God Loves… Himself

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. What is the source and status of faith? Is it the God-given means whereby the God-given justification is received, or is it a condition of justification which it is left to man to fulfill? Is it a part of God’s gift of salvation, or is it man’s own contribution to salvation? Is our salvation wholly of God, or does it ultimately depend on something that we do for ourselves? (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

This is a vital point in the doctrine of justification by faith alone in the teaching of the Reformers and perhaps especially Luther. The source of faith is vital to the whole issue. It is not just whether a person believes something intellectually or not, it also has to do with the source of the faith. In the paragraph from the Introduction just above, if one follows the paragraph slowly and carefully, it is clear that the broader principle of grace alone and that source of faith are tied together. They cannot be separated. Again, we have very few options in this situation. Faith is either what God gives by grace as a means to receive a free justification, or it is man’s contribution or addition to what God has done. Faith is either what Christ has purchased for His people or it is something that man does to make salvation possible for himself. Faith is that which comes from a regenerate heart that has been washed in regeneration by the Holy Spirit or it is that which a will that is free to some degree from depravity and from grace is able to do on its own. We cannot have it both ways and there is no middle ground because regeneration is either all of grace or it is partially caused by the will of man.

Regeneration is either how God brings life to the soul and as such makes it a believing soul with Christ as its life or it is the result of what God does when the soul comes up with faith on its own. Regeneration produces a believing soul or a ‘free-will’ comes up with faith and that causes God to respond with regeneration. Again, there is no real in between here. Something is the real cause of regeneration and of faith. Either regeneration produces a believing heart or a ‘free-will’ produces something that moves God to regenerate. If God responds to the one that comes up with faith from a ‘free-will,’ then faith is the condition for salvation that man must fulfill. That means that salvation is not totally and completely of grace and grace alone, but instead it would depend on something man is able to do and does for himself.

This backs us up into a corner and forces us to look at the situation with some clarity. We cannot run from this with our fingers in our ears. The Gospel of Christ alone and grace alone forces us to a position that faith itself is the gift of God and so salvation is utterly and wholly of the Lord and His grace. If not, then in some way salvation does depend on something that man does for himself. Ephesians 2:4-9 speaks very clearly to this: “But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.”

Sinners are dead in sins and trespasses and are by nature children of wrath (Eph 2:1-3). There is nothing in them to cause God to raise them from the dead (regeneration) and give them life. He did this because of Himself. When dead sinners are raised to life, it is not because of anything in them that they are raised to life. It is because of the character and purposes of God. It is when dead sinners are raised to life and there is nothing in them to cause this or move God to do it that it can be said “by grace you have been saved.” What does God do this? Is it because the sinner comes up with faith and fulfilled a condition? No, it is that He may show the surpassing riches of His grace in Christ Jesus. How do we know that it was because of grace alone and not because of faith? It is because the text (v. 8) gives us the reason (“for”). Dead sinners are raised to life and will be trophies and receptacles of grace for eternity because it is by grace that they have been saved. The whole of salvation (the broader principle of salvation) is that it is all of grace and nothing but grace. This grace comes through faith, but even that is the gift of God. It is absurd to say that the text is not speaking of faith but of grace when it says “and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God.” Of course grace is not of man and of course grace is a gift and can be from nothing else. The text also goes on to show that both grace and faith are not the result of works in order that no one would boast.

Once again the text is quite black and white though many try to muddy the waters. If faith is not of grace, then faith is a work of the will of man and of the flesh of man. But whatever the text is speaking of (grace or faith or both) it says that it is not the result of works. So faith cannot be of the human will and must be a gift of God. This is necessary to make sense of this text and is necessary for salvation to be by grace alone. If it is of works (or of one work) then grace is no longer grace (Rom 11:6). Those who preach and teach in a way that makes salvation out to be by works or by a work of the human will are not preaching and teaching a Gospel of grace alone. Doing that is to teach a salvation of works and is to fall from grace. Those who teach a so-called gospel of works hiding it under the words “faith alone” and “grace alone” are very deceptive and are very dangerous in terms of the true Gospel. They are worse than those who openly teach a Gospel that is by works.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. What is the source and status of faith? Is it the God-given means whereby the God-given justification is received, or is it a condition of justification which it is left to man to fulfill? Is it a part of God’s gift of salvation, or is it man’s own contribution to salvation? Is our salvation wholly of God, or does it ultimately depend on something that we do for ourselves? (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

