Grudem "Free Grace" Theology

5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel
1. Auflage 2016
ISBN: 978-1-4335-5117-8
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection

E-Book, Englisch, 160 Seiten

Must the gospel message include a call for people to repent of their sins? 'No,' say Free Grace advocates. Is evidence of a changed life an important indication of whether a person is truly born again? 'No, again,' these advocates say. But in this book, Wayne Grudem shows how the Bible answers 'Yes' to both of these questions, arguing that the Free Grace movement contradicts both historic Protestant teaching and the New Testament itself. This important book explains the true nature of the Christian gospel and answers the question asked by so many people: 'How can I know that I'm saved?'

Wayne Grudem (PhD, University of Cambridge) is Distinguished Research Professor Emeritus of Theology and Biblical Studies at Phoenix Seminary in Phoenix, Arizona. He is the author of more than twenty-five books, including Bible Doctrine and Christian Beliefs.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Grudem, Wayne

Leseproben

Introduction

It is with some reluctance that I write this book. Many of the people who hold the Free Grace viewpoint that I disagree with in the pages that follow have been my friends for years, even decades. They strongly affirm the complete inerrancy of the Bible, the Trinity, the full deity of Christ, the substitutionary atonement of Christ for our sins, and dozens upon dozens of other important doctrinal convictions. Many of them lead exemplary Christian lives. They are genuine brothers and sisters in Christ, and I appreciate their friendship and their partnership in the work of God’s kingdom here on earth. Therefore I consider this book to be part of a serious, earnest discussion of a significant difference, but a difference that is still among friends.

Yet this book is about more than the Free Grace controversy. It is about the nature of the gospel that we proclaim in evangelism. The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes the need for repentance from sin (in the sense of an internal resolve to turn from sin) as a crucial part of genuine saving faith. As I worked on this book, I became increasingly concerned that much of modern evangelicalism has a tendency to avoid or water down any call for unbelievers to sincerely repent of their sins (not merely to “change their minds”) as part of coming to trust in Christ for forgiveness of those sins (see chapter 2).

This book also deals with assurance of salvation. How can I know if I’m really a born-again Christian, and how can I know that I will be saved for eternity? I’m concerned that there is considerable uncertainty about assurance in the evangelical world today, and therefore I have attempted to explain the New Testament material on assurance and also to treat sensitively the question of pastoral care for those who are wondering if they are truly saved (see chapter 3).

Finally, this book deals with the nature of saving faith in the New Testament, explaining that it is a fuller and richer concept than merely believing that what the Bible says is factually and historically true (though that is important). Saving faith involves coming into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, coming into his presence and deciding to place my trust in him as a living, divine person who sees and hears us every moment and who knows the deepest thoughts of my heart. I am concerned that this emphasis on placing our trust in the person of Christ is too often missing in our evangelism today (see chapter 4).

What I have found to be true in many previous theological disputes has also proven to be true in the dispute before us here: the Lord has several purposes in allowing a doctrinal controversy into his church. In particular, I suspect that the Lord would have us not only disagree graciously with those who hold the Free Grace position but also think carefully about our own understanding and practice regarding the nature of the gospel, repentance, saving faith, and assurance of salvation.

Many evangelicals today who have never heard of the Free Grace movement have unknowingly moved too far in the direction of Free Grace teaching anyway. They have become too timid about urging unbelievers to repent of their sins as they come to trust in Christ (in part because we live in a culture that would condemn any call for repentance as legalistic and judgmental), too vague about explaining what it is to trust in Christ personally, and too uncertain about how and when to give assurance of salvation to those who are part of our churches.

For all these reasons, I hope that this book will be useful for evangelical Christians today.

A. What is the Free Grace gospel?

The Free Grace position claims that we are justified by faith alone.1 I have no disagreement with that statement in itself—in fact, justification by faith alone has been a primary belief of Protestants since the time of Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.2

The problem comes when the Free Grace movement understands “alone,” in the phrase “justified by faith alone,” in a novel way. Protestants generally have taken “alone” to mean that nothing else helps or nothing else contributes in our obtaining justification from God. Our faith is the only thing that God requires of us—not good works, not offering some sacrifice, not performing some ritual or ceremony, not the use of some means of grace—just faith alone.

But Free Grace proponents have gone beyond the claim that God asks of us nothing more than faith when he justifies us. They have made an additional claim: that faith occurs by itself when a person is justified, in the sense that no other human actions necessarily accompany faith (such as repentance from sin or doing good works after we are justified).3

Then, because they argue that “nothing else must necessarily be present” with faith, the Free Grace movement teaches that it is wrong to say that:

repentance from sin must accompany faith

or

any other human activities necessarily result from faith, such as good works or continuing to believe.4

This Free Grace understanding of “justification by faith alone” leads to several significant pastoral practices, such as

In evangelism. Evangelistic messages generally should not include any call to repentance, in the sense of an inward resolve to turn away from sin (this is said to be adding “works” to faith).

In giving assurance to people who deny their faith. People who accurately understood the gospel and sincerely said that they believed in Christ at some time in the past but now say that they no longer believe in Christ are likely to be still saved, and we can assure them that they are saved (because justifying faith is a one-time act).

In giving warnings to people who persist in sinful conduct. A professing Christian’s sinful conduct should not ordinarily be used as a basis for warning the person that he or she might not be saved (rather, we should say that the person is foolishly not living according to who he or she really is).

In giving assurance to people who continue to produce good works. A professing Christian’s righteous and godly conduct of life (“good works”) should not ordinarily be used as one basis for giving that person assurance of salvation.

Where did the modern Free Grace movement come from? As far as I can tell, it stems primarily from a minority view among the faculty members at Dallas Theological Seminary. More particularly, it stems from an aggressive promotion of the Free Grace viewpoint by Zane Hodges (1932–2008), who taught New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary for twenty-seven years, from 1959 to 1986.

But that recent origin does not mean that the movement is insignificant. Although only a minority of Dallas Seminary professors held a Free Grace view, Zane Hodges was an exceptionally persuasive teacher, and every year some students adopted his view. Then, through these students, the Free Grace movement gained a remarkable worldwide influence, especially in discouraging Christians from including any explicit call to repentance in their presentations of the gospel. (I have been surprised how many Christian leaders in various parts of the world have said to me, “I’m glad you’re writing about this.”)

B. Why I do not use the term Lordship Salvation.

Some readers may wonder why I do not use the term Lordship Salvation in discussing this topic. In fact, the matters that I discuss here have in previous years often been referred to as the “Lordship Salvation controversy.”5 But as I researched this topic, it became increasingly apparent that the phrase Lordship Salvation was a decidedly misleading and unfortunate summary of the central issues involved.6 In brief, popular terms, the controversy was sometimes summarized as follows.

1) Some people believe that you can accept Jesus as Savior but not as Lord (the Free Grace position).

2) Other people believe that you have to accept Jesus as both Savior and Lord (those who do not hold the Free Grace position but rather what was termed the “Lordship Salvation” position)

The problem is that neither side will ever win or lose the argument when it is framed in those terms. The Free Grace supporters who hold the first position still affirm strongly that Jesus is in fact Lord over the entire universe and over all of our lives, even though we imperfectly submit to his lordship.7 And those on the non-Free Grace side, those who hold the second position, all agree that our submission to Christ’s lordship is imperfect in this life.8

So both sides agree that Jesus is Lord of our lives in some sense and is not fully Lord of our lives in another sense. Trying to define precisely how much Jesus has to be acknowledged as...