The Gospel - The Means of Grace

Chapters in The Means of Grace Series

Chapter One - Aroma of Life unto Life
(II Cor. 2: 14-16)
Chapter Two - The Life Giving Spirit (Gospel)
(II Cor. 3: 6)
Chapter Three - Begotten Through Gospel Truth
(James 1: 18-22)
Chapter Four - Born Again By The Gospel Word
(I Peter 1: 23-25)
Chapter Five - Begotten By The Gospel
(I Cor. 4: 15)
Chapter Six - Saved By Gospel Dynamite
(Rom. 1: 16)
Chapter Seven - Saved By Gospel Faith
(Rom. 10: 13-17)
Chapter Eight - Unbelievers Doomed
(II Thess. 1: 8)
Chapter Nine - Forgiven By Faith
(Rom. 4: 7)
Chapter Ten - Quickened By The Gospel
(Psa. 119: 50)
Chapter Eleven - Calley By The Gospel
(II Thess. 2: 14)
Chapter Twelve - The Saved Love God
(Rom. 8: 28)
Chapter Thirteen - The Spirit Via The Gospel
(Rom. 8: 9-15)
Chapter Fourteen - Becoming A Child Of God
(Rom. 9: 8)
Chapter Fifteen - A Description Of The Saved
(Heb. 6: 4-6)
Chapter Sixteen - Inheriting God's Promise
(Heb. 6: 17)
Chapter Seventeen - Cleansing The Conscience & Application Of The Blood
(Rom. 5: 11)
Chapter Eighteen - Chosen To Gospel Enlightenment
(Rom. 11: 7)
Chapter Nineteen - Saved From Hell By Faith
(Luke 16: 27-30)
Chapter Twenty - Choosing Christ As Husband
(Eph. 5: 22-27)
Chapter Twenty-one - The Lost Found Through The Gospel
(II Cor. 4: 3, 4)
Chapter Twenty-two - Obtaining The Kingdom By Faith
(Mark 10: 15)
Chapter Twenty-three - Saved By The Gospel Preacher
(Acts 26: 15-18)
Chapter Twenty-four - The Fear Of God & Salvation
(Rom. 3: 18)
Chapter Twenty-five - Believe To Life
(John 20: 31)

 

The Gospel - The Means of Life XXV

Believing Unto Christ and Life

This chapter will represent the conclusion of our series on the gospel as the divine means of grace. I have given twenty four clear biblical arguments that show 1) that the preaching of the gospel is the divinely appointed means of saving sinners, and 2) that the experience of regeneration cannot be divorced from conversion, or from coming to faith and repentance, and 3) that the experience of regeneration is not a non-cognitive, or sub-conscious experience, as the Hyper Calvinists affirm, whether they be Hardshells or "Reformed" Baptists and Paedo-Baptists. I have several chapters in my book on the "Hardshell Baptist Cult" wherein I present the bible proof for regeneration being accomplished through the means of the gospel and by faith in Christ. These twenty four chapters are an enlargement. In fact, I may add some of these present chapter postings, of this series, to my book.

When I left off writing in the "Hardshell Baptist Cult" book, I had already presented the biblical evidence against hardshellism, and for means in salvation, and was nearing completion of rebutting the scriptures and arguments that the Hardshells offer in affirmation of their views on "regeneration." It is my intention to finish that rebuttal section, and move on to other issues, such as the Hardshell teaching regarding perseverance, predestination, the Great Commission, Sunday Schools, ministerial education, etc. I also plan to write extensively about the historical claims of the Hardshells, examining their leading "historians" relative to their history and origins.

In my debates with the advocates of Campbellism (aka "Church of Christ" or "Christ Church") I have had to explain what being "baptized eis (into, unto, for) Christ." (Rom. 6: 3, 4: Gal. 3: 27) I have pointed out that everything a believer does is "eis Christ," or "unto the Lord."

"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to (eis) the glory of God." (I Cor. 10: 31)

"And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men." (Colossians 3:23)

Therefore, it is is easy to see how being baptized in water, in obedience to Christ, is "eis Christ."

Water baptism is a picture (or "likeness") of that mystical experience of the soul when it is regenerated, renewed, or begotten. The soul is "plunged into Christ," submerged in his cleansing blood, overwhelmed with the Spirit and with the light of the gospel. Thus, the "baptism" that saves is that mystical baptism of the soul, of which the baptism of the body is a type.

In my debates with those who believe in "baptismal regeneration" I have shown how the scriptures not only speak of being "baptized into (eis) Christ," but also of "believing (eis) Christ." In the New Testament the phrase "eis auton" ("unto him") is used frequently. Notice these verses:

"And this is the will of Him that sent Me, that every one which seeth the Son, and is believing on him (eis - unto or into him), may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:40)

"Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye may be believing on him (eis - unto or into him) whom He hath sent." (John 6:29)

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that is believing on (eis - unto or into) Me is having everlasting life. I am that bread of life." (John 6:47-48)

Thus, one believes into Christ. And, since one believes before being baptized in water, one is in Christ before baptism.

But, not only does believing into Christ overthrow baptismal regeneration, but it destroys the Hardshell view of regeneration, which will not allow that "believing" has anything to do with being "in Christ."

Believing "unto" eternal life

"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." (John 20: 31)

"And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life." (John 5: 40)

"Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to (eis) life everlasting." (I Tim. 1: 16)

Thus, one believes "unto" or "into" life, just as the scriptures speak of believing "unto righteousness," believing "unto salvation," and believing "unto justification (forgiveness)."

Hardshells, along with some "Reformed" Calvinists, will insist that "regeneration precedes faith," but clearly the preceding scriptural evidence does not support that view. Besides, what is one affirming when they say that spiritual life precedes faith and repentance? In the same sense as saying "regenerated before life"? With the meaning that "before faith" doesn't mean "without faith"? With the idea that there is a "gap in time" between regeneration and faith?

Problems with the "gap theory"

1. A man may be regenerated and not a believer.
2. A man may be regenerated and not justified (reconciled, at peace with God).
3. A man may be regenerated and not sanctified (washed and purified).
4. A man may be regenerated and not pardoned or forgiven.
5. A man may be regenerated who cannot please God (without faith cannot please).
6. A man may be regenerated who does not know God or Jesus.
7. A man may be regenerated who does not love God or Jesus.
8. A man may be regenerated who has not received the Spirit of God.
9. A man may be regenerated who is not sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.
10. A man may be regenerated who is still dead.
11. A man may be regenerated who is not converted.
12. A man may be regenerated who is not born again.
13. A man may be regenerated who is not penitent or convicted of sin.
14. A man may be regenerated who is not enlightened and has no revelation.
15. A man may be regenerated who has not been taught by God.
16. A man may be regenerated who has not come to Jesus.
17. A man may be regenerated who has not called upon or confessed Jesus as Lord
18. A man may be regenerated and be opposed to Christ
19. A man may be regenerated and and not have the mind of Christ
20. A man may be regenerated and yet not enter the kingdom of God
21. A man may be regenerated and yet still be lost
22. A man may be regenerated and yet has not turned to the Lord (repented)
23. A man may be regenerated and yet have no fear of God.

Thus, it would be absurd to speak of a man who is "regenerated" who is not, at the same time, a believer.

It is my hope that this series on the means of grace will help many to see the truth about the glorious phenomenon of regeneration, which is also an epiphany.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XXIV

Fear Of God & Salvation

"A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway." (Acts 10: 2)

This was said of the Gentile centurion, Cornelius, before he became a Christian through the preaching of Peter. Cornelius was a devout religionist, dedicated to religious life. Nevertheless he was a lost sinner. The angel that appeared to Cornelius told him to send to Joppa for Peter to come to him so that Cornelius would "hear words whereby you and your house may be saved." (Acts 11; 14) Obviously Cornelius was not "saved" before he heard the gospel from the mouth of Peter and believed it.

But, such a plain declaration of the condition of Cornelius before he became a convert to Christ is dismissed by the Hardshell apologists. They affirm that he was "saved" before he heard the preaching of Jesus, before he was a "believer," or had "faith," before he repented of his sins and turned to the Lord Jesus. So, they deny what Peter said about the matter!

