Post by Eli Brayley on Jun 5, 2009 8:33:49 GMT -7
This is such an excellent three part series on assurance that I highly recommend everyone should read. May God bless the truths here to your hearts.
----------------
The Doctrine of Assurance
Part One (Can I Really Be Sure?)
John G. Reisinger
The doctrine of Assurance of Salvation has been the subject of both confusion and controversy down through the years. Actually, it goes all the way back to the New Testament times. The question, "Can I really be sure I am going to heaven?" has been given a variety of answers. Some have not only said yes, but have gone a step farther and taught that you must be sure or else you do not really have faith in Christ. At the other extreme, men have not only answered with an emphatic "No!" but have earnestly contended that any form of assurance of salvation was a dangerous delusion of the devil. In between these two positions have been the many forms of 'maybe' which were attended by many 'ifs' and 'buts' that tended to nullify each other. I personally think this is one of the most misunderstood doctrines of our generation. I will try to unravel the problem with a series of questions.
One: Is true assurance of salvation possible or must we wait until we die? Put another way, is it possible for a person, while still living, to be certain that he is going to go to heaven? The answer is, "Yes, assurance is not only possible but Christians are exhorted, as a duty, to seek and find heartfelt assurance."
Two: Is assurance of salvation necessary to true salvation? Can a true Christian doubt that he is saved and still be saved? The answer is, "Assurance is not necessary to salvation." Faith and assurance are not the same thing. You can have either one without having the other.
Three: Is it possible to be sure you are saved and actually be lost? The answer is, "Yes, it is possible to have false assurance of salvation."
Four: How can I be sure of salvation and be certain I am not deluded with false assurance? The answer to that will form the bulk of this article.
Let us examine the first question and answer it more fully. When we affirm that a believer can indeed be sure of his justification before God we immediately part company with religions like Roman Catholicism. The question of assurance was one of the primary points of contention between Rome and the Reformers. Rome called assurance of salvation "the Sin of Presumption." For anyone to dare believe he went straight to heaven upon dying was tantamount to an unwarranted presuming on the grace of God. It was and is literally a mortal sin.
This view teaches that no man can be sure, while he is in this life, that he is justified in God's sight. No man can be certain that all of his sins are completely forgiven and that when he dies he is sure to see the face of God in peace and acceptance. The Roman Catholic Church is the premier representative of this view. She is also the most adamant in her deliberate opposition to the Biblical doctrine of assurance. Gregory the Great, a seventh century pope, not only denied assurance was possible, he taught it was dangerous and not even desirable.
The greater our sins, the more we must do to make up for them …whether we have done enough to atone for them we cannot know until after death … We can never be sure of success … assurance of salvation, and the feeling of safety engendered by it is dangerous for anybody and would not be desirable even if possible.
The Council of Trent, in answer to Luther's exposition of the Biblical truth of Justification by faith alone, went a step farther than Gregory the Great. They were not content to say that assurance was dangerous and not desirable, they declared that it was a mortal sin to claim assurance of salvation. They went still farther and, with full Papal authority and sanction, hurled anathemas and consigned to eternal damnation all who dared preach or believe such a doctrine. Let any who doubt this read the section on justification in the Decrees of the Council of Trent, and see how specifically and clearly the Jesuits spelled out how deeply Rome hates the doctrine of Assurance. Here are the actual words used by the Council of Trent:
Whosoever shall affirm, that when the grace of Justification is received, the offence of the penitent sinner is so forgiven, and the sentence of eternal punishment reversed, that there remains no temporal punishment to be endured, before his entrance into the kingdom of Heaven, either in this world or in the future world, in purgatory, let him be accursed. Council of Trent, January 1547.
The above "curse," or anathema, which means "let him go to hell" is still the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic church. Assurance of salvation is still a cardinal sin, the sin of presumption, and anyone holding that doctrine is condemned to hell. Many think Rome has changed and has become evangelical. They are being duped very badly. The Anathema of Trent still stands in force. It is still a cardinal sin for which there is no forgiveness unless it is given up before you die. In other words, a Roman Catholic who dies with assurance of salvation is sure to be doomed in hell according to the official teaching of Roman Catholicism.
Like Roman Catholicism, every form of works religion must of necessity say, "No, you cannot be sure." The best you can have is a "hope-so" salvation and wait until death to find out for sure. You can only "do your best and hope it is good enough." One never knows if he has worked hard enough in a system of works religion. We all know we have sinned, but how many good deeds does it take to make up for a bad deed? Any notion of a works religion is totally foreign to the Bible. The Word of God is clear that salvation is by grace through faith and not by works.
Here is a sample prayer from the Roman Catholic prayer book that shows how far into error one can go when rejecting the gospel of free and sovereign grace.
"I desire by Thy grace to make satisfaction for my sins by worthy fruits of penance; and I willingly accept from Thy hands whatever pains, crosses, or sufferings I shall meet with during the remainder of my life, or at my death, as just punishments for my iniquities; begging that they may be united to the sufferings and death of my Redeemer, and sanctified by His passion, in which is all my hope for mercy, grace, and salvation."
One need only compare that works statement with the words of the great hymn, It Is Well With My Soul to see how radically different Rome's gospel is from the gospel of grace preached by Paul.
My Sin—O the bliss of this glorious thought!
—my sin, not in part but the whole,
is nailed to the cross and I bear it no more;
praise the Lord, Praise the Lord, O my soul!
When Roman Catholics become sick, they are urged to pray these words:
"Beg that God would accept of all thy pains and uneasiness, in union with the sufferings of your Savior Jesus Christ, in deduction of the punishment [in Purgatory] due to your sins."
Again, the Roman Catholic is urged to ask God:
"Let our fasts, we beseech Thee, O Lord, be acceptable to Thee, that by atoning for our sins, they may both make us worthy of Thy grace, and bring us to everlasting effects of Thy promise."
One final quote to show how clearly and totally Rome rejected the all-sufficiency of Christ's death as the only ground of assurance and substitution for the filthy 'good' works of the sinner.
"How very short the time of this life is, which is given us in order to labor for eternity, and to send before us a stock of good works, on which to live for eternity."
It should be obvious that it is impossible to believe in salvation by works, that is, earning the favor or mercy of God by our own efforts or good deeds, and at the same time have any degree of assurance. Any person, Catholic or Protestant, who starts where Pope Gregory did, will inevitably end up where the Council of Trent did. If we have to 'atone for our sins' and 'make up for them by our works,' we certainly will never know 'whether we have done enough' and must therefore, of necessity, never be 'sure of success.' It must also follow that it will not be possible for such a man to be anything other than angry with the person who says, "I know" and "I am sure". The very nature of salvation by works not only makes assurance impossible, it also makes hostility toward anyone that claims assurance inevitable. The most that sincere 'good works' can produce is a very shaky foundation at best, and the man who has earnestly labored 'by his own efforts' knows this only too well. It is only natural for him to react in anger at the man who says, "Ah, friend, a single look at the Lord Jesus Christ in repentant faith brought hope and assurance to my soul. My feet are on a foundation of solid rock." If the poor man has spent his whole lifetime working hard at his religion without even a taste of assurance, who does the person think he is who boasts about "full salvation by simple faith" having tasted of a "well of water that springs up into soul satisfying assurance."
