Parent: JesusWordsOnly
Does It Matter If We Rely Only Upon Jesus
Two Paths
In our Christian walk, what would be the difference if we had to explain salvation from Jesus' Words Only? Without using Paul? What would we say instead? How does the message change when we add Paul to the mix? If the message substantially changes, doesn't this raise the question of why did we ever regard Paul as inspired in the first place?
So what would salvation look like if we had Jesus' Words Alone? Then once we establish Jesus' doctrine, then we were supposed to measure whether Paul fits into Jesus' salvation doctrine. (2John 1:9.) If we cannot fit Paul, we were supposed to eject Paul's words, not Jesus' words, from what we obey.
What Jesus ' Words Only Means
If we quote only Jesus, we have to tell people that Jesus explains we are justified by repenting from sin. (Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee, Luke 18:10 et seq
We can witness to others by memorizing Jesus' steps on how to have eternal life given to the rich young man. ((Matt. 19:16-26); (Mark 10:17-31); Luke 18:18-26.) Jesus told him to follow the Ten Commandments, 1 deny himself (viz., give away his wealth) and follow Jesus. Our Lord then explains His meaning immediately thereafter. He tells His twelve apostles that if you give up fathers, mothers, and brothers for Him, deny yourself, take up your cross, and "follow Me," you " shall have eternal life." (Matthew 19:27-29.) See also, Matthew 10:37-39.
It was as Jesus says elsewhere. Those who are following Him and are losing their life in this world to serve Him do so for "life eternal." (John 12:25-26).
However, the young rich man did not respond properly to this invitation. The cost was too high for him. His work worthy of repentance that Jesus required for him to receive eternal life was giving up all his wealth and giving it to the poor. Jesus said grace was not free, contrary to what we are so often told. Jesus elsewhere said that you need "to count the cost" of becoming a Christian or otherwise you would not "complete" the course, but fail to continue and be destroyed. (Luke 14:28.) Thus, Jesus taught the rich young man (and ourselves) that salvation came at a price -a price the rich young man was unwilling to pay. It is as Jesus says in Luke 13:24: "Strive to enter in by the narrow door: for many, I say unto you, shall seek to enter in, and shall not be able [/. e ., lack strength]." Salvation requires a stem repentance from sin that most people refuse
nal life but only if it comes free. Jesus expressly rejects such free-grace teaching, regardless of the sincerity of those who insist this doctrine belongs to Christianity.
Jesus told us vividly what the correct response should have been from the rich young man. Jesus tells us that Zaccheus did correctly understand and accept Jesus' gospel. Zaccheus is a model of what a proper response should look like. Zaccheus repents of extortion by paying back fourfold what he stole. He gives the rest of his money to the poor. Then he follows Jesus. After those works worthy of repentance, Jesus responds: "Today salvation has come to this house...." (Luke 19:9.)
Thus, if Jesus' words alone applied, we would boldly tell people that they should follow Zaccheus' example. 'Be a Zaccheus!' we would say. Zaccheus is an actual concrete example of a person whom Jesus said received salvation. What prompted that response from Jesus should be the focus of almost every salvation sennon. Alas! Today Zaccheus is a forgotten man.
If we had Jesus' words alone, what would be the meaning of the salvation promised to the thief on the cross? All the thief says is "Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom." (Luke 23:42.) Jesus tells us the thief will be with Him that day in Paradise. Wasn't the thief saved because he "confessed me before men," declaring Jesus was the king-another way of saying He was Messiah? Did not Jesus say that anyone who did this, He would then "confess him before the angels in heaven?" (Luke 12:8.)
Was this a promise of salvation for belief alone? Or is confession a step beyond mere believing? Apostle John gives us the answer in clear unmistakable terms. "[E]ven many of
- The thief no doubt was Jewish and knew the Messianic prophecies. He realized that Jesus was the king. The prophesied figure of a king who would rule eternally was identified only one time in Hebrew Scripture as prince Messiah. believed in Him [ i.e ., Jesus], but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him for fear they would be put out of the synagogues." (John 12:42 NASB.) Thus, confession is a courageous step beyond believing. Jesus therefore promised salvation to the thief precisely because the thief took a step beyond mere belief. Faith alone would not have saved the thief any more than it could have the believing rulers who were fearful and would not confess Jesus. The thief is in Paradise because he was willing to go further than faith alone. The thief confessed Jesus in front of those who would likely whip him for standing up for Jesus. Thus, we see confession for the thief was a means of "bearing] his own cross" and following Jesus despite those risks. ((Matt. 19:27-29).) The thief confessed Jesus in the most unfavorable circumstances possible. He also first had to repent from sin. Originally the thief like everyone else was ridiculing Jesus.
(Matt. 27:44.) Without this repentance, there would be no confession.
Without Paul in the mix, we see the thief was saved by something other than mere private mental assent of facts about Jesus. The thief is thus saved precisely because after repenting of sin he made a confession of trust in Jesus as a king (messiah) in public before men when the pressure surrounding him was to do otherwise. Jesus tells us this is one path to Him that saves you. (Luke 23:43.) Jesus promises He will "confess" you before the "angels in Heaven" if you " confess me before men ." (Luke 12:8.)