They then twist the text by giving a strange and novel definition to the word "saved" as used by Peter. Peter, the Hardshell apologist affirms, already knew that Cornelius and his house were "saved," and so was simply saying that he would preach to them in order to "save" them from their religious ignorance.

It is true that Peter desired the salvation of Cornelius, a salvation that involved his being brought out of religious ignorance, but Peter did not believe that this salvation was different from the one that is connected with regeneration. So, what reasons do the Hardshells offer, apologetically, for affirming that Cornelius was already "saved" (in spite of what the text says)?

First, they say that the description of Cornelius' spiritual state, as given in Acts 10, shows that Cornelius was already "saved" or "regenerated." For instance, he is said to be one who "fears God." But, if one studies the scriptures, he will see that simple "fearing God" is not only said of saved people. But, this is a false premise, and shall demonstrate it to be so from the scriptures, which deny the premise.

"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble." (James 2: 19)

The "trembling" arises from the fear that the "demons" have of the "one God" they know and recognize. If having a fear of God is a proof of "regeneration," or "salvation," then "the devils" are "regenerated"!

So, the fact that Cornelius "feared God" does not mean he was "saved." First of all, it was not necessarily the one true God of Israel alone that he feared, though he was a friend and supporter of Judaism, nor of the "God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." We will look at this further shortly.

Next, Cornelius was a "devout man," and Hardshells argue that this also identifies him as already "saved," for only regenerated people are "devout." The Greek word used here is similar to that used in other places. The Greek word "eulabēs" means "taking hold well," or "carefully and surely, or cautiously," or "reverencing God, pious, religious." A "devout" person is a pious or dutiful person. In verse ten there is mention of a "devout soldier," which may mean a "religious soldier" or simply a "dutiful soldier." In Acts 22: 12 we read of Annanias being "a devout man according to the law."

Next, Cornelius was one that "prayed to God always," which must be a description of someone already saved. But, many lost Jews pray. This is clear throughout the gospels, where Jesus condemned the praying of the religious hypocrites among the Jews. Unsaved people pray, and the bible is filled with examples of it. In fact, salvation is the result of calling upon the name of the Lord in prayer, a fact clearly taught in scripture.

Next, Cornelius was one whose "prayer was heard" by the one true God. Does God not hear the prayers of only the righteous, of those who are already saved and regenerated? The Hardshells ask. Some will try to prove this by citing the words of the self-righteous Jews who said to Jesus - "Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth." (John 9: 31) On this Dr. Gill wrote:

"All mankind are sinners, even God's elect; yea, such who are truly gracious and righteous persons; for there is no man without sin; and God hears such who cry unto him day and night; such Christ came to save; for such he died; and these he calls to repentance; and every penitent sinner God hears: but by "sinners" are meant notorious sinners, such in whom sin reigns, who live in sin, and particularly impostors. The man takes up the word the Jews had made use of, and applied to Christ, John 9:24, and suggests, that had Jesus been a sinner, that is, an impostor, God would not have heard him, or have assisted him in doing a miracle, to support an imposture, or cover and encourage a fraud..." (Commentary)

Gill says God hears the prayers of unsaved sinners when they pray for saving mercy and that the argument of the man was that Jesus could not be the notorious sinner that the Jewish religious leaders were affirming of him.

"And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican." (Luke 18: 9-11)

Notice how this "Pharisee" was "devout," dedicated to his religious exercises, and how he "prayed" regularly as part of his obedience to the external law, and was a "God-fearer," at least by profession. Yet, Jesus says that he was a man "who trusted in himself that he was righteous," but who was not, but was deceived and self-righteous, and who felt like he "had no need of a physician" (no need for Christ as Savior). The Pharisee did not leave the temple "justified" as did the "publican" (sinner).

The case story of Cornelius only shows what preparatory work God does in the life of those sinners whom he intends to call and save. What is said of him may be said of many sinners just prior to their salvation.

Next, Cornelius did "good works," or "worked righteousness" that was acceptable and pleasing to God, by his giving alms to the poor and to the local Jewish synagogue. But, were they "good works"? Yes, they were good in a sense, being good in themselves, but not good because not done with the proper motive and understanding, not done with "faith," for "without faith it is impossible to please God" (Heb. 11: 6) and "whatever is not of faith is sin." (Rom. 14: 23) Thus, since Cornelius was not yet a "believer" in Jesus and the gospel before he heard the words of Peter, he could not please God. The Hardshell notion that he pleased God before he became a believer is contrary to scripture.

"But as for thee (Pharoah) and thy servants, I know that ye will not yet fear the LORD God." (Exo. 9: 30)

By the end of the plagues Pharoah had come to fear the Lord and to tremble, like demons, at the destructive power of Lord God. When Pharoah was brought to a state of fear and dread of God, was he then "regenerated"?

"And the fear of God was on all the kingdoms of those countries, when they had heard that the LORD fought against the enemies of Israel." (II Chron. 20: 29)

This is said of people who were not saved, who were "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel," and "without God" and "without hope." (Eph. 2: 12) When the Lord "roars" in destructive power, "who cannot but fear?" (See Prov. 20: 2 & Amos 3: 8)

Duty Of All Men To Fear God

"I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him." (Eccl. 3: 14)

"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." (Eccl. 12: 13)

"And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul." (Deut. 10: 12)

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king." (I Peter 2: 17)

"For great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised: he also is to be feared above all gods." (I Chron. 16: 25)

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." (Rev. 14: 6, 7)

All these verses show clearly that all men are required, by duty, to "fear" the Lord. But, if the fear of God is what only characterizes saved people, then the duty to fear God is a duty to save themselves. Hardshells, however, reject what is called "duty faith," not believing that all men are required to believe the gospel. So, as they have rejected faith as a duty and requirement, so too do they reject godly fear as a duty and requirement.

Some Have No Fear Of God

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes." (Psa. 36: 1)

"There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Rom. 3: 18)

It is true that some of the lost have "no fear of God," but some of the lost do fear God, just as demons also do.

Learning To Fear The Lord

"Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children." (Deut. 4: 10)

"And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them." (Deut. 17: 19)

"And the LORD commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is at this day." (Deut. 6: 24)

"Gather the people together, men and women, and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the LORD your God, and observe to do all the words of this law: And that their children, which have not known any thing, may hear, and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as ye live in the land whither ye go over Jordan to possess it." (Deut. 31: 12, 13)

These verses show that the "fear of the Lord" results from being taught the word of God, which is contrary to the Hardshell "no means" and "Spirit alone" view of "regeneration."

"Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience...Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent." (Acts 13: 16, 26)

These words are often cited by Hardshells to prove that the gospel is to be "addressed" only to those who have been saved in regeneration, that it is only of use to those who are already saved, and has no power to save the unregenerate. First, the Hardshells argue that "whosoever among you fears God" means "whosoever among you is already born again." Thus, they equate "God fearer" with "regenerated person." But, we have already seen how unsaved men and devils have a "fear of God," and so their argument is invalid.

Scholarly opinion states that the term "God-fearer" was used by Luke to designate those Gentiles who were sympathetic to the Jewish faith, possibly "proselytes," or those who are partial converts to Judaism.

Having said all this, it is not denied that all who have been saved (or regenerated) do have a fear of God. It is simply denied that only the saved have any fear of God. The "fear of God" that saved people have is no doubt qualitatively and quantitatively superior to the fear of God that unregenerate men and devils have. The fear of God possessed by born again people is a fear that imparts wisdom that brings salvation, a fear that involves a holy reverence and adoration, and faith and delight in the God who is feared.

"Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him. But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow; because he feareth not before God." (Eccl. 8: 12, 13)

Certainly it will be well with those who fear God, both now and forever. It is like "godly living," which is both profitable for "the life that now is," and "for that life which is to come." (I Tim. 4: 8) It is "well" for the devils to fear God, for Pharoah to fear God, but it is superlatively well for men to fear God enough to serve and acknowledge him to salvation.