Again, we must understand the context that we are dealing with. First, we are looking at what Luther said about those who deny Pelagianism and then teach it with different words. Second, we are looking at the term “justification by faith only” and how it is not just a phrase that as long as a person gives some sort of assent that it is true that person is saved. The Gospel is not just a matter of believing some facts, but it is about the grace of God actually doing something in the soul. Justification by faith alone must of absolute necessity be seen in the broader principle of grace alone. If we do not interpret justification by faith alone in the broader principle of grace alone, we will not understand the truth of the Gospel. Apart from the biblical teaching of grace alone justification by faith alone is really a teaching of a work or works for salvation and is in truth a form of Pelagianism.

The broader principle of grace alone drives us relentlessly to ask the question as to the source and status of faith. Our real answer here, even if our mouths say something different, will show to some degree whether we at least intellectually believe in a Gospel of grace alone or whether we are to some degree Pelagian. The three questions above after the question about our source and status of faith gets at the real issue. What are the possible sources of faith? The possible sources would be the ‘free-will’ of man, God, or a third party in some way. The ramifications are enormous on how we answer this question. If we answer that the source of faith is the ‘free-will’ of man, then we are left with the view that salvation is almost all of grace but its final decision rests upon one act of the human will. But for the human will to be free, it must be free from the ravages and bondage of sin as well as the grace of God. So if we assert that the human will is free, then we must admit that total depravity is not true and that salvation is not wholly of grace. Clearly, and that without question, to assert that faith is from the human ‘free-will’ is to assert Pelagianism in some form.

It may be the case that someone would want to argue, though I am not sure how they could. Romans 11:6 speaks to the issue: “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” The King James Version uses a few more words in verse 6: “And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” This verse of Scripture sets the matter out for us very clearly. Salvation is either by grace apart from works or works apart from grace. There is no mixture and there is no in between. Salvation is all of grace or all of works since the two cannot be mixed. Pelagianism asserts a salvation by works while the historical position of the Reformed asserts is salvation by grace and grace alone. Arminianism tries to be in the middle, but it fails as there is no middle ground. Admittedly Arminianism is closer to the Reformed position in one sense, but in another sense it is in being closer that it is more dangerous. Justification by faith alone is a teaching that when separated from grace alone makes a person a Pelagian to some degree, though when truly rooted in grace and grace alone it is the Gospel. So we can see how modern Arminianism is in many ways simply a more palatable version (at first glance in appearance)  of Pelagianism and yet Luther says it is worse because it is more deceptive. Those who profess to be Reformed need to be careful because their associations and “fellowship” with professing Arminians can be nothing less than to be enemies of the Gospel.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

If it is the case that justification by faith alone is not rightly understood until it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of grace alone, then the more important teaching on justification by faith alone is grace alone. But the statement is made that it “is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle” of grace alone. In other words, justification by faith alone is anchored to the teaching of grace alone and to remove it from that or to misunderstand grace alone is to misunderstand what justification by faith alone really means.

For those who believe the Bible as the Word of God, there are only two positions regarding justification, though there are some variances in the positions. The one position says that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone and so it sees that faith itself is part of the grace that God saves with and is His gift to sinners He saves. The second position thinks of faith as the effect of the ‘free-will’ of man and so it does not think of faith as being by grace and itself the gift of God. The first position is really a form of Pelagianism and the second is the Reformed position. There is no consistent middle ground between Pelagianism and what is consistently Reformed. The problem, however, is that the world is full of inconsistent people on both sides. However, those who are inconsistent on the Pelagian side still have Pelagian principles and are usually thought of as Arminian. Those who claim to be Reformed are still thought of as Reformed, though at their inconsistent points they are actually more Pelagian.