The people who feel that assurance of forgiveness is either the result of pride or presumption are not aware of it, but actually, it is they who are filled with pride. They have never seen themselves to be what they really are in God's sight. Once a man stands under the Word of God and honestly measures himself by its requirements, he will never again talk about earning God's mercy in any manner or any amount. When God's word in Romans, "none righteous no not one … all are sinners … all guilty …" (Rom. 3:10–23), comes to their hearts in power, their mouths will be stopped, their hopes in their own efforts crushed, and they will be forced to look outside of themselves for hope.
Now because sin is not felt, the work of Christ in behalf of poor sinners cannot be seen. The first hope that such a thing as assurance is possible begins when we see the greatness of Jesus Christ. Ah, friend, if you would see how able He is to deal with sin, death, and the grave, you would seek Him and Him alone. If you have been taught by the Holy Spirit how willingly the Savior is to receive and forgive all who come to Him in repentance and faith, how can you keep from coming to Him as the hymn says:
Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfil Thy law's demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.
Nothing in my hand I bring;
Simply to Thy Cross I cling!
Naked, come to Thee for dress;
Helpless, look to Thee for grace:
Foul, I to the fountain fly;
Wash me, Savior, or I die.
The real problem with those who commit this first mistake, those who believe you cannot be sure of forgiveness, is not so much a wrong doctrine of assurance as it is a wrong doctrine of salvation. They have no salvation about which to be sure. They have no sure way into the presence of God to test and try. It is not an understanding of how to have assurance these folks need, but rather a knowledge of salvation—or how to be saved. It is true we might show them how the great apostle uses those two great words of assurance—I know, and I am persuaded—to prove assurance is a reality. We might preach from II Timothy 1:12, "…I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." However, we would have to go back to verse nine and show what saved and called meant. We would preach from that text what salvation by grace—not according to works—but grace from eternity according to His own purpose, really means. We would probably then go to 4:6–8 and explain how Paul's great assurance was based on the certainty of (1) Christ being able and willing (1:12), and (2) Paul knew he had really believed and committed because his perseverance in the fight and faith proved it. There must be faith before it can be tested, and there must be a clear gospel before there is faith. Most of those in this error need the gospel.
We should add that Rome's great fear that assurance of salvation would lead to loose living and a 'no-care' attitude was unfortunately justified by the lives of some of those claiming to be 'justified by grace through faith alone.' We can do no better than to quote the article on assurance of salvation in the Philadelphia Confession of Faith:
Although temporary believers and other unregenerate men, may vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presumptions of being in the favor of God, and (in a) state of salvation, which hope of theirs shall perish; yet such as truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love him in sincerity, endeavoring to walk in all good conscience before him, may in this life be certainly assured that they are in the state of grace, and may rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, which hope shall never make them ashamed. Philadelphia Confession of Faith, Chapter XVIII, Article 1.
Do the Scriptures support this statement? Is real assurance of salvation possible in this life time? I believe the Bible does teach what the confession states. I have looked in many faces in hospital beds and read Romans 5:1, "Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God." I would ask, "Do you have this peace which is here promised? Have you been declared righteous by God? Can you say, "I am as righteous—in God's sight—as His dear Son Jesus Christ?'" That text is clearly stating that assurance of salvation is possible.
Ephesians 2:8, 9 has been used of God to bring many sheep to an assurance of forgiveness of sins. They have seen that salvation is a totally free gift from God's grace that is the possession of every one who has faith in Jesus Christ. The "have been saved" is a "once and for all statement" that cannot be altered. That passage is talking about assurance of salvation.
II Timothy 1:12 is like a sledge hammer against the work mongers that deny assurance is possible. Just look at those amazing words carefully.
For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. II Timothy 1:12.
This verse contains two of Paul's favorite words. Paul knows and he is persuaded. He is not saying that he knows all about Jesus Christ. Paul knows Christ Himself. He is emphasizing Whom he knows—not what he knows. Because he knows Christ, Paul is confident that he can commit his soul and his eternity into Christ's hands and both will be kept secure for time and eternity. Paul had entrusted his eternal destiny into the hands of Christ against "that day" when he, Paul, would stand before God. He knew all would be well in the day of judgment. He was positive he was saved and secure. The word committed means to deposit and would be the word used when you deposited money in the bank. You were trusting them to keep it for you against a rainy day. When Paul envisioned himself standing before God, he was absolutely certain he would hear God say, "Come and welcome, thy sins are all forgiven Thee."
It is essential that we realize these words of Paul are not spoken in an emotional fit of religious enthusiasm by someone unaware of the import of his words. No, no, these are the words of a man whose emotional reality expressed exactly what he knew was true from personal experience. These words are the logical conclusion to a lifetime of faith that had been tested experientially under every circumstance and had "finished the course" with flying colors.
The most important thing about this statement is that it is not written for Apostles, preachers, missionaries, or "super spiritual Christians." This is for every believer. This statement includes every person that is joined to Christ in a living faith. If you have trusted Christ then this verse describes you whether you feel it is true of you or not! It is not your faith that will keep you, it is the one in whom you have put your faith. If you have committed your soul and life into the hands of Jesus Christ, you are safe!
One of my favorite passages in dealing with strangers to grace is John 14:1–6. I explain that Jesus predicted that He was going back to heaven. He then informs His disciples that they not only know where He is going but they also know how to get there. I am so grateful that Thomas asked the big question. "Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?" (John 14:5). I explain to people that any religious leader, including myself, could mislead them through ignorance, but Jesus Christ would never do so. Here, in the Bible, a confused doubter asked Christ Himself the specific question, "How can I know the way to heaven?" If anyone ought to be able to answer that question with absolute authority, it is our Lord Jesus Christ.
And what is the answer? It says nothing about baptism or joining the church. Jesus did not tell Thomas to "send up a big stock of good works." Look at the answer Jesus gave. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). The way to heaven is by believing in Jesus Christ. He is the Way, without Him there is no going. He is the Truth, without Him there is no knowing, and He is the Life, without Him there is no living. When you put this verse together with John 6:37 you have the gospel and assurance. Just as Jesus said, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me," (John 14:6). He also said that all, without a single exception, that did come to the Father through Him were absolutely guaranteed of being received and kept forever. Read John 6:37 for yourself.
We totally reject Rome's view that assurance is both impossible and a mortal sin. However, we must immediately add that if Rome's doctrine of salvation led to assurance being the sin of presumption, modern fundamentalism's doctrine of salvation has led to the sin of a groundless assumption. The doctrine of "eternal security" is not assurance, it is insurance for graceless professors. Today everybody and his brother is sure they are going to heaven regardless of how they think or act. They made a decision and were given the assurance that they were truly saved. We call this "easy-believism." The root cause of this error grows out of the strong desire of every religious group to have a method of manufacturing believers.
Every group seems to have this strong desire for a fool-proof method of giving assurance of salvation. Each group has a system that enables them to produce, package, label, and seal their converts with the assurance that they are heaven bound. Every group may have a different method, but they all have a clearly defined system that enables them to say to anyone who goes through the prescribed course, "you are saved and safe." Let me list a few such religions and their particular system.
