Category Archives: Salvation

Expiation and Propitiation Defined. . .

Posted by Dan C. on

The text of an excellent sermon delivered at Grace Valley Christian Center can be found here. Below is an excerpt from that sermon that discusses both expiation and propitiation:

“In the Greek, the word “to propitiate” is hilaskomai, which means to appease, to placate, to avert, to turn aside the wrath of an offended person by means of a sacrifice. Four things are involved in propitiation: First, there is an offended deity; second, an offending sinner; third, the offense committed; and fourth, the sacrifice which removes the offense and causes the offended person to be gracious to the one who offended him. Salvation, in the Christian sense of the term, requires one very definite type of sacrifice, namely, propitiation. It is directed toward God to turn away his wrath, which is revealed against our offense, that he may be gracious to us.

“For the past century and a half, the idea of a God who is wrathful and opposes sin and sinners has not been accepted by unbelieving theologians. They readily will choose the conception of God as love but want to forget about the idea that God is holy. The notion of an angry God, they say, is not Christian, but pagan. They say the God of Christianity, in their highly evolved conception of it, is always a loving, nice God. When they translate the Greek word hilasmos, as found in 1 John 2:2 and 4:10, they reject the word “propitiation,” preferring to use the word “expiation,” which has to do with the cancellation of sin, but has nothing to do with a sacrifice offered to God to turn away his wrath.

Expiation means that God has canceled our sin and now there is nothing to worry about, but it is not the same as propitiation. One scholar wrote, “Those who hold to the ‘fire and brimstone’ school of theology, who revel in ideas such as that Christ was made a sacrifice to appease an angry God, or that the cross was a legal transaction in which an innocent victim was made to pay the penalty for the crimes of others as a propitiation of a stern God, find no support in Paul. These notions came into Christian theology by way of the legalistic minds of the medieval churchmen.” We must ask: If Christ’s death on the cross was not propitiation, if this sacrifice was not offered to God to turn away his wrath that he may be gracious to us and forgive us our sins and restore us into his fellowship, if the liberals are right that God is love all the time and never angry at sinners, then what is the need for Christ’s death even as expiation? It is doing nothing to God. Why doesn’t God, being nice and loving, just forgive our sins almost automatically whenever we commit them?” Christ, Our Propitiation,1 John 2:1,2 | Sunday, January 14, 2001 By P. G. Mathew, M.A., M. Div., Th.M., Copyright © 2001 by P. G. Mathew

Another gospel?

Posted by Dan C. on

“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–” Galatians 1:6

Martin Luther’s commentary on the above verse states:

“When the devil sees that he cannot hurt the cause of the Gospel by destructive methods, he does it under the guise of correcting and advancing the cause of the Gospel. He would like best of all to persecute us with fire and sword, but this method has availed him little because through the blood of martyrs the church has been watered. Unable to prevail by force, he engages wicked and ungodly teachers who at first make common cause with us, then claim that they are particularly called to teach the hidden mysteries of the Scriptures to superimpose upon the first principles of Christian doctrine that we teach. This sort of thing brings the Gospel into trouble. May we all cling to the Word of Christ against the wiles of the devil, “for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

Within the Galatian church, the false prophets to whom Paul referred were those who would add to the sufficiency of the gospel of grace through faith. Luther, like Paul, was concerned with the adding of works to the principles of faith. Paul’s clear teaching is that adding ‘works’ to grace is ‘another gospel’.

When we look around at the landscape of American Christianity we can find, even today, examples of adding works to the principles of faith in the matter of the salvation of the soul, as well as in the matter of the assurance of our salvation. In contrast, a far greater danger today might be what has been taken away from the teaching of the gospel rather than what is added. Gone, for the most part, is clear preaching and teaching concerning the problem of sin (before and after salvation), along with the adjacent topics of wrath, judgment to come, and the spiritual warfare faced by every believer as he/she works out their salvation with ‘fear and trembling’.

Without mentioning specific examples of today’s popular ministry methods, here’s the question/food for thought: Are omissions from the gospel as preached and taught in Scripture, for whatever reason, examples of ‘another gospel’?