2 Timothy 1:9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.

Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.

The two verses above set out the reality and truth of what saves the sinner and in doing so shows us what justification by faith is anchored in. It is anchored in the purposes, mercy, and grace of God. Sinners have no hope in themselves and any work of their own, but instead there is only one hope and that is that God would have mercy on them and grant them grace. The Timothy passage (from just above) shows that God saves and calls sinners in accordance with His own purpose and grace. When was this granted to the sinner? It was granted in Christ Jesus and that from all eternity. The text says nothing about God saving a person according to his faith or according to a faith that was seen in eternity. A justification by faith alone is based on grace alone and is one where God saves the sinner in accordance with His grace and nothing else but His grace.

The second verse from above also shows that God saves sinners according to His mercy, and He does so by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit. So the salvation of sinner is attributed totally to His mercy and His mercy in this text is seen by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit. In this passage, though it is not explicitly mentioned, we see that faith must come from the regenerating and renewing work of the Holy Spirit. The text clearly says that salvation is not according to our works, and if faith is the work of a ‘free-will’ then salvation is according to at least one work. If faith is not the work of a human ‘free-will,’ then it is the work of the mercy and grace of God who creates faith in the soul that He regenerates and renews.

What we see, then, is that both texts set out that salvation is in accordance with God and not according to a work of faith. Both texts are very clear in their denials in saying that salvation is not according to our works or according to our deeds. For a ‘free-will’ to be free it must be free of both sin and of grace. It is impossible for it to be free from sin and it is impossible for a salvation to be by grace alone and for a sinner to be free of grace at the same time. Any teaching on justification, therefore, that allows for ‘free-will’ is a move toward Pelagianism and away from a Gospel of grace alone and in reality destroys the biblical teaching of justification. Any preaching and teaching of a so-called justification that depends on the ‘free-will’ of man is a different gospel. Any one that claims to be Reformed and yet does not teach a real salvation by sovereign grace alone and will not stand and preach a grace alone that is opposed to ‘free-will,’ has departed from the Gospel of the Reformation. The teaching of justification, even by a professing Reformed person,  that does not set out with clarity that man is totally helpless in sin and that salvation is by sovereign grace is a teaching that has moved from being Reformed and is Pelagian to some degree. That is to disagree with Pelagianism by creed and assert it by what is preached and taught.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

The doctrine of justification by faith alone does not stand out from all the other teachings of the Bible and is not superior to them all. No, it fits with all the other teachings of the Bible and must fit with them. It must also be directly parallel and actually flow out of the teachings of Scripture on the attributes of God. A doctrine must be seen as it comes from Scripture, but also how it flows from a fits with God Himself. It is God alone who saves and so justification by faith alone must be consistent with the character of God.

Romans 3:21-31 and Ephesians 1:1-2:10 are very clear passages of Scripture which set out salvation as the work of God. God is the One who justifies sinners, but He is just and justifier. God is the One who declares sinners righteous, but He does so in a way that declares His righteousness. God is the One who saves sinners by grace alone, and He does so to the praise of the glory of His grace. God is the one who raises dead sinners to life, but He does so to magnify His love and grace for eternity. As one reads the passages listed at the beginning of this paragraph, it is clear that God saves sinners for His own reasons and for His own glory. The causal reason for salvation is God Himself and not what the sinner provides. Faith is part of what God provides by grace and the sinner does not have to look to self in order to work it up. In fact, if the sinner tries to work up faith in order to be saved that is doing nothing less than trying to be saved in a way apart from grace alone.

The Bible is quite clear that the  entirety of what God does He does to manifest His glory and to shine forth the glory of His name. The Gospel is part (large part) of how God manifests His glory and how He takes sinners who are opposed to His glory and live for themselves and makes them lovers of Him and to live for His glory. The Gospel is always according to the glory of God. “According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God” (I Tim 1:11). It is the Gospel of the glory of God. We also see that in II Corinthians 4:4 and 6.

4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 6 For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.