The Roman Catholic system of making a 'saint' is quite clear. You live a holy life and then make a personal appearance via a miracle. The church investigates and validates both your holy life and miraculous appearance after death and then declares that you are on the saint list. This is called being "canonized." The faithful may then pray to you along with Mary and the other saints on the list.
The Episcopalian will baptize you as a baby and declare that your original sin has been removed and you are now a regenerated child of God.
The Church of Christ does not sprinkle little babies into the kingdom but they do teach that you "meet the blood of Christ in the waters of baptism (immersion)." Like Rome and the Episcopalian, this group believes it is essential to be baptized in order to be saved.
The Lutheran and the Reformed, including the Presbyterians will sprinkle you into the covenant as a baby and then later 'confirm' you in the Covenant of Grace into full church membership after catechizing you in their particular creed.
The Plymouth Brethren have an iron-clad system of rigidly conforming to their clearly defined but unwritten code of nonconformity. They have the tightest nondenominational denomination that you will ever find.
The typical Baptist and Bible churches also have their system. You walk down the aisle in response to an altar call, say a short prayer, memorize a verse, shake the preacher's hand and you are assured that you are "saved, eternally secure and ready for heaven."
The Charismatics put their hands on a television as a "point of contact" with the guru who has "the gift of healing and power to anoint you with the Holy Spirit." A $100.00 donation to keep this "mighty work of faith on the air" is often implied to be part of the system. The sign that you are sealed in grace is the ability to speak in tongues.
True Religion Is A Heart Matter
The great difficulty with this packaging and labeling business is obvious to any honest observer. First of all, we all know that true religion is ultimately a "heart matter" that directly affects one's life, attitudes, and conduct. We also know, in our saner moments, that we cannot look into another person's heart. This being true, we cannot therefore give any person assurance that he is really saved. At most, all we can say, "John professes to be a child of God, and so far his profession looks pretty good. His life seems to back up his profession." We really have no business to dogmatically say to, or about, any individual, "He is saved." All we can say is, "His profession looks genuine." If he deserts his wife and family and runs off with the choir director next year then we will say, "His profession looks totally empty."
The second difficulty this packaging and labeling business creates is this: Once we have run someone through our system and labeled them saved, what do we say when they get caught in open sin and rebellion? What do we say about our converts to whom we gave explicit assurance that they were saved and secure because they had gone through our system? Remember, we are the ones that "signed, sealed, and assured their certainty of heaven." And, I must add, this sad and embarrassing situation occurs in every group mentioned above.
I remember when one of the popes took some of the Catholic saints off the list. The comedians had a field day with a song called When the Saints Come Tumbling Down. One of the saints removed was Saint Christopher. He was the patron saint of my wife's aunt, an ardent Roman Catholic. She always prayed to Saint Christopher and was furious when the pope took her favorite saint off the list. She never did forgive the pope. It was not a joking matter to her.
Many babies who were 'engrafted into Christ' at baptism and then sealed at confirmation later lived like the Devil and mocked the very grace they had supposedly had infused into them. Who does not remember the famous Episcopal priest who received a $2,000 speaker's fee for ridiculing the very gospel that he had sworn to believe and preach? His favorite line was, "When I hear the hymn "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; Let me hide myself in Thee," I think of scared thingy roaches running into cracks in the rocks." The Bishop had assured that man's parents that he was engrafted into Christ.
All of the branches of Reformed churches have seen many who had been sprinkled into the church and later memorized the catechism only to grow up in blatant unbelief and hate and ridicule the very truths they learned as children.
The fundamental Baptists and independent churches have had more than their share of false converts. How many have gone forward, prayed the sinners prayer, been given assurance of eternal security only to disgrace the name of Christ in openly wicked living? This group has many Chuck Templetons, the co-founder of Youth for Christ, who today totally deny what they once preached to thousands.
I would venture to say that the church that you attend has seen some cases of apostasy that has brought great grief to your soul. You saw a young couple walk down an aisle with tears running down their face. You took them into the inquiry room and assured them, after they prayed, "Lord Jesus, come into my heart," that they were saved and eternally secure. They are now divorced, the husband is in jail for selling dope and the wife is working as a stripper and living with a man who is married to another woman. Have we not all seen things that we can hardly believe are true?
Problems With Labeling People
One of the greatest difficulties in dealing with this packaging and labeling error is the inability to confront the problem because we are often the very people who packaged and labeled the guy who is in jail for selling dope. He went through our system and we told him he was safe and secure. It is not possible to deal with the problem without at least considering that just maybe something is terribly wrong with our system. However, the moment the system is challenged many will immediately reply, "But the altar call system and inquiry room method really works!" But does it really? Granted it gets people to make a confession of faith but are most of the professions really genuine?
We assume that we are the truly fundamental people that alone are proclaiming the truth. All of the 'godly soul winning preachers' have done it this way. This argument totally rewrites history. The church evangelized for nearly 2,000 years without any altar calls or inquiry rooms and still experienced genuine revival. It is true that they had people fall away after confessing Christ but never in the great numbers that are doing so today.
The real question we must face is this: What do we do with a host of our converts that are living like the Devil after they were 'saved' by going through our system? There are not too many choices and most of them are cures that are worse than the disease. Let me mention two errors that arise when we refuse to admit that something may be wrong with our system of giving assurance.
First of all, we can adopt the old view that these people were saved and then lost. Granted there are some texts that seem to teach that this is possible but a careful examination of those texts plus an exegesis of many other texts will always lead us to conclude that no one will ever be truly saved and then lost. I will say more about this later. The second error is of more recent origin and has deeply penetrated the church in our generation. It was invented by people who were unwilling to either examine their system or give up their doctrine of eternal security. I am referring to the Carnal Christian doctrine. We covered this subject in two previous issues of Sound of Grace (Volume 5, Nos. 5 and 6) and so will say very little here. I do, however, want to remind you of several things.
(1) This doctrine was a deliberate invention to protect the converts of an easy-believism gospel that had departed from the biblical gospel. Leaders could not blame their own system nor could they accept that a Christian could be saved and lost. Believing those two things forced them to find another answer to the problem and the Carnal Christian doctrine was the result. This doctrine enabled the proponents to protect (a) their easy-believism gospel, (b) the altar call and giving assurance to all who came, (c) the doctrine of eternal security of all who had been assured, and (d) the 'sure salvation' of their converts who did not live like real converts. Everybody and everything won except the truth of the gospel. The truth of the gospel was dragged through the streets.
(2) The Carnal Christian doctrine is less than 200 years old and was preceded by, and consciously brought about by, the people who rejected the preaching of both repentance and the lordship of Christ in evangelism. This doctrine was designed and promoted purely as a means of justifying the lack of true godliness among the converts of easy-believism.
(3) To repeat what I said in previous articles. No Christian is totally carnal and likewise no Christian is totally spiritual. There are not two categories. A carnal Christian, meaning a person totally controlled by carnality even though truly saved is a contradiction in terms. All Christians have carnal aspects in their life and likewise all Christians have spiritual aspects in their life.
A Fair and Honest Question
"But Mr. Reisinger, are you saying that we should never label people? Do you mean we should never tell anyone, 'You are saved' "?