Amazing love! How can it be that thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

Posted by Dan C. on

And Can It Be that I Should Gain

 Words: Charles Wesley, 1739 (Acts 16:26)
Music: Thomas Campbell, 1835

And can it be that I should gain
an interest in the Savior’s blood!
Died he for me? who caused his pain!
For me? who him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be
that thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be
that thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

‘Tis mystery all: th’ Immortal dies!
Who can explore his strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
to sound the depths of love divine.
‘Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
let angel minds inquire no more.
‘Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
let angel minds inquire no more.

He left his Father’s throne above
(so free, so infinite his grace!),
emptied himself of all but love,
and bled for Adam’s helpless race.
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free,
for O my God, it found out me!
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free,
for O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned sprit lay,
fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
thine eye diffused a quickening ray;
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
my chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed thee.

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in him, is mine;
alive in him, my living Head,
and clothed in righteousness divine,
bold I approach th’ eternal throne,
and claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach th’ eternal throne,
and claim the crown, through Christ my own.

I was reminded of this hymn this morning listening to a presentation given by Albert Mohler at the Together for the Gospel conference. Dr. Mohler described it as systematic theology. At the center is the doctrine of Christ’s substitutionary atonement on our behalf. What is sad is that in our time there are many who claim Christ who hate that doctrine.

The presentations made at the conference can be found here: http://www.t4g.org/.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO ACCEPT CHRIST?

Posted by Dan C. on

“Now if you were to ask the average man, the average preacher or the average person – the average Christian anywhere – “How do I come into saving relation to Jesus Christ?” the answer would be one of three. People would either tell you “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” — that’s Acts 16:31 or, they would say “Receive Christ as your Savior” — that’s John 1:12, or else they would give you this other answer. (And of course, those first two answers are true; they’re true!) Or else they would give you this third answer, “Accept Christ as your personal Savior.”

Now the word ‘accept Christ’ to the astonishment of a good many people does not occur in the Bible – it’s not there. What is it to ‘accept Christ’?”

The above is taken from an A.W. Tozer sermon. There are two parts to that sermon that can be found and read here. Just scroll down and you will see links to Parts 1 and 2. It is well worth the read!

Is God’s "Unconditional Acceptance" a Biblical Concept?

Posted by Dan C. on

Some time ago I participated in a Bible study concerning the importance of knowing what we believe as Christians – a great subject! A major point of the study book and materials was the topic of “unconditional acceptance” – God’s unconditional acceptance of us and the need for our unconditional acceptance of others. We should accept others with all their sin and faults, because we know that God accepts us even with our sin. This has become the mantra of much of today’s evangelical church – the new gospel, if you will. But is it biblical?

Well, I can’t find in anywhere in the Bible, and believe me I did my homework. What I do find in the Bible is Christ’s death for our sin as the first point of the gospel message that Paul preached, among others. What the death of Christ in our place means is that God can only accept us through the shed blood of His own Son. Saving faith hinges on recognizing our sin, repentance and a wholehearted turning from it, not bringing it with us!

I found that “unconditional acceptance” became the centerpiece of humanistic psychology beginning in the mid ’50s.  It gradually invaded the church until the condition we have today that it is this ‘new gospel’ permits avoiding the sin issue in the proclamation of the good news, as well as the need for continuously confronting the sin in our lives and turning from it in the process of sanctification as we grow spiritually.

Did I pose a rhetorical question? You bet, as far as I am concerned! The myth of God’s “unconditional acceptance” of sinners is the greatest lie the enemy has ever fed the human race (especially the church), except for the original lie in the Garden when he hinted that we can be like God and the first couple bit.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, unless someone can offer solid scriptural proof that I am wrong.

Salvation Apart From Repentance?

Posted by Dan C. on

Is salvation apart from repentance even possible? I am not talking here of some agonizing exercise of dredging up every little sin ever committed in order to make a verbal confession of each and every one. I am speaking however, of recognizing one’s sinful wretched state apart from Christ  and a consciousness turning away from sin and toward God.

“The idea that God will pardon a rebel who has not given up his rebellion is contrary to the Scripture and common sense. How horrible to contemplate a church full of persons who have been pardons but who still love sin and hate the ways of righteousness. And how much more horrible to think of heaven as filled with sinners who have not repented nor changed their ways of living.

