brings about and trials we bring upon ourselves as a result of our sins and lack of wisdom. Even trials that come from Satan or the evil world, however, are suffered by God for the trying and improving of the faith and holiness of his people. We see that truth in the story of the prophet Job. With these introductory comments let us begin by giving attention to what James the Lord's brother wrote on the subject. Said he:

"My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing." (James 1: 2-4 nkjv)

For "trials" the KJV has "temptations." All temptations to sin are trials but not all trials are temptations to sin. So, why did James exhort Christians to be happy when they experience trials of various kinds? Do not Christians pray to the Father -- "lead us not into temptation"? (Matt. 6:13) If trials and temptations are things to be thankful for, why not rather pray -- "Father, lead us into trials and temptations"? 

Surely it is because God in his providence makes the trials of his people to bring forth good in them. That is certainly what Paul intended to say when he wrote -- "and we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to his purpose." (Rom. 8:28 nkjv) Though this is true, yet it oftentimes is hard to believe when a believer is under great stress or afflictions, for he cannot see what possible good will come from them. This is very trying. It was for Job in his great sufferings and trials. But, though he could not perceive the reason God was bringing many evils upon him, yet he refused to "charge God foolishly" (Job 1:22), saying "though he slay me, yet will I trust him." (Job 13:15) He also believed that his trials were intended to purify him and make him more holy. He said: "But he knoweth the way that I take: when he hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold." (Job 23:10 kjv) 

This makes me think of the old Christian hymn "God Moves In A Mysterious Way" and these stanzas:

Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take;
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings on your head.

Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust Him for His grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.

His purposes will ripen fast,
Unfolding every hour;
The bud may have a bitter taste,
But sweet will be the flower.

Blind unbelief is sure to err
And scan His work in vain;
God is His own interpreter,
And He will make it plain.

So, though we may not know why God is causing or permitting our trials and afflictions, yet we "lean not upon our own understanding" but "trust the Lord." (Prov. 3:5) In his own time he will make known the why and the wherefore of all our sufferings, "will make it plain," or as another song says, "We will understand it better bye and bye." That was the case with Abraham when he was tried and tested, when LORD God told him to take his only begotten son to the mountain and offer him up for a burnt sacrifice.

Sufferings For Christ

Both James and Peter speak of "various trials" and not strictly about trials that come from persecution of Christians. However, if there was ever a reason to rejoice from a sore trial or affliction, it is those trials that come from being persecuted for the Christian faith. Further, Christians should not be surprised when such persecution comes, for as Paul said "all who live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution" (II Tim. 3:12). Peter also agrees, writing as follows:

"Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you; but rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ’s sufferings, that when His glory is revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy. If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you." (I Peter 4:12-14a nkjv)

Peter gives additional reasons why Christians are to rejoice and be thankful for their trials and sufferings. He says they show that they are partakers of Christ's sufferings, and like Christ, will experience glory and exceeding joy and gladness, divine blessedness, as reward for enduring such trials. They will experience having "the Spirit of glory and of God resting upon" them. Earlier in his letter he also mentioned another great benefit that comes from God's sanctification of his people's trials, writing as follows:

"In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ." (I Peter 1:6-7 nkjv) 

Here Peter sees trials, whatever kind they are, as being crucibles, means of refining or purifying believers. In purifying metals foreign inferior elements in the metals are separated from the metals, like separating wheat from tares. As we cited from Job earlier, Job said "when he hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold." His trials were a refining or purifying of him.

There are in the history of the Christian church many examples of martyrs who rejoiced when they were being tortured or put to death in the most gruesome manners. How could they do this? Is it not because they knew that they would be immensely rewarded for it by Christ? So we read:

"And they agreed with him, and when they had called for the apostles and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name." Acts 5: 40-41 nkjv)

Notice the persecuted one's state of mind when being threatened and violently attacked. They rejoiced! Why? Because they "were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name." This is what Jesus said they should do. Notice it:

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Matt. 5: 10-12 nkjv)

Nearly all of the first Christians suffered severe persecutions and martyrdoms. Notice what Paul said to the Jewish Christians:

"But recall the former days in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great struggle with sufferings: partly while you were made a spectacle both by reproaches and tribulations, and partly while you became companions of those who were so treated; for you had compassion on me in my chains, and joyfully accepted the plundering of your goods, knowing that you have a better and an enduring possession for yourselves in heaven." (Heb. 10: 32-34 nkjv)

And Paul wrote of his own trials and persecutions in this manner:

"We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised. Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwellingplace; And labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it: Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day." (I Cor. 4: 10-13 kjv)

How did the apostle respond to these evils? Did he whine and complain? Did he curse God, as Job's wife asked him to do? Did he not rather do as James said and counted it all joy to experience his trials? Did he not say himself -- "we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope" (Rom. 5:3-4 nkjv)? In his second letter to the Corinthians he said:

"Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.  Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong." (II Cor. 12: )

We should as Christians imitate or think like Paul and see our trials, infirmities, persecutions, distresses, etc., as being opportunities to make known the power of Christ to others and to make us stronger soldiers for Christ, veterans in the army of the Lord. We should remember that our trials are ordained by God for our good, for our growth and maturity, to make us more like himself, well trained soldiers of Christ. So Paul wrote:

"...no one should be shaken by these afflictions; for you yourselves know that we are appointed to this. For, in fact, we told you before when we were with you that we would suffer tribulation, just as it happened, and you know." (I Thess. 3: 3-4 nkjv)

The Good That Comes From Trials

We have already seen where James said that Christians should esteem it the highest joy to experience trials of all kinds, not restricting his exhortation to trials resulting from persecution of Christians. We also saw where he gave the reason for rejoicing in trials, which was because it produced a highly valuable good, i.e patience or perseverance, refinement in holiness, and developing good character. Paul also added that trials teach a Christian to rely more on Christ and less on self or others. This makes me think of another well-known Christian song titled "Learning To Lean on Jesus" which is what we learn as Christians through our trials. We learn how dependent we are on the Lord, how poor and needy we are in ourselves. God sanctifies the "school of hard knocks" to teach his people valuable lessons and to bring them to spiritual maturity. To be "good soldiers of Jesus Christ" they must learn how to "endure hardness." (II Tim. 2:3) Boot camp is difficult.

So, every Christian should say as David, and definitely will say when they have finished their pilgrimage, "It is good for me that I have been afflicted, That I may learn Your statutes." (Psa. 119:71 nkjv)

The Confidence Needed To Endure

"No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it." (I Cor. 10: 13 nkjv)

"Then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials" (II Peter 2:9).

"When he hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold."

Keeping these things in mind and trusting these words will fortify the faith of every believer and give him strength to endure every trial and even to rejoice in them. This is due in part because "the joy of the Lord" is their "strength." (Neh. 8:10) Notice how Paul looked at his sufferings, which is an example for us.

"For we do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, of our trouble which came to us in Asia: that we were burdened beyond measure, above strength, so that we despaired even of life. Yes, we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves but in God who raises the dead, who delivered us from so great a death, and does deliver us; in whom we trust that He will still deliver us." (II Cor. 1:8-10 nkjv) 

This is the kind of trust that Abraham had when he was told to sacrifice his only begotten son to the Lord. He trusted in the Lord even when he did not understand why God would command such a thing. God was testing Abraham. (See Genesis chapter twenty two) Abraham believed that God would resurrect Isaac once he had been slain, because he knew that God had said that Isaac was the promised child and that of him would come a great chosen nation.