Systematic Theology

Writing a Fundamental and Biblical Systematic Theology for the 21st Century REGISTER to comment at

Part 08 Soteriology

A Systematic Theology for the 21st Century Part 08 Soteriology

Table of Contents

Soteriology Introduction 3

Msg #1352 The Rip-Tide of Sin 4

Msg #1411 Christ is the Answer, 4 Good, Bad & Ugly 5

Msg #1412 Compromise NOT, Confederate NEVER 6

Soteriology, a Crucial Element 7

Cambron’s Chapter 6 Soteriology – The Doctrine of Salvation 9







Understanding The Biblical New Birth Clarifies Doctrines about Sacraments, Election, and Perseverance of Saints. 26

I Introduction 26

Purpose 28

Approach 28

II A Biblical Model of the New Birth 28

III The Instantaneous Transaction of Conversion 33

IV The Instantaneous Transaction of Regeneration 39

V The Instantaneous Transaction of Justification 40

VI The Instantaneous Baptism Into Christ 40

VII The Instantaneous Indwelling of The Holy Spirit 41

VIII The conflict with our philosophy and doctrines 41

Critique of other Systematic Theology Soteriology Works 45

Critique of John Miley’s 1892 Methodist Soteriology 45

Critique of Charles Hodge’s 1878 Soteriology 49

Critique of Augustus Strong’s 1907 Soteriology 49

Critique of Theisens’ 1949 Soteriology 49

Critique of Geisler’s 2002 Soteriology 49

Critique of Chafer’s Volume III Soteriology Introduction 50

Dallas Theological Seminary President successor Praises Chafer’s Work 51

Troublesome Independent Fundamental Baptist’s Leaning Toward Chafer 53

Dr. DaveT’s Comments & Response 55

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. II 58

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. III – VII 61

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. VIII – XX 63

Calvinism and Reformed Theology is the Gateway to Diabolical Error 66

Critique of Arthur W. Pink’s “Present Day Evangelism” 69

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Conclusion 70


Soteriology Introduction

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will? Heb 2:3-4

There is no greater theme extending from Genesis to Revelation, in the Holy Bible, than that of Soteriology. “Soterio” is the Greek word for “Salvation”, and “ology” is a most thorough consideration of, a most thorough analysis of, a most thorough communication about a topic. When one considers the salvation of man as the overspreading theme of the whole Bible, one finds every chapter, every verse and every line somehow interrelated to that theme. Such a task need not be daunting; it needs to be thorough, and it is a joyous revelation of God’s grandest purpose.

Salvation necessitates three ingredients, a lost estate, a helplessness of/in restoring that estate, and a savior who can restore the estate. Holy Scripture employs such a salvation on/in three perspectives, the lost estate of corporate mankind, the lost estate of a nation, Israel, and the lost estate of the individual. Consequently, salvation must needs be explored in all three ingredients, in all three perspectives. Thirdly, one must consider that the last estate, that of the individual, is not always in relation to man’s lost eternal soul. King David, for example, asked for the salvation of his integrity, the salvation of his peace of mind, and the salvation of his kingdom, An estate, thus, may be a condition, status or rank. An estate may be ones fortune, one prosperity, or ones possessions. The word estate is often in relation to an interest or ownership in land or property. Considering salvation will find our main focus on mans lost estate with God; there are other lost estates that need a savior, it is marvelous that there may be many lost estates under consideration, but there is only one Saviour.

Semi-Pelagianism and Pelagianism

This work on soteriology must deal in part with the doctrines of election and predestination as they touch “So great salvation” on several fronts. A couple antiquated terms for this area should be noted. Semi-Pelagianism is a Christian theological understanding about salvation, the process of restoring the relationship between humanity and God. It arose among the monks of southern France in the fifth century, in reaction to the teachings of Pelagius and to Augustine’s doctrines of divine grace and predestination.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “Pelagianism received its name from Pelagius and designates a heresy of the fifth century, which denied original sin as well as Christian grace.”1 Semipelagianism, they say is, “A doctrine of grace advocated by monks of Southern Gaul at and around Marseilles after 428. It aimed at a compromise between the two extremes of Pelagianism and Augustinism, and was condemned as heresy at the Ecumenical Council of Orange in 529 after disputes extending over more than a hundred years. The name Semipelagianism was unknown both in Christian antiquity and throughout the Middle Ages;… The most recent investigations show that the word was coined between 1590 and 1600 in connexion with Molina’s doctrine of grace, in which the opponents of this theologian believed they saw a close resemblance to the heresy of the monks of Marseilles…. After this confusion had been exposed as an error, the term Semipelagianism was retained in learned circles as an apt designation for the early heresy only.”

Discussion of election and predestination will be addressed in this effort without the use of these rather antiquated terms.

Consider the following short essay on the need of salvation:

Msg #1352 The Rip-Tide of Sin

What The Bible Says

Good Samaritan’s Penny Pulpit by Pastor Ed Rice

“How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, … “ (Heb 2:3a) Along the east coast of America there are places where powerful rip-tides flow rapidly out into the ocean. A rip-tide is formed when high tide draws water into lowland areas, and low tide funnels them back through subtle valleys in the sand. An unaware swimmer captured in a rip-tide is helpless to get back to shore. No matter how gallant his effort he is carried further and further out into the ocean depths. Without a savior that will pluck them out of their plight and set their feet back on solid ground, all hope is gone. The swimmer does not initially realize his dilemma. Cries from shore go unheeded. When they suspect their situation may be worsening they swim harder until their whole focus is getting back to the shore. They are certain they can swim the distance because they do not know the power of a rip-tide. The theme of the whole Bible is Salvation. Salvation defines a lost estate, a helpless condition, and a savior who can restore that estate. With Christmas behind us, and a new year before us, it is important to know that no religion, no mass, no penance, and no new-leaf can save us from the rip-tide of sin; you need a Saviour. Those already saved from that rip-tide, rejoice in, and openly worship our Saviour and Lord, Jesus Christ. Those still dabbling in sin, and not understanding the power of a rip-tide put their strength in religion, mass, penance, peace on earth, and turning over new leaves. Cries from the shore go unheeded. What a loved one needs are cries from the knees. Salvation is of the Lord.

An Essay for week #52 Sun, Dec 29, 13

The Reformed Theologian, and those entangled in their doctrines and/or denominations, thoroughly muck up Soteriology, the Doctrine of So-Great-Salvation. They believe that they are the elect which replaces the elect Israel Their view of God as the Sovereign Predestinator who chose them for that role overrides all else, and thus they cannot discern Scripture which describe corporate salvation, Israel’s salvation, and even salvation from enemy or circumstance. Their focus is on John Calvin’s Covenant Theology, his single Covenant of Grace, and his Roman rooted Replacement Theology. The tentacles of their error reach deep into their soteriology. They must allegorize, discredit or dismiss all language of the salvation of Israel, all language of the “corporate” in salvation, and all consideration of ones salvation from enemy and circumstance. These dismissals and shortcomings so permeate Protestant thinking that they regularly leaven into Baptist thinking, even though Baptists are to be people of the Book, not people of the reformation.

Consider God’s warning and illustration about compromising Israel, that went confederate with Syria, as detailed in these two essays:

Msg #1411 Christ is the Answer, 4 Good, Bad & Ugly

What The Bible Says

Good Samaritan’s Penny Pulpit by Pastor Ed Rice

When I was a lad the mayor of Corning was ushering a visiting dignitary into town. Who seeing a sign which read “Christ is the Answer”, above the city, asked “So what is the question?” The agnostic mayor stammered, then stuttered, then started a campaign to get that sign down. Fifty years later, the sign is there. God’s written record through his prophet Isaiah brings that answer to four leading questions. Chapter seven starts with an account involving the good, the bad, and the ugly. In the days of Ahaz the good king of Judah, Rezin the bad king of Syria, is confederate with Pekah the ugly king of Israel. The latter is so ugly that God and Isaiah never refer to this son of Remaliah by name again. This confederacy against good unites the enemy of God with a nation called Israel. Now Israel, the ugly, was the union of ten sons of Jacob, who 1,000 year previous, had a name change. Judah the good, slanderously called “Jew”, was the outcast favored of God dwelling in the favored city of God, Jerusalem. Now these are all sure enough real characters in a real scenario, as it were, chosen brother against brothers who leagued with the world and enemy of God. The answer to this ugly mess is Christ, and he shows up in verse 14, “Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” God does not just tell what happened in history; in His-Story he tells us what happens. Sure enough, the ugly neo-evangelical is confederate with the progressive-liberal world, in an effort to stamp out and replace the Bible believing remnant who dwell in their 1611 King James Holy Bible. Christ is still the answer, and he is coming soon.

An Essay for week #11 03/16/2014

Msg #1412 Compromise NOT, Confederate NEVER

What The Bible Says

Good Samaritan’s Penny Pulpit by Pastor Ed Rice

Christianity has made ugly compromises with worldliness. It is confederate with progressive-liberals. The believing remnant should now pay careful attention to Isaiah 8. The theme is Maher-shalal-hash-baz, wherein the enemy goes quickly to the spoil and makes haste to the prey. When the compromise and confederacy is made, a generation will not pass before the destruction is wrought, vr4. Here, the grass roots refused the Living water, and rejoiced in Rezin, the bad King of Syria, and Remaliah’s Son, the ugly, compromised, confederated, King of Israel, vr6. This chapter places emphasis on “a great roll and the writing on it with a mans pen,” vr1. When judgment arrives like an overwhelming flood the remnant of uncompromised believers are given five pieces of advice, when the LORD spake with a strong hand. (1) Make no association, compromise, or confederacy with the compromising majority, vr11-12. (2) Sanctify the Lord of hosts and let him be your fear, vr13-15. (3) Hold tight to your King James Bible, “Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples … to the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them,” vr16, 20. (4) Wait on the Lord, vr17. (5) Be a peculiar people, be a sign and a wonder unto them, vr18. I would rather be mocked and persecuted as a King James Onlyite, than use a Vatican bible that rips out 1John 5:7 and more. The doom of the compromiser is sealed and rushing in hastily; i.e. Maher-shalal-hash-baz. God illustrates through Israel the horrid consequence of the neo-evangelical compromise. Dr. Kean once said, Three words should be removed from a Baptist’s vocabulary “can’t”, “quit”, and “compromise.” They all start with “K” so you can just strike them from your dictionary.

An Essay for week #12 03/23/2014

Soteriology, a Crucial Element

These considerations make a Systematic Theology’s volume on Soteriology, the doctrine of So-Great-Salvation a crucial element of a holistic Systematic Theology. There is no greater theme in the Holy Bible.

A Systematic Theology must first have as its foundation a true Bible Doctrine. From that foundation a discourse must systematically analyze the doctrine keeping it pure from its detractors, and evaluating its fit into the larger arena of theology. Detractors from truth are myriad from outside but fall under three major considerations when guarding against internal sabotage. The Roman Catholic Religion has always directly opposed Bible truth; the Protestant Reformers are supposed to have come back to Bible truth, but, subtly, they carry all the Roman error as concealed weapons; and the ecumenical Bible correctors who make a pretense of using textual criticism and modern language to “fix” what God was unable to preserve. These three are enemies to Bible doctrine, Roman, directly; Reformed, more subliminally; and Ecumenical Bible correctors, very shrewdly. Exposing their pernicious ways is not generally the focus of a Bible Doctrines book, and in a world where Bible doctrine is under constant attack, this type of systematic theology needs be developed. Herein a solid Biblical Doctrine must form the basis and starting point for a systematic theology.

There is no truer, or more thorough, published, Baptist, and Biblical doctrine than that of Dr. Mark G. Cambron.2 His teachings on Ecclesiology at Tennessee Temple Bible School thoroughly lay the foundation for this systematic theology. His book, Bible Doctrines3 will, with the permission of the Cambron Institute4, be given in block quotes throughout this effort. The book is readily available through , and it forms the foundational basis for this Systematic Theology.5

Believing in the verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures and believing that every single word is directly chosen by God, it is necessary to preserve and defend the doctrines extracted from Scripture and presented by Dr. Cambron. Below, in a block quote of his book, is his extensive analysis of Soteriology: [block quote of Dr. Cambron’s Bible Doctrines page 188-210}

Cambron’s Chapter 6 Soteriology – The Doctrine of Salvation


SOTERIOLOGY (The Doctrine of Salvation)



I. Repentance.

A. Citation.

B. Explanation.

C. Manifestation.

D. Condition.

E. Definition.

II. Faith.






III. Regeneration.

A. Citation.

B. Explanation.

C. Compulsion.

D. Condition.

IV. Justification.






V. Sanctification.

A. Citation.

B. Explanation.

C. Condition.

D. Definition.

VI. Adoption.

A. Citation.

B. Explanation.

C. Origination.

D. Consummation.

E. Manifestation.

VII. Redemption.



VIII. Prayer.











Chapter VI SOTERIOLOGY Soteriology is the doctrine of salvation.


A. Citation.

“In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, and saying,

Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:1, 2). “Jesus began to preach,

and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 4: 17). Paul testified

“both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our

Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:21). “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous

therefore, and repent” (Rev. 3:19). See also Mark 6:12; Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 11:18;

26:20; II Peter 3:9.

To those who say that repentance is not to be preached today, and that it is not essential

for salvation, we point out that repentance was preached by John the Baptist, the Lord

Jesus Christ, and the Apostle Paul. Repentance was proclaimed before Pentecost, at

Pentecost, and after Pentecost. “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke


B. Explanation.

1. It Is Not Reformation. Repentance is wholly an inward act of the mind. To many

people it means to turn away from their sins, but if that were so, this would be

reformation. Repentance is not doing something, as an act, for no man is saved because

he gives up something. A man can turn away from his sins and still not be a Christian.