I think there is little doubt that the teachings of salvation without repentance has lowered the moral standards of the church and produced a multitude of deceived religious professors who erroneously believe themselves to be saved when in fact they are still in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity.” A. W. Tozer – The Root of the Righteous

There are those who would say that ‘repentance is an act, something one ‘does’, making it a work and therefore not necessary for salvation.  I have even heard on more than a few occasions and from various sources that you are accepted by Jesus and will be embraced by God “with” your sin. Such is the popular notion of “unconditional acceptance”, and what appears to be the modern definition of grace. Not only that, it is being preached as the gospel of Jesus Christ in churches all across America, not to mention ‘sold’ as the gospel in Christian bookstores filled with ‘spiritual junk food’ as the main fare.

Step right up! Come to Jesus!  NO repentance necessary! If you give up on sin later, that’s ok. If you don’t, that’s ok too! God loves you SOOOOOOOO MUCH he cannot imagine heaven without you!

My friend, the creator of the universe did not send his Son to die for our sins so that we could just drag them along with us when we eagerly raise our hand, walk down front, or sign a little card in order to have our ‘best life now’. God sent his own Son, literally ‘gave him up’, so that when faced with our sin, we would hate it, forsake it, turn to Him and live the rest of our lives for His glory!

For God so loved the world. . .

Posted by Dan C. on

“For this is the way36 God loved the world: He gave his one and only37 Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish38 but have eternal life.”39 – John 3:16 (NET)36tn Or “this is how much”; or “in this way.” The Greek adverb οὕτως (Joutws) can refer (1) to the degree to which God loved the world, that is, to such an extent or so much that he gave his own Son (see R. E. Brown, John [AB], 1:133-34; D. A. Carson, John, 204) or (2) simply to the manner in which God loved the world, i.e., by sending his own son (see R. H. Gundry and R. W. Howell, “The Sense and Syntax of John 3:14-17 with Special Reference to the Use of Οὕτως…ὥστε in John 3:16,” NovT 41 [1999]: 24-39). Though the term more frequently refers to the manner in which something is done (see BDAG 741-42 s.v. οὕτω/οὕτως), the following clause involving ὥστε (Jwste) plus the indicative (which stresses actual, but [usually] unexpected result) emphasizes the greatness of the gift God has given. With this in mind, then, it is likely (3) that John is emphasizing both the degree to which God loved the world as well as the manner in which He chose to express that love. This is in keeping with John’s style of using double entendre or double meaning. Thus, the focus of the Greek construction here is on the nature of God’s love, addressing its mode, intensity, and extent.37tn Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).38tn In John the word ἀπόλλυμι (apollumi) can mean either (1) to be lost (2) to perish or be destroyed, depending on the context.39sn The alternatives presented are only two (again, it is typical of Johannine thought for this to be presented in terms of polar opposites): perish or have eternal life.

B4B NOTE: I think it worth noting that it only those who believe have eternal life, although the extent of God’s is love is to the world. The question then becomes “Who CAN believe?”, followed by “What does it mean to believe?”

Keeping first things first. . .

Posted by Dan C. on

The Apostle Paul probably ascertained some misplaced priorities within the church at the church in Corinth, for he had this to say to them in a letter written to them to point out that very thing – divisions and misplaced priorities.

“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.  After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep (died).” (1 Corinthians 15:3-6) (Emphasis mine)

The above verses are nearly always used to answer the question “What is the core of the gospel message?” I know I refer to them constantly when discussing the definition of the “gospel”.  Paul was a, in his own words, a ‘Jew among Jews’, with what some term the equivalent of several Masters degrees and Doctorate or two in his curriculum vitae. He nearly always preached in Jewish synagogues first before taking his message to his primary audience, the non-Jewish Gentile community. Wherever he went, his message revolved around the crucifixion of Christ and the work of God in reconciling men and women to Himself through that death and resurrection. More of Paul’s words to the same crowd. . .

“. . ., but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,” (1 Corinthians 1:23)

“For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 2:2)

Many times I’ve heard this sort of reaction to what Paul says is ‘of first importance’:

“So what? That was then and this is now. Just talking about God’s love and how much he wants us to find our special purpose and have our best life now is what attracts people to church. We don’t need all that sin and repentance stuff!”