Also, since the Hardshells believe that a "fear of God" is equivalent to being "regenerated," then how can they say that the "regeneration" experience is "non-cognitive" and "on the sub-conscious level"? How can one fear one that he has no cognition of? Besides, we have already seen how the "fear of the Lord" is taught and begotten through the instrumentality of the word of God. So, we may ask - "how shall they fear him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XXIII

Saved Through The Gospel Preacher

"And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." (Acts 26: 15-18)

This passage of scripture is detrimental to the Hardshell "Spirit alone" or "no-means" view of regeneration (salvation). Clearly salvation is the the result of Paul's preaching the gospel. This salvation is described as being "turned" by God "from" darkness and the power of Satan, and being turned "to" light and God. It is described as "receiving forgiveness of sins," and "receiving inheritance among the sanctified." Finally, this salvation (sanctification) is "by faith."

The Hardshells will take several approaches in trying to make these words to harmonize with their aberrant views. First, some will say that the word "manifestly" should be inserted before each description of salvation. I am sending you that they may "manifestly receive pardon," may "manifestly turn from Satan to God," etc. But, this is adding to the word of God.

Second, some will say that the description is not of salvation proper, or of regeneration, but to a "time salvation" or to "conversion," neither being necessary for being regenerated or eternally saved. Such a view represents "regeneration" as not delivering one from the power of Satan and from darkness, and as not connected with receiving forgiveness and inheritance, which is absurd.

On this passage, Dr. Gill wrote:

"Now though this is all the work of the Spirit, by whom only the eyes of the understanding are enlightened; yet this is ascribed to the apostle, not as the efficient cause, but as the instrument and means through preaching of the Gospel, which the Spirit of God would, and did make use of..."

"...and this inheritance these sanctified ones receive by faith now, as they do the forgiveness of their sins; that is, they now receive by faith the promise of the inheritance, and the earnest and pledge of it, and their right unto it, and claim upon it..."

In fulfilling the commission of Christ to save sinners by the preaching of the gospel, Paul is said to have gone out and preached to the Gentiles "that they should repent." (vs. 20) On this verse Dr. Gill wrote:

"...this is not a national repentance which the ministers of the Gospel are to show to men the necessity of; though this is not unworthy of them, when there is a call in Providence to it, and the state of things require it; much less a legal one, but an evangelical repentance; which has along with it faith in Christ Jesus, dealing with his blood and righteousness for the remission of their sins, and their justification before God; and which springs from, and is encouraged and heightened by, a sense of the love of God: and now this being a part of the Gospel ministry, does not suppose it to be in the power of men to repent of themselves, since no man, whilst he remains insensible of the evil nature of sin, and the hardness of his heart continues, which none but God can remove, can repent; and when he becomes truly sensible, he then prays to God to give him repentance, and to turn him: nor does it at all contradict its being a blessing of the covenant, a gift of Christ, and a grace of the Spirit of God; nor does it suggest, that the preaching of the word is sufficient of itself to produce it; the contrary of which the ministry of John the Baptist, of Christ, and of his apostles, declares; but the design of its being insisted on in the Gospel ministry, is to show that men are sinners, and in such a state and condition, that they are in need of repentance, and that without it they must perish; and the rather this is to be quietly inculcated, since true repentance is unto life, is the beginning and evidence of spiritual life, and issues in eternal life; and since there is a close connection between that and salvation, and that without it there is no salvation." (Commentary)

Dr. Gill expresses the "Old Baptist" position, and yet Hardshells deny it, and yet they claim to be the "Old Baptists"!

Further, Hardshells are inconsistent on the experience of being saved from darkness and being given light. When gospel means and faith are involved, then it does not refer to regeneration or eternal salvation, but when there is no mention of faith or means, then regeneration and eternal salvation are referred to. For instance, notice this passage:

"Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son." (Col. 1: 13)

When I was with the Hardshells I always heard this verse applied to the experience of "regeneration." Many Hardshells argued that the word "translation," like the words "creation," "resurrection," and "birth," is used to describe the experience of regeneration, and denotes passivity and what is unconditional. However, this translation experience into the kingdom of Jesus is described as being "delivered from" the "power of darkness," the very thing that Paul is said to effect by his preaching the gospel in Acts 26: 18. Thus, some Hardshells will affirm that the deliverance from darkness in Acts 26: 18 is not regeneration, but the deliverance from darkness in Colossians 1: 13 is regeneration. The honest interpreter, however, will see them both as speaking of regeneration.

"Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth." (Acts 13: 46, 47)

"That you (Paul and Barnabas) may be for salvation unto the ends of the earth." This is denied by Hardshells. They reject the statement and will make it to mean something other than what it says. Certainly the words were originally said to Isaiah, and applied to him, but in a greater way, to the Lord Jesus Christ. But, here the words are applied to Paul and Barnabas, in their character as gospel preachers.

Dr. Gill wrote:

"that thou shouldest be for salvation to the ends of the earth; impetratively as the author of it, and applicatively by means of the Gospel, which publishes salvation by Christ; and is the power of God unto salvation, to Gentiles as well as Jews, even to all that believe, in what part of the world soever they live: thus what was decreed and resolved on by God the Father, and was declared by him to his Son, is applied to his ministers and ambassadors, who represented him; so that what they did, he may be said to do; and who by them was to go, and did go to the Gentiles, and enlighten them with the light of the Gospel, and became salvation to them; so that this prophecy is produced by the apostles, to vindicate their conduct..."

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XXII

Obtaining The Kingdom By Faith

"Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." (Mark 10: 15)

The great Hardshell debater, C. H. Cayce, often used this verse in debate in an attempt to prove that sinners are born again apart from the gospel and faith. He argued that adults "receive the kingdom," or are born again, in the same way as infants. Since infants "receive the kingdom," he argued, apart from hearing and believing the gospel, then so are adults. But, this is fanciful and totally against the meaning and intent of the words of Jesus. Hardshells are always intent on finding any verse that says "adults are regenerated just like infants," that is, apart from conversion, apart from faith and repentance. They think they find it in John 3: 8, where Jesus said - "SO is everyone who is born of the Spirit." If they can find one person who was regenerated apart from faith and conversion, then they will argue that all are born again in the same manner.

First of all, the "little child" in the above passage is not an infant, but young child. It is the same class of people mentioned by Christ when he said - "suffer little children to come unto me." (Matt. 19: 14, etc.) But, how can one let and encourage infants to come to Jesus?

"Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 18: 3)

In this account of Matthew, Jesus connected being "converted" with "entering" the "kingdom of heaven." Obviously a "little child" can be converted.

Second, the word "receive" is from the Greek word "dechomai" and is in the active voice and means to accept. Vine, in his new testament words, said that dechomai "signifies 'to accept,' by a deliberate and ready reception of what is offered (cp. No. 4), e.g., 1Th 2:13, RV, 'accepted;' 2Cr 8:17; 11:4. See RECEIVE, TAKE."

This certainly disproves the Hardshell notion that the "little child" is an infant and an infant who is receiving passively, and unconsciously, or non-cognitively, the kingdom of God.

The Greek word for "little child" is "paidion" and means "a young child, a little boy, a little girl." It does not mean "infant" or one just a few days old.

Hardshells have several man-made propositions that they take to the scriptures and twist the scriptures to make them harmonize with them. This is their hermeneutic method. For instance, when they read verses where "faith" is a requirement for eternal salvation, they will deny that it is belief, but will make it to deal with God's faith (so called), or Christ's faith (so called), or with some kind of "seed faith" that believes nothing, but is a kind of spiritual substance deposited in the nature of one who is "regenerated," a seed substance that is "dormant." (Which is nonsense, of course) This is their method of interpretation regarding passages dealing with faith and salvation.

Another instance of their false hermeneutic method is seen in how they handle those verses that speak of "salvation." In those passages where salvation is seen as conditioned upon faith and perseverance, they will not make it deal with "eternal" salvation, but with a "time salvation." The remaining passages they will say deal with eternal salvation, the ones where God seems to be doing all and requiring nothing. In such a method the context is ignored and their purpose becomes finding a way to interpret the passage, by twist, so as not to oppose their man-made propositions. Those passages which seem to contradict Hardshell propositions must be made, by hook or crook, to harmonize with the Hardshell propositions.