That is exactly what I am saying. If you are honest, you will have to admit that since you cannot see a person's heart you cannot give him assurance that he has truly believed. Someone may say, "But I always make sure they are sincere." And how my friend, do you do that without looking into their heart? If you reply that you "always ask them if they are truly sincere," I will not bother to answer that silly statement.
Whether we like it or not we are not in a position to say with perfect certainty that any one individual is either saved or lost! The most we can say of any person in an absolute sense is that they either do or do not make a profession of being a Christian. There are many people that appear to be truly lost and others that appear to be truly saved, but in both cases we cannot see the heart.
In my first pastorate there was a Deacon who used to say, "Time and the Devil will tell." If someone got married and I said, "Ray, I believe that will be a good marriage," he would say, "Time and the Devil will tell." When someone made a confession of faith and I said, "I believe that is genuine," I would get the same "Devil will tell" routine. And do you know what happened in every case? Time and the Devil would show that sometimes we were right in our expectations but other times we would see how very wrong we were. Let me give you a few biblical examples of this fact.
If we would have heard Peter curse and swear by the fire when he openly denied Christ, we would have concluded he was not a truly saved man, but at that moment Peter was a true believer.
If we would have heard Thomas utter his words of unbelief, we would have been sure he had no faith, but he did have saving faith.
We would have called David an adulterous and murdering hypocrite, but at that very moment he had the grace of God in his heart. (By the way, people often say, "David's sin of adultery and murder prove the doctrine of eternal security." That is nonsense. David's awful sin only proved that he was a sinner. The sincere repentance expressed in Psalm 51 is what proved the grace of God was in his heart.)
Likewise, if someone would have suggested that Judas was a phony and had his hand in the till, we would have protested and said, "He is a godly believer. You are misjudging him."
In all of these cases we would have been as wrong as can be.
I honestly believe the average fundamental church in our generation would have labeled Judas a "carnal Christian" who was eternally secure. They would have never let that rich young ruler get away. They would have "decisioned" him and made him a deacon within six months as well as chairman of the building committee.
Another Sincere Question
"But Mr. Reisinger, if we do not give people assurance, many true believers will lack the joy and peace that only assurance can give. I have heard you labor the point that only assurance of salvation can promote truly holy living."
It is true that what I am saying may cause a few sincere believers to doubt their salvation. However, the opposite danger is far more dangerous and prevalent. If we give assurance to the people that went through our system, then many false professors will have a false peace and think they are saved when in reality they are lost. I would cut off my hands before I would try to deny assurance to a true child of God. But I do not feel that a lack of assurance is nearly as big a problem in our churches today as is the many lost people that have a false security based upon being given assurance by a pastor or personal worker. Is your church filled with serious seekers after holiness that are not sure they are saved, or is it filled with people with little evidence of any desire for holiness but who are loaded with assurance?
I would rather send a true believer home without assurance than I would send a lost man home assured that he is saved and safe. If we give hypocrites assurance then we cannot help them when it becomes evident we may have made a mistake. What do we say when we challenge them and they reply, "But you assured me I was saved. I did exactly what you told me to do. I went down front at the altar, I prayed the prayer after you, and I memorized the verse of Scripture."
This awful problem is the curse of fundamentalism that they simply will not face. It is the result of an easy-believism message followed by a physical act—usually walking to the front of the church—by all who want to publicly confess they have believed or want to believe. Whether it is done in a mass campaign, or in the local church, or in response to a radio preacher, or in a living room with a 'soul-winner,' all who "bow your heads and repeat after me" are given assurance they are saved and safe. "You have obeyed this promise of Christ (usually Rev. 3:20), and I assure you on the authority of God's word that He has done exactly what He promised to do." In order to make sure the individual 'has assurance,' he is asked, "Where is Christ now?" If he hesitates, or gives the wrong answer, the salesman (oops, I mean personal worker) goes back to approach number three, lesson number four, in the sales manual (I mean personal worker's course) and proceeds like this: "Did you just now invite Christ into your heart? Does he ever lie? (You really have him now!) If you invited Christ into your heart, and He says He will come in when He is asked, and He never lies, where is He right now?" Now, if the client (I mean person) is rather dull, it might be necessary to spell out the obvious dilemma in which he is caught. "Are you going to admit you are really saved or are you going to call Jesus Christ a liar?" (The manual will probably explain how important it is to raise your voice to emphasize how awful is such doubting of Christ.) If that does not force assurance into their minds, nothing will.
These words may sound as though I am attacking many sincere and godly people. However, I believe those who are genuinely sincere and truly godly will carefully weigh that little piece of satire. It should really be funny because it is so ridiculous but since it is true and involves the souls of men, it is not funny, it is tragic. I do not write to be amusing, but in the hope people might see how anti-Biblical the whole system of present day 'soul winning' really is. I ridicule such nonsense in the hope that some dear sincere people (who were butchered by other sincere people) who are now saying, "I tried that once, and it doesn't work," might realize they never tried Christ and His salvation at all. All they tried was a man-centered, man-inspired, man-manufactured, and man-manipulated way of getting 'decisions.' God's way of saving poor sinners through the work of Christ and His way of giving confident assurance by the work of the Holy Spirit, have been replaced by the much quicker and more 'successful' method outlined above. Sinners do Christ's work and save themselves by their decision, and evangelists and personal workers do the Holy Spirit's work and seal the decision as genuine and the one who made it as safe and secure in Christ.
Now, fundamentalists are not the only ones guilty of the sin of assumption. As I noted earlier every group that has a system that you go through that is "God's way of bringing His grace to men" can easily fall into this error. When anyone who has obediently gone through the system, given the correct answers, and performed the right acts, is told he is a Christian, false assurance must inevitably follow. How many millions are enduring the torments of hell today who had the following words of the Book of Common Prayer recited over them as they were sprinkled with water? (Emphasis mine).
Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate and grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits, and with one accord make our prayers unto him that this child may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning.
I wonder how many children mouthed the following words at their confirmation by the Bishop and later in life mocked the whole idea?
Question: What is your name?
Answer: Give name.
Question: Who gave you this name?
Answer: My Godfather and Godmother in my Baptism; wherein I was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of Christ.
All of these people need to be told, whether they were put through a system by the Anglicans, the Presbyterians, the Lutherans, the Baptists, or the Fundamental Independents, that they should consider the clear teaching of Scripture. Many texts could be given but I will mention only one.
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. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:21-23
I want you to particularly notice how assured these people were of their salvation. They professed to know Jesus as their personal Savior. They had done many things, including preaching, and had given Christ the glory by doing all of it in His name. They went all through life without doubting their salvation. They went through the valley of death without an ounce of doubt. So convinced were they that they were saved that they dared to argue with Christ the Judge. Standing at the judgment in eternity, unshaken by the trials of life or the ordeal of death, fully assured as they approach the judgment, they cry out in shock, "No Lord, you made a mistake. Go check the books again." Now that is how sure a man can be that he is God's child but be miserably deluded. Many, like these in this text, are positive they know Christ and have His forgiveness, but have never bothered to investigate if He knew them.
What then is True Biblical Assurance?