2. It Is Not Contrition. By this we mean that repentance is not agony of the soul for

sin. Many folk in jail are sorry. Are they sorry for their crime? No. They are sorry

because they were caught. We believe, however, that in a genuine case of repentance, the

sinner will be sorry for his sin. Just being sorry for sin is not repentance, but it can lead to

repentance. “Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the

sorrow of the world worketh death” (II Cor. 7:10).

3. It Is Not Penance. Penance is an expression of sorrow (by some act) that is done to

pay for sin; it is something like a punishment.

4. It Is a Change of Mind. The literal meaning of repentance is “after-thought” or

“reconsideration.” By “change of mind” we do not mean a “change of opinion”; a


“change of mind” is the substitution of a new mind for the old. It is new in character.

True repentance is a change of mind which will lead to a change of action, but let us be

warned that it is possible to have a change of action without a change of mind. A good

example of repentance is found in Mathew 21:28, 29:

“But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son,

go work today in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he

repented, and went.”

Before anyone can be saved there must be repentance. There must be a change of mind

about many things: sin, self, God and Jesus Christ. “The servant of the Lord” must

instruct “in meekness . . . those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give

repentance to the acknowledging of the truth” (II Tim. 2:25).

Making it a little stronger, repentance means not only a change of mind; it is the taking of

one’s stand against himself and the placing of himself on the side of God. Thus,

repentance is self-judgment.

C. Manifestation.

1. Change in the Intellect.

2. Change of Feeling.

3. Change of Will.

4. Change of Action.

D. Condition.

1. Through the Goodness of God. “Despisest thou the riches of his goodness and

forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to

repentance?” (Rom. 2:4). See also II Peter 3:9.

2. Through the Gospel of God. “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their

hearts, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall

we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name

of Jesus Christ for [because of] the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the

Holy Ghost. . . . Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day

there were added unto them about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:37, 38, 41).

3. Through the Scriptural Teaching. “The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be

gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose

themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the

truth” (II Tim. 2:24, 25).

4. Through the Chastisements of God. “Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly


and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth” (Rev. 2:16). See also Revelation

2:5; 3:3; Hebrews 12:6-11.

E. Definition.

Repentance is the work of God which results in a change of mind in respect to man’s

relationship to God. It is neither sorrow nor penance, though penitent sorrow may lead to

a change of mind. Repentance is always an element of saving faith.


A. Citation.

“The gospel of Christ … is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. . .

. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, the

just shall live by faith” (Rom. 1:17). “We conclude that a man is justified by faith without

the deeds of the law” (Rom. 3:28). See also Matthew 9:22; Acts 26:18; Romans 4:5; II

Corinthians 5:7; Ephesians 2:8; Hebrews 11:6; James 5:15; I Peter 1:5.

B. Explanation.

A good definition of faith is: confidence in others; reliance upon testimony. True faith is

composed of the following:

1. Knowledge. One must be informed before he can have faith. This is true in the

things of man, as it is in Christ. It is impossible to have faith in Christ without the Word.

“Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). Sometimes we

may ask for more faith, but this is out of order. To increase one’s faith, one has only to

read more of the Word of God. Before a person can have faith, he must know it exists.

2. Belief. The second element of faith is belief. Everyone knows what belief means,

that is, to accept it as the truth. People can know that there is a Saviour by the name of

Jesus, and believe that He can save. Yet, this is not saving faith. To have faith in a chair,

one must know that it exists, and believe that it can hold him up. Still this is not complete

faith in the chair, until the third element is involved, and that is:

3. Trust. Trust is essential to faith in anything. It is most essential in saving faith. It is

one thing to know that Christ died, and believe it; it is quite another thing to trust Him,

the dying and resurrected Saviour, for salvation. Let us take the chair again for example:

One can know that a chair exists, and believe that it can hold him up, but faith in that

chair is not exercised until he sits in it. Are you completely trusting Christ for your


4. Recumbency. This means to wholly rely upon Christ. When one lies upon the bed,

he fully relaxes upon it and rests. When we put our trust in Him, we should rely upon

Him and rest.


C. Donation.

1. By God the Father. “I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is

among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think

soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith” (Rom. 12:3).

2. By God the Son. Jesus is “the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that

was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right

hand of the throne of God” (Heb. 12:2).

3. By God the Holy Spirit. “To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom . . . to

another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit” (I Cor.

12:8, 9).

D. Centralization.

The object of faith is Christ, and He alone.

E. Production.

The end of faith is salvation. “By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of

yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8, 9).


A. Citation.

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born

again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. . . . Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto

thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of

God” (John 3:3, 5). We are “born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by

the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever” (I Peter 1:23). “Whosoever is born of

God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is

born of God” (I John 3:9). See also I John 2:29; 5:4, 18.

B. Explanation.

1. It Is Not Reformation. Some people think that by turning over a new leaf one

becomes a child of God. Some men quit drinking because of a bad heart, not because they

know it is sin against God. One could cease from all sin; yet this is not regeneration.

2. It Is Not Conversion. Many times we speak of regeneration as conversion, but, in

reality, “conversion” means to turn around. Saved people can be converted (turned

around) even after they are saved, as was Peter. He was saved long before the Lord Jesus

had declared: “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift


you as wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art

converted [turned around], strengthen thy brethren” (Luke 22:31, 32).

3. It Is Not Confirmation. Some churches, as they administer a certain ritual of the

church, claim that the participants (usually children of twelve or thirteen years of age)

receive the Holy Spirit with the anointing of oil. This is a false doctrine. One does not

receive the Holy Spirit by any act of man, but upon receiving Christ as Saviour.

4. It Is Not Water Baptism. There is no saving faith in all the water of the world.

Someone may ask, then, “Why are we commanded to be baptized?” It is the answer of a

good conscience toward God (I Peter 3:21b). It is an ordinance depicting the death, burial

and resurrection of Christ, and nothing more.

5. It Is Not Church Membership. We are told in Hebrews10:25 not to forsake “the

assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is.” However, this does not bring

about change in a sinner’s heart. Remember, the word “church” means “a called-out

company,” or “assembly.” Joining a human assembly cannot bring about salvation. Some

people believe that the Church saves. Now translate this statement correctly: “The

assembly saves.” Is there an assembly on earth which can give salvation? Is there a

called-out company which can make a person a child of God? No! There is no assembly

that we would trust with the saving of our soul.

6. It Is Not the Taking of the Lord’s Supper. There is no saving efficacy, or cleansing

of sin, in partaking of the elements of the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is taken only

in remembrance of Christ and His work upon Calvary. We shall do this in remembrance

of Him until He comes.

7. It Is the New Birth. “If any man is in Christ, there is a new creation: the old things

are passed away; behold, they are become new” (II Cor. 5:17, R.V.). “If ye know that he

is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him” (I John


C. Compulsion.

Ye must be born again. It is a necessity declared by the Lord Himself.

1. As Seen in the Depravity of Man. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh: and that

which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). The words, “Ye must be born again,” are

better translated, “Ye must be born from above.” Man must have a birth from above if he

is to live some day in the heavens above.

2. As Seen in the Universality of Man. There is not a man anywhere but who has to be

born again. “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23).

3. As Seen in the Holiness of God. If one is to be received and made a child of God by

a righteous and holy God, a great change must take place to make him holy. “It is written,


Ye shall be holy; for I am holy” (I Peter 1:16, R.V.).

D. Condition.

1. The Divine Work. The process of becoming a child of God is not by natural

generation. Man cannot regenerate himself. It is not a matter of the human will, but of

God. “As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even

to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the

flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:12, 13). Practically speaking, we had

nothing to do with our first birth, and we can have nothing to do with the second birth.

2. The Human Element. While it is God who regenerates the believing sinner, yet there

is one part that man plays; he must believe! “By grace are ye saved”; yes, but “through

faith.” “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” Yes, Jesus is the way, but the sinner

must come! The sinner must receive Christ by his own faith. This is the human part. God

does the rest.


A. Citation.

We are “justified by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Rom.

3:24). “The righteousness of Christ shall be imputed to us, if we believe on him that

raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was

raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:24,25). “Being justified by faith, we have

peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1). “Such [thieves, covetous,

drunkards, and the like] were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but

ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (I Cor. 6:11).

See also Romans 3:26; 5:9; Galatians 2:16, 17; Titus 3:7.

B. Explanation.

To justify is “to reckon, to declare, or to show righteous.” To justify does not mean to

make righteous. God declares the believer to be righteous; He does not make him

righteous. Justification is a legal term: a good standing.

In the human law courts, the law is over the judge. If the judge is an honest and just

judge, he can show no mercy. He must declare the defendant guilty, or not guilty,

according to the law. In God’s law court, the believer, a guilty man, is brought before the

judgment bar of God and is declared not guilty. God is over His law.

In a human law court, a guilty person may be pardoned, the crime forgiven but not paid.

In God’s law court this is not so. All sins must be paid for, and the sinner punished. Three

things are incorporated in God’s justification.

1. Forgiveness. “He, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Be it known you,

therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness


of sins: and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not

be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:37-39).

A Christian is not a pardoned criminal; he is a righteous man. God declares him so. He is

one who has paid for his sins by another, his substitute, the Lord Jesus Christ. God never

pardons apart from Christ.

2. Imputation. “Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in

whose spirit there is no guile” (Ps. 32:2). “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not

impute sin” (Rom. 4:8). “Until the law sin was in the world: but sin is no imputed when

there is no law” (Rom. 5:13).

Imputation means to “put something against.” Therefore, the righteousness of Christ is

put to the sinner’s account. All of the believer’s sins were put to Christ’s account — He

paid them in full. In turn, His righteousness was put to the believer’s account, and he

stands there, declared to be righteous.

3. Fellowship. “One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in

you all” (Eph. 4:6). This is the fellowship of God and the believer as Father and Son.

Remember, God is Father only of His children, not of unbelievers.

C. Condition.

1. Negative.

a. Not By Works. “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but

of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his

faith is counted for righteousness” (Rom. 4:4, 5). See also Romans 11:6.

b. Not By the Deeds of the Law. “That no man is justified by the law in the sight of

God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith” (Gal. 3:11). See also Romans 3:20;

Galatians 2:16.

2. Positive.

a. By God. God set forth Christ Jesus “to declare… his righteousness: that he might

be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26). See also Romans


b. By Grace. “Being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the

hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:7). See also Romans 3:24.

c. By Blood. “Being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath

through him” (Rom. 5:9). See also Romans 3:24, 25.

d. By Faith. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord

Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1).

e. By Resurrection. Faith shall be imputed to us for righteousness “if we believe on

him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and

was raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:24, 25).


D. Illustration.

1. Abraham (Rom. 4:1-5).

2. David (Rom. 4:6-8).

3. Noah (Heb. 11:7).

E. Manifestation.

1. In Works. “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered

Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works

was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed

God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of

God” (Jas. 2:21-23). The evidence of salvation is gratitude, which is good works. Many

times the good works are very, very weak, but God accepts the will that is behind them.

2. In Experience. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord

Jesus Christ: by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and

rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And not only so, but we glory in tribulation also:

knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience,

hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts

by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us” (Rom. 5:1-5).


This is one phase of salvation which is very much confused today. The Bible student will

be surprised at what God has to say about sanctification. Much is said about experience,

and we believe in experience; but let us be cautious and let the Word of God interpret our

experience, rather than our experience interpret the Word of God.

A. Citation.

“This is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication.

. . . For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness” (I Thess. 4:3, 7).

“Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus,

called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our

Lord, both theirs and ours: Grace be unto you and peace” (I Cor. 1:2). “Both he that

sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to

call them brethren” (Heb. 2:11). “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which

no man shall see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14). See also I Peter 1:2; John 17:17; Exodus 13:2;

Jeremiah 2:3; Ephesians 1:1. The words “sanctification, holiness, and saints” all come

from the same root.


B. Explanation.

1. It Is Not a Betterment of the Flesh. Never does it say in Scripture that the work of

the Holy Spirit is to improve the old nature. The natural man cannot understand the Holy

Spirit. How could the natural man be improved by the Spirit? This is hard to say, but

nevertheless, it is true, that the flesh of the believer is no better than the flesh of the

sinner. The Scriptures say, “Mortify the deeds of the flesh.”

2. It Is Not the Eradication of the Sinful Nature. There are those who contend that a

believer may have a purifying experience that will burn out all carnality, thus rendering

him sinless, incapable of committing sin. We do not deny such an experience, but we

caution the believer to prove his experience by the Word, rather than trying to prove the

Word by his experience. Even though the Old Testament is written in the Hebrew, and

the New Testament is written in the Greek, the words “sanctification,” “holy,” and

“saint” all have the same root meaning.

To those who hold that sanctification is an experience by which the sinful nature is

eradicated, let us turn to the Word and see how sanctification is used: “Thou shalt anoint

the altar of the burnt-offering, and all his vessels, and sanctify the altar: and it shall be an

altar most holy” (Ex. 40:10). Where is the eradication here? Did the altar have a sinful

nature? Here is another example: “Moses said unto the LORD, The people cannot come

up to Mount Sinai: for thou chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about the mount, and

sanctify it” (Ex. 19:23). Did Mount Sinai have a sinful nature? “Let the priests also,

which come near to the LORD, sanctify themselves, lest the LORD break forth upon

them” (Ex. 19:22). How could priests eradicate their own sinful natures? “Say ye of him,

whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent unto the world, Thou blasphemest; because I

said, I am the Son of God” (John 10:36). Here Christ Himself is spoken of as being

sanctified. There is no sinful nature here! “For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also

might be sanctified through the truth” (John 17:19). Does this mean eradication of the

sinful nature? Of course not. “The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the

unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now

are they holy” (I Cor. 7:14). Is it possible that believing wives can eradicate the sinful

nature from their unbelieving husbands? If sanctification means eradication from the

sinful nature, explain the following: “Sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready

always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you

with meekness and fear” (I Peter 3:15). Carnal Christians are sanctified; this does not

speak of the eradication of the sinful nature (I Cor. 1:1, 2 with 3:1, 3).