- As John MacArthur says of the thief: "Repentance wrought a
dramatic change in his behavior, and he turned from mocking Christ to
defending him." (J. MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus,
supra,
If on the other hand, you deny Jesus, then Jesus says he will deny you-Luke 12:9, which emphasizes this confession must be out loud in a pressure situation, not just in your heart.
What does this threat by Jesus to deny those who cowardly deny Him mean? Remember the rulers who "believed" in Jesus but were "afraid to confess" Him? (John 12:42.) They were moral cowards. God tells us the "cowardly" will be thrown in the "lake of burning sulfur" with "unbelievers." (Rev.21:8.) Hence, Jesus' threat to deny those who deny Him was intended to threaten actual believers, like the rulers were believers, who were "afraid to confess Him." This fact proves conclusively that the thief took a crucial step for salvation which belief alone could not provide. For the same reason, the belief alone of the rulers of John 12:42 will not save them. If they remained cowards to the end, God tells us such cowards will be end up in the same place as those who are unbelievers: in hell itself.
Thus, without Paul in the mix, the thief would be the perfect illustration that faith alone cannot save. What saved the thief was precisely going beyond faith and confessing Him (as Messiah-King). This is no easy step, but involves danger, and resisting cowardice. Thus, Jesus' promise to the thief of salvation is the equivalent of Jesus' promise of "eternal life" if you "deny yourself," "take up your cross," and "follow me." ((Matt. 19:27-29).) Accordingly, faith alone could not therefore possibly be what saved the thief. He had courage, and not just belief, and thus was saved. By contrast, the rulers in John 12:42 had the belief, but not the courage to confess Jesus and hence were lost. The cowardly but believing rulers of John 12:42 should remain a constant reminder that faith alone does not save.
Alas, with Paul in the mix, the thief is almost never remembered for anything other than to address the question whether someone is saved without water baptism. 4 shall be saved" if you "endured to the end." (Matt. 10:22.) Cfr. John 3:16 (if continue to believe then "should" be saved.)
In particular, if we trusted in Jesus' words alone, we would have to tell a new Christian it is imperative to be forgiving to others post-salvation. Jesus makes our post-salvation forgiveness from God and ultimate salvation expressly conditional on our being forgiving to others. If we refuse subsequently to forgive others, God will revoke our prior forgiveness, and absent repentance, send us to hell.
For example, Jesus told us to pray daily: "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.''(Matt. 6:12.) This makes our request for forgiveness conditional. We cannot make an unconditional plea for forgiveness that disregards our own failure to forgive.
- The thief's experience is potentially relevant on the issue of baptism. Those who claim baptism is crucial to salvation cite promises of salvation if you are baptized. ((Mark 16:16); Acts 2:28, 38; Acts 22:16; and (1Pet. 3:21)). However, a promise is not the same as a command to be water baptized as a condition of all paths of salvation in Jesus. These promises which mention baptism among other conditions contain one element of a sure way to be saved. However, what is ignored by baptizers-for-salvation is that Jesus gives us similar promises without the condition of water baptism, such as publicly confessing Him (Luke 12:8). This is precisely what the thief did. This is equally a sure way to be saved in Jesus. The thief was saved without baptism. There is no valid verse saying negatively later done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." Gathercole comments on this verse, and acknowledges, as worded it means that "John's Jesus [says]...the criterion for whether one is punished or receives life at the eschaton [i.e., the age to come] is the 'doing' of good or evil." 5
Jesus repeats this principle of the necessity of fruit or works many other times. For example, in John 15:1-6, Jesus at the Last Supper, after Judas leaves (John 14:7), says "you," the apostles, are "branches" and Jesus is the Vine. They are also reassured that they are all "clean" right now. Then Jesus tells them that a branch that "keeps staying" in Him and produces fruit will be continually "cleaned." Cf Deut. 6:25. This way it bears more fruit. Jesus also warns and encourages them in verses five and six that "a branch in me" that produces no fruit because it failed to "keep staying" in Jesus, will be thrown "outside" the vineyard. It is as a branch that died ("dried up"). It is gathered up into the "fire and is burned."