----------------
The Doctrine of Assurance
Part One (Can I Really Be Sure?)
John G. Reisinger
The doctrine of Assurance of Salvation has been the subject of both confusion and controversy down through the years. Actually, it goes all the way back to the New Testament times. The question, "Can I really be sure I am going to heaven?" has been given a variety of answers. Some have not only said yes, but have gone a step farther and taught that you must be sure or else you do not really have faith in Christ. At the other extreme, men have not only answered with an emphatic "No!" but have earnestly contended that any form of assurance of salvation was a dangerous delusion of the devil. In between these two positions have been the many forms of 'maybe' which were attended by many 'ifs' and 'buts' that tended to nullify each other. I personally think this is one of the most misunderstood doctrines of our generation. I will try to unravel the problem with a series of questions.
One: Is true assurance of salvation possible or must we wait until we die? Put another way, is it possible for a person, while still living, to be certain that he is going to go to heaven? The answer is, "Yes, assurance is not only possible but Christians are exhorted, as a duty, to seek and find heartfelt assurance."
Two: Is assurance of salvation necessary to true salvation? Can a true Christian doubt that he is saved and still be saved? The answer is, "Assurance is not necessary to salvation." Faith and assurance are not the same thing. You can have either one without having the other.
Three: Is it possible to be sure you are saved and actually be lost? The answer is, "Yes, it is possible to have false assurance of salvation."
Four: How can I be sure of salvation and be certain I am not deluded with false assurance? The answer to that will form the bulk of this article.
Let us examine the first question and answer it more fully. When we affirm that a believer can indeed be sure of his justification before God we immediately part company with religions like Roman Catholicism. The question of assurance was one of the primary points of contention between Rome and the Reformers. Rome called assurance of salvation "the Sin of Presumption." For anyone to dare believe he went straight to heaven upon dying was tantamount to an unwarranted presuming on the grace of God. It was and is literally a mortal sin.
This view teaches that no man can be sure, while he is in this life, that he is justified in God's sight. No man can be certain that all of his sins are completely forgiven and that when he dies he is sure to see the face of God in peace and acceptance. The Roman Catholic Church is the premier representative of this view. She is also the most adamant in her deliberate opposition to the Biblical doctrine of assurance. Gregory the Great, a seventh century pope, not only denied assurance was possible, he taught it was dangerous and not even desirable.
The greater our sins, the more we must do to make up for them …whether we have done enough to atone for them we cannot know until after death … We can never be sure of success … assurance of salvation, and the feeling of safety engendered by it is dangerous for anybody and would not be desirable even if possible.
The Council of Trent, in answer to Luther's exposition of the Biblical truth of Justification by faith alone, went a step farther than Gregory the Great. They were not content to say that assurance was dangerous and not desirable, they declared that it was a mortal sin to claim assurance of salvation. They went still farther and, with full Papal authority and sanction, hurled anathemas and consigned to eternal damnation all who dared preach or believe such a doctrine. Let any who doubt this read the section on justification in the Decrees of the Council of Trent, and see how specifically and clearly the Jesuits spelled out how deeply Rome hates the doctrine of Assurance. Here are the actual words used by the Council of Trent:
Whosoever shall affirm, that when the grace of Justification is received, the offence of the penitent sinner is so forgiven, and the sentence of eternal punishment reversed, that there remains no temporal punishment to be endured, before his entrance into the kingdom of Heaven, either in this world or in the future world, in purgatory, let him be accursed. Council of Trent, January 1547.
The above "curse," or anathema, which means "let him go to hell" is still the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic church. Assurance of salvation is still a cardinal sin, the sin of presumption, and anyone holding that doctrine is condemned to hell. Many think Rome has changed and has become evangelical. They are being duped very badly. The Anathema of Trent still stands in force. It is still a cardinal sin for which there is no forgiveness unless it is given up before you die. In other words, a Roman Catholic who dies with assurance of salvation is sure to be doomed in hell according to the official teaching of Roman Catholicism.
Like Roman Catholicism, every form of works religion must of necessity say, "No, you cannot be sure." The best you can have is a "hope-so" salvation and wait until death to find out for sure. You can only "do your best and hope it is good enough." One never knows if he has worked hard enough in a system of works religion. We all know we have sinned, but how many good deeds does it take to make up for a bad deed? Any notion of a works religion is totally foreign to the Bible. The Word of God is clear that salvation is by grace through faith and not by works.
Here is a sample prayer from the Roman Catholic prayer book that shows how far into error one can go when rejecting the gospel of free and sovereign grace.
"I desire by Thy grace to make satisfaction for my sins by worthy fruits of penance; and I willingly accept from Thy hands whatever pains, crosses, or sufferings I shall meet with during the remainder of my life, or at my death, as just punishments for my iniquities; begging that they may be united to the sufferings and death of my Redeemer, and sanctified by His passion, in which is all my hope for mercy, grace, and salvation."
One need only compare that works statement with the words of the great hymn, It Is Well With My Soul to see how radically different Rome's gospel is from the gospel of grace preached by Paul.
My Sin—O the bliss of this glorious thought!
—my sin, not in part but the whole,
is nailed to the cross and I bear it no more;
praise the Lord, Praise the Lord, O my soul!
When Roman Catholics become sick, they are urged to pray these words:
"Beg that God would accept of all thy pains and uneasiness, in union with the sufferings of your Savior Jesus Christ, in deduction of the punishment [in Purgatory] due to your sins."
Again, the Roman Catholic is urged to ask God:
"Let our fasts, we beseech Thee, O Lord, be acceptable to Thee, that by atoning for our sins, they may both make us worthy of Thy grace, and bring us to everlasting effects of Thy promise."
One final quote to show how clearly and totally Rome rejected the all-sufficiency of Christ's death as the only ground of assurance and substitution for the filthy 'good' works of the sinner.
"How very short the time of this life is, which is given us in order to labor for eternity, and to send before us a stock of good works, on which to live for eternity."
It should be obvious that it is impossible to believe in salvation by works, that is, earning the favor or mercy of God by our own efforts or good deeds, and at the same time have any degree of assurance. Any person, Catholic or Protestant, who starts where Pope Gregory did, will inevitably end up where the Council of Trent did. If we have to 'atone for our sins' and 'make up for them by our works,' we certainly will never know 'whether we have done enough' and must therefore, of necessity, never be 'sure of success.' It must also follow that it will not be possible for such a man to be anything other than angry with the person who says, "I know" and "I am sure". The very nature of salvation by works not only makes assurance impossible, it also makes hostility toward anyone that claims assurance inevitable. The most that sincere 'good works' can produce is a very shaky foundation at best, and the man who has earnestly labored 'by his own efforts' knows this only too well. It is only natural for him to react in anger at the man who says, "Ah, friend, a single look at the Lord Jesus Christ in repentant faith brought hope and assurance to my soul. My feet are on a foundation of solid rock." If the poor man has spent his whole lifetime working hard at his religion without even a taste of assurance, who does the person think he is who boasts about "full salvation by simple faith" having tasted of a "well of water that springs up into soul satisfying assurance."