3. It Is Not Sanctimoniousness. Sanctification is not an affected, or hypocritical

devoutness; neither is it false saintliness. Sanctification is not marked by the wearing of a

beard, or black stockings, and the like. You can tell whether saintliness is real or false.

4. It Is Not a Second Blessing. In II Corinthians 1:15 Paul speaks of wanting to give

the Church a second benefit, not a second blessing. This epistle was written to people

who were already sanctified (I Cor. 1:2 and 6:11).


5. It Is “To Be Set Apart.” The root idea always means “to be set apart,” or

“separation.” To sanctify always means to set apart for a purpose, whether in respect to

saint or sinner. Unsaved men can separate, or sanctify themselves unto sin. “They that

sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind the tree in the midst,

eating swine’s flesh and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together,

saith the LORD” (Is. 66:17). Jesus sanctified Himself; to say He made Himself sinless is

blasphemous. The Sabbath was sanctified, and we know that the Sabbath had no sinful


Again we emphasize that the words “holiness,” “sanctification,” and “saint” all come

from the same word meaning “set apart,” “separation.” The word “sanctify” in Exodus

13:2, and the word “holiness” in Psalm 29:2, and the word “saints” of Psalm 34:9 are the

same word. The word “sanctify” of John 17:17, and the word “saint” of Philippians 1:1,

and the word “holiness” of Hebrews 12:10 are all from the same word.

Sanctification, being set apart, is spoken of in three ways:

a. Positional. “Such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but

ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (I Cor. 6:11).

We are sanctified the very moment we believe. The above Scripture declares that we are

sanctified before we are justified, thus ruling out the second and third works of grace.

“We are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord,

because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of

the Spirit and belief of the truth” (II Thess. 2:13). Sanctification is first in order,

absolutely. See also I Peter 1:2. God never allows us to work up to a position; He first

places us in a position set apart to Him, and tells us to be true to that position. A saint

truly is God’s man.

b. Practical. “Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourself

from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (II Cor.

7:1). “Grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him

be glory both now and forever. Amen” (II Peter 3:18).

This is our present state of sanctification. A saint never grows up to sanctification, but

grows in sanctification. Every believer is a saint; however, some believers do not act like

saints. The living Christian still has the flesh in him and obeys it at times. Then God, by

Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit, metes out chastisement. See John 17:17; I

Thessalonians 4:3; Hebrews 12:10; II Corinthians 3:18.

c. Final. Perfect sanctification will occur in the future at Christ’s second coming.

“The Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all

men, even as we do toward you: to the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in

holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his

saints” (I Thess. 3:12, 13).

C. Condition.

1. The Divine Side.

a. Through God the Father. “Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth


the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine” (Ex. 13:2).

b. Through Jesus Christ the Son. “Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with

his own blood, suffered without the gate” (Heb. 13:12).

c. Through the Holy Spirit. “We are bound to give thanks alway to God for you,

brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to

salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (II Thess. 2:13).

2. The Human Side.

a. Faith in the Redemptive Work of Christ. “Of him [God] are ye in Christ Jesus, who

of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption”

(I Cor. 1:30).

b. Study of and Obedience to the Word of God. “Now ye are clean through the word

which I have spoken unto you” (John 15:3).

c. Through Yieldedness. “I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of

your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity

unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness”

(Rom. 6:19).

d. Through Chastening. “Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every

son whom he receiveth…Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but

grievous: nevertheless, afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto

them which are exercised thereby” (Heb. 12:6, 11).

D. Definition.

1. Sanctification is the work of Christ for the believer, which sets him apart for God.

2. Sanctification is that work of God in the believer, through the Spirit and the Word,

which changes him into the image of Christ progressively.

3. Sanctification is the work of God which perfects the believer in the likeness of

Christ by His appearing in glory.


A. Citation.

“Not only they [the whole creation], but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the

Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the

redemption of our body (Rom. 8:23). There are four other places in the New Testament

where the word “adoption” is mentioned: Romans 8:15; 9:4; Galatians 4:4, 5; Ephesians


B. Explanation.

The English word “adoption” has an entirely different meaning than the Greek word or

the Oriental custom. The English word means to take a person from another family and


make him legally one’s own son or daughter. The Greek word, however, means “placing

as a son.”

In New Testament times, when the boy or girl was a minor, he or she differed little from

a slave (Gal. 4:1). Upon the day appointed by the father, at the age from twelve to

fourteen, a celebration was held declaring the child of age. Thus the boy or girl was made

a son or daughter. A boy or girl was born into the family as a child; upon reaching

majority, the boy or girl was declared a son or daughter. The same is true in the case of

the believer. He is not adopted into the family of God; he is born into the family of God.

By birth, he is a child of God; by adoption he shall be a son of God.

C. Origination.

“He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and

without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children

by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will” (Eph. 1:4, 5).

D. Consummation.

We are now only the children of God. “Ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ

Jesus” (Gal. 3:26, R. V.). We will become sons of God at the day appointed by the

Father. At that time He will openly present us as the sons of God. We do not look like

sons of God now, but some day the world will be able to recognize us as the sons of God.

This will take place at the second coming of Christ. “Not only they, but ourselves also,

which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting

for the adoption to wit, the redemption of our body” (Rom. 8:23).

E. Manifestation.

1. Delivered From a Slavish Fear of God. “Ye have not received the spirit of bondage

again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father”

(Rom. 8:15).

2. Made Possessors of Sonship.

3. Made Subject to Both Privileges and Responsibility of Adult Sonship.


The Bible is full of redemption. It is God’s character to save. He can destroy, but He

loves to save. The theme of the Bible is Jesus Christ. The message of the Word is


A. Citation.

“If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away some of his possession, and if any of


his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold…And if a

sojourner or stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother that dwelleth by him wax poor,

and sell himself unto the stranger or sojourner by thee, or to the stock of the stranger’s

family: after that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem

him” (Lev. 25:25, 47, 48). “Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts with

righteousness” (Is. 1:27). “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the

forgiveness of sin, according to the riches of his grace” (Eph. 1:7). See also Nehemiah

5:8; Colossians 1:4; Galatians 3:13; I Corinthians 1:30; Romans 8:23.

B. Explanation.

There are four Hebrew words in the Old Testament that pertain to redemption, and all

mean “to set free.” The word “goel” is used two ways: first, the One who redeems;

second, the act of redeeming. The “goel” was always a near kinsman. While the word

“redemption” means “to set free,” it incorporates the meaning “to buy back, to purchase.”

The redemption of the child of God is by his Near Kinsman, the Lord Jesus Christ, who

alone has the redemptive price — His own precious blood!

1. Redemption Declared.

a. Is Wholly of God (John 3:16).

b. Is Through a Person — Christ (I Peter 1:18, 19).

c. Is By Blood (Heb. 9:12).

d. Is By Power (I Cor. 1:30).

2. Redemption Perfected. The use of the word “redemption” is presented in the

following three ways:

a. To Buy or Purchase in a Slave Market. The Lord Jesus Christ came down into this

slave market of sin and bought us, who were upon the slave block.

b. To Purchase Out of the Market. After one purchased a slave, the master took him

out of the market. We are looking for our Master to come and take us out of this slave


c. To Loose or Set Free. The Lord Jesus is not a slave trader; neither is He a slave

holder. One day the Lord Jesus shall set us free from the bondage of corruption and sin,

and we shall know the perfect liberty of being the sons of God.

In Israel a man could not be a slave forever against his will. After becoming a slave, he

could be set free by redemption through a near kinsman, or by waiting for the Sabbatical

year or the year of Jubilee, when all slaves were set free. Should he love his master,

however, and not care to be set free under any circumstances, he could go to his master,

who in turn would bore a hole in his ear and make him a bondslave for life (Ex. 21:6).

Paul said that he was a bondslave of Jesus Christ – a bondslave for life. He was bought by

blood, bound by love. The Christian should have his ear bored, figuratively speaking,

yea, his hands, his all. He should recognize that he is crucified with Christ.



Prayer is the essential element of Christian character which is lacking in most believers

today. One reason for this is that prayer is misunderstood. Prayer is mostly thought of as

asking and receiving. It is that; however, it is much more. We fail to see the value of

prayer as communion with our God (Is. 43:21, 22; 64:6,7 R.V.; Zeph. 1:46; Dan. 9:13,14

with Hos.7:13, 14; 8:13, 14).

A. Affirmation.

1. It Is Sin to Neglect Prayer. “As for me, God forbid that I should sin against the

LORD in ceasing to pray for you: but I will teach you the good and the right way” (I

Sam. 12:23).

2. It Is Appointed by God. “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find;

knock, and it shall be opened unto you: for everyone that asketh receiveth; and he that

seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you,

whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him

a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how

much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?”

(Matt. 7:7-11).

3. It Is Commanded by God. “Pray without ceasing” (I Thess. 5:17). “Continue

steadfastly in prayer, watching therein with thanksgiving” (Col. 4:2, R.V. ).

4. It Is Necessary to Ask. “Ye have not, because ye ask not” (Jas. 4:2c).

B. Delineation.

1. Abraham Prays for Sodom (Gen. 18).

2. Jacob Prays the First Personal Prayer (Gen. 32:9-12). See other personal prayers

(Deut. 26:1-16; Ex. 5:22).

3. Joshua and Judges Cry Unto the Lord (Josh. 7:6-9; Judg. 10:14).

4. Samuel Prays As an Intercessor (I Sam 7:5, 12).

5. David Prays With Thanksgiving (II Sam. 7).

6. Believers Pour Out Their Hearts to God (Ps. 42:4; 62:8).

C. Explanation.

1. Presbyterian Catechism. “Prayer is the offering up of our desires to God, for things

agreeable to His will in the name of Christ with confession of our sins and thankful


acknowledgment of his mercy.”

2. Scriptural Definition.

a. As a Child Going to the Father. “Ye have not received the spirit of bondage again

to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father” (Rom.


b. As a Child Crying to the Father. “Lord. what wilt thou have me to do?” (Acts 9:6).

c. As a Child Desiring to Be With the Father. “Jabez called on the God of Israel,

saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand

might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me!

And God granted him that which he requested” (I Chron. 4:10).

d. As a Child Petitioning the Father. “When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain,

because they have sinned against thee; if they should pray toward this place, and confess

thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou afflictest them: then hear thou in heaven” (I

Kings 8:35, 36).

e. As a Child Asking Intercession of the Father. “When he had taken the book, the

beast and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them

harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of the saints” (Rev. 5:8). See

also Revelation 8:34.

f. As a Child Waiting in Silence Before God. “LORD, thou hast heard the desire of

the humble: thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear” (Ps. 10:17).

3. Human Experience. By this we mean that the saints of God have found these truths

through prayer.

a. It Is a Fervent Mind Settled On God.

b. It Is Laborious in Its Task (Col. 4:12).

c. It Is a Business.

D. Stimulation.

1. Abundant Testimony of Christians Proves That God Answers Prayer.

2. Universality of Phrases in Scripture: Whosoever, Whatsoever, Whensoever.

3. The Wealth of the Promises by God to Praying Believers.

4. The Confidence of Access Through Jesus Christ. “Having therefore, brethren,

boldness to enter into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by the way which he dedicated

for us, a new and living way through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having a great

priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith, having

our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience: and having our bodies washed with pure

water” (Heb. 10:19-22, R.V.).

5. The Assurance of Help by the Holy Spirit. “The Spirit helpeth our infirmities: for we

know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession

for us with groanings which cannot be uttered” (Rom. 8:26).


6. The Revelation of God by Christ. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only

begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (John 1:18).

7. The Limitless Supply of Grace in Christ. “My God shall supply all your need

according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:19).

8. The Unlimited Possibility of Faith. “Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all

things are possible to him that believeth” (Mark 9:23).

9. The Abundant Ability of God. “Now unto him that is able to do exceeding

abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto

him be glory” (Eph. 3:20).

E. Illustration.

1. Abraham Interceding for Sodom (Gen. 18:22, 23; 19:29).

2. Prayer of Abraham’s Servant (Gen. 24:12).

3. Personal Prayer of Jacob (Gen. 32:9-12).

4. Moses’ Intercession for Israel (Ex. 32:11-14, 30-34; Num. 14:11-21).

5. Samuel Interceding for King and People (I Sam. 12:6-25).

6. Elijah Praying for Fire and Water (I Kings 18:25-41; James 5:17, 18).

7. Nehemiah’s Prayer for Jerusalem (Neh. 2:4).

8. Joshua’s Prayer for Discernment (Josh. 7:7-9).

9. Samson’s Prayer for Renewed Strength (Judg. 16:28).

10. Hannah’s Prayer for a Child (I Sam. 1:10, 11).

11. David’s Prayer of Penitence (Ps. 51).

12. Solomon’s Prayer for Wisdom (I Kings 3:5-9).

13. Solomon’s Prayer of Dedication (I Kings 8:25-53).

14, Jonah’s Prayer for Deliverance (Jonah 2).

15. Habakkuk’s Prayer of Praise (Hab. 3).


16. Paul’s Intercession for the Saints (Eph. 1:15-23; 3:14-21; Col. 1:9-14).

17. The Malefactor’s Prayer for Forgiveness (Luke 23: 42, 43).

18. Stephen’s Prayer of Submission (Acts 7:59, 60).

19. The Lord Jesus’ Prayer for Strength (Matt. 26:27-46).

20. The Bible’s Last Prayer (Rev. 22:20).

F. Regulation.

1. As to the Posture of the Body. There is much supposition concerning the posture of

the body while in prayer. Some contend that prayer is not prayer unless one is on his

knees, believing it to be blasphemous to pray while walking, and the like. According to

the following Scriptures there is no set rule as to the position of the body in prayer:

a. Christ on His Face. “He went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed,

saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I

will, but as thou wilt” (Matt. 26:39).

b. Solomon on His Knees. “It was so, that when Solomon had made an end of praying

all this prayer and supplication unto the LORD, he arose from before the altar of the

LORD, from kneeling on his knees with his hands spread up to heaven” (I Kings 8:54).

c. Peter on the Water. “Lord, save me” (Matt. 14:30c).

d. Thief on the Cross. “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom”

(Luke 23:42).

e. Elijah With Face Between His Knees. “So Ahab went up to eat and to drink. And

Elijah went up to the top of Carmel; and he cast himself down upon the earth, and put his

face between his knees” (I Kings 18:42).

f. David on His Bed. “I am weary with my groaning; all the night make I my bed to

swim; I water my couch with my tears” (Ps. 6:6).