Another instance of their hermeneutic method is seen in how they deal with those passages which speak of salvation being a "receiving" or an "entering" of the kingdom of God (or of Christ or heaven). Those passages that seem to show that the entering of the kingdom is the work of God without mention of means or conditions the Hardshells will say is dealing with eternal salvation. But, with those passages that seem to connect the receiving and entering of the kingdom with those who believe and persevere in the Christian faith, they will want to say that they are talking about "time salvation," or to the regenerated sinner's "joining the church," or being baptized into the "one true church," which is "the kingdom that God set up." This kingdom, the Hardshells affirm, applies to them alone, to the "Primitive Baptist Church."

When a person reads the bible, he must not bring any preconceptions to it. He must approach it "honestly." He must desire to know its true interpretation. "An honest and good heart" (Luke 8: 15) is required if one is to know the truth of scripture. "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine," said Jesus. (John 7: 17) "If any man has the will to do his will," or "if anyone really, honestly, and sincerely wants to know the truth, he WILL know the truth."

Seeking the Kingdom

"seek ye first the kingdom of God." (Matt. 6: 33)

The kingdom, like the Lord and salvation, is to be "sought" if it is ever to be "found."

The Hardshells will not make this "kingdom of God" to be connected with final, or eternal, salvation for it puts a condition upon obtaining the kingdom of God. So, they will affirm that the "kingdom of God" in this passage must refer to the church, which to them is the "Primitive Baptist Church," to the exclusion of all others, and refers to the experience of "conversion," an optional experience that comes after "regeneration."

"...the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found..." (Matt. 13: 44)

What is this "treasure" that is "found"? The Hardshells will not connect this finding of the treasure with being regenerated, but to their "conversion." To many of them the "treasure" is the church, and they alone are "the church."

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." (Matt. 7: 21)

This entering of the kingdom the Hardshells will deny is talking about eternal salvation, but to a "time salvation," when one "joins the old Baptist church." Since the passage speaks of "doing" the "will of God" as a condition, the Hardshells cannot accept that it refers to the "eternal kingdom" or with eternal salvation, but to entering the old Hardshell church. Clearly Jesus put the entering of the kingdom in the future, however.

Jesus spoke of those who would be "...instructed unto the kingdom of heaven..." (Matt. 13: 52) Being taught is a necessary step for entering God's kingdom. Jesus said elsewhere - "everyone therefore who has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me." Again, being taught precedes coming to Christ, and coming to Christ precedes "life." Being "instructed into (unto) the kingdom" is the same as being "instructed unto salvation," for entering the kingdom is equated with being saved. One becomes a citizen of this kingdom when he receives, by faith, the gospel of Christ.

"Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." (Luke 12: 32)

Every Hardshell preacher I ever heard cite these words of Jesus, have made them apply strictly to themselves as a denomination. To them, the "little flock" is a reference to the "one true visible church of Christ," now known as, they say proudly, the "Primitive Baptist Church." This is part of what it means to be a "cult," for a group to say "we be the only ones."

But, the truth is, the "little flock" of Jesus is the body of the elect, and they have ever been a minority or remnant. A person asked Jesus - "Lord, are there few that be saved?" (Luke 13: 23) Jesus replied - "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." (Luke 13: 23, 24) Jesus said "few there be that find" the strait way. (Matt. 7: 14) The "little flock" are the "few" who shall be saved. In this way the story of Noah's situation becomes typical, for Peter says that only a "few," that is, "eight souls," were "saved through water." (I Peter 3: 20)

And who does Jesus identify as this "little flock," with these "few"? Those who have "entered" the "strait gate," and who travel the "strait way," these are they.

Most Hardshells say that the saved (elect) are on both roads, the broad that leads to destruction, and the strait that leads to life, and that it is not eternal life or eternal destruction that is meant, but "timely" or "temporal" destinies, to things that only pertain to this mortal life. But, this is not the common use of the terms in the new testament, but a rare usage. Second, "leads to" is future oriented, and therefore the life and destruction are not viewed as present realities. If entering the strait gate, and beginning the walk on the strait way, denotes conversion, or becoming a Christian, then the "road" that is traveled by the Christian must be equivelent to his whole Christian life and walk. This road "leads to life," being that which comes at the end of the road! What comes at the end of the Christian life, when he dies? "Life"! Eternal life! What comes at the end of the worldly life, when one dies? "Destruction"! Eternal destruction!

Further, walking of this Christian road, where are the few, is necessary for obtaining that "life" that comes at the end of the road, that comes at the end of one's life.

"The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." (Luke 16: 16)

Not only are sinners "instructed unto" the kingdom, and "seek for" and "find" it, and "receive" it by choice, but they are said to "press into it." Again, this is another way of expressing the salvation experience, but Hardshells will deny that it deals with salvation, for it requires men to "press into" it, and so will make the "kingdom" to be their denomination, which men should "press into." But, again, they are simply applying their man-made proposition to the verse and they refuse to justify interpreting "entering the kingdom" as not dealing with its normal new testament usage and sense.

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:4, 6)

Most Hardshells will say that this "kingdom" is a reference to the church, or to that institution known today as the "Primitive Baptist Church." It is good that Hardshells teach that the church is to be composed only of those who have been "born again." But, is Christ speaking of "seeing" and "entering" the local church? Is he not rather referring to inheriting the kingdom of God when Jesus comes again and sets up the kingdom on earth? The Hardshells, like those called "Reform Baptists," will insist that these words of Christ affirm that "regeneration precedes conversion," or precedes faith. They think that Jesus' affirmation that one must be born again in order to "see" the kingdom affirms it. "Seeing" the kingdom is interpreted as a perceiving of the kingdom, and such a perception is part of faith, they argue.

But, it is clear that Jesus is referring to final salvation, to that time when Christ returns and resurrects the bodies of the sanctified, and glorifies them, and when they "inherit the kingdom" that was "prepared" for them "from before the foundation of the world." (Matt. 25: 34) This latter passage is admitted by Hardshells to be dealing with final salvation, or with the "eternal kingdom."

The new testament scriptures speak of the kingdom of God being both a present reality, in some sense, with those who are elected and called, and also a future reality after Christ comes and glorifies believers.

Throughout the Book of Acts we find the message of the gospel to be a message concerning salvation and the kingdom of God. Notice this survey:

"...speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God..." (Acts 1: 3)

"But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God." (Acts 8: 12)

"Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." (Acts 14: 22)

"...disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God." (Acts 19: 8)

"And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more." (Acts 20: 25)

"And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening...Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him." (Acts 28: 23, 31)

These verses show that the kingdom of God is connected with being saved. The saved will inherit the kingdom, while those who are not saved will not.

"For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." (Rom. 14: 17)

"For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power." (I Cor. 4: 20)

These verse identify the leading aspects of the kingdom of God. This is a description of what is received when one receives the kingdom. How does this fit with Cayce's idea of what infants in the womb receive when they are "regenerated"?

"That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory." (I Thess. 2: 12)

To be "called to" salvation is at the same time to be "called unto his kingdom and glory." This calling is by the gospel. (II Thess. 2: 14)

"And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." (II Tim. 4: 18)

"For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." (II Peter 1: 11)

"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." (Rev. 12: 10)

These verses give the predominant teaching concerning the kingdom of God and show how it is mostly yet future and is connected with being eternally saved.

The kingdom, in scripture, being viewed as both now received and as yet future, is like what is said of receiving eternal life. It is likewise sometimes presented as a present reality, but sometimes as a future reality.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XXI

The Lost Found By The Gospel

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me....
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now, I see

Sinners are "lost," or unsaved. Salvation involves a man being "found," or being recued from a lost conditon.

"For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." (Luke 19: 10)

"And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost." (Luke 15: 6)

The word "lost," in this and most passages in the new testament, denotes loss, or ruination, with the idea of being destroyed or perishing. But, it does not exclude the idea of being without a sense of direction or place, or of being in a strange and unknown environment and unable to find the way out. This is clear from Jesus' use of the term "seek" (search) with the word "lost." You look for people who have lost their way, and who are without knowledge of their location. The ones lost do not know where they are, and others also do not know where they are, and so become "seekers" of the ones "lost." In such a lost state, one is enveloped with fear and dread, and suffers loss of hope and assurance.

