Sovereign Grace Baptist Church Meets weekly at 907 Hillsboro Boulevard, Manchester, TN, 37355. Currently, our church is without a pastor/elder and the members meet weekly for praise and worship in hymn, prayer, reading of Scripture, study of the word, and fellowship.
Many times the call is heard in a similar vein: “You must receive the Lord.” When this is backed up with the authority of scripture the matter becomes air tight and suggests that one has a condition to fulfill. Those who receive Him get the right to be children of God (cf. John 1:12). So the good news is offered to the masses in a manner much like a peddler of goods knocking at your door with his best offer and better merchandise on hand ready to trade. Is salvation an offer for your reception, or is this another misunderstanding of the “mechanics” of salvation?
Let us take a more careful look at the text of John 1:11-13. The context sure explains that the Lord, while He manifested Himself to the Jewish Nation, was rejected in a wholesale manner (His own received Him not). This does not require the conclusion that not a single Israelite was saved by Jesus, as we certainly know this to have transpired. It is a look at the nation en masse. It indicts the whole people for its treatment of the Savior. However, on the heels of such a statement comes the unexpected declaration that an alternative scenario is also true. It begins with the adversative in English, “but,” but this is missing in the Greek. It simply retorts that: “as many as received him. . .” which is the exception to the general truth of His wide-scale rejection. This language has been introduced in sermons to indicate a condition that is to be met so that one can be saved. One must receive Jesus! This inference is seen in context to be closely tied to the matter of believing on His name as the verse seems to identify the concepts in the said verse: As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in his name” (John 1:12). So receive Christ is tantamount to believing in His name. So the argument is now clear from the said exposition that to receive or believe on Jesus is the condition to be met if one wants to be saved. So when this approach is laid out in a sermonic manner the appeal is given as a form of invitation. This approach is utilized by many evangelists in trying to get sinners to accept or receive Christ often indicated by their approach to the front of the building and/or reciting a stated prayer by the evangelist. This scenario is all too familiar. I have used it in my own ministry in times past.
What is wrong with this exposition and use of the text? First, it is often cut off from larger theological concerns such as the problem of sin, and the inherent inability of hearers to respond to the gospel. Second, it ignores the contextual clues as to how the said reception or acceptance of Christ comes about in the life of an individual, which is precisely the topic of 1:13. Third, it misreads a host of biblical statements about the notion of “receiving,“ in which the exact opposite meaning is attached to the terms rather than what the authors of scripture deem by the language. These three reasons are sufficient to question the validity of the argument about using John 1:12 in its evangelistic manner by so many popular appeals today.
Does the broader theology have to be jettisoned to preach this text in such a way. The question is particularly sensitive as we are embarking on an era in the wider church where reformed theology has had a tremendous comeback. Many reformed minded people are speaking God’s Word to the masses, and the gospel message has reached many through various media over the last 100 years. Within the Christian church, however, are many voices proclaiming the gospel as they see fit, and because of that not all trumpet sounds are alike. Today, many reformed preachers are indistinct from their Arminian cousins in that they too believe the gospel to be an offer of grace, or an invitation for one to respond to in like manner as described above (receiving/accepting Christ). Given this affinity for evangelizing in this way, of course one must have to say that these Calvinist evangelists would never dream of setting aside the truth of total depravity in their preaching. So the answer is a resounding No, it is not inherent from the situation per se. Even John Wesley claimed to believe in total depravity (of course his solution as to how it is overcome is not acceptable to any serious reformed minded person). But is that compatible with the truth of how a person actually comes to salvation? Can the reformed preacher to use the colloquial expression, preach like an Arminian and believe that his sermon is faithful to the entire corpus of theology when he instructs his hearers to accept Christ or to receive Christ, often leaving the distinct impression that it is within their grasp to do so? It is on this issue that I believe it is necessary to re-examine what the gospel is inherently. It is not a mere invitation. It is not grace being offered. It is not a bargaining scenario where my acceptance of the terms makes me fit for the kingdom. The power of grace operative in the gospel is monergistic and unstoppable when it is the Lord’s desire to save. In Ephesians 1:19 and in 3:7, Paul indicates that both the believing of the saints and reception of grace is a direct result of the omnipotent power of God. The presentation of the gospel is indeed an injunction to believe. It is commanded to all men everywhere to repent. These are divine imperatives. They are a summons from the court of heaven. They are not mere invitations that we may or may not adhere to as we please, they are a direct call from the king of kings and as such we must obey. The difficulty is that many confuse our responsibility to obey with our ability to adhere. That is a part of the problem. Distinguishing these matters goes a long way to solving the riddle. The truth of total depravity is not jettisoned but rather implied in our gospel preaching. We know full well that no person on their own initiative can comply with the summons of the gospel. However, we keep proclaiming as it has been commanded us to do exactly that. We are not driven to the evangelistic task because we expect results, as if that were humanly possible, but primarily we engage the task to please the Lord that sent us. We trust His grace to overcome the problem of total depravity. He alone can do that. How he does it leads us to our second point.
