One of the reasons there is so much confusion about the gospel is that we have misunderstood and misapplied the intent of the gospel.
We (in the American church at large) have come to believe that the gospel is all about a decision instead of a lifestyle. Our efforts are predominantly decision-oriented. We encourage people to “pray the prayer” so they will be “ok.” We tend to count professions over radically changed lives. And consequently (and sadly), we are more surprised when a new believer exhibits genuine transformation and new life than when he does not.
There is a sense in which it is appropriate to pursue decisions and professions — every person who follows Christ began following Him at a point in time with a decision. Yet the problem with decision-based evangelism and ministry is that it succumbs to the temptation to ignore the importance of what happens to a believer after that initial decision. And a corollary to that temptation is the one that establishes two classes of believers — those who believe and don’t walk with Christ or have interest in Him, and those who believe and demonstrate the power of the Holy Spirit working within them through a genuine transforming life (disciples, we call these “special” Christians).
Yet Christ and the NT writers had no such dual categories for believers. Rather, they had just two categories of people — believers and unbelievers.
From the very beginning of His ministry, Jesus made it clear that repentance is not indicated only by a profession, but that it will also be accompanied by fruit in keeping with that repentance. So the Pharisees weren’t baptized by Him and began their antagonistic relationship with Christ.
And followers who bear fruit was the consistent message of Christ. Good trees (righteous lives) bear good fruit (evidence of conversion); bad trees (unrighteous, unredeemed lives) bear bad fruit (evidence of lack of conversion).
Those who do not give evidence of Christ’s life will be judged by Christ.
All those who belong to Christ will demonstrate their kinship to Him through transformed lives and fruit; yet the amount of fruit that they produce will vary (in large part because of the various gifts and faith given by God Himself to them).
These truths are also the testimony of the remainder of the New Testament — those who live a consistent pattern of ungodliness will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Consistent patterns and lifestyles of sin are evidence of an unredeemed life; evidence of the new life is that the believer can observe sin and say, “that is what I was…” (and not what I now am).
The life of faith will give evidence to that faith with righteous deeds; there is no living faith without living works.
The one who says that he is a believer (in fellowship with God) and continues to live a life consistent with unbelief is in fact not a believer, but a lying unbeliever. [I have long said that the problem that people have in interpreting John’s epistles, particularly the first one, is not that they are especially hard to understand, but that they have hard implications for those who do not live righteously.]
So I say again, Jesus and the NT writers only had two categories of people — believers and unbelievers. And those who do not give evidence of a transformed life have no right to assume that they are believers (in fact, such an assumption is perilous to the eternal state of their souls).
This obviously is no small issue: how we understand the gospel and salvation will influence the way we do (or do not do) evangelism — and who we will (or will not) present with the gospel.
Let me say again, as I said on Sunday: Jesus Christ did not come to earth to sell an insurance policy so all men might have a good place to go when they die. He came to give His righteousness and His life and a corresponding new way to live so that we might forever enjoy fellowship with Him. Those who believe the former and disdain the latter will not have eternal life and life with Christ. The issue is just that big.
We best get this one right.
Words of Grace 