Jesus is the "seeker" of the lost sheep (elect). He is the one who goes looking for the lost and ruined sinner. Further, he never fails to find those who he goes looking for. Thus, salvation is an experience that is defined as a time when the Lord "finds" his sheep who are "lost."

The word "found" means to discover. The salvation experience may be described as two persons finding each other. God finds the sinner and the sinner finds God. God is not lost, of course, and finding God implies no such thing. But, the sinner in his lost condition does not know where God is located. The sinner is lost, not knowing where he is, but God knows where he is.

Most Hardshells will easily accept the fact that salvation (regeneration) is described in scripture as a time when the Lord finds the "lost." What nearly all of them deny, however, is how the Lord's finding of the lost is also a time when the lost find the Lord. They would also affirm that this phenomenon of the Lord locating and rescuing his lost sheep occurrs in "regeneration," but if so, then it occurs "non-cognitively" and "on the sub-conscious level," for that is their view of the "regeneration" experience. But, how can one seek and find something non-cognitively?

But, what saith the scriptures?

"But if our gospel be hid (unrevealed), it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (II Cor. 4: 3, 4)

Paul equates, in this passage, "the lost," with "unbelievers," with those who have no revelation of the gospel. Do the Hardshells? Do they not rather teach that many who are unbelievers, and who have no revelation of the gospel, are nevertheless saved?

Hardshells interpret this passage as dealing with "conversion," of what takes place after "regeneration," in only a few of the regenerated, but certainly not in all of them. This shining of the light of the gospel revelation into the heart the Hardshells will not ascribe to "regeneration." By this interpretation one can be "regenerated" and yet have no light in them! How can they be "children of the light (or God)" but have no light?

"Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." (Isa. 55: 6, 7)

The Hardshells do not have a problem with regeneration being a time when the Lord finds the sinner, but they have a problem with regeneration being a time when the sinner finds the Lord. Some of them will even decry others who speak of a sinner "finding the Lord." They will say - "I didn't know the Lord was lost." But, this is fault-finding and nit-picking, demonstrating a cantankerous cultic spirit. Of course "finding the Lord" does not imply that the Lord is lost! Do the words of Isaiah not exhort all to "seek the Lord"? Does that imply that the Lord is lost? He says "while he may be found." Does that imply that God is lost? What it means, as I have already shown, is that the lost sinner does not know where the Lord is! He does not know where he is, himself, and neither does he know where the Lord is. But, when he "finds" the Lord, he discovers that the Lord also found him.

Notice how this "finding" of the Lord is connected with salvation, with "returning" to the Lord (repentance and faith, or conversion), with being shown "mercy" (justification) and given "pardon."

"I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name." (Isa. 65: 1 & Rom. 10: 20)

The words of the prophet are applied by Paul to the calling of the Gentiles, by the gospel, the Gentiles being formerly those who were not "seekers" of the Lord, and who were not "called by my name." But now, however, they have become seekers and finders of the Lord, by the gospel. Now they have become the people of God for they have been "called by my name," or "named the name of Christ." (II Tim. 2: 19) Doubtless this "finding" of the Lord is a cognitive experience, and involves enlightenment and a revelation.

"And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart." (Jer. 29: 13)

Jeremiah's message is the same as Isaiah's. Salvation is described as "finding" the Lord.

Jesus taught the same.

"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." (Matt. 7: 7, 8)

The Hardshells, due to their Hyper Calvinism, and extremism concerning the Calvinistic doctrine of "total depravity," have denied that one can be a "seeker" before his regeneration. But, Gill, Spurgeon, and the old Baptists of the confessions did not believe this, for they often spoke of "seeking sinners," people who had not yet come to faith in Christ, who had not yet been saved or regenerated, as still being lost or unsaved.

The old Baptist writers of former centuries spoke of these seekers as being "awakened sinners." Did they mean that they were "regenerated"? No, they did not. They saw this awakening as a "prevenient" or "preparatory" work before regeneration/conversion. They saw this as occurring when sinners became aware of certain facts of the gospel, and became, to some degree, "convicted." Hardshells see conviction of sin as an after-effect of regeneration, and so would pronounce any and all who are convicted of sin, as saved. But, the 17th and 18th century Particular Baptists did not view mere conviction of sin as evidence of a saved state, but of a lost state. To be saved (born again, or spiritually quickened) one had to be convinced (convicted) not only of "sin," but also of "righteousness" and "judgment," per Jesus in John 16: 8. They taught that one must come to believe in the righteousness of Christ, and to trust in it.

I have asked Hardshells this unanswerable question - "when the Spirit tells a sinner that he is lost, or convinces him of that fact, is he telling him the truth?"

If the Hardshells say "yes," then the convicted sinner cannot be said to be saved. If they say "no," then they make the Spirit a witness of falsehood.

"For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry." (Luke 15: 24, 32)

These are the words concerning the "prodigal son," in the context of "lost" things (lost coin, lost sheep, and lost son). Actually, they are stories of not only what is "lost," but of what is both lost and "found." The deliverance of the prodigal from "lost" condition was equated with his being restored to life, to his resurrection from death. But, when was he "found" and made "alive again"? Was it while he was under conviction, at that time when he "came to himself," when he received a revelation of his condition, and became contrite? This cannot be because he was still a foreigner to his father's house, and still in the pig pen, and "perishing with hunger."

Yes, he learned some things while in the pig pen of sin, and such teaching is what eventually brought him back to his father and to his father's house. He learned that he was truly miserable and a failure, that he done wrong to his father in leaving, and that he was to blame for his condition. Is everyone who comes to realize this saved? Certainly not. Many examples from scripture can be given to further demonstrate the truth of it.

He also saw the way of salvation. I will return to my father's house. I will humble myself before him and confess my wrong and my guilt. I will beg for his mercy and hope for his restoration. He knew the plan of salvation. But, are all those who have become aware of the plan of salvation alive from spiritual death? Certainly not. Jesus says that the Father's teaching and drawing is what causes a sinner to "come" to him for life and salvation. The teaching and drawing work is preparatory to the salvation experience. (See John 6: 44, 45)

The words of the text say that the prodigal was "alive again" upon his return (repentance), when he was "found" and no longer lost and away from his father.

All the experiences of the prodigal prior to his return were only "preparatory" operations of God upon him leading him to "life" and deliverance from being "lost."

"And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us." (Acts 17: 26, 27)

All men are commanded to "seek the Lord" and this certainly includes those who are "lost," and who do not possess the Lord. They are promised success if they do so, as has been seen from the scriptures already cited. Again, "find him" is a term describing the salvation experience. But, Hardshells must deny that sinners "find" the Lord in regeneration, for this would make salvation cognitive, and involve the sinner being saved by faith and repentance, and they will not affirm this.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XX

Choosing Christ As Husband

"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." (Eph. 5: 22-27)

Lord Jesus is identified as being the "husband" of the "church" and the church is identified as being his "wife." The Hardshells correctly identify Christ's bride with the elect, with those chosen by the Father before the world began. Some have gone to extremes on this by affirming that the church, as a bride, existed with Christ in eternity past. This is known as the "eternal children" doctrine, connected with the "two seeds" theory of Hardshell founding father, Daniel Parker. Involved in this teaching was the idea that the elect existed with Christ in eternity past, at least seminally, as Eve was in Adam before her actual physical existence, or in what is called "eternal vital union." In this scheme the "eternal children" are the Lord's "seed" from eternity. But, the devil also has a "seed." These also, according to this scheme, are eternal children, but of the Devil. It is ancient Zoroastrianism or Manichaeism (dualism) in Christian disguise.

Many of the first Hardshells followed some aspects of Parker's "two-seedism." Gilbert Beebe believed in "eternal vital union." He did not fully accept Parker's view regarding the Devil's seed, or that the devil was without beginning as God. Further, most Hardshells today reject nearly all aspects of "two-seedism," denying that the elect existed in Christ from eternity. Good for them. Correctly they assert, as do all Calvinists, that the elect had no real existence in Christ before they were born into the world. The elect did exist as an idea or mental image in the mind of God, but this was no actual existence.