2. As to Time. Many poems have been written suggesting the time to pray. We do

know that the Christian should select a time when it is the most convenient for him to be

alone with the Lord. Here again there is no regulation stipulated. Notice the following


a. Daniel: Three Times a Day. “Now when Daniel knew that the writing was signed,

he went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber toward Jerusalem, he

kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God as

he did aforetime” (Dan. 6:10).

b. Christ: Early in the Morning. “In the morning, rising up a great while before day,

he went out, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed” (Mark 1:35).

c. Peter and John: Hour of Prayer (3 P.M.). “Now Peter and John went up together

into the temple at the hour of prayer, being the ninth hour” (Acts 3:1).

3. As to Place. Where is the place God meets man today? The Lord Jesus said,

“Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at


Jerusalem, worship the Father. . . . But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true

worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to

worship him” (John 4:21, 23). Here, too, we see that no definite place is commanded:

a. Christ in the Garden: “Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called

Gethsemane, and said unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder” (Matt.


b. Christ on the Grass. “He commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and

took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake,

and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude” (Matt. 14:19).

c. Christ on a Mountain. “It came to pass in those days, that he went out into a

mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God” (Luke 6:12).

d. Paul in a Storm on Board Ship (Acts 27). Where is the place the Christian should

pray? Christ said, “Thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast

shut thy door, pray to thy Father, which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret

shall reward thee openly” (Matt. 6:6). Where is the closet, and how may one close the

door? The closet is any place where the believer may closet himself from the outside

world. It may be on a bus, walking on the street, or it may be in a closed room. It is a

place where he and God are alone together.

G. Conditions.

What will it take to get our prayers answered? The Christian is one who asks to receive.

The following truths guarantee answers to prayer.

1. Confidence. “Without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God

must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him”


2. Earnestness. “I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find:

knock, and it shall be opened unto you” (Luke 11:9). Ask: Matthew 7:7; seek: James

5:17; knock: Acts 12:5.

3. Definiteness. “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your

children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good gifts to them

that ask him” (Matt. 7:11).

4. Persistence. “Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving” (Col.

4:2). See also Luke 18:1-8.

5. Faith. “I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye

receive them, and ye shall have them” (Mark 11:24).

6. Submission. “This is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask anything

according to his will he heareth us: and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask,

we know that we have the petitions that we desire of him” (I John 5:14, 15). When we

ask according to His will, then two have agreed, thus assuring that prayer will be


answered. “Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching

anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven”

(Matt. 18:19).

H. Limitation.

1. Through Spiritual Profanation. This is well illustrated in the life of Esau. Paul bids

us to look diligently “lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one

morsel of meat sold his birthright. For ye know how that afterward, when he would have

inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance though he

sought it carefully with tears” (Heb. 12:16, 17). Esau gave away the blessings that went

with the birthright. That which he sold was gone forever. In the Christian life lost days

and lost opportunities are gone. Yesterday is gone forever.

2. Through Judicial Penalties. “Speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith the

Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and

putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the

LORD will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols” (Ezek. 14:4).

See also Deuteronomy 3:25-27; Jeremiah 15:1.

3. Through Lack of Action. “The LORD said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto

me? speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward” (Ex. 14:15). To be sure there

is a time to “stand still and see the salvation of the LORD,” but there is also the time to

go forward.

4. Through Insincerity. “When thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are, for

they love to pray standing in the synagogue and in the corner of the streets, that they may

be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward” (Matt. 6:5).

5. Through Carnal Motives. “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye

may consume it upon your lust” (Jas. 4:3).

6. Through Unbelief. “Let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is

like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he

shall receive anything of the Lord” (Jas. 1:6, 7).

7. Through Cherished Sin. “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me”

(Ps. 66:18).

8. Through Failure to Ask. “Ye have not, because ye ask not” (Jas. 4:2c). Some find a

conflict with the above verse and Matthew 6:8: “Be not ye therefore like unto them: for

your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.” They reason that if

the Father knows what we have need of, why then should they pray? This has hurt the

prayer life of many Christians. It should not. It is true that our Father knows everything

we have need of; if He didn’t He would not be God. His knowledge, however, is not a

guarantee that we shall have the needed things: “Ye have not, because ye ask not.” Yes,


the Father knows what we need, but we have to pray for it. We are warned, nevertheless,

that we cannot fool God and ask for things we do not need.

I. Mediation.

“There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (I

Tim. 2:5). “In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him”

(Eph. 3:12). See also John 16:24-26, “Through him we both have access by one Spirit

unto the Father” (Eph. 2:18). This is the Scriptural formula for the presentation of

prayers: To the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit.

Prayers should contain the following:

1. Adoration.

2. Thanksgiving.

3. Confession.

4. Supplication.

5. Intercession.6


Understanding The Biblical New Birth Clarifies Doctrines about Sacraments, Election, and Perseverance of Saints.7

I Introduction

Within Christendom there are many divides of doctrine normally falling along denominational lines. There have been efforts to break down the lines and in the words of some, to “not let doctrine divide us and let the spirit unite us.” Many have said that we are all Christians we just do things differently; all the same but with different ideas or doctrines, about how to do what we do. In this article, it will be demonstrated that there is a hinge pin where these doctrinal lines divide in their many directions. That hinge-pin is the view and understanding of the new birth or salvation experience as presented in the Bible. It is important to focus on this dividing point (and it is that) because it sets a crucial difference between denominations, between Churches, and between movements that entangle our Churches in the 21st century. Standing between Christendom and non-Christendom8 there exists another dividing line based upon the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. An incorrect doctrine of who Christ is, his deity, his human-ness, his virgin birth, his equality with God, neatly separates away those which are non-Christian. Plainly many of these concede that they are not Christian and call themselves, latter day saints (Mormons), J. witnesses (Russelites) or other religions. Some, however infiltrate the ranks of Christendom and call themselves Christians. They try to follow the teachings of Christ while rejecting the person of Jesus Christ. The departure from this doctrine of “who Jesus was” makes them infidels to Christendom just the same. Those who do not accept completely the deity of the man Christ Jesus are plainly infidels to the faith. This is not the hinge-pin we will focus on in this paper.

When we are fastened on the hinge-pin of who Jesus Christ was; and we call ourselves Christian; and accept the orthodox Christian doctrines as true; a second hinge-pin exists that separates the many doctrinal avenues that are still open. This second hinge-pin is clearly to be found in the doctrine of the new birth, the understanding of what happens when one is born again. Catholic, Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Brethren, even Charismatic and non-denominationals all divide neatly when we consider the ‘who’ , the ‘how’, and the ‘how long’ of salvation. These differences find an epicenter in what happens when one is “born again”. Thus this makes a hing-pin for clearly distinguishing between ‘Christian faiths’, between denominations and within ‘Christian movements’. Biblically evaluating what takes place when a person is saved, and contrasting that with the teaching of a denomination can bring into focus many of the other differences which are often debated in ignorance. Establishing and understanding this root difference clarifies both intra-denominational and inter-denominational squabbling and misunderstandings about the exact syntax of other doctrinal issues. Particularly here, it will help clarify and solidify the Biblical doctrines of sacraments (the ‘how’ salvation is obtained question), election (the ‘who’ can be saved question) and perseverance of saints (the ‘how long’ one stays saved question). Clarifying these questions through a look at what happens when one is born-again, will bring into focus a majority of denominational differences within Christendom.


A Biblical understanding of the new birth can bring into focus doctrinal errors about 1) how one gets saved, 2) who can be saved, and 3) how one stays saved. In this article the we will model the salvation experience and then examine the effect of this model on the doctrines of sacraments, the doctrines of election, and the doctrines of perseverance of saints.


The approach in examining this thesis shall be to use Scriptures to construct a model of salvation which includes regeneration, conversion, justification, union with Christ, and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, to briefly examine some Christian doctrines about sacraments as they relate to this Biblical model, to briefly examine some Christian doctrines about election as they fit with the model, then to briefly examine some Christian doctrines about perseverance of saints as they pertain to a Biblical model of the salvation experience. This examination will not be an exhaustive treaty of these doctrines, but will present aspects of each which conflict with a well developed Scriptural model of salvation.

II A Biblical Model of the New Birth

There are two ways of developing a systematic model that captures what Jesus called “being born again”, or “being saved”, or “receiving eternal life.” The first is to consider 1) the preponderance of Scripture, 2) the orthodox teaching of the past and 3) the logic and philosophy of human reasoning then develop a model, choose the supporting verses and stick with the model. It will be shown that this method has been widely used and the results take on the names of their prominent developers such as Calvinism, or Arminianism. Such models will often be defended to the death, even when their developments begin to contradict a majority of Scripture. A second approach is to consider the preponderance of Scripture alone, develop a systematic model then contrast the model with the orthodox teaching of the past (as a sanity check and completeness check), and to then consider the logic and philosophy of human reasoning to comprehend the model. We use our deductive reasoning to comprehend Scripture, but we also have a tendency to use our reasoning to twist Scripture and make it fit into our realm of reason. Thus, where this systematic model does not fit our finite comprehension, we do not tweak the Biblically based model, but we compensate our finite understanding with the knowledge that God’s thoughts are not mans thoughts. ISA 55:7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Let us therefore build our model faithful to the Scriptures and let the misunderstandings not be a misrepresentation of so great salvation.

There are five aspects that seem to capture completely what happens to an individual when they are “born again”. These are 1) Conversion, 2) Regeneration, 3) Justification, 4) Baptism into Christ, and 5) Indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They are shown figuratively as a gold ring in Figure 1. Notice here that, like a ring there is no starting place nor stopping place, it is continuous unit. The new birth is quite like the placing of the ring upon a finger, there is no time delayed sequence of events, no process over time, but 5 immediate transactions that occur when one is born-again.

This immediacy of the new-birth, that all five partitions occur at one instant in time, is vital to the comprehension of Biblical salvation, and is key to distinguishing between denominations and doctrines. Understanding the new-birth as just that, an event in time, for an individual, where all five of these ingredients come together and take place simultaneously, clarifies and distinguishes the Biblical teaching from most doctrinal error and denominational differences. The hinge-pin that distinguishes most clearly between denominations is how far they will separate any of these 5 events from one another and take them out of a distinct, individual, personal salvation experience. An example developed later but given here for illustration, is the timing of the occurrence of regeneration within the reformed & Presbyterian doctrine. Many holding to individual soul election contend that a soul in sin is totally depraved, so depraved he is incapable of turning one fiber of his being towards the redeeming act of salvation. Thus before that person could start down a path that would lead to conversion, he must be regenerated. Regeneration, then is separated from the ring above, and made an event that precedes the new birth. We should, then, carefully develop the timing of these five and demonstrate that in Scripture they all must occur simultaneously. Then we will just stick tenaciously to the Scriptures as a Biblicist, or Fideist as some have labeled this approach.

With this as our basic model of the new birth, we should define each of these five ingredients of the new birth. In the next chapter we will take each and show how they systematically fall out of the Scriptures and how they are tied together in time as a single event.

Conversion is the turning from sin to Christ. This is the human part in the salvation transaction. It equally involves turning from sin and turning to Christ, you cannot have one side without the other and have this transaction complete. It involves a completeness in turning from sin and a completeness in turning to Christ in faith. God is not interested in making any new or special deals here; so one must wholly repent and turn from sin (singular) and wholly grasp Christ in faith, letting go of all else for the security of his soul.

Regeneration is the “that act of God by which new, spiritual life is implanted in man whereby the governing disposition of the soul is made holy by the Holy Spirit through truth as the means.”9 Dr. W. Vanhetloo gave here the best one sentence definition of regeneration that this author has seen.

Justification is best defined by Scripture in IICor 5:21 For he hath made him (Christ) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Being saved from the condemnation of sin involves coming under the umbrella of what Christ did for us. Justification, then, is a heavenly judicial declaration of 1) remission of sin and of 2) restoration to God.

Baptism into Christ often called the union with Christ, this is simply being united with Christ. Again probably best defined by Scripture in Christ’s prayer in John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the actual literal moving into our bodies by the Holy Spirit of God whereby he now permanently indwells us. Again Scripture pictures this superbly in I Cor 6:19 What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. Also Romans 8: 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. When one is saved, the Holy Spirit of God takes up residence inside them, he indwells them.

The purpose of this paper is not to define and develop these five transactions that occur at salvation, but to demonstrate that Biblically they all occur at an instant in time, the instant one is ‘born-again’. We shall develop more fully these five transactions in the next chapter. Again with our emphasis on the marvelous revelation that all five of them are instantaneous and united transactions. Making this tie, that all five are tied in time to conversion, is what will allow us to clearly differentiate various denominational differences. We can use this understanding of conversion as the hinge-pin to evaluate and bring into focus all other ‘Christian’ doctrines and differences.

III The Instantaneous Transaction of Conversion

We said previously that:

Conversion is the turning from sin to Christ. This is the human part in the salvation transaction. It equally involves turning from sin and turning to Christ, you cannot have one side without the other and have this transaction complete. It involves a completeness in turning from sin and a completeness in turning to Christ in faith. God is not interested in making any new or special deals here; so one must wholly repent and turn from sin (singular) and wholly grasp Christ in faith, letting go of all else for the security of his soul.