The people who feel that assurance of forgiveness is either the result of pride or presumption are not aware of it, but actually, it is they who are filled with pride. They have never seen themselves to be what they really are in God's sight. Once a man stands under the Word of God and honestly measures himself by its requirements, he will never again talk about earning God's mercy in any manner or any amount. When God's word in Romans, "none righteous no not one … all are sinners … all guilty …" (Rom. 3:10–23), comes to their hearts in power, their mouths will be stopped, their hopes in their own efforts crushed, and they will be forced to look outside of themselves for hope.
Now because sin is not felt, the work of Christ in behalf of poor sinners cannot be seen. The first hope that such a thing as assurance is possible begins when we see the greatness of Jesus Christ. Ah, friend, if you would see how able He is to deal with sin, death, and the grave, you would seek Him and Him alone. If you have been taught by the Holy Spirit how willingly the Savior is to receive and forgive all who come to Him in repentance and faith, how can you keep from coming to Him as the hymn says:
Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfil Thy law's demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.
Nothing in my hand I bring;
Simply to Thy Cross I cling!
Naked, come to Thee for dress;
Helpless, look to Thee for grace:
Foul, I to the fountain fly;
Wash me, Savior, or I die.
The real problem with those who commit this first mistake, those who believe you cannot be sure of forgiveness, is not so much a wrong doctrine of assurance as it is a wrong doctrine of salvation. They have no salvation about which to be sure. They have no sure way into the presence of God to test and try. It is not an understanding of how to have assurance these folks need, but rather a knowledge of salvation—or how to be saved. It is true we might show them how the great apostle uses those two great words of assurance—I know, and I am persuaded—to prove assurance is a reality. We might preach from II Timothy 1:12, "…I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." However, we would have to go back to verse nine and show what saved and called meant. We would preach from that text what salvation by grace—not according to works—but grace from eternity according to His own purpose, really means. We would probably then go to 4:6–8 and explain how Paul's great assurance was based on the certainty of (1) Christ being able and willing (1:12), and (2) Paul knew he had really believed and committed because his perseverance in the fight and faith proved it. There must be faith before it can be tested, and there must be a clear gospel before there is faith. Most of those in this error need the gospel.
We should add that Rome's great fear that assurance of salvation would lead to loose living and a 'no-care' attitude was unfortunately justified by the lives of some of those claiming to be 'justified by grace through faith alone.' We can do no better than to quote the article on assurance of salvation in the Philadelphia Confession of Faith:
Although temporary believers and other unregenerate men, may vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presumptions of being in the favor of God, and (in a) state of salvation, which hope of theirs shall perish; yet such as truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love him in sincerity, endeavoring to walk in all good conscience before him, may in this life be certainly assured that they are in the state of grace, and may rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, which hope shall never make them ashamed. Philadelphia Confession of Faith, Chapter XVIII, Article 1.
Do the Scriptures support this statement? Is real assurance of salvation possible in this life time? I believe the Bible does teach what the confession states. I have looked in many faces in hospital beds and read Romans 5:1, "Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God." I would ask, "Do you have this peace which is here promised? Have you been declared righteous by God? Can you say, "I am as righteous—in God's sight—as His dear Son Jesus Christ?'" That text is clearly stating that assurance of salvation is possible.
Ephesians 2:8, 9 has been used of God to bring many sheep to an assurance of forgiveness of sins. They have seen that salvation is a totally free gift from God's grace that is the possession of every one who has faith in Jesus Christ. The "have been saved" is a "once and for all statement" that cannot be altered. That passage is talking about assurance of salvation.
II Timothy 1:12 is like a sledge hammer against the work mongers that deny assurance is possible. Just look at those amazing words carefully.
For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. II Timothy 1:12.
This verse contains two of Paul's favorite words. Paul knows and he is persuaded. He is not saying that he knows all about Jesus Christ. Paul knows Christ Himself. He is emphasizing Whom he knows—not what he knows. Because he knows Christ, Paul is confident that he can commit his soul and his eternity into Christ's hands and both will be kept secure for time and eternity. Paul had entrusted his eternal destiny into the hands of Christ against "that day" when he, Paul, would stand before God. He knew all would be well in the day of judgment. He was positive he was saved and secure. The word committed means to deposit and would be the word used when you deposited money in the bank. You were trusting them to keep it for you against a rainy day. When Paul envisioned himself standing before God, he was absolutely certain he would hear God say, "Come and welcome, thy sins are all forgiven Thee."
It is essential that we realize these words of Paul are not spoken in an emotional fit of religious enthusiasm by someone unaware of the import of his words. No, no, these are the words of a man whose emotional reality expressed exactly what he knew was true from personal experience. These words are the logical conclusion to a lifetime of faith that had been tested experientially under every circumstance and had "finished the course" with flying colors.
The most important thing about this statement is that it is not written for Apostles, preachers, missionaries, or "super spiritual Christians." This is for every believer. This statement includes every person that is joined to Christ in a living faith. If you have trusted Christ then this verse describes you whether you feel it is true of you or not! It is not your faith that will keep you, it is the one in whom you have put your faith. If you have committed your soul and life into the hands of Jesus Christ, you are safe!
One of my favorite passages in dealing with strangers to grace is John 14:1–6. I explain that Jesus predicted that He was going back to heaven. He then informs His disciples that they not only know where He is going but they also know how to get there. I am so grateful that Thomas asked the big question. "Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?" (John 14:5). I explain to people that any religious leader, including myself, could mislead them through ignorance, but Jesus Christ would never do so. Here, in the Bible, a confused doubter asked Christ Himself the specific question, "How can I know the way to heaven?" If anyone ought to be able to answer that question with absolute authority, it is our Lord Jesus Christ.
And what is the answer? It says nothing about baptism or joining the church. Jesus did not tell Thomas to "send up a big stock of good works." Look at the answer Jesus gave. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). The way to heaven is by believing in Jesus Christ. He is the Way, without Him there is no going. He is the Truth, without Him there is no knowing, and He is the Life, without Him there is no living. When you put this verse together with John 6:37 you have the gospel and assurance. Just as Jesus said, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me," (John 14:6). He also said that all, without a single exception, that did come to the Father through Him were absolutely guaranteed of being received and kept forever. Read John 6:37 for yourself.
We totally reject Rome's view that assurance is both impossible and a mortal sin. However, we must immediately add that if Rome's doctrine of salvation led to assurance being the sin of presumption, modern fundamentalism's doctrine of salvation has led to the sin of a groundless assumption. The doctrine of "eternal security" is not assurance, it is insurance for graceless professors. Today everybody and his brother is sure they are going to heaven regardless of how they think or act. They made a decision and were given the assurance that they were truly saved. We call this "easy-believism." The root cause of this error grows out of the strong desire of every religious group to have a method of manufacturing believers.
Every group seems to have this strong desire for a fool-proof method of giving assurance of salvation. Each group has a system that enables them to produce, package, label, and seal their converts with the assurance that they are heaven bound. Every group may have a different method, but they all have a clearly defined system that enables them to say to anyone who goes through the prescribed course, "you are saved and safe." Let me list a few such religions and their particular system.
The Roman Catholic system of making a 'saint' is quite clear. You live a holy life and then make a personal appearance via a miracle. The church investigates and validates both your holy life and miraculous appearance after death and then declares that you are on the saint list. This is called being "canonized." The faithful may then pray to you along with Mary and the other saints on the list.