If our friend knows of Paul, he may not listen to Jesus' words alone from the Metaphor of the Vine which requires works after initial salvation. Perhaps you need to quote another passage of Jesus. In the Parable of the Unprof
- Simon J. Gathercole, Where Is Boasting: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in (Rom. 1-5). (Eerdmans 2002) at 114. However, Gathercole claims that John's Jesus does not equate "doing good" with "obeying Torah" because of Jesus' answer in John 6:26-29. (Id.) However, Gathercole is relying on a Pauline translation of that passage, as explained at Footnote No. 15 on page 254. In fact, it stretches all credulity to think in John 5:28-29 that Jesus means by "good works" simply "belief' in Himself. To even suggest this is just another example of the Pauline mantra in contemporary Christian commentary that overshadows the literal meanings of Jesus. If Jesus had in mind those who had belief outside in outer darkness. The unproductive servant suffers there weeping and gnashing of teeth. Only the two other productive servants are saved. In Matt. 25:14 et seq., Jesus says of the unproductive servant: "now throw this unprofitable servant into outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matt. 25:30, KJV). 6
If our friend still balks at listening to Jesus alone on faith and works, we can further cement the point with the Parable of the Sower. In this parable, only the fourth seed is saved. The second seed "believes for a while," sprouts, but in time of temptation falls away and dies. (Luke 8:13.) The third goes further, grows substantially but is then choked by thorns-by the pleasures and riches of this life. As a result, the third seed never brings any fruit to completion. (Luke 8:14.) The fourth seed is sewn into good ground. It alone produces to the end. (Luke 8:15.) It alone is saved. Thus, Jesus again taught faith without bringing your fruit to completion does not save. Jesus expressly taught faith alone does not save. When faith is destroyed by sin, such faith is dead. Faith plus endurance in producing fruit saves, our Lord insists.
- Some Paulunists admit if the two productive servants are believers, there is no textual reason to believe the third servant is not a believer. (Dillow, Reigri of the Servant Kings, supra, at 355.) Other Paulunists use circular logic to deny the servant with one talent was ever a saved Christian. Since he was evidently lost due to lacking works, they insist he could never have been a Christian. Yet that presupposes the very issue at stake-the validity of Paul's contrary teaching of works, then cite him to Jesus' Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. (Matt. 25:32 et seq .) Both the sheep and goats call Jesus Lord. One group serves Jesus by feeding the brethren in need, clothing them, and giving them water. The sheep in essence give charity. The other group who calls Jesus Lord fails to give any charity. Jesus calls them the goats. On Judgment Day, Jesus says he will separate the sheep from the goats. He will send the sheep to heaven but the goats to "eternal fire." It is as James says, the one who has "faith alone," lacking works of charity of feeding the brethren and giving them clothes, food, and drink, has a faith that is "dead" and "cannot save." ((Jas. 2:14-17).) As Gathercole concedes, Jesus in (Matt. 25:31-46) says "deeds of hospitality... are certainly the criterion for judgment."
If we had Jesus' words alone, then we would have seen the identical message of faith plus works appears in the Metaphor of the Vine, the Parable of the Unprofitable Servant, the Parable of the Sower, and the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. The productivity that Jesus implores is not optional. It is not forensic proof of some already sufficient status of being saved. Instead, if we rely on Jesus' words alone, we need to tell our friend that Jesus says productivity is essential to avoid becoming spiritually "dried up" (dead). It is vital to avoid being thrown "in outer darkness" and "outside" to be "burned." Otherwise, we will suffer "weeping and gnashing of teeth" in "eternal fire." As Jesus said, "every tree that does not bear good fruit...is cast into the fire." (Matt. 7:19.) Jesus also added that only those who have "done good" will rise to eternal life while those who have "done evil" will rise to condemnation. (John 5:28-29.) If we had Jesus' Words Only, the addition of "good fruit" (works) to faith as an absolute condition for salvation would never have caused a controversy at all.
- Simon J. Gathercole, Where Is Boasting: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in (Rom. 1-5) agonizomai] to be entering into the cramped door which, I tell you, [many] shall be seeking to enter [it] but they shall not be having strength [to do so]." 9 Jesus' words meant many will be fighting to enter because of the cramped nature of the doorway itself. But only those who strive with all their might, and are strong enough, can enter. Jesus portrays salvation as something you must use all your strength to obtain.
Yet, we must not forget that in the Metaphor of the Vine, Jesus taught that "staying in me" was the crucial means of having vital strength. The way to avoid sin that destroys the faith of the second seed in the Parable of the Sower is to "keep holding to the Root." The key is to pray every day Father "lead us from temptation." (Matt. 6:13.) We must pray for the strength to enter the kingdom. However, absent such strength, we will not be strong enough to enter the kingdom. The spiritually weak-those who do not pray to resist temptation-will not be able to enter. Christians whose prayer life
- Because this runs afoul of Paulinism, this verse is often translated in a tepid manner. Yet, commentators acknowledge the true meaning. For example, Barnes agrees agonazai in Greek "literally [means] agonize," not strive, which is the common translation. (KJV.) Barnes likewise acknowledges in context it means to be "diligent...to overcome our sinful propensities." Thus, Jesus means to say salvation depends on our effort to avoid sin. Jesus thereby exhorts us in the strongest possible terms to believe this. In Greek, the gate here is not the same gate as in (Matt. 7:13) where Jesus talks of the narrow and wide gait. Robertson explains that in Matthew 7:13, the gait is puls, an outside gate, while in Luke 13:24, it is thurast, the door to enter a house. This is important, for the emphasis here is on the cramped nature of the gate to enter the house. Finally, the last part of the sentence is also normally translated very tepidly. Jesus supposedly warns some "will not be able" to enter. (KJV.) However, the Greek word emphasizes they "lack being strong." The Greek word is icxycoycin.