Examining conversion as one of the five instantaneous entities that make up salvation is somewhat of a challenge because it is, in our mind, the act that sets off the whole event, and is viewed more as a process than an event. Thus, as we examine it, we shall attempt to separate it from all the events, process’s and circumstances that leads a soul to the place where he would turn from sin and turn to Christ. And separate it from the after-math of the changes that begin to happen, changes which demonstrate that there was genuine conversion.

This turning from sin to Christ is the hall mark of salvation. Conversion, in various forms occurs in 37 verses10 of the Bible. It is clearly described in Scripture as an event that happens in an instant of time. A works salvation is very attractive to man. A works salvation is what surrounds and encapsulates ‘religion’. This ever present teaching of works salvation is what makes it difficult, but necessary, to look at this conversion as an event that happens in an instant of time. In examining the Scriptures that pinpoint this as an event, we shall examine the aspects of conversion as 1) A new birth, 2) turning (from sin and to Christ) and 3) belief on Christ.

In John 3 there is a record of a religious man asking about his prospects of getting to heaven. In the course of Jesus’ addressing the shortfalls of religion he states “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. (John 3:5-7)

Thus we speak of being ‘born again’ as an event, and can ask an individual if they are a born again believer. In this explanation, given by Jesus Christ himself, he brings out that being born of the spirit, being converted, being saved from ones sin debt is a voluntary operation or act of belief by an individual. However, it is likened to a birth. Does one voluntarily choose birth, no. What initiates birth? Certainly conception and coming to full term has a role, but even as I write this we wait for twin grand kids to be born. Labor started 6 weeks early then stopped, and we now wait. We have tried lots of things to help but we often hear that “they will come when they are ready”. What initiates the birthing event? God does. In our spiritual life what initiates the spiritual new birth? God does. Can we force it or fake it? Many have, but God is in charge of genuine spiritual birth. We have overlooked several aspects of this powerful illustration let me list a few for your consideration:

  1. Birth takes place at a time, thus we end up with a birthday.
  2. Birth is a miracle, not just conception and development but birth itself.
  3. Birth is initiated.
  4. Birth may be labored.
  5. Birth is completed.
  6. The infant is not in control.
  7. It marks the entry of a new independent life into the world

Jesus used this as an illustration of what Nicodemus needed. Not the only illustration he gave him, but a powerful one just the same. We should be careful not to over weight any of these aspects of birth to the conversion of the soul, but so to we should not discard those that fit so well.

Anyone that is born in the flesh11 can be born in the spirit. It is thus been said by some “If you are born once, you must die twice, but if you are born twice you may12 die only once.” Clearly this new birth is not a process over years, but an event in ones life. Clearly an infant has little control during this birthing process but lets look at an individuals involvement in the spiritual birth.

Jesus further clarified this new birth with the illustration from Numbers 26 that looking to a brazen serpent saved the life of a judged snake bite victim. As much as an Israelite had only to look at the brazen serpent to be saved from his snake-bite, so one has only to turn and look to Christ to be saved from his sin sentence. (John 3:14-16) What was mans part? To believe and to look. Belief alone was inadequate. There must be an application of the belief, but that application had no physical requirement, no gauze or ointment, no water washing or need of someone else to dunk them in magical water. In the word’s of the songwriter one had but to “look and live, my brother live, look to Jesus now and live, it’s recorded in in His word, halleluiah, it is only that you look and live.” Marvelous simplicity. Marvelous availability. Marvelous attainability to all who would believe.

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. The word ‘believe’ has lost it’s effectiveness today. We say “I believe it will be a nice day.” We say “I believe the world is round.” Believe has been distanced from trust. To capture the intent of Biblical belief on Christ, we must tie the word back to trust, to letting go of other securities and placing the full trust of our soul in Christ. “Whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Both the turning to the brazen serpent and the turning loose of all else for a belief in Christ, alone, show two inseparable parts of conversion. Repentance, is turning from, and Faith is believing in.

The best illustration of conversion then is in a two sided coin containing faith and repentance. Accepting the whole coin is as easy as reaching out and receiving. Dividing the two is as difficult as cutting a coin without defacing either side. When your done you don’t have a complete coin.

Comprehending conversion as an act of an individual that takes place in their volition at an instant in time leads to several clarifications that should be stated.

  1. One can know they have done this as sure as one can know that they got married.
  2. There is more than a ‘head knowledge’ involved in believing faith.
  3. There is no work to be done to deserve conversion, it is an act of faith alone.
  4. There is nothing that can be done externally by the individual, his family or a Church to accomplish a souls conversion.
  5. There are no sacraments (mystical physical acts with spiritual consequences) involved in conversion.
  6. The Church cannot issue salvation via sacraments.
  7. An infant cannot be converted.

Let’s emphasize a couple of verses again and recognize that conversion is this new birth and new birth is conversion.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Matt 18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

American society is filled with individuals who were never converted yet think themselves Christian. There is no time or place in their life where they verbally called on Christ for their salvation and realized it a completed transaction. They often have spent their lives acting Christian without the new life and assurance that conversion brings. If you are one of these please realize now that “Except ye be converted, . . . ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

Keeping these things in mind, one goes on in the exploration of events that accompany salvation. Recall that all five of these events, Conversion, Regeneration, Justification, Baptism into Christ, and Indwelling of the Holy Spirit, occur simultaneously and in an instant of time in an individuals life.

IV The Instantaneous Transaction of Regeneration

We said previously that:

Regeneration is the “that act of God by which new, spiritual life is implanted in man whereby the governing disposition of the soul is made holy by the Holy Spirit through truth as the means.”13

Once again we are not covering all aspects of this tremendous miracle in this chapter, only establishing the Scriptural basis that it occurs at an instant in time in an individuals life, that it occurs simultaneously with the new birth, and that this new birth also includes the other four ingredients of Conversion, Justification, Baptism into Christ, and Indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The word regeneration appears only twice in the Bible, in Matt 19:28 and Tit 3:5.

Matt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

So here the part of regeneration we are interested in might be better conceived with the word quickened. The word quickened, meaning made alive, is used 25 times in the Bible, 10 in the NT and 15 times in Psalms. The fact that the new birth described in John 3 is tied with new spiritual life, quickening or regeneration is indisputable. The descriptions of the new life being just that, a “new” life, where one once was dead and now is made alive are throughout the epistles.

V The Instantaneous Transaction of Justification

Justification is best defined by Scripture in IICor 5:21 For he hath made him (Christ) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Being saved from the condemnation of sin is coming under the umbrella of what Christ did for us. Justification, then, is a heavenly judicial declaration of 1) remission of sin and of 2) restoration to God.

VI The Instantaneous Baptism Into Christ

Baptism into Christ often called the union with Christ, this is simply being united with Christ. Again probably best defined by Scripture in Christ’s prayer in John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

VII The Instantaneous Indwelling of The Holy Spirit

Indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the actual literal moving into our bodies by the Holy Spirit of God whereby he now permanently indwells us. Again Scripture pictures this superbly in I Cor 6:19 What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. Also Romans 8: 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. When one is saved, the Holy Spirit of God takes up residence inside them, he indwells them.

VIII The conflict with our philosophy and doctrines

CALVINISM–a definition and explanation

The essential parts of this Calvinistic system are the well-known five points of Calvinism, namely, total depravity in distinction from partial; unconditional election in distinction from conditional; irresistible regenerating grace in distinction from resistible; limited redemption (not atonement) in distinction from universal; the certain perseverance of the regenerate in distinction from their possible apostasy. No one of these points can be rejected without impairing the integrity of Calvinism . . .

[William G. T. Shedd. Calvinism: Pure and Mixed. p. 147].


The General Association of Regular Baptist Churches Article X states that:

We believe that in order to be saved, sinners must be born again; that the new birth is a

new creation in Christ Jesus; that it is instantaneous and not a process; that in the new

birth the one dead in trespasses and sins is made a partaker of the divine nature and

receives eternal life, the free gift of God; that the new creation is brought about by our

sovereign God in a manner above our comprehension, solely by the power of the Holy

Spirit in connection with divine truth, so as to secure our voluntary obedience to the

gospel; that its proper evidence appears in the holy fruits of repentance, faith and

newness of life [General Association of Regular Baptist Churches. Literature Item 1. p. 6].


The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647, Chapter VIII and Section VIII says:

To all those for whom Christ has purchased redemption He does certainly and

effectually apply and communicate the same; making intercession for them, and

revealing unto them, in and by the Word, the mysteries of salvation; effectually

persuading them by His Spirit to believe and obey [emphasis added–aal]; and governing

their hearts by His Word and Spirit; overcoming all their enemies by His almighty

power and wisdom, in such manner and ways as are most consonant to His wonderful

and unsearchable dispensation [Schaff. op. cit. p. 622].


The Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England in Article XVII states:

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the

foundations of the world were laid) He has constantly decreed by His counsel secret to

us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He has chosen in Christ to

everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honor [emphasis added –aal]. Wherefore, those

who are endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God’s

purpose by His Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they

are justified freely: they are made sons of God by adoption: they are made like the

image of His only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and

at length, by God’s mercy, they attain to everlasting happiness [Ibid. p. 497].




Table of Truths Established for Each Aspect of Salvation




Baptism Into Christ

Indwelling of Holy Spirit

One can know they did this as sure as marriage vows. One can know this happened, know there is now new life. One can read and understand this promise. One can read and understand this promise. One can know when someone moves into their life.
Involves both mental assent and willful trust. New life is imparted by God.
Wholly Independent of Works The new life is eternal, it cannot die.
No external, physical act done, or to be done by another. The new life CANNOT sin.
Independent of Reformation The new life can see spiritual things.
Independent of Church Sacraments The new life responds with the Holy Spirit.
Not done by/to infants.


Table of Conflicts Between Systematic Doctrines and Each Aspect of Salvation

The Bible Model Sacramental Salvation (Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian) Calvinism (Reformed, Presbyterian) Arminianism (Methodist, Pentecostal) Charismatic (Feelings usurp Scriptural Authority)
Conversion the act of turning from sin, repentance; and turning to Christ, in faith. More than a mental persuasion, The act of letting go of all else and trusting Christ with your soul. The Church hands out physical mystical sacraments used to attain Salvation. Conversion is coming into the Church not into the Kingdom of God. Impossible unless one is first chosen of God and then already regenerated, man is totally depraved spiritually unable to make a decision for Salvation. The use of the awakening of the Will to claim
Regeneration act of God whereby a new spiritual life is implanted in man whereby the governing disposition of the soul is made holy by the Holy Spirit through truth. Salvation is not a new life implanted but a process of feeding ones soul with sacraments, thus administration of Communion and Last Rights.
Justification a heavenly judicial declaration of 1) remission of sin and of 2) restoration to God, accomplished at Calvary, but applied at conversion.
Baptism into Christ as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: . . And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
Indwelling of Holy Spirit the actual literal moving into our bodies by the Holy Spirit of God whereby he now permanently indwells us. your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God,

Critique of other Systematic Theology Soteriology Works

A systematic theology is more than a doctrines book. It needs to systematically review other belief systems and theology works.

Critique of John Miley’s 1892 Methodist Soteriology

John Miley (1813-1895), a Methodist, published his Systematic Theology in 1892. It is introduced here because it staunchly refutes the Calvinism tainting all other systematic theologies. It is also superbly organized and utilizes aged reasoning. One hundred and twenty years ago writers worded their reasoning and their arguments with great depth and compound sentences. The dumbing-down of English prose, human reasoning, and judicial argument has produced a society which does not tolerate much reading of the Systematic Theology of Miley, Hodge or Strong. “Ology” still has the meaning that the target subject is covered with such depth that one goes on and on about it, examining every angle and consideration. Miley published a carefully structured Soteriology section in his Systematic Theology, but he does go on and on about it. Its prime argument is that salvation is forever deeply entangled in the work of Christ’s atonement, and it categorically refutes Calvin’s system of theology.

The heart of Miley’s Soteriology is knit with atonement which he defines as: “The vicarious sufferings of Christ are an atonement for sin as a conditional substitute for penalty , fulfilling , on the forgiveness of sin, the obligation of justice and the office of penalty in moral government.” He structures this argument with the following general outline:
























In Chapter I of his argument John Miley exposes the error of John Calvin’s system. He declares that as much as Scripture interprets Scripture, so to doctrine must interpret doctrine. “Thus, beyond the fact of an atonement, we search for a doctrine. We seek to understand its nature ; what are its elements of atoning value; how it is the ground of divine forgiveness.” Ergo, one doctrine in a defective system can completely circumvent another doctrine, rendering it completely ineffectual. Under this principle, Miley states:

“A doctrine of atonement must be in scientific accord with cardinal doctrines vitally related to it. If other cardinal doctrines of Calvinism are true, its doctrine of atonement is true. It is an integral part of the system, and in full harmony with every other part, the doctrines of divine sovereignty and decrees, of unconditional election to salvation, of the effectual calling and final perseverance of the elect, and that their salvation is monergistically14 wrought as it is sovereignly decreed, require an atonement which in its very nature is and must be effectual in the salvation of all for whom it is made. Such an atonement the system has in the absolute substitution of Christ, both in precept and penalty, in behalf of the elect. He fulfills the righteousness which the law requires of them, and suffers the punishment which their sins deserve. By the nature of the substitution both must go to their account. Such a theory of atonement is in scientific accord with the whole system. And the truth of the system would carry with it the truth of the theory. It can admit no other theory. Nor can such an atonement be true if the system be false.”15

Rather than labor through more of this carefully worded argument, be it said Miley argues extensively that since Calvin held to “the doctrines of divine sovereignty and decrees, (and) of unconditional election to salvation,” there is no real need to examine his belief about atonement. “Such an atonement (cannot) be true if the system be false.” In John Calvin’s system, a person is saved by election and not by atonement. Miley parallels the Calvinist’s dilemma in this regard with the dilemma of the Socinian. Since the Socinian does not believe in the deity of Christ, there is little merit in considering what he may believe about the atonement. It is not effectual. So to, in the system of John Calvin, the atonement is not effectual and, ergo, not even pertinent for consideration.