Justification by faith alone must never be yanked from the context of the glory of God. It must not be interpreted apart from the sovereignty of God, but instead in light of the sovereignty of God. It must never be interpreted apart from the grace of God, but instead interpreted in light of the grace of God. It must never be interpreted apart from the satisfaction of the wrath of God, but instead in light of the satisfaction of the wrath of God. It must never be interpreted apart from the self-sufficiency of God, but instead in light of the self-sufficiency of God. The list could go on and on, but this should suffice to make the point. When justification is interpreted outside of the sovereignty of God, the grace of God, the satisfaction of the wrath of God, and the self-sufficiency of God, it will not be a biblical teaching of justification by faith alone. When justification is taught apart from the truth of the sovereignty of God and the sovereign grace of God, it will not be taught according to what Luther and Calvin taught but will by default be a form of Pelagianism. Those who teach a form of Pelagianism in their doctrine of justification by faith alone which may sound Reformed but is not, are dangerous teachers regardless of how nice, gracious, and winsome that they are. While not many would want to admit that, in terms of what Luther would say that might even make them more dangerous. Not only do they condemn Pelagianism and then teach a form of it, they actually believe their Pelagianism is Reformed. But again, if justification is the teaching by which all churches and all people stand or fall, a false teaching of justification is dangerous to all.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

Anyone who preaches justification by faith alone apart from justification by grace alone has missed the point of justification by faith alone. Anyone who preaches justification by faith alone apart from the utter helplessness of man in sin has missed the point of justification by grace alone as well. The doctrine of justification by faith alone does not stand out from all the other teachings of the Bible. Even if one can repeat the words and believe something like that is true that does not mean that the person is saved. This teaching is perverted in our day.

Romans 11:6 is so clear that any work in effect makes grace to be no longer grace. Whatever justification by faith alone means, it must never be thought of as a work or effort of the human will apart from grace. Ephesians 2:8-10 is also so very clear that salvation is by grace alone and faith itself is the gift of God. If salvation is said to be by grace alone through faith alone and yet faith itself is not of grace, then salvation cannot be by grace alone. We can look at Romans 4:4-5 and see this clearly as well. “Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”

If we think of the Gospel of grace alone as contingent on the faith of the sinner which comes from his own will, then we are left with the position of contradicting Romans 4. To the one who works (faith is the work of a free-will) his salvation is not credited as a favor but what is due. That is what those who teach that a faith comes from a free-will must teach in order to be consistent. If faith is the only think lacking to be saved and that faith is the work of a free-will, then salvation is no longer granted or credited by grace alone but as that which is due to the person. On the other hand, the person that does not work and that includes the work of faith, but simply believes in Him who justifies the ungodly apart from any cause or works on their part, that person’s faith is credited as righteousness. Why is that the case? It is because faith is the gift of God and the person is united to Christ who gives the person a perfect righteousness. So it is not the faith in and of itself that is credited as righteousness, but the object of faith (Christ) which a true faith is united to which gives a perfect righteousness by grace alone.

Luther’s great work on The Bondage of the Will is not some philosophical or metaphysical treatise. No, but rather it is a treatment that is at the heart of the Gospel. William Cunningham set it out that the doctrine of the will was where the depravity of man and the Gospel of grace alone met. When people do not teach the doctrine of the bondage of the will to sinners, then sinners do not understand their depravity and they do not understand the Gospel of graced alone either. What this means, then, is that there are many folks who are orthodox in so many ways but they will not set out the utter helplessness and inability of man in sin. It is not the mere mention that man is dead in sin that will get this across, but a clear and forthright teaching of the helplessness of man and his inability that can get it across to sinners of their utter need of grace alone to save them. As long as sinners look to themselves and have any hope in themselves they will not look to Christ alone and grace alone. This means that those who are orthodox and yet are so afraid of being hyper-Calvinists that they will not teach the helplessness of men are not teaching a pure Gospel of grace alone. When that is not taught, they are not teaching the truth of justification by faith alone either. In that case Pelagianism and its children is being taught by those who are orthodox and the Gospel is hidden underneath orthodox creeds by conservative ministers.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