God the Father's election of a people to become a "wife" or "bride" for his Son was made from before the world began. (Eph. 1: 4) This the old Baptists have always believed and is what is expressed in her oldest confessions. This choice is a kind of prearranged marriage, done after the oriental fashion, and in accordance with Hebrew practice (see the case of Abraham arranging a marriage for Isaac).

When the elect are effectually "called" according to God's foreknowledge and predestination (Rom. 8: 29, 30), it is the time of their actual "engagement" to their appointed husband. This "engagement" of the appointed bride to her husband, however, goes against Hardshellism.

In the scriptures this "engagement" or "espousal" to Christ occurs in the experience of conversion, a conversion however that the Hardshells divorce from regeneration, and that they say is unnecessary for being the bride of Christ and for being eternally saved. Thus, their views deny that the bride of Christ, though appointed for Christ in the eternal decree of election, must become "engaged" to Christ through conversion. But, that is against both reason and scripture.

The chosen bride of Christ must become "willing" to have Christ as her husband, but the Hardshells argue that such "willingness" does not occur in time when the elect are called or regenerated. Calvinists, of course, believe that she shall be "made willing" by the constraining love of Christ and by the power of his Spirit to allure and draw her. (See Psa. 110: 3; Phil. 2: 13)

Some Hardshells even argue as do the Arminians in saying that all "obedience" is the result of free will and cannot be effectually cause by God. They would also say that is impossible that God irresistibly make one "willing." Yet, the bride of Christ, at some point, either in conversion, or when resurrected to glory, do become "willing" to become the wife of Christ. Other Hardshells, however, will affirm that those who become part of the church or bride of Christ will indeed be "made willing" and "obedient" by the sovereign efficacious grace of God. But, the question for all of them is this - when does one become "engaged" to Christ? When will they become willing to become his bride, willing to say "I do"? There are only three views possible.

First, one can argue that the sinner becomes a member of the church (bride) of Christ when he is "regenerated," and before he is "converted." This would be when the sinner, being saved, becomes "willing" to be engaged to Christ, or chooses to be such. Such a view according to Hardshellism contradicts their teaching that affirms that "regeneration" is "non-cognitive" and on the "sub-conscious" level.

Second, one can argue that the sinner becomes a member of the congregation of the saved, or chooses Christ, when he is "converted." But, the problem is, today's Hardshells believe that "conversion" is not necessary to become part of the bride of Christ.

Third, one can argue that the sinner does not become a member of the church, or bride of Christ, until he is glorified at the return of Christ, when he is resurrected and glorified. But, such a view fails to see how the scriptures teach that the actual marriage is when Christ returns, and the engagement occurs before that.

What saith the scriptures?

We have already agreed that the scriptures teach that the Father appointed the bride for Christ from eternity past. This is typified in God's appointment of Rebecca to become the wife of Isaac. In this choice Christ agreed with his Father's choice. The question is this, however; must not the chosen wife become willing to be the bride of her husband? Yes, she does, and for any Hardshell to deny it is to teach contrary to sacred scripture.

Though the choice of Christ's bride was made before the world began, the winning of the heart of the chosen bride, by Christ, takes place in time when the elect are converted by faith through the gospel.

"For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused (engaged) you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." (II Cor. 11: 2)

Even the Hardshells must confess that this "espousal" to Christ is what takes place in "conversion," an experience that Hardshells admit comes by faith through the gospel. The "one husband" is Jesus and the "chaste virgin" are those sinners who have given their hearts to Christ in covenant. Paul basically says - "I arranged your engagement to Christ." Paul was not denying that the Father had arranged it, but only acknowledging his being used by God to bring about the engagement. Also, most Hardshells will affirm that this "espousal" is not "regeneration" since it was 1) made through the instrumentality of Paul, that is, by the preaching of the gospel by Paul, and 2) made by the choice or willing of those who become married to the Lord.

"The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son...Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage." (Matt. 22: 2, 9)

"And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut." (Matt. 25: 10)

The scriptures speak of "the marriage supper of the Lamb." (Rev. 19: 7, 9) Without a doubt this marriage and marriage supper are yet future and will occur when all the elect have been called, when "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in," and so to argue that both the engagement and marriage will take place at the same time, when Christ returns, is against all logic and historical marriage tradition. Thus, one can only conclude that the "engagement" takes place in time when a person is saved, and becomes a member of the body of Christ, or church, or when he chooses Christ. Also, the words of Paul shows that the engagement to Christ takes place in time in regeneration/conversion, although he believed that the marriage was yet future.

On this passage the great old Baptist doctor, John Gill, wrote:

"The act of espousing, the apostle here, with respect to this church, takes to himself, though in another sense, and which is the principal one, it is ascribed to Christ himself, who betroths all his to himself in righteousness, in judgment, in lovingkindness, and tender mercies; he saw them in his Father's purposes and decrees, in all the glory they were designed to be brought unto, when he loved them as his Father did, and desired them for his spouse and bride, which was granted to him; and then secretly in covenant betrothed them to himself, and ever after looked upon them as in a conjugal relation to him; wherefore though they fell in Adam, and became guilty and filthy, he gave himself for them as his church and bride, to sanctify and cleanse them, that he might present them to himself, just such a glorious church he had seen them before. In consequence of this, the Spirit of God attends the ministration of the Gospel, to the conversion of each of these souls, when they become willing to be the Lord's, and give their free and full consent to have him for their husband; and this is the day of their open espousal to him, and in this the apostle had, and other ministers of the Gospel have a concern; he was a means, in the hands of the Spirit, of their regeneration, a minister by whom they believed, an instrument in directing their souls to Christ, by setting forth his unsearchable riches, the glory of his person, and fulness of his grace: as Abraham's servant set forth the greatness of his master, and the large possessions his son was heir to, and brought out his bracelets and ear rings, his jewels of gold and silver, and thereby gained his point, a wife for Isaac; so the Spirit of God going along with the ministration of the apostle so wrought upon these Corinthians, as to give up themselves to the Lord, and take him for their head and husband, Saviour and Redeemer." (Commentary)

That is the "Old Baptist" position and the Hardshell notion about it is novel and hybrid, and opposed to the scriptural teachings.

"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God." (Rom. 7: 4)

Though the word "marriage" is not in this passage, it is nevertheless implied by the context. Literally the text reads - "that you should become another's," meaning become another's spouse. Doubtless Paul alludes to the conversion experience of the Romans, to the time when they chose Christ as their Lord, Savior, and Husband.

On this verse, Gill wrote:

"...here respect is had to their open marriage to him in time, the day of their espousals in conversion; to make way for which, the law, their former husband, must be dead, and they dead to that, that so their marriage to Christ might appear lawful and justifiable; who is very fitly described by him..."

Joined To Christ

"For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh." (Eph. 5: 30, 31)

This is how Paul concludes his words concerning the church's union with Christ in Ephesians chapter five. Notice the word "joined." Marriage is a "joining" or uniting together, a gluing or cementing of two together as one. When are the elect "united" or "joined" together with Christ? First, the engagement (which is in Jewish tradition, a kind of initial marriage, so that the terms wife and husband are used during the engagement period). Second, complete union, which will take place at the marriage when Jesus returns.

Saved people are people who have joined themselves to the Lord in a covenant.

"...joined himself to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants..." (Isa. 56: 6)

"They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the LORD in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten." (Jer. 50: 5)

"And many nations shall be joined to the LORD in that day, and shall be my people..." (Zech. 2: 11)

"But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit." (I Cor. 6: 17)

It would be absurd to affirm that one can be engaged to the Lord and yet be, at the same time, a heathen and idolater. A worshipper of Baal a born again child of God who is also engaged to the Lord? How stupid is that?