Of Arminianism, Miley, the Methodist, declares its certain truth:

If the cardinal doctrines of the Arminian system, such as differentiate it from Calvinism, be true, then the atonement of satisfaction, in the Calvinistic sense of it, cannot be true. If the atonement is really for all, and in the same sense sufficient for all, then it must be only provisory, and its saving benefits really conditional. And no other truths are more deeply wrought into Arminianism, whether original or Wesleyan ; none have a more uniform, constant, unqualified Methodistic utterance. They are such facts of atonement, or facts in such logical relation to it, that they require a doctrine in scientific agreement with themselves. Such a doctrine is the special aim of this discussion, not without regard to consistency in the system, but specially because these facts are scriptural, and the doctrine agreeing with them scriptural and true.16

Such a black and white contrast between Calvinism and Arminianism is refreshing, and true in principle. The system of Calvin has the pre-creation election of souls for salvation and for damnation as its pillar of truth. It need not fuss that much about a doctrine of atonement. But the system of Aminian does not take the doctrine of atonement to its completed end. That system is flawed in doctrine about the perseverance of the soul. When the atonement produces a quickening of the soul, that quickening is not dependent on ones keeping the faith, and it cannot be undone. John Miley’s discourse on Soteriology has it directly connected to the atonement. The atoning work of Christ is defined and developed extensively. But, alas, in the Arminian and Methodist system the atonement lacks being a completed work, and their ‘hope’ is that they might endure to the end and make it to heaven. For the Bible believer the atonement applied produces a quickening of the soul, which can never be undone, it is an everlasting life.

Critique of Charles Hodge’s 1878 Soteriology

Critique of Augustus Strong’s 1907 Soteriology

Critique of Theisens’ 1949 Soteriology

Critique of Geisler’s 2002 Soteriology


Critique of Chafer’s Volume III Soteriology Introduction

It is distressing to lay Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer’s third volume of Systematic Theology, entitled Soteriology, on my desk beside Dr. Cambron’s single volume of “Bible Doctrine”, or beside Dr. Bancroft’s volume of “Elementary Theology”. Both Baptists capture the heart of Soteriology in pages while Chafer does not even present a shadow of the subject in his whole volume. Cambron uses 23 pages in a thorough coverage, and Bancroft uses 50 in an unabridged coverage, while Chafer has 396 pages, that is 33 pages a week for a twelve week college quarter, wherein he never addresses justification, never describes conversion, never mentions quickening, writes not one paragraph on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and carefully steers clear of ones Baptism (that is complete immersion) into the Lord Jesus Christ. These five essentials to So-Great-Salvation, all expounded clearly, continually and completely in Scripture, Cambron, and Bancroft are not even or ever addressed in 396 pages of a volume called Soteriology by neo-evangelicalism. Analysis of how such an incompetent 396 communique could seep from Dallas Theological Seminary is crucial, and unfortunately it is herein ground breaking. The hypercritical content of this work is centric to comprehending that Evangelicalism, which has not strayed far from Rome and Reformed Theology, is a caustic leaven which has permeated Christendom.

Many strongly disagree with this assessment. Christian Book Distributors (consider that their motivation is to sell books) says that Chafer has “an unabridged systematic theology of unparalleled scope.17” Reporting that Chafer defines systematic theology as “the collecting, systematically arranging, comparing, exhibiting and defending of all facts concerning God and His works from any and every source.18” They report that Walter Elwell calls Chafer’s work “the definitive statement of dispensational theology.” and Charles Ryrie says “Though scholarly in the true sense of the word, this work can also be read and understood by those not formally trained in theology. 19“ Such comments make one suspect a massive evangelical coverup is in place. Chafer’s own definition of systematic theology reveals his purposeful departure from The Holy Bible as theology’s sole source, or even its primary source! What he ends up with in considering every source is not “unabridged” it is diabolical.

Dallas Theological Seminary President successor Praises Chafer’s Work

Of course Dr. John F. Walvoord, (1910-2002) Dr. Chafer’s successor at Dallas Theological Seminary, showered his predecessor’s work with great praise. He says of Chafer’s eight volume work, “Never before has a work similar in content purpose, and scope been produced.”… it is “Remarkably Biblical… appeal is constantly to Biblical authority rather than to philosophy, tradition or creed.” Dr. Walvoord, himself considered the worlds foremost interpreter of biblical prophecy and a most prominent evangelical scholar of his generation20, said of Dr. Chafer’s third volume “The contribution of President Chafer in the field of Soteriology has been hailed as the most important of all his theological works.”21

There is little doubt of Dr. Walvoord’s sincerity or integrity in this declaration, but it needs to be highlighted again that when Chafer writes four hundred pages on Soteriology and never addresses a soul’s justification, a soul’s quickening, a soul’s conversion, and/or a soul’s indwelling and baptism into Christ, then the most important theological work of the Protestant/Evangelical community is bankrupt of all Biblical doctrine.

Dr. Walvoord himself confesses to the fault, when he acknowledges Chafer’s first section on Soteriology deals with Christ’s offices, his sonship, his hypostatic union and his sufferings. Therein we find no mention of Christ’s substitutionary death, burial, and resurrection. Second and third sections deal with the doctrine of election, not the doctrine of salvation. Forth and fifth sections concern the work of God and ones eternal security not the So-Great-Salvation referenced in the Epistle to the Hebrews. And the last section covers the terms of salvation, “a section which is most practical and helpful”, says Dr. Walvoord. In reality this last section only deals with four terms of salvation 1) Repent and Believe, 2) Believe and Confess, 3) Believe and be Baptized, and 4) Believe and Surrender. Nowhere in 400 pages does Dr. Chafer spell out what the Bible says must be ‘believed’, nowhere does he spell out what the Bible calls the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

Yet for all its hollowed emptiness Dr. Walvoord still says “The volume on Soteriology, if it stood alone, would in itself assure the author a place among notable writers of Christian Doctrine.22” That is inconceivable. Chafer never writes about justification, conversion, quickening, indwelling or baptism into Christ! And yet this Evangelical continues “There is no volume in the field of Systematic Theology which approaches (Chafer’s Third Volume) in Biblical insight , spiritual comprehension of the saving work of god, and unabridged treatment of the great work of God in salvation.23

Was it emphasized enough that Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer’s Third Volume entitled “Soteriology” never addresses justification, never describes conversion, never mentions quickening, writes not one paragraph on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and carefully steers clear of one’s baptism, i.e. complete immersion, into the Lord Jesus Christ. And yet the whole of the Protestant/Evangelical world cries out that this is the very best they could ever attain. Ergo it is cried out here that the Protestant/Evangelical world is completely bankrupt when it comes to describing and defending or contending for and comprehending God’s So-Great-Salvation. Reformed Theology, Scholarly Philosophy and Modernist Liberal Apostasy has rendered the whole of the Evangelical World completely bankrupt when it comes to Preaching, Comprehending, and Contending for the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. The gospel is indeed 1) Conversion, by Repentance and Faith, 2) Justification, Declared, 3) Quickening, where once I was dead, 4) Indwelling wherein we are the tabernacle of God, and 5) Compete Immersion in Christ, whereby we forever have a position in Christ.

Troublesome Independent Fundamental Baptist’s Leaning Toward Chafer

As troubling as the Evangelical failures are they were well predicted. Indeed the whole point of the Fundamental departure of the last century was one of separation from such an apostate condition. Neo-Evangelicalism refused the fundamentalist position and had as its premise that separation from the reformers apostasy and their Reformed Theology was to drastic a measure, choosing rather a coexistence in their apostate circles. There was never any doubt about where such compromise would land the neoevangelical. Like “Christian Rock Music” their lyrics were carefully chosen but there was never any question about where their melody came from. If one dare call such stuff a melody at all. What then, might be the position of the Fundamentalist who 100 years ago avowed separation from such apostasy?

Dr. Cambron, Theologian of Tennessee Temple Baptist Seminary, staunchly affirmed that the doctrine of Salvation is captured in the five ingredients fore mentioned. Dr. Bancroft, Theologian of Bible Baptist Theological Seminary, affirmed exactly the same. Neither frittered away a single paragraph of their Soteriology trying to figure out what God had decreed, or who was elect for what before the foundation of the world. They captured the doctrine of salvation very Biblically, very exactly, and very succinctly. But look where we have sunk in the last 50 years of that Fundamental century.

An Independent Fundamental Baptist Pastor with a Masters from Pensacola Christian College, and a Doctorate from Bethany Theological Seminary, revels that “Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer’s Systematic Theology is the single greatest Systematic Theology ever written.24” This self acclaimed “Doctrinal Expositor” wrote of Dr. Chafer’s Soteriology, “(Chafer’s) desire to be ‘Biblical’ in his Systematic Theology requires (that) he surround his system to the text of Scripture. He is to be highly commended for that.” This well trained Independent Fundamental Baptist Preacher further heaps ten paragraphs of praise onto Dr. Chafer’s Soteriology because it tears the “L” right out of T.U.L.I.P.25 Any Baptist praise for even T.U.I.P should be disconcerting. The whole Presbyterian, Reformed, Calvinistic, Covenant Theology, Replacement Theology is fraught with diabolical error and T.U.L.I.P. Is only the ugly “tip of the iceberg.” Taking the “L” out to T.U.L.I.P. Is like taking Purgatory out of Catholicism. It might deliver a crippling blow to an errant system, but the lie still limps along without major effect. An Independent Fundamental Baptist praising Chafer’s 400 pages of Soteriology which does not even address a soul’s conversion, justification, or quickening is a powerful indicator of a serious compromise and dangerous blindness. The giant of Neoevangelicalism defies the Salvation of God, and it needs to be reiterated: “Is there not a cause?”

Correspondence with Dr. DaveT is included here:

Dr. DaveT’s Comments & Response

Subject: Pastor Ed Rice is forwarding an email to you

From: Pastor Ed Rice <>

Date: Thu, February 06, 2014 2:06 pm

To: Dr. Dave T. <>

Dave, I talked about you and your love for Dr. Chafer’s work in this report and wanted to ensure you got a courtesy copy. It will be published in Systematic Theology, and in my written report for credit at LBTS.

Theology Working Group,

Subject: RE: Pastor Ed Rice is forwarding an email to you

From: “Dr. David Txxxxxxx” <dave@xxxxxxx>

Date:2/6/2014 3:28 PM

To: “Pastor Ed Rice” <>

Hi, Pastor Rice,

Thanks for the note. A couple of errors you may want to correct:

1) you have misspelled my name

2) Chafer includes an entire article on Justification in Vol 7

3) Chafer includes multiple chapters on Election in Vol 3

4) a search on the word “quicken” returned 30 results in the Chafer systematic theology

You should fact check other faulty assumptions. If your grade depends on the accuracy of your statements, you will be glad you did. Thanks for including me with a giant like Walvoord. That is very flattering indeed, although I will confess I do not belong in such rarified air.


Dr. David Txxxxxxx

Dear Dr. Dave T.,

When Pilgrim wandered from the straight and narrow path he was assigned, and it was pointed out how far off he strayed, how awful the mire, and how deep the upcoming pit, his first and natural tendency was to justify his error.

I have quite well fact checked my declaration. Your hero might well have written of justification in his final volume titled “Doctrinal Summarization” but in so doing he violates good organization by including in summary something that is found nowhere else in the body of his work. The fact is his whole volume on Soteriology never addresses justification, and I have quite clearly declared the fact.

John Calvin’s 1536 magnum opus, “The Institutes of the Christian Religion26”, the Presbyterian’s 1618 Synod of Dort27, and Lewis Sperry Chafer’s 1948 volume on Soteriology inexplicably tie salvation to election and predestination. The fact is the Holy Bible does not. The fact is I have well introduced this momentous blunder, even labeling it a diabolical error, and the body of my critique of Chafer’s Soteriology provides ample proof of such an introductory declaration. Chafer’s multiple chapters on Election in Vol 3 fully support my argument, and your announcing it as important does not justify your error, it only muddies the mire.

There are no faulty assumptions in this introduction to my critique of Chafer’s Soteriology. The fact that he speaks of ‘quickening’ somewhere in the bowels of his Systematic Theology, cannot justify his bankrupt volume on Soteriology that does not bring it up. When it is pointed out that the Neo-Evangelical giant, Dr. Walvoord and an Independent Fundamental Baptist, Dr. Dave T. are wallowing around in the same pit of diabolical error it is not flattery. It is presented here as an alarming manifestation of the grossest compromise. Prayerfully, I trust you will see how far you are strayed from the straight and narrow and get back in the battle for truth.

The fact that your name was misspelled is the only error left standing. Because of my embarrassment for you I shall not fix that error, I will eliminate its reference all together. I trust this correspondence finds you turning back from Chafer’s winding path and making your way back to the Cross of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Pastor Edward Rice

The breakout of Chafer’s emphasis in Volume III on Soteriology is shown as follows:

Chap 1 Introduction to Soteriology 3-10 2% of vol 3

Chap 2 The Person of Christ 11-34 6%

Chap 3 Introduction to the Sufferings of Christ 35-54 5%

Chap 4 Things Accomplished by Christ in His Sufferings and Death 55-115 15%

Chap 5 The Sufferings and Death of Christ in Types 116-126 3%

Chap 6 Biblical Terminology Related to Christ’s Sufferings and Death 127-130 1%

Chap 7 Theories False and True of the Value of Christ’s Death 131-164 9%

Chap 8 The Fact of Divine Election 165-177 3%

Chap 9 The Order of Elective Decrees 178-182 1%

Chap 10 For Whom Did Christ Die? 183-205 6%

Chap 11 The Finished Work of Christ 206-209 1%

Chap 12 The Convicting Work of The Spirit 210-224 4%

Chap 13 The Riches of Divine Grace 225-266 11%

Chap 14 Introduction to the Doctrine of Security 267-272 2%

Chap 15 The Armenian View of Security 273-312 10%

Chap 16 The Calvinistic Doctrine of Security 313-339 7%

Chap 17 The Consummating Scripture 340-354 4%

Chap 18 Deliverance From Reigning Power of Sin and Human Limitations 355-363 2%

Chap 19 The Believer Presented Faultless 364-370 2%

Chap 20 The Terms of Salvation 371-395 6%

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. II

For all that has been said about what Chafer did not include in a volume on Soteriology, something needs to be said in critique of what he did include. The heart of what Chafer has to offer any discussion of Soteriology is found in his fourth chapter entitled; “Things accomplished by Christ in his Sufferings and Death.” As was stated previous, Dr. Chafer has no skeleton, i.e. no structured organization, to add meat to, but any miniscule pickings of “meat” are found in this chapter.