It is vital to understand that Luther was ready to die for the Gospel of justification by faith alone, but only as it was interpreted in the light of sovereign grace and the utter helplessness and inability of sinners in their sin. He did not see these doctrines as just dogmas to give a mental assent to, but as teachings that the souls must come to an inward conviction of. Not only that but the soul that wants salvation must reach the point of losing all hope in self and of anything that came from self. It is not just an agreement with the doctrine of total helplessness and inability, but it is the soul’s inward realization of that and losing all hope in self so that the teaching describes the soul and the reality that the soul has. The soul realizes that it has no ability and no hope in itself and so is utterly helpless in its sin. The only hope that the soul can possibly have, therefore, is in the sovereign grace of God. The soul must come to the point of a deep realization that God can save that soul if He is pleased to do so by His grace of He may not as He pleases.

Luther was crystal clear that the soul must reach a point of humiliation where it looses all hope in itself and its own ‘free-will’ in order for it to be ready to be saved. Until a soul is utterly emptied of all hope in self it will not look to grace alone for salvation. It will look to itself for some merit or some work that it can do which for most theologies today that would include a work of faith. While they may not call the act of faith a work that is precisely what it is. As long as sinners are not taught and driven away from all hope in themselves and all ability to come up with faith themselves, they will look to themselves for a reason or cause to be saved rather than grace alone. It is far easier to teach the words that a sinner is justified by faith alone and then encourage a sinner to make an act of faith or to say a prayer than it is to teach sinners the correct interpretation of justification by faith alone. Perhaps this is one reason why the biblical teaching of justification is largely unknown in America today.

One of the reasons that the correct interpretation of justification by faith alone is so lost in the modern day is because of so many teachers of Pelagianism in Reformed dress. A person can teach justification by faith alone with a fair amount of orthodoxy and yet miss the proper context and thus its proper interpretation. One thing that has happened in our day with the teaching of justification by faith alone is that the focus is on faith rather than grace. It is also true that the doctrine of man’s depravity can be taught apart from what it really means and so it is another danger. It is perfectly orthodox to teach that human beings are sinners and are in bondage to sin, but that is still leaving out some important points. Until sinners are taught and brought to a deep realization of the reality of their utter helplessness and inability in sin they will not see the utter need of grace and the utter need for God to give them faith. It will be just another doctrine that they need to have in their head in order to be consistent.

So the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone has been virtually lost in our day because of a hidden (to the teachers themselves and others) Pelagianism. It is not that a clear and open Pelagianism has come into the external church and has been accepted, but instead it came in the door calling itself Arminianism which has the appearance of more orthodoxy. Because of its appearance of more orthodoxy, it was accepted by many as a form of Christianity. As it went downhill and became more Pelagian, the Reformed people began to accept more deviations in order to be to overly exclusive and to keep their positions of influence in the denominations. So in reality Pelagianism has taken over though it has done so under different names. Reformed teaching is very deadly, even more deadly than open Pelagianism, when it does not interpret justification by faith alone with the background of man’s utter helplessness and inability in sin and in light of the bigger principle of sovereign grace. Until a few begin to see this and fall on their faces in utter helplessness before God, we will continue to be in “the Pelagian Captivity of the Church” in our day.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

While it is easy to think that all who agree to the words “justification by faith alone” are orthodox in their view of justification, this is simply not the case. Not only is it not the case in the modern day, but it would seem that the vast majority of those who hold to the words seem to deny the true meaning of the phrase as set out by the Reformers. Whatever else we do we must never deviate from a justification that is by grace alone. It must be more than just the words alone, but it must be a true Gospel that sets out the sovereign grace of God alone that saves. It is not that God’s grace saves in a vacuum, but it is God saving sinners apart from any merit or work that they have done, will do, or can do. The biblical justification teaches that sinners are saved by what God does and what they do has nothing to do with their justification. The faith that sinners are said to be saved by really means that sinners are saved through faith and that the faith itself is a gift of God rather than an action of the will of the sinner.