The Episcopalian will baptize you as a baby and declare that your original sin has been removed and you are now a regenerated child of God.
The Church of Christ does not sprinkle little babies into the kingdom but they do teach that you "meet the blood of Christ in the waters of baptism (immersion)." Like Rome and the Episcopalian, this group believes it is essential to be baptized in order to be saved.
The Lutheran and the Reformed, including the Presbyterians will sprinkle you into the covenant as a baby and then later 'confirm' you in the Covenant of Grace into full church membership after catechizing you in their particular creed.
The Plymouth Brethren have an iron-clad system of rigidly conforming to their clearly defined but unwritten code of nonconformity. They have the tightest nondenominational denomination that you will ever find.
The typical Baptist and Bible churches also have their system. You walk down the aisle in response to an altar call, say a short prayer, memorize a verse, shake the preacher's hand and you are assured that you are "saved, eternally secure and ready for heaven."
The Charismatics put their hands on a television as a "point of contact" with the guru who has "the gift of healing and power to anoint you with the Holy Spirit." A $100.00 donation to keep this "mighty work of faith on the air" is often implied to be part of the system. The sign that you are sealed in grace is the ability to speak in tongues.
True Religion Is A Heart Matter
The great difficulty with this packaging and labeling business is obvious to any honest observer. First of all, we all know that true religion is ultimately a "heart matter" that directly affects one's life, attitudes, and conduct. We also know, in our saner moments, that we cannot look into another person's heart. This being true, we cannot therefore give any person assurance that he is really saved. At most, all we can say, "John professes to be a child of God, and so far his profession looks pretty good. His life seems to back up his profession." We really have no business to dogmatically say to, or about, any individual, "He is saved." All we can say is, "His profession looks genuine." If he deserts his wife and family and runs off with the choir director next year then we will say, "His profession looks totally empty."
The second difficulty this packaging and labeling business creates is this: Once we have run someone through our system and labeled them saved, what do we say when they get caught in open sin and rebellion? What do we say about our converts to whom we gave explicit assurance that they were saved and secure because they had gone through our system? Remember, we are the ones that "signed, sealed, and assured their certainty of heaven." And, I must add, this sad and embarrassing situation occurs in every group mentioned above.
I remember when one of the popes took some of the Catholic saints off the list. The comedians had a field day with a song called When the Saints Come Tumbling Down. One of the saints removed was Saint Christopher. He was the patron saint of my wife's aunt, an ardent Roman Catholic. She always prayed to Saint Christopher and was furious when the pope took her favorite saint off the list. She never did forgive the pope. It was not a joking matter to her.
Many babies who were 'engrafted into Christ' at baptism and then sealed at confirmation later lived like the Devil and mocked the very grace they had supposedly had infused into them. Who does not remember the famous Episcopal priest who received a $2,000 speaker's fee for ridiculing the very gospel that he had sworn to believe and preach? His favorite line was, "When I hear the hymn "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; Let me hide myself in Thee," I think of scared thingy roaches running into cracks in the rocks." The Bishop had assured that man's parents that he was engrafted into Christ.
All of the branches of Reformed churches have seen many who had been sprinkled into the church and later memorized the catechism only to grow up in blatant unbelief and hate and ridicule the very truths they learned as children.
The fundamental Baptists and independent churches have had more than their share of false converts. How many have gone forward, prayed the sinners prayer, been given assurance of eternal security only to disgrace the name of Christ in openly wicked living? This group has many Chuck Templetons, the co-founder of Youth for Christ, who today totally deny what they once preached to thousands.
I would venture to say that the church that you attend has seen some cases of apostasy that has brought great grief to your soul. You saw a young couple walk down an aisle with tears running down their face. You took them into the inquiry room and assured them, after they prayed, "Lord Jesus, come into my heart," that they were saved and eternally secure. They are now divorced, the husband is in jail for selling dope and the wife is working as a stripper and living with a man who is married to another woman. Have we not all seen things that we can hardly believe are true?
Problems With Labeling People
One of the greatest difficulties in dealing with this packaging and labeling error is the inability to confront the problem because we are often the very people who packaged and labeled the guy who is in jail for selling dope. He went through our system and we told him he was safe and secure. It is not possible to deal with the problem without at least considering that just maybe something is terribly wrong with our system. However, the moment the system is challenged many will immediately reply, "But the altar call system and inquiry room method really works!" But does it really? Granted it gets people to make a confession of faith but are most of the professions really genuine?
We assume that we are the truly fundamental people that alone are proclaiming the truth. All of the 'godly soul winning preachers' have done it this way. This argument totally rewrites history. The church evangelized for nearly 2,000 years without any altar calls or inquiry rooms and still experienced genuine revival. It is true that they had people fall away after confessing Christ but never in the great numbers that are doing so today.
The real question we must face is this: What do we do with a host of our converts that are living like the Devil after they were 'saved' by going through our system? There are not too many choices and most of them are cures that are worse than the disease. Let me mention two errors that arise when we refuse to admit that something may be wrong with our system of giving assurance.
First of all, we can adopt the old view that these people were saved and then lost. Granted there are some texts that seem to teach that this is possible but a careful examination of those texts plus an exegesis of many other texts will always lead us to conclude that no one will ever be truly saved and then lost. I will say more about this later. The second error is of more recent origin and has deeply penetrated the church in our generation. It was invented by people who were unwilling to either examine their system or give up their doctrine of eternal security. I am referring to the Carnal Christian doctrine. We covered this subject in two previous issues of Sound of Grace (Volume 5, Nos. 5 and 6) and so will say very little here. I do, however, want to remind you of several things.
(1) This doctrine was a deliberate invention to protect the converts of an easy-believism gospel that had departed from the biblical gospel. Leaders could not blame their own system nor could they accept that a Christian could be saved and lost. Believing those two things forced them to find another answer to the problem and the Carnal Christian doctrine was the result. This doctrine enabled the proponents to protect (a) their easy-believism gospel, (b) the altar call and giving assurance to all who came, (c) the doctrine of eternal security of all who had been assured, and (d) the 'sure salvation' of their converts who did not live like real converts. Everybody and everything won except the truth of the gospel. The truth of the gospel was dragged through the streets.
(2) The Carnal Christian doctrine is less than 200 years old and was preceded by, and consciously brought about by, the people who rejected the preaching of both repentance and the lordship of Christ in evangelism. This doctrine was designed and promoted purely as a means of justifying the lack of true godliness among the converts of easy-believism.
(3) To repeat what I said in previous articles. No Christian is totally carnal and likewise no Christian is totally spiritual. There are not two categories. A carnal Christian, meaning a person totally controlled by carnality even though truly saved is a contradiction in terms. All Christians have carnal aspects in their life and likewise all Christians have spiritual aspects in their life.
A Fair and Honest Question
"But Mr. Reisinger, are you saying that we should never label people? Do you mean we should never tell anyone, 'You are saved' "?
That is exactly what I am saying. If you are honest, you will have to admit that since you cannot see a person's heart you cannot give him assurance that he has truly believed. Someone may say, "But I always make sure they are sincere." And how my friend, do you do that without looking into their heart? If you reply that you "always ask them if they are truly sincere," I will not bother to answer that silly statement.