If you ever get that, a reply to those objections just might be. . .

Well, you might be filling pews (and theater seating) with the ‘unchurched’, and pronouncing anyone who ‘makes a decision’ because they liked the show ‘saved’, but how many ‘newly churched/saved’ folk actually remain ‘unsaved’ because things ‘of first importance’ were not part of your marketing/advertising campaign to get them through the front doors, nor are they preeminent (and in some cases even included) in your preaching, stage presentations?

Something to think about. . .

So that’s what I was thinking about during my ‘morning’ time before I went to work today and during my drive to work. Pulling into the parking lot, I heard a Keith Green song that literally made my whole day. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There is a Redeemer

There is a Redeemer
Jesus, God’s own Son
Precious Lamb of God
Messiah, Holy One

Jesus, my Redeemer
Name above all names
Precious Lamb of God
Messiah, O for sinners slain

Thank You, O my Father
For giving us Your Son
And leaving us Your Spirit
‘Til the work on earth is done

When I stand in glory
I will see His face
And there I’ll serve
My King forever
In that holy place

What is Evangelism?

Posted by Dan C. on

I suppose if you did one of those ‘man on the street’ type things and asked the question “What is evangelism?” you would get a wide variety of answers, even if you were outside Any Church, U.S.A.  If you were outside a church you could ask a follow-up question after receiving a definition of evangelism something like “How are you contributing to the evangelism effort?” Here is a good definition of evangelism published in the Banner of Truth magazine over 30 years ago that still holds true today.

“Evangelism is not a making of proselytes; it is not persuading people to make a decision; it is not proving that God exists, or making a good case for the truth of Christianity; it is not inviting someone to a meeting; it is not exposing the contemporary dilemma, or arousing interest in Christianity; it is not wearing a badge saying “Jesus Saves!”  Some of these things are right and good in their place, but none of them should be confused with evangelism. To evangelize is to declare on the authority of God what he has done to save sinners, to warn men of their lost condition, to direct them to repent, and to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.” (John Cheesman, The Grace of God in the Gospel [Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1972], 119)

Using the ‘contextualization/need to adapt to the culture’ excuse for leaving 3/4 of the ‘good news’ is NO excuse! The ‘believe in Jesus’ is about all that’s left in the modern evangelical gospel. Man’s lost condition without Christ has not changed, the effect of sin has not changed, the need to repent has not changed.

We need only declare/proclaim, in fact that is all that we are asked to do – tell it. When we tell it and God has opened ears to hear, eyes to see and awakened a dead heart, true salvation follows – a work of God, not man. Even faith to believe is a precious gift. Ephesians 2:8-9.

He is Risen!

Posted by Dan C. on

On the morning after the Jewish Sabbath, a small group of women went to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus, wondering who would roll away the stone. When they arrived, the stone had already been rolled away and they were met by an angel who said:

“But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified.  He is not here, for he has risen, as he said.” Matthew 28:5-6

When it comes to classic Easter music, a favorite of mine is the refrain from the Robert Lowery hymn Up From The Grave He Arose:

“Up from the grave he arose;
with a mighty triumph o’er his foes;
he arose a victor from the dark domain,
and he lives forever, with his saints to reign.
He arose! He arose! Hallelujah! Christ arose!”

If we consider more contemporary music, my favorite has to be The Easter Song, written my Keith Green and performed by The 2nd Chapter of Acts. I actually found a short clip of an early performance by the 2nd Chapter of Acts with Keith Green on guitar here.

Favorite Easter music aside, there’s the significance of the resurrection, summarized by the Apostle Paul  in one of his letters to the Corinthian church:

“And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” 1 Corinthians 15:14

If there were no resurrection, not only would preaching Christ be senseless and faith in Christ useless, all the witnesses and preachers of the resurrection would be liars, no one would be redeemed from sin, all former believers would have perished, and Christians would be the most pitiable people on the earth! (See 1 Cor 15:14-20).

To borrow from The Easter Song:

Here the bells ringing
They’re singing that you can be born again
Here the bells ringing
They’re singing Christ is risen from the dead

The angel up on the tombstone
Said he has risen, just as he said
Quickly now, go tell his disciples
That Jesus Christ is no longer dead

Joy to the word, he has risen, hallelujah!