The teaching of Scripture as set out by Luther and the Reformers is that sinners are saved by faith in order that it may be by grace (Rom 4:16). So the biblical reason that sinners are declared justified is changed when people change the concept of faith or grace. The Bible sets out to destroy and hope that man may have in himself and his own merits, works, or will. The Bible leaves man utterly helpless in sin and without the slightest hope that man can do anything to save himself or move God to save him. Man is utterly dependent on grace to save him which is to say that man is utterly dependent on God and His sovereign grace to save if He is pleased to do so.

In the modern day sinners are said to be saved if they have faith, or perhaps to be more accurate they are said to be saved if they make a profession of faith or agree that a sinner is saved by faith alone. If faith is the gift of God so that sinners can be saved by grace alone, then assuredly it is to be like the devil to tell people that they are saved by faith alone and interpret that to mean that man can come up with their own faith and that they can do it as they please. Indeed, to tell men that they are saved by works is dangerous, but to tell them (in accordance with the Bible) that they are saved by faith alone and then change the meaning of the Bible as to the nature of faith and its origin is to be even more dangerous. Perhaps it is to be “Pelagians double-dyed.”

Justification by faith alone is a phrase that needs a lot of interpretation because sinners are so prone to look to themselves for some little something in order to save themselves or at least help in salvation. Any teaching of a true teaching of justification by faith alone must always set out the fact that sinners are saved by grace alone. For that teaching to be taught, sinners must be taught that they have no help in themselves and no ability to come up with faith either. In other words, for the truth of justification by faith alone to be taught it must be seen as fitting with justification by grace alone and the truth of the sovereign grace of God must never be given up so that the truth of justification by faith alone can be taught in truth. On the other hand, the other side of grace alone must be taught and that is the utter helplessness and inability of sinners in sin. So justification by faith alone has two necessary truths that go with it in order for it to be interpreted correctly. When a person does not teach the sovereign grace of God and the utter helplessness and inability of sinners, that person is not teaching the true doctrine of justification by faith alone and so has not interpreted it correctly. Whether the person intends to do so or not, that person is fooling others with lying words and false appearances. Oh how the Gospel of grace alone can be distorted and lost with orthodox words.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

To the Reformers, the crucial question was not simply, whether God justifies believers without works of law. It was the broader question, whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin, and whether God is to be thought of as saving them by free, unconditional, invincible grace, not only justifying them for Christ’s sake when they come to faith, but also raising them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith. Here was the crucial issue; whether God is the author, not merely of justification, but also of faith; whether, in the last analysis, Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

According to Packer and Johnson (in their “Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will) it is a crucial issue in Christianity of whether faith is thought to be of self or of God. Without going into all or even many of the issues of faith, a true and living faith can only come from life Himself. A true and living faith cannot come from sinners who are dead in sins and trespasses, but it must come from life. In other words, a dead sinner cannot have a living faith, but instead must be made a living soul that it may be a “faithing” soul. The words of Christ are received by those dead in sin as dead letters, but those with life in their souls receive the words of Christ as life.

There are so many wrong kinds of faith and deceptive things about false faiths that we must be very careful here as well. All people have some kind of faith, and all those who have any sort of belief in God have some form of faith in God. But few of those have true faith because few of those have a faith that came from God. Instead, we have so many who trust in themselves to have faith and so their faith is a fleshly faith and so a fleshly faith has as its real object of faith the flesh. True enough a fleshly faith will use religious words and Christian words, but it is still a faith that came from the flesh and so it can never have in reality a faith that is greater than the flesh. This should show that the origin of faith is vital to a true and living faith.