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XIX

Saved From Hell By Faith

"Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent." (Luke 16: 27-30)

The rich man, in this story, is in that place in Hades where the wicked dead went prior to the resurrection of Christ. It is the place of suffering, a prison for wicked spirits. (See I Peter 3: 19) It is the place where he went after he was "dead and buried." Does the rich man rue the event? Certainly. Does he realize why he is there? Certainly. Does he know that he could have been saved and gone to the place where Lazarus is? Certainly. Does he know the way of salvation, how he may have been saved? Certainly. What is that way? He knows that "repentance" at the preaching of the gospel was the way. "If Lazarus preaches to them, and if they repent, then they will not come to this place." That is the reasoning of the rich man. Was he correct? Certainly. The scriptures promise salvation to all who believe and repent. "Repent ye, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out." (Acts 3: 19) "Repentance" is "unto life." (Acts 11: 18) The message of the gospel is - "repent or perish." (See Luke 13: 3, 5; II Peter 3: 9)

If the rich man is correct, then both the preaching the gospel and repentance are necessary for being saved from Hell's torments. Further, Abraham, who speaks for God and truth, does not correct the rich man, but confirms his understanding, by saying "they have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them." They have the word available to them, testified Abraham. They have opportunity to repent, he argued. Implied in this testimony of Abraham is agreement that repentance would prevent one's going to the place of the rich man. Abraham does not say - "you have it all wrong! Preaching and repentance have nothing to do with men escaping Hell's torments!" These would been his remarks had Abraham believed Hardshell teachings.

The Hardshells realize the implications of this conversation and how it uproots Hardshell notions about salvation and faith, about being eternally saved from Hell and damnation. That is why many of them have begun to reinterpret the story of the rich man and Lazarus to make it deal with something other than with where people go when they die. Some of them even make it a "test of fellowship," excluding any who believe the traditional view.

"Let them hear Moses and the prophets," said Jesus. "Let them receive the testimony given by them," and let them repent upon hearing it, and so escape the place of torments. These words of Jesus uphold the gospel means position, and teach that all the unbelieving and unrepentant will go to the place of torment when they die.

"Let them hear Moses and the prophets"! And why? First, because Moses and the prophets "testified" of Christ.

"And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself." (Luke 24: 47)

"Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." (John 1: 45)

"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me." (John 5: 46)

This is why Christ condemned the hypocrites, who professed allegiance to the "scriptures" (old testament) and yet who rejected him. "Search the scriptures," exhorted Jesus, for "they are they which testify of me." (John 8: 39) They testify of the way of salvation. An example of this in the old testament are these words:

"Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David." (Isa. 55: 3)

This is what the rich man understood to be the way of salvation, and which Abraham confirmed to him. The rich man's brothers, if they would be saved, must needs "hear" (heed) that message if they are to "live" and escape the torments of Hades.

When I was a Hardshell I nevertheless believed that the story of the rich man and Lazarus taught what happened to people when the die. This was the view of the first Hardshells. It was the view presented by the great Hardshell debater and apologist, Elder John R. Daily, in his debate with the Universalists and No-Hellers. So, how did I deal with it? How did I reconcile it with my "no-means" and "no-faith" view of salvation? I did not do as most of today's Hardshells and "spiritualize" the story, making it teach that the "hell" was a temporary punishment, and that the torments were for those Jews who were "cut off" from kingdom (church). What I reasoned, in my own mind, was that Abraham simply did not want to correct the rich man, but answered him according to his own false scheme, that scheme which says that hearing and believing the gospel is unnecessary for salvation from eternal torment. But, I now see that such reasoning was simply a way of trying to "get around" the clear implications of the story and dialogue that occurred between the rich man and Lazarus.

On the dialogue between Abraham and the rich man, Dr. Gill wrote:

"let them hear them; for they testified concerning Christ, and concerning the sins of the Jews, and the calamities, both temporal and eternal, that should come upon them; and which, testimony was sufficient to leave them without excuse: and indeed, the word of God, read, explained, and heard, is the ordinary means of conversion, or of bringing men to faith and repentance." (Commentary)

Also, in commenting upon I Peter 4: 6, Gill wrote:

"...yet repenting and believing, upon Noah's preaching to them, they live in their spirits in eternal life, according to the free mercy and grace of God..."

"live according to God in the Spirit; while they were here on earth, the Gospel preached to them had such an effect upon them, as to cause them to live spiritually, to live by faith on Christ, to live a life of holiness from him, and communion with him, and to live according to the will of God, in righteousness and true holiness..."

This is the old Baptist position, one that realizes that faith and repentance are necessary conditions for being saved from Hell and damnation.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XVIII

Chosen To Gospel Enlightenment

"What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded." (Rom. 11: 7)

Unto what are the elect chosen? The Hardshells will say that they are elected to salvation, and this is correct. But, what is involved in this "salvation"? The Hardshells exclude enlightenment, the receiving of saving truth, and the elimination of ignorance about God, Christ, and salvation. Hardshells affirm that "no knowledge is given in regeneration," the whole experience being "non-cognitive" and "on the sub-conscious level."

What is the "it" of this verse? What was it that the elect Israelites "obtained" by their election? The answer to that question destroys Hardshellism. The answer to these questions are easily ascertained by the context.

"Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace." (vss. 3-5)

The "seven thousand men" are they who believed in the one true and living God, and who were not pagan worshippers of other gods, and were they who persevered in their allegiance to Jehovah. They were chosen to faith and perseverance, the two things required for the obtaining of the promises of salvation. (See Heb. 6: 12)

None of the worshippers and followers of Baal were of the elect and this is contrary to the belief of the Hardshells who affirm that some Baal worshippers are of the elect and born again. They reject the idea that God's election is unto faith and perseverance.

Further, Paul says, "and the rest were blinded." This word "blinded" (or 'hardened') involves ignorance, or lack of knowledge about God, and lack of faith in him. This "blindness" is evident in their allegiance to Baal and of their faith in false gods.

On this verse Dr. Gill wrote:

"and the rest were blinded: the non-elect, or those who were not chosen and reserved, to whom Christ was "a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence"; and who "stumbled at the word" of the Gospel, "being disobedient" to the divine revelation, "whereunto they were appointed", 1Pe 2:8; hence they obtained no mercy, grace, faith, life, righteousness, and eternal salvation, but were "blinded"; left in that native blindness and ignorance..."

It is appropriate that Dr. Gill refers to the words of Peter. Peter wrote:

"Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. BUT ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light." (I Peter 2: 7-9)

First, it is clear that the elect are styled as the believing and obedient ones, while those not chosen are styled the unbelieving and disobedient. The elect are they who "allow" (accept) the stone while the non-elect are they who "disallow" (reject) the stone. The elect receive the word, and understand it, but the reprobates stumble over Christ, and are offended by him. All these things are contrary, however, to the Hardshell understanding of who are the elect and called.

"But you are a chosen generation," the word "but" offering a contrast between those who reject Christ and those who accept him. This word "but" shows that those who reject Christ are not chosen.

Further, this choice of God to salvation includes being chosen to faith, being chosen to "show forth the praises of God," but who can say this fits non-Christians? Do they show forth the praises of God? They may show forth the praises of their heathen gods, but not being believers in the God of Israel, and of Christ, they cannot fit this description.

Also, the elect are chosen to be called out of religious "darkness" and into the "marvellous light" of the gospel. But, Hardshells exclude enlightenment and saving knowledge from the experience of being chosen and called.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XVII

Cleansing of the Conscience &
Application of the blood

"And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." (Romans 5: 11)

For one to be saved, he must not only have had Christ make "atonement" (reconciliation) for him, but he must "receive" the "atonement." The atonement must be imputed to a person, the blood of Christ must be applied to the sinner, both forensically and experimentally. How does one "receive" the atonement? Is it not when he is saved or born again?

"Receiving the atonement" simply means the receiving of the fruits or benefits of the atonement. On this verse the great old Baptist, Dr. John Gill, wrote:

"by whom we have now received the atonement; atonement is not made, but received by us; which denotes the application of the atoning blood and sacrifice of Christ to the conscience, the Spirit's witness of interest in it, and the office of faith, as a recipient of it: it is not faith, nor anything else of the creature's, that makes the atonement, only Christ; but faith receives it from him, and by him..." (commentary)

The word "receive" in this verse deserves special attention.