Chafer’s chapter 2 is completely misplaced. Parts of this chapter might find outline space in Christology, but even there, Chafer’s trite outlining methods and his verbosity makes the chapter very undesirable. It is disquieting to say that a chapter on the person of the Savior could be totally discarded. It is indeed totally misplaced. But it is also observed that the first sentence of the letters to The Hebrews has more about the Saviour than does the misplaced chapter by Chafer. He tries to use catchy outlines, like; “Son of God, Son of Man, Son of David and Son of Abraham,” but such preachable outlines can not excuse the responsibility levied on the Systematic Theologian. Chafer is not systematic in any sense of the word. He has displayed no ability to outline a topic in a logically structured manner. He displays no talent here for separating a “system” like Christology or Soteriology in a confining border and then dealing with each “subsystem” separately. In this volume Chafer has so intermixed other “subsystems” of information that he did not include any “Soteriology” at all. Chapter 2 exemplifies this blunder. It should be in his Christology.

Stepping thus away from the subject of Soteriology to critique what Dr. Chafer calls “The Person of the Saviour” we can only establish his purpose late in this chapter. It is not in his verbose introduction, but in his third section, with the catchy title “The Sonships of Christ”, his lead sentence intimates this purpose. “As a further step in the general investigation into who the Saviour is…” Upon discovering this purpose, twenty pages into the chapter, it was disturbing to find only three marginal notes that this author had scratched into the margins of Chafer’s twenty pages. They were (1) “Not on topic, (2) “trite play on words” and (3) “Bla,Bla,Bla.” This was disturbing because on the topic “general investigation of who the Saviour is,” nothing whatsoever should be labeled “Bla.” And yet, there you have it Despite a noble effort to pull out a specific sentence that illustrates Chafer’s profundity of wordiness in capturing bla,bla,bla. All examples examined were, well, excuse the pun, rather bla.

Dr. Chafer herein again demonstrates a propensity for verbose, passive, run on sentences, but struggling to look past this communication flaw, struggling to come up with the gist of what he may be driving at, the total bankruptcy of Evangelical Theology is all the more manifest. This founder of Dallas Theological Seminary broke from the Fundamentalist concept of Separation and waded right into the middle of 70 plus denominations. There he worded and worded and worded 8 volumes that captured what all 70 believed. He worded and worded and worded to ensure not one old bird got their feathers ruffled. He worded and worded and worded some more, until precious few could even comprehend what his main point was. He mixed in a lot of Greek but no exegesis. In this chapter he had to include the “Hypostatic Union” of Christ to be recognized as “most scholarly.” Eight volumes containing over 2000 pages is labeled as unabridged Systematic Theology. This author calls it very wordy, passively written, tip-toeing. It is truly awful.

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. III – VII

For all that has been covered in this critique of Dr. Chafer’s Soteriology, most has thus far centered on his total lack of content. He has manifest the total bankrupt condition of the Neo–Evangelical movement concerning the subject of So – Great -Salvation. In these next chapters, however, Chafer leaves off his demonstration of bankruptcy and goes headlong out avenues of spurious error.

The Roman Catholic basis of Soteriology can be framed in suffering. Your sin is only purged, and your own righteousness is only secured in penance and in suffering. They allege that their Latin Vulgate Bible, the corrupted Latin translation from the 4th century, states their concept clearly, “Except ye ‘do penance’ ye shall all likewise perish.” If you, with your beads, and penance perhaps suffer enough in this life you go to heaven. If not, you go to purgatory, where you or your loved one may suffer sufficiently to get your soul to heaven.

Jesus’ sufferings are our superb example, they say. He attained perfect righteousness because of his great sufferings, they say. If you suffer and sacrament enough in this life you might attain eternal life in heaven, they say. If someone obviously excelled in suffering and sacrament, excelled by so much that a Roman Pope recognizes the excess, he can declare that person a saint. These declared Roman Catholic Saints surely have some handmade righteousness left over and they may use some of the excess righteousness for your needs if you just pray to them. With that doctrine embedded deep in this author’s Italian blood, one can not imagine how quickly or vehemently his blood boils when Dr. Chafer, the neoevangelical theologian, founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, which caters to 70+ denominations, spends 33% of his volume of Soteriology covering the importance of Christ’s Sufferings and 0% of the volume talking about justification by faith. When the 70+ denominations broke away from Roman Catholic Soteriology , they did not make a clean break. It is repulsive that Dr. Chafer kept an exaggerated emphasis on the sufferings of Christ in order to appease those denominations which carried that theme from their Roman Catholic heritage. Dr. Chafer’s exaggerated, verbose explanations never rebuke the analogy that we must likewise suffer to attain righteousness.

One must ask, why does Chafer fail to speak against this Roman Catholic doctrine about suffering? And one must answer that it is related to his desire to appeal to 70+ denominations that sprang from the “Holy Roman Church”. Chafer dare not admit that it is an apostate “Holy Roman Church”, and those denominations which carry forth her doctrine are also apostate.

When Dr. Chafer does interweave some remarkable truths about Christ into such a brazen compromise of Soteriology, it is too little too late. His verbose-run on- passive style makes it obvious that one would be far better off reading the book of Hebrews from their Holy Bible and gleaning these truths from God himself. In chapter VII, “Theories False and True of the Value of Christ’s Death”, Chafer adds a capstone to his arch of folly. The false concept that the scientific method can be used to determine valid theology seeps from Protestant Systematic Theology books. Here Chafer tries to present ‘theories’ wherein after much testing and philosophy, the truth may be found. After testing one’s hypothesis it becomes a theory, after years of testing and evaluation a theory becomes a law. When in time, no one can debunk or refute the “law”, it is presumed to be the truth. Such a method is fine for Kepler determining the laws of planetary motion, but for Chafer to resort to some listed theories in a scientific method for determining the truths is utter folly. There is no value in Chafer’s theories, when one holds in their lap the inspired, inerrant Word of God. His use of theories only enables Chafer to continue to tip toe in and out of the 70+ denominations he must appease.

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Chap. VIII – XX

As distressing as it is that 33% of Dr. Chafer’s Volume on Soteriology rambles on and on about the sufferings of Christ, his dedication of 58% to “The Fact of Divine Election”, makes this volume completely apostate. Divine Election is the king pin of Presbyterian error, the big Kahuna of John Calvin’s theological blunder, and the staple for the Roman Catholic’s Replacement Theology which John Calvin Reformed into covenant Theology. It is not surprising that a neoevangelical, who refused the turn of the century Fundamentalist position on separation from apostasy and desires to appease 70+denominations gravitating to Dallas Theological Seminary, would herein dedicate over half his volume on Soteriology to “The Fact of Divine Election.” What is surprising is that any Fundamentalist would waste his time reading it and expecting to glean any valuable truth whatsoever. It is even more appalling that a self defined Independent Fundamental Baptist would give Chafer’s work his “Best of Class Award” and ascribe it as “the best pre-millenial Systematic Theology ever published,” and then personally add “I consider it the single best Systematic Theology ever written regardless of Theological perspective.” Fundamentalism is now visiting the bankruptcy found in Chafer’s neoevangelical theology. This authors whole book “The Biblical Doctrine of Election and Predestination28” might well be repeated here to refute Dr. Chafer’s staunch position. Half of the author’s Master Thesis entitled “Reformed Theology’s Reformations Are Not Producing a Biblical Systematic Theology29” would equally expose Chafer’s error. It will suffice here to explore the a priori, i.e. Presumed without analysis, bias which locks one into Calvinistic error. Chafer puts it this way, ”God has by Election chosen Some to Salvation, but not all. This truth, to often resisted for want of an understanding of the nature of God, or of the position He occupies in relation to his Creatures, is reasonable; but it is distinctly revelation.30” When one is this locked into “The Fact of Divine Election,” they will not see another “whosoever will” in God’s Holy Scripture. Instead he sees only that individuals were chosen in the Lord (Rom. 16:13), chosen to salvation. (2Thess. 2:13), chosen in Him before the foundation of the World (Eph.1:4); predestined to the adoption of sons (Eph. 1:5), elect according to the foreknowledge of God (1Pet. 1:2),vessels of mercy which He hath before prepared into glory (Rom. 9:23). The fore mentioned books demonstrate how each of these six texts are taken out of context to support the Calvinists presupposition that God elects individual souls for salvation. As Dr. Chafer puts it, “There can be no question raised but that these passages contemplate an act of God by which some are chosen, but not all…… This suggests …. that predestination points either to election or retribution, and that election can not be understood in any other light.31” Does it bother anyone that the theologian who can only word theories about Christ’s substitutionary death, can accept no questions concerning “The Fact of Divine Election.” It is disconcerting that Dr. Chafer is so emphatically locked in on John Calvin’s doctrine of Divine Election and yet so cavalier about Salvation’s Doctrine about salvation’s conversion, salvation’s Justification, salvation’s Quickening, salvation’s Indwelling and salvation’s Baptism into Christ. This theological blunder is substantial.

Examine, for a moment, the entrapment of John Calvin’s Doctrine of Divine Election. According to his preface, Dr. Chafer originally set out to write a systematic theology which documents Biblical dispensational doctrine. Such a dispensational view is in direct contrast to John Calvin’s Covenant Theology.

This latter errant theology has its roots in Roman Catholic Replacement Theology, and in both Roman Catholic error and John Calvin’s Covenant Theology, Christians are the new elect of God and replace the Jew as God’s chosen and Elect. John Calvin read and taught all Scriptures with this dogma firmly embedded in his soul and spirit. Every time he saw the word ‘elect’, ‘chosen’, or ‘predestinated’, there was no other consideration driving his interpretation. John Calvin’s preoccupation and predisposition with Rome’s Replacement Theology caused his construction of the doctrine of Divine Election. Along comes Dr. Chafer, realizing the Biblical teaching of Dispensational Theology but not having the intestinal fortitude to reject Covenant Theology or Replacement Theology. Ergo Dr. Chafer remains in lock step blindness with John Calvin’s Doctrine of Divine Election. It is a scholarly blindness; it is a majority opinion blindness, which appeals to the 70+ denominations that sprang from Mother Rome; and it is a blindness which causes one to see all Scripture through the fatalistic spectacles of John Calvin. It is a robust entrapment indeed.

Just as one can get a better delineation of Christ from Hebrews, one can get a better delineation of Calvinism from John Calvin. Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer is very talented with a verbose passive run-on soft shoe. The latter adequately defined as “a speech, explanation, sales pitch, or other set of remarks delivered in a restrained or conciliatory manner in order to persuade, distract, or otherwise influence someone.”32 This author has always failed at “soft-shoeing”, and consequently holds a low esteem of those who do it well. It is curious, yeah, even disturbing, that Dr. Chafer waxes firm on this “Fact of Divine Election”, yet “soft shoed” on the substitutionary propitiation of Christ’s death. The latter just called “theories”, the former called “fact.” It is illuminating, and yet still disturbing, that a verbose neo-evangelical theologian spends well over half his page count of Volume III, “SOTERIOLOGY,” on John Calvin’s doctrine of Divine Election, and none on God’s doctrine of Justification.

Calvinism and Reformed Theology is the Gateway to Diabolical Error

Another response pertinent to this report:

If you will excuse the vulgar vernacular, Calvinism is a “Gateway Drug” to Covenant Theology, and Covenant Theology is the “Home Turf” of the diabolical Replacement Theology. A gateway drug is not glaringly horrid, nor even apparently harmful. Once through the gate, more obnoxious, addictive and powerful mind altering concoctions are available. And so it goes, Calvinism and TULIPs are portrayed as Biblical and reasonable. Look inside the gate and you see Covenant/Replacement Theology. Be sure that Replacement Theology sprang from the Gates of Hell via the Roman Catholic Church. It declares that Israel and Hebrews are no longer the elect of God, because now the Roman Catholic Church and Christendom are the true Elect of God. The reformers attempted to grasp the truth that salvation is by faith alone, but they would not let go of all the “Mother Church” mentality and doctrine. Reformed Theology is still rampant with Covenant Theology, a Catholic Church, and their Election before the foundation of the world.

John Calvin’s 1536 magnum opus, “The Institutes of the Christian Religion33”, the Presbyterian’s 1618 Synod of Dort34, and Lewis Sperry Chafer’s 1948 volume on Soteriology inexplicably tie salvation to election and predestination. The fact is the Holy Bible does not. In the Bible “So Great Salvation” is inexplicably tied to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, without a breath about election. The Calvinist/Reformed Theology nowhere has a Gospel of Jesus Christ separate from their Doctrine of Election and Predestination. The Holy Bible nowhere has the Gospel of Jesus Christ touching any doctrine of election. Israel was not elect for salvation but for service in God’s purposes. In the New Testament economy, souls are not elect for salvation, but saints are elect for service in God’s purposes. All Calvinism, all TULIPs no matter what points are ripped out, and all Reformed Theology are laced with enough Bible to deceive and the diabolical purpose is to wedge one away from the true Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

In his article “TULIPs or ROSES” Iain D. Campbell regurgitates the concepts of a leading Reformation scholar, Dr. Timothy George and his book Theology of the Reformers. He gives Dr. George’s purpose: “He is concerned to bring the mainstream Baptist churches to a deeper appreciation of sovereign grace, but is also concerned to note that we are no longer in the seventeenth century, and therefore that the conclusions of Dort require reformulation.”35 Reformed Theologians want to infiltrate mainstream Baptist doctrine because its core is the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Their core is not.