If God is not the author and sustainer of faith, then the flesh is the author and sustainer of faith. If the “free-will” is the author of faith, then faith comes from a source that is free of grace as well. So we are left once again looking at whether a faith that is free of grace can produce a salvation that is of grace alone. No, it cannot. For a salvation to be by grace alone faith must be by grace alone as well. This is why the issue of whether God is the author of faith or not is indeed crucial and not just something to ignore. To the degree the issue of faith is thought of as unimportant in regards of justification is the degree that justification by grace alone through faith alone is misunderstood or ignored. This issue is so crucial that it is at the very heart of Christianity and the Gospel. The sinner must look to God alone for justification and all that goes with justification and all that is needed to be justified or the sinner must look to himself or a third party for what is lacking. When the sinner does not look to God for faith, the sinner is looking to himself or a third part what something that is essential for salvation and that of necessity means that the sinner is not trusting in Christ alone.

No matter how one slices it or how one plays with words, the sinner is either looking to himself or to God for faith in order to be justified. Even if we ignore this we are teaching people something about faith and its origin. If we do not teach people the origin of faith and their great need to be broken from looking to themselves for faith, they will look to themselves. It is at this point that so many who are Reformed in creed are actually teaching (perhaps by silence) what at the heart of it is Pelagianism. If we teach a justification that is orthodox all the way through except we don’t teach people about the crucial issue of the origin of faith, we are more dangerous than those who teach a false gospel openly. It is that serious. But as Luther says, ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

To the Reformers, the crucial question was not simply, whether God justifies believers without works of law. It was the broader question, whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin, and whether God is to be thought of as saving them by free, unconditional, invincible grace, not only justifying them for Christ’s sake when they come to faith, but also raising them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith. Here was the crucial issue; whether God is the author, not merely of justification, but also of faith; whether, in the last analysis, Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

In the previous BLOG (The Gospel and Enslaved Will 137) the crucial question from the paragraph just above was looked at. The Reformers, then, thought the crucial question went beyond whether God justifies believers without works of the law. They thought that it was crucial to set out that sinners were wholly helpless in their sin and that God saved them by a free and unconditional grace. Even more, they said that it was a crucial part that God raises sinners from the death of sin to bring sinners to faith. Does God justify sinners without works of law? Many in the theological world today would give a resounding yes, but they will not go as far as the Reformers did in what that meant to the Reformers. To the Reformers for or a sinner to be truly justified without works of law meant that the sinner had to be wholly helpless in sin and that God raised the sinner from spiritual death in order to bring the sinner to faith. Does God justify sinners without works of law? If we mean by that what the Reformers meant, then the theological world responds with a resounding silence. But if we cannot agree with what the Reformers meant by God justifying sinners without works of law, then we do not preach the same Gospel that they did.

We can see the issue at stake by what was and is the crucial issue. That is whether God is not only the author of justification but of faith as well. To put it in different words, the crucial issue is whether “Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort” in all or part of it. If God has provided all things necessary for salvation but faith itself, then man is reliant on self and the efforts of self for faith. That means that man does not rely on God for all things and is not wholly helpless in sin. The issue, then, is not just over the words of whether justification is by faith alone, but indeed it goes to the depths of man’s helplessness and the depths of the grace of God in giving faith.

Is this really a crucial issue to the Gospel? If it is crucial to the Gospel as preached by the Reformers, were they wrong about the Gospel or is our modern day wrong? When it is taught that it does not matter where faith comes from or if a person knows whether that is important or not in our day, that runs counter to the Gospel as taught by the Reformers. That is quite counter to what Luther teaches in The Bondage of the Will. Luther did not think that the utter helplessness of man was an unimportant part of teaching, but he thought that his book was at the very heart of the Reformation teaching. He told Erasmus “that you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like—trifles, rather than issues—in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood (though without success); you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and aimed for the vital spot.” The crucial issue to the Gospel has to do with the bondage of man’s will in sin and upon the utter helplessness of man in sin. This was far more crucial to Luther than the teaching on the Papacy, purgatory, and even indulgences. This was the crucial issue of the Gospel because it is necessary for the soul to be saved by a sovereign grace alone. To the degree, then, that these things are not taught in our day is the degree that the crucial issue to the Gospel is missed. This also shows how men can be orthodox in words and yet by leaving this out they are leaving out what is crucial to the Gospel and so they are more dangerous than those who openly teach salvation by works. It is not only wrong to withhold this teaching from souls; it is to be worse than the Pelagians who openly teach that it is wrong. Apart from this crucial issue the Gospel is nothing more than words and faith is nothing more than the work of the soul that is free from grace, and that is true even if the person professes to be Reformed. That is true even if the person teaches justification by faith alone. In fact, apart from teaching the utter helplessness of man and sinners coming to the realization of that about themselves, the orthodox teaching of justification by faith alone is not orthodox and is deceptive. The Gospel is hidden with  orthodox words in our day.