Whether we like it or not we are not in a position to say with perfect certainty that any one individual is either saved or lost! The most we can say of any person in an absolute sense is that they either do or do not make a profession of being a Christian. There are many people that appear to be truly lost and others that appear to be truly saved, but in both cases we cannot see the heart.
In my first pastorate there was a Deacon who used to say, "Time and the Devil will tell." If someone got married and I said, "Ray, I believe that will be a good marriage," he would say, "Time and the Devil will tell." When someone made a confession of faith and I said, "I believe that is genuine," I would get the same "Devil will tell" routine. And do you know what happened in every case? Time and the Devil would show that sometimes we were right in our expectations but other times we would see how very wrong we were. Let me give you a few biblical examples of this fact.
If we would have heard Peter curse and swear by the fire when he openly denied Christ, we would have concluded he was not a truly saved man, but at that moment Peter was a true believer.
If we would have heard Thomas utter his words of unbelief, we would have been sure he had no faith, but he did have saving faith.
We would have called David an adulterous and murdering hypocrite, but at that very moment he had the grace of God in his heart. (By the way, people often say, "David's sin of adultery and murder prove the doctrine of eternal security." That is nonsense. David's awful sin only proved that he was a sinner. The sincere repentance expressed in Psalm 51 is what proved the grace of God was in his heart.)
Likewise, if someone would have suggested that Judas was a phony and had his hand in the till, we would have protested and said, "He is a godly believer. You are misjudging him."
In all of these cases we would have been as wrong as can be.
I honestly believe the average fundamental church in our generation would have labeled Judas a "carnal Christian" who was eternally secure. They would have never let that rich young ruler get away. They would have "decisioned" him and made him a deacon within six months as well as chairman of the building committee.
Another Sincere Question
"But Mr. Reisinger, if we do not give people assurance, many true believers will lack the joy and peace that only assurance can give. I have heard you labor the point that only assurance of salvation can promote truly holy living."
It is true that what I am saying may cause a few sincere believers to doubt their salvation. However, the opposite danger is far more dangerous and prevalent. If we give assurance to the people that went through our system, then many false professors will have a false peace and think they are saved when in reality they are lost. I would cut off my hands before I would try to deny assurance to a true child of God. But I do not feel that a lack of assurance is nearly as big a problem in our churches today as is the many lost people that have a false security based upon being given assurance by a pastor or personal worker. Is your church filled with serious seekers after holiness that are not sure they are saved, or is it filled with people with little evidence of any desire for holiness but who are loaded with assurance?
I would rather send a true believer home without assurance than I would send a lost man home assured that he is saved and safe. If we give hypocrites assurance then we cannot help them when it becomes evident we may have made a mistake. What do we say when we challenge them and they reply, "But you assured me I was saved. I did exactly what you told me to do. I went down front at the altar, I prayed the prayer after you, and I memorized the verse of Scripture."
This awful problem is the curse of fundamentalism that they simply will not face. It is the result of an easy-believism message followed by a physical act—usually walking to the front of the church—by all who want to publicly confess they have believed or want to believe. Whether it is done in a mass campaign, or in the local church, or in response to a radio preacher, or in a living room with a 'soul-winner,' all who "bow your heads and repeat after me" are given assurance they are saved and safe. "You have obeyed this promise of Christ (usually Rev. 3:20), and I assure you on the authority of God's word that He has done exactly what He promised to do." In order to make sure the individual 'has assurance,' he is asked, "Where is Christ now?" If he hesitates, or gives the wrong answer, the salesman (oops, I mean personal worker) goes back to approach number three, lesson number four, in the sales manual (I mean personal worker's course) and proceeds like this: "Did you just now invite Christ into your heart? Does he ever lie? (You really have him now!) If you invited Christ into your heart, and He says He will come in when He is asked, and He never lies, where is He right now?" Now, if the client (I mean person) is rather dull, it might be necessary to spell out the obvious dilemma in which he is caught. "Are you going to admit you are really saved or are you going to call Jesus Christ a liar?" (The manual will probably explain how important it is to raise your voice to emphasize how awful is such doubting of Christ.) If that does not force assurance into their minds, nothing will.
These words may sound as though I am attacking many sincere and godly people. However, I believe those who are genuinely sincere and truly godly will carefully weigh that little piece of satire. It should really be funny because it is so ridiculous but since it is true and involves the souls of men, it is not funny, it is tragic. I do not write to be amusing, but in the hope people might see how anti-Biblical the whole system of present day 'soul winning' really is. I ridicule such nonsense in the hope that some dear sincere people (who were butchered by other sincere people) who are now saying, "I tried that once, and it doesn't work," might realize they never tried Christ and His salvation at all. All they tried was a man-centered, man-inspired, man-manufactured, and man-manipulated way of getting 'decisions.' God's way of saving poor sinners through the work of Christ and His way of giving confident assurance by the work of the Holy Spirit, have been replaced by the much quicker and more 'successful' method outlined above. Sinners do Christ's work and save themselves by their decision, and evangelists and personal workers do the Holy Spirit's work and seal the decision as genuine and the one who made it as safe and secure in Christ.
Now, fundamentalists are not the only ones guilty of the sin of assumption. As I noted earlier every group that has a system that you go through that is "God's way of bringing His grace to men" can easily fall into this error. When anyone who has obediently gone through the system, given the correct answers, and performed the right acts, is told he is a Christian, false assurance must inevitably follow. How many millions are enduring the torments of hell today who had the following words of the Book of Common Prayer recited over them as they were sprinkled with water? (Emphasis mine).
Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate and grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits, and with one accord make our prayers unto him that this child may lead the rest of his life according to this beginning.
I wonder how many children mouthed the following words at their confirmation by the Bishop and later in life mocked the whole idea?
Question: What is your name?
Answer: Give name.
Question: Who gave you this name?
Answer: My Godfather and Godmother in my Baptism; wherein I was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of Christ.
All of these people need to be told, whether they were put through a system by the Anglicans, the Presbyterians, the Lutherans, the Baptists, or the Fundamental Independents, that they should consider the clear teaching of Scripture. Many texts could be given but I will mention only one.
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. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:21-23
I want you to particularly notice how assured these people were of their salvation. They professed to know Jesus as their personal Savior. They had done many things, including preaching, and had given Christ the glory by doing all of it in His name. They went all through life without doubting their salvation. They went through the valley of death without an ounce of doubt. So convinced were they that they were saved that they dared to argue with Christ the Judge. Standing at the judgment in eternity, unshaken by the trials of life or the ordeal of death, fully assured as they approach the judgment, they cry out in shock, "No Lord, you made a mistake. Go check the books again." Now that is how sure a man can be that he is God's child but be miserably deluded. Many, like these in this text, are positive they know Christ and have His forgiveness, but have never bothered to investigate if He knew them.
What then is True Biblical Assurance?
This is a good piece. Appreciate this man's approach on assurance. I've always wondered about that. Especially not feeling saved at times or wonder if you really are. Can you feature? Saved 37 years and I was glad to hear what this man had to say.