One writer wrote:

"In the words of John Murray, the ‘word ‘receiving’…does not refer [in 5:17] to our believing acceptance of the free gift but to our being made the recipients’ of it. Indeed, Paul rarely used ‘lambano’ (‘to receive’) in the sense of ‘to take hold’ or ‘to accept believingly’. To receive something in his sense is simply to be the object or the recipient of it, as Murray says. We see this clearly in Romans 13:2, where those who receive (or incur) judgement are the objects or the recipients of it; they receive judgement in much the way that a boxer might receive severe blows to the head. Similarly, in Romans 1:5 those who ‘have received grace’ and in Romans 5:11 those who ‘have now received reconciliation’ are clearly the recipients of these effects in the same passive sense that a newborn baby receives life."

On the same web page, a commenter disagreed, and said:

"The word "receive" is in the active voice, which means its something YOU do. The word "receive" should have been translated ACCEPT, not receive. Or it should have translated TAKE. Its the Greek word "Lambano" which literally means to take hold of."

http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1116

So, which is it, active or passive voice? And, what are the consequences in either case?

A. T. Robertson says that "lambano" (received), in Romans 5: 11, is "second aorist active indicative."

So, though it is true that the word "lambano" (received) often is in the passive voice, it is sometimes put in the active voice. Often people receive things passively, and such things are put in the passive voice in the Greek. Dead people receive life, but they are passive in it. Receiving slaps on the face is also passive. But, when in the active voice, "receiving" means "accepting," or "laying hold of" (grabbing), or "taking." Thus, Murray is wrong.

It is not a denial of Calvinism and sovereign grace for the will to be active in salvation. The experience of salvation is not in every way passive, nor is it in every way active. In some respects the sinner is being acted upon, but in other respects the sinner is acting. Action is necessarily involved in being saved. The question is this, however: Is all the action and activity God's? or all the sinner's? Or, does salvation not involve action on the part of both God and the sinner? This leads to the debate about monergism and synergism.

Though these terms are often used by Calvinists, their definitions of them are often biased and misleading. Many Calvinists today, like John Hendryx, affirm that Calvinism is strictly monergistic and that Arminianism is synergistic in regard to being "born again" or "regenerated." In professional writings on this subject, "monergism" denotes passivity (passive voice) and "synergism" denotes activity (active voice). So, "what saith the scriptures?" Do the scriptures speak of regeneration in totally monergistic and passive terms? Or in totally synergistic and active terms? Or, in a combination of both? What does the old London Confession of 1689 say?

1689 London Confession on Effectual Calling

1._____ Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

Here it seems that the old Baptists blended both passive and active, both monergistic and synergistic, factors to the experience of salvation or regeneration. God acts upon the sinner. The sinner is passive. But, the sinner, being acted upon, acts himself, "so that they come most freely." Their being "willing" is the result of God's action, but it is nevertheless their action in coming. Is the sinner regenerated before his will has been changed? Before it is made willing? Before it comes to Christ?

It is true that this work cannot be called a "cooperation" in the general sense of that term. It is also true that God's act is always effectual, being irresistible. "Drawing" denotes this. God's power is the efficient cause, but the will of man is the instrumental cause. God causes the will of the sinner and the will of the sinner causes the sinner to come.

2._____ This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.

Can a man be said to be "called" and "quickened" who has not "answered" this call? Before he has "embraced" the grace offered and conveyed? Job, in speaking of his coming resurrection, said "you will call and I will answer." (Job 14: 15) Was Lazarus raised from the dead when Jesus called unto him or when he answered the call? Thus, regeneration (or resurrection) does not simply comprehend the cause but also that which is effected by the call.

Dr. Archilbald Alexander, the great teacher of Princeton Calvinism, and forerunner of Charles Hodge, wrote:

"Sometimes regeneration is considered distinctly from the acts and exercises of the mind which proceed from it, but in the Holy Scriptures the cause and effect are included..."

http://baptistgadfly.blogspot.com/2009/02/dr-grudems-errors.html

Those Calvinists who say that "regeneration" is the act of God that causes regeneration is false, for such a definition says that one is regenerated before he is regenerated, which is nonsensical. Such a definition limits regeneration to the cause of it, but not to the effect of it. Some of these Calvinists will say that the "drawing" = regeneration, but if this is so, then one is regenerated, or has spiritual life, before he "comes" to Jesus. But, Jesus put life after coming. (John 5: 40) The order given by Christ is drawing-->coming-->life. If the "drawing" = "receiving life," then one is alive before he is alive. But, again, this is nonsensical.

"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." (Rom. 3: 25)

"Propitiation" is a result of the sinner placing his trust in the sacrifice of Christ, in the righteousness of Christ. Again, this is in direct opposition to Hardshellism which teaches that faith in the blood of Christ is no condition or means for obtaining propitiation.

On this verse, Dr. Gill wrote:

"...'faith' in his blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the benefits of his propitiation; such as peace, pardon, atonement, justification, and adoption..." (Commentary)

Propitiation occurs through application of the blood of Christ. In the old testament typology, the blood was applied to the mercy seat and also applied to the people by sprinkling. During the inaugural of the first passover, the Lord instructed the people to apply the blood of the sacrificial lamb to the doors of their homes and this typifies the sinner's application of the blood to his own case by believing in Jesus. Further, in old testament atonement, the individual was required to lay his hands upon the sacrificial lamb and confess his sins as a way of appropriating the benefits of the atoning sacrifice.

Thus, since propitiation requires faith, and faith requires the hearing of the gospel, then the gospel is a means of grace and salvation.

"And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." (Rev. 7: 14)

The Greek word for "washed" is in the active voice, according to Robertson. Thus, regeneration is not, in every respect, a passive or monergistic experience. How do sinners wash their robes? Wrote Dr. Gill:

"The "robes" which they washed in his blood may either design themselves, their consciences, which this blood purges from dead works; or their outward conversation garments, which have their spots, and need continual washing; or else the robe of righteousness, and garments of salvation, or their justification, which is by the blood of Christ, Ro 5:9. The act of washing from sin, by the blood of Christ, is sometimes ascribed to Christ himself, as in Re 1:5; but here to the saints, and designs the concern which faith has in the blood of Christ, which deals with it for justification, peace, and pardon, for the removing of sin from the conscience, and for cleansing from all impurity, both of flesh and Spirit: and the effect of this is, that their robes were "made white"; that is, that they were freed from all sin, were without fault before the throne, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. This shows that these persons had no trust in themselves, or dependence on their own merits, and works of righteousness, but wholly trusted to, and depended on the blood and righteousness of Christ; which is the only way to come out of tribulation, and enter the kingdom." (Commentary)

"How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Heb. 9: 14)

This verse deals directly with the application of the blood of Christ to a person and occurs when one is saved, born again, or regenerated. Notice how this work is not non-cognitive as the Hardshells affirm. It involves the removing of ignorance (purging) and the giving of true saving knowledge. The word "conscience" denotes cognition, as does the word "serve." It is foolishness to speak of "born again pagans," as do the Hardshells, for pagans and all idolaters still serve false gods and are involved in "dead works," and do not serve the living God.

"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb. 10: 22)

Do pagans possess a "good conscience" or an "evil conscience"? The Hardshells affirm that many pagans are "born again," even though their consciences are yet unclean. Who has a "true heart"? Those who have faith or those who do not?

"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." (John 6: 53-56)

This is another passage that deals with the application of the blood of Christ to a soul. Salvation is sometimes described as Christ being incorporated into a believer, and is sometimes described as the believer being incorporated into Christ. This is symbolized in the two ordinances of the Christian faith, in baptism and the Lord's Supper. In the typology of baptism, the sinner is pictured as being incorporated into Christ, but in the Supper Christ is pictured as being incorporated into the sinner. So, how is Christ incorporated into the sinner? It is by appropriating the sacrifice of Christ by believing in Christ and accepting his atonement. On this Dr. Gill wrote:

"But the words design a spiritual eating of Christ by faith. To eat the flesh, and drink the blood of Christ, is to believe that Christ is come in the flesh, and is truly and really man; that his flesh is given for the life of his people, and his blood is shed for their sins, and this with some view and application to themselves...only such that believe in Christ are living souls...between these acts of faith, and eternal life, there is an inseparable connection."

This is the old Baptist position and it is false for the Hardshells to claim that they are "Old Baptists" when they reject that position.