The guardians of ‘free-will’ have exemplified the saying: ‘out of the frying-pan, into the fire.’ In their zeal to disagree with the Pelagians they start denying condign merit, and by the very form of their denial they set it up more firmly! By word and pen they deny it, but really, in their hearts, they establish it, and are worse than the Pelagians upon two counts. In the first place, the Pelagians confess and assert condign merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here, who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ‘If you regard our pretences, we appear as the Pelagians’ bitterest foes; but if you regard the facts and our hearts, we are Pelagians double-dyed.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

To the Reformers, the crucial question was not simply, whether God justifies believers without works of law. It was the broader question, whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin, and whether God is to be thought of as saving them by free, unconditional, invincible grace, not only justifying them for Christ’s sake when they come to faith, but also raising them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith. Here was the crucial issue; whether God is the author, not merely of justification, but also of faith; whether, in the last analysis, Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort. (“Historical and Theological Introduction” to Bondage of the Will)

Notice that in the paragraph above the word “crucial” is used twice. To the Reformers the crucial question was “whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin” and therefore whether God saves them by His “free, unconditional, invincible grace” and raises them from the death of sin in order to bring them to faith. Notice the language of the Packer and Johnson in the Introduction of the book. They set out a contrast that they thought (at least at the time) was a crucial issue. Does God justify sinners “for Christ’s sake when they come to faith” or is it that He raises “them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith”? This paragraph is another paragraph with thoughts of monumental importance in it. In earlier BLOGS this question has been looked at, but not exactly in the same way.

The authors show us how that for the pioneer Reformers the issues of depravity and a free and unconditional (in man) grace are inextricably linked together. It is to the degree that the depravity and helplessness of sinners are set out that the greatness and freeness of grace can be set out. It is only if sinners are entirely helpless in sin can they be entirely saved by grace. In other words, if sinners are not entirely helpless in sin then salvation is not entirely by grace. So to the degree that the entire helplessness of sinners is not set out, it is to that degree that salvation by grace alone cannot be taught. But even more, since this is far more than just an intellectual exercise, to the degree that the sinner is brought to his or her own helplessness is the degree that the sinner can rest in grace alone. To the degree that the sinner does not die to his or her own helplessness, is the degree that the sinner trusts in his or her own ability to help self.

This cannot be emphasized too much. If sinners are not brought to a real sense of their utter inability, they will rely on their ability to some degree. If sinners are not brought to a real and experiential sense of their utter helplessness before God, they will think that they can help themselves in some way even if it is just a little. But as long as sinners think that they can help themselves just a little, that little destroys the teaching of grace alone just as much as a works salvation. In fact, going back to the first paragraph above by Luther, he would say it is worse to teach Arminianism than it is to teach Pelagianism. The Arminian is hiding the essence of the doctrine of Pelagianism behind orthodox words and as such is really teaching Pelagianism in reality. To teach sinners that they can do something is worse than teaching them that they can do it all. It is worse because it is hiding the heart of Pelagianism behind a more orthodox language and that means that it is a more subtle deception.

 The heart of man is born Pelagian and the heart of religious man is still Pelagian unless God renews it and gives it life and sight. The heart of man can be Pelagian be hidden in a Reformed pulpit and underneath a Reformed creed. The heart of a Pelagian will blind itself to its own Pelagianism with its adherence to what is close to the truth and even with the words of truth. But the Pelagian heart with a Reformed theological mind is twice as dangerous as the open Pelagian. That is because it is a heart and mind that has deceived itself and with conviction it will deceive others.