Second, it is the truth of John 1:13 that actually explains how it is that any one ever does believe or receive Christ. What is strangely muted from much of the contemporary evangelistic appeal is the analysis of John and his exposition of man’s inability. So many times, even by reformed minded evangelists, the hearer is urged that he may of his own free will decide to receive Christ. Theologians, who should know better, have written their reformed books as a partial apologetic to express their agreement in sentiment with their Arminian cousins on the matter of free will. This is a shame! John states quite plainly that those who believe on Christ (receive Him/believe in His name) do not achieve this by the will of the flesh or the will of man. Nothing could be plainer than that our will does not contribute one iota to our believing Christ. The answer is that we are born of God. It is the reformed teaching that John exposits in the text, that of regeneration preceding faith. Indeed, because of total depravity it is the only sane explanation of the how of salvation! How otherwise can a dead person believe in Christ? First comes life, regeneration; then comes faith, the cry of life. Otherwise we are left with a pretty difficult scenario. We must preach to corpses and wait for them to resurrect themselves. Surely, such is not the case. The dry bones live as God gives them life.
Finally, the whole matter of “receiving” needs addressing. In two passages from Paul we see the issue of “recveiving” emerge in important theological and practical contexts respectively. In Romans 5 in the latter part of the text a comparison and contrast is developed by Paul concerning the fate of those represented by the respective heads: Christ and Adam. Couched in a section of 5:17 the apostle declares, “those who receive abundance of grace. . . will reign.” The obvious salvific overtones are not in dispute. Despite the other difficulties that are inherent in such a difficult passage, the ultimate fate of those “who receive” is not in question. But the meaning of the expression is one that needs a little more study, and in order to do that we must part with major assumptions. The language of reception is so loosely linked with the idea of invitation or offer that it is very difficult for one to overcome their disposition to read the term in any other way. Yet this “other” way is the only way it ought to be read. For starters, nothing can be seen to add to the achievement of righteousness by the cross of Christ, otherwise His work is not effective in achieving its end. The weight of the passage speaks against such an addition. Next, the manner of receiving is not set forth as an obligation met as if one had completed all obligations, but is a description of the reality of those who are saved by the righteousness of Christ. Not a condition met but a reality stated is what we find here. To further substantiate this reading of the concept of receiving one can see how Paul discusses the matter in a locus classicus of the topic, 1 Corinthians 4:7. Here Paul asks the rhetorical question: “Who makes you to differ from another?” Given our assessment from today’s contemporary evangelistic attempts, one would sense that the answer to this should be, “well, me, of course.” This is precisely the attitude that Paul seeks to dissuade the readers from adopting. He goes on explaining the reality: “What do you have that you did not receive?” This is the crux of the matter. Paul is not saying, “what is it that you have that you fulfilled the condition of receiving?” That would be foolish indeed. Paul is saying that the very blessings of redemption are like things they are passively recipients of as in physical features that we have no control over like blue eyes or long noses. This is the true sense of receiving. Why do you boast as if you have not received makes no sense given a “condition fulfilled” reading of receiving. It is only the real notion of Paul’s biblical theology that has “receiving” as an entirely gracious matter, where the conditions have been met by another that this interrogation warrants intelligibility.
In conclusion, the gospel is not about our receiving in our own free will or otherwise. It is about God’s active grace opening the heart of a sinner to the reception of the Christ, on behalf of God’s elect, and in God’s good time. The gospel will never fail because it is an expression of the eternal love of God for His own. And love never fails. Those who receive this message will have no one to thank but God.
Older
Top