I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, Reformed Theologians, Calvinists, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

To read more about the Reformers attack on the Gospel it is highly recommended that you download and read the two books:

The Biblical Doctrine of Election and Predestination By Edward G. Rice Paperback: $18.95 The Author is a USAF retired systems engineer turned Baptist Preacher who brings a fresh Biblical look at this doctrine and all our systematic theology.

Free at

Reformed Theology’s Reformations Are Not Producing a Biblical Systematic Theology By Pastor Edward Rice Hardcover: $24.05 Reformed Augustinian Theology is, as its name so aptly captures, a reformation of bad Augustinian Theology that previously framed up the belief system of Roman Catholic Theology.

Free at

Keep up the good fight,

Pastor Ed Rice

Critique of Arthur W. Pink’s “Present Day Evangelism”

Arthur Pinks pre 1952 book “Present Day Evangelism”36 has as its thesis that present day evangelism has overstepped his doctrine of the Sovereignty of God, his doctrine of God’s Sovereign Election, his doctrine of the Total Depravity of Man, and his doctrine of Christ’s Limited Atonement. (cf pg 20 1. The Grand Design of God.) Pink totally misses God’s assertion that we (born again believers) are the “special and immediate intervention of God” (pg 22) He misses that God’s Holy Spirit indwells us, and that God’s command to “go into all the world and preach the gospel” is not limited by the Old Testament verse “Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts “ (Zech 4:6)

Pink’s contention that the untrained (i.e. non-Clergy) novice witnesses (ch 3 pg 40-42) are mucking up evangelism by believing and repeating Acts 16:31 reveals his true reformed, reformationist heart beat. Only Clergy (and priests?) can interpret these clear gospel Scriptures properly. They must be “weighed, interpreted, and applied in accord with their context, and that calls for prayerful consideration, careful meditation, and prolonged study.”(pg 45) By Clergy? Really? Arthur here contends that only Clergy should be expounding his carefully sculpted Sovereign Grace, and salvation by the election of souls. Pink perceives that the misled “present day evangelists”… “tells his hearers that salvation is by grace and is received as a free gift, that Christ has done everything for the sinner, and that nothing remains but for him to ‘believe’, to trust in the infinite merits of His blood. “ For Arthur Pink this is cardinal error, and this simple gospel message is strongly contested by this staunchly Calvinist, Puritan, Covenant Theologian who calls Dispensationalism “modern pernicious error.”

Pink accuses that such a simple gospel message is tarnishing the holiness and sovereignty of God. Although Dr. Pink brings to bear a needed emphasis on repentance and the Lordship of Christ, his staunch rejection is that people, possibly people not even chosen before the foundation of the world, are being told to “receive Christ as personal Saviour”, and this reacts negatively to all that Arthur Pink holds dear in his misguided Covenant Theology. Curious book. Curious entrapment to Reformed Theology’s errors. Incidentally, rat poison is 99% good stuff.

Critique of Chafer’s Vol. III Soteriology Conclusion

In light of this present distress, it is worthy, at this point in a critique to abandon criticisms of Lewis Sperry Chafer’s work and pursue an actual systematic theology about soteriology. This tactic is recommended even for those more interested in John Calvin’s errant theology of Divine Election. This author has two books that delineate that error, and they contain no soft-shoe, just a straight forward presentation of the facts. An effective Systematic Theology Volume on So-Great-Salvation might still be written, but it will not be found in any Protestant library, and never found in a neo-evangelical pen. The next section of this critique holds a reasonable draft/beginning-outline for such a worthy endeavor.

Recall from this author’s criticisms of previous Systematic Theologies that such must first be “Systematic”. Systematic does not mean thorough nor, as Chafer supposes, unabridged. Chafer, Geisler, even Strong, Hodge, Shedd, and sometimes Thiessen, tried to capture unabridged every thing that man has ever believed about God. Their definition of “Systematic” treated theology as a science. Theology is revelation. And systematic means having a planned effective strategy for exploring every fiber of that Revelation. A retired Systems Engineer’s approach to “Systematic Theology” is far more effective than the theologian who attempts to use the scientific method, with its hypothesis tested into some theory that still needs to be somehow proven. Systematic has always implied the breaking down of the whole into understandable systems for a more thorough analysis. Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer epitomizes the building up of hypothesized theory into a voluminous unabridged run-on consideration. Examine briefly a better tack.


The Holy Bible

Bancroft, Emery H., Elemental Theology, 1932, Baptist Bible Seminary, 1945, 1960, Zondervan 1977, [In 1932 Emery H. Bancroft became the first Dean of Baptist Bible Seminary, Johnson City, NY and published his text for his course Elemental Theology. In 1968 the Seminary relocated to Clark Summit PA. In 1970 this author attended Practical Bible Training School on the Johnson City campus and studied Bancroft’s text. In 1999 – 2000 this author attended Baptist Bible Seminary to take Greek (NT502 and NT503) via a 3 hour commute from Hammondsport NY to Clark Summit PA, and was reintroduced to Bancroft’s exceptional work.]

Cambron, Mark G. Bible Doctrines. Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1954, [Independent Baptist, Professor, Tennessee Temple Bible School, 1954].

Carroll, James Milton, The Trail of Blood, 1932, open source, public domain, from

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.[Lewis Sperry Chafer was an American theologian. He founded and served as the first president of Dallas Theological Seminary, and was an influential founding member of modern Christian Dispensationalism. Born: February 27, 1871, Rock Creek, Died: August 22, 1952, Seattle, Education: Oberlin College, Wheaton College. For my Doctorate of Philosophy in Theological Studies through LBTS, I was tasked to analyze all six volumes of his Systematic Theology]

Satan, 1909, Free ebooks – Project Gutenberg,2004, accessed 06/01/2013

Christian, John T., A History of the Baptists, Vol 1&2, The Baptist Bible Institute, New Orleans, Louisiana, first published in 1922, public domain, soft copy T. Christian/vol1/ or

Dollar, George W., A History of Fundamentalism in America, Bob Jones University Press, 1973.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Baker Books, Grand Rapids, MI, 1985.

Finney, Charles G., Power from On High, Christian Literature Crusade, public domain, from

Gaussen, L., Theopneustia – The plenary Inspiration of The Holy Scriptures deduced from Internal Evidence, and the Testimonies of Nature, History and Science, David Scott’s translation, Chicago, The Bible Institute Colportage ASS’N., 1840.

Geisler, Norman L, Systematic Theology in One Volume, Bethany House, 2002, 3, 4, 5, 11 [Geisler, also a neoevangelical, sharply contrasts with Lewis Sperry Chafer in that Geisler 1) admits what he is, neoevangelical, 2) admits what he is attempting, a compilation of evangelical theologies, 3) shows superb organization and structure of thought, 4) contains depth, and 5) is a masterful communicator. This author cannot endorse all that Geisler believes to be true, but can endorse that he seems to capture all that has been believed by conservative evangelicals.]

Hodge, Charles, Systematic Theology: Volume I-IV, Charles Scribner & Company, 1871, Hardback- Grand Rapids, Mich., Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1940, Christian Classics Ethereal Library,, public domain. [The Internet Archive], [Charles Hodge, 1797-1878, Presbyterian Minister, Princeton Theologian].

Larkin, Clarence. The Spirit World, Published by the Clarence Larkin Estate, 1921, Cosimo, 2005

Miley, John, Systematic Theology Vol. 1 & 2, The Library of Biblical and Theological Literature, New York: Eaton and Mains, 1894, The Internet Archive, [John Miley (1813-1895, Methodist Theologian].

Rice, Edward G., The 357 Magnum Errors of the Modernist’s Critical Texts, Public Domain,,

Ryrie, Charles C., Basic Theology. Victor Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 1981.

Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom. Three volumes, 1877, reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977.

———-. History of the Christian Church. Third edition, revised in eight volumes, Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1910.

Schofield, C. I., Prophecy Made Plain, Photolithoprinted by Grand Rapids Book Manufacturers, Grand Rapids, MI, 1967.

Shedd, William G. T., Dogmatic Theology, Roosevelt Professor of Systematic Theology in Union Theological Seminary, New York, Charles Scribner & Sons, 1888. [The Internet Archive], [William G.T. Shedd, 1820-1894, Old School Presbyterian & Reformed Theologian].

———-. Calvinism: Pure and Mixed, A Defense of the Westminster Standards. 1893, reprint, Edinburgh, UK: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1986.

———-. Commentary on Romans. 1879, reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980.

Strong, Augustus H., Systematic Theology:Three Volumes in 1, Philadelphia, Valley Forge PA, The Judson Press, 1907, 35th printing 1993. [Augustus H. Strong, 1836-1921, American Baptist Pastor & Theologian].

Thiessen, Henry Clarence, Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdman Publishing Company, 1949. [Henry Clarence Thiessen, ? -1947, President of Los Angles Baptist Theological Seminary, later renamed John MacArthur’s The Master’s College].

Lectures in Systematic Theology. Revised by Vernon D. Doerksen, Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdman Publishing Company, 2006.

Waite, D.A.. Defending the King James Bible. The Bible For Today Press, 1992 & 2002.

1New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia s.v. “Pelagianism,” (accessed 11/05/2016).

2Dr. Mark G. Cambron, B.A., M.A., Th.B., Th.M., Th.D., D.D., L.L.D., Litt.D., was one of the foremost theologians of our times. Born in Fayetteville, Tennessee on July 31, 1911. He was born-again in 1919. It was during a Billy Sunday campaign in Chattanooga that he trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ as his personal Savior. He served for many years at Tennessee Temple College (1948-59) with Dr. Lee Roberson and served as Dean of the College. From accessed 10/16/2013

3Mark G. Cambron, Bible Doctrines, 1954, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 60-69

4The Cambron Institute, 35890 Maplegrove Road, Willoughby, Oh 44094

5It is noted and reproved in the Bibliology section of this work that Dr. Cambron’s Bible Doctrines book recommends using the R.V., instead of the Holy Bible, 41 times for 54 Bile verses.

6Mark G. Cambron, Bible Doctrines, 1954, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 185-210

7Edward G. Rice, Dec 30 2000, Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the course “Soteriology” #404 Video Studies Program (based on spring semester 94), Professor Warren Vanhetloo Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary.

8Non-Christendom here generally referring to cults, hedonism or non-Christian religions.

9Dr. W. Vanhetloo’s Syllabus of Soteriology #404 Spr 94, Page 42, Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary

10Josh 8:35 1Sam 25:15 Psal 19:7 Psal 37:14 Psal 50:23 Psal 51:13 Isai 1:27 Isai 6:10 Isai 60:5 Matt 13:15 Matt 18:3 Mark 4:12 Luke 22:32 John 12:40 Acts 3:19 Acts 15:3 Acts 28:27 2Cor 1:12 Gala 1:13 Ephe 2:3 Ephe 4:22 Phil 1:27 Phil 3:20 1Tim 4:12 Hebr 13:5 Hebr 13:7 Jame 3:13 Jame 5:19 20 1Pet 1:15 1Pet 1:18 1Pet 2:12 1Pet 3:1 2 1Pet 3:16 2Pet 2:7 2Pet 3:11

11Note here that there has been much disparity about exactly what is meant by Christ when he said “except a man be born of water and of the Spirit” The very simplest, literal and logical reading is that this is speaking of ones physical birth. To see the kingdom of God, one must of necessity be born first physically. This reading fits into both the argument of Nicodemus who asked if he necessarily had to enter into his mothers womb again, and into the parallel clarification that follows about being born of flesh. Some like to make this ‘born of water’ phrase mean touched, anointed, cleansed or born-of the Word of God, (because some times the Word is pictured figuratively as water). They argue that if is was physical birth Jesus was speaking of, he would be requiring Nicodemus to be born physically again. No they say, he is requiring that he be touched with the gospel, to hear the Word of truth as part of the new birth. Although, in a system of theology it is the preaching of the Gospel that precedes the new birth, it is a rough and forced fit to make this ‘born of water’ fit that requirement. Clearly, in context, it is talking about physical birth. Others will muck this portion up further by requiring that ‘born of water’ has something to do with water baptism. Again, they are guilty of making the Scriptures imply something that they believe rather than taking a good hermeneutical approach to a literal interpretation of this passage. There are ample references to the power and need of the word of God, without stretching this one to go there. There are ample references to the correct teaching of baptism without making this one capture something it is not intended for. To be ‘born of water’ is simply equivalent to being born of the womb.

12The term ‘may’ is used here because Jesus himself said “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. John 11:25-26

13Dr. W. Vanhetloo’s Syllabus of Soteriology #404 Spr 94, Page 42, Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary

14Miley’s 1894 work was received with all the folly of an early text scanner. This word is either his own creation or it might be monogenistic having to do with the theory that all human beings are descended from a single pair of ancestors. Incidental, Bible believers hold that as fact, and not as theory via the American Heritage Dictionary.

15John Miley, Systematic Theology, Volume II, The Library of Biblical and Theological Literature, New York: Eaton and Mains, 1894 by Hunt & Eaton, pg 67-68.

16ibid. 68

17From accessed Dec 2013

18In making such a brash definition Chafer unwittingly puts Aristotle Saint Augustine and Saint Aquinas on equal ground with Holy Scriptures and in writing his seven volume work he actually does. Woe!


20From accessed Dec 2013




24David Txxxxxxx‘s accessed 12/14/2013

25Total Depravity; Unconditional Election; Limited Atonement; Irresistible Grace; Perseverance of the Saints

26Freely available at

27See Darby’s extensive development of history in R.L. Dabney “The Five Points of Calvinism”



30Chafer, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 172

31Ibid. 172 accessed 28 March 2014

33Freely available at

34See Darby’s extensive development of history in R.L. Dabney “The Five Points of Calvinism”

35From accessed 12 February 2014