Repentance is a Must?

[B-Ray]

The guys in my church (IFB) really harp on this one. I guess the first time i started questioning this was when i started watching "Through the Bible with Les Feldick" about a year after i was saved. He said Faith + nothing. So i questioned my pastor and other learned men about this and they said that was easy believism and that was wrong.

Well, the N.T. to my knowledge never attactches repentance to salvation, though i have literature (i.e IFB) that is heavy on O.T. when trying to prove repentance is needed. But all the verses N.T. i know say
FAITH
It seems to me that our fleshly, self-centered, finite minds just can't accept such an easy road to Jesus and His eternal Glory! And that we too often want people coming our way.

Am I right in believing it trully is faith plus nothing or do i condemn people to hell when i preach that to them?

I asked my S.S. teacher this and he got it right as far as +nothing was concerned and then at the last minute slipped in "and turn from your sins."

[redhot]

This is something that I have recently started studying as well. Still trying to figure out what I believe about it.

[Bob M]

This is a huge question. It is not easy to answer. I would say, with qualifications, that you must repent. There must be a change of mind and heart with regard to sin. John macarthur wrote a book called "The Gospel according to Jesus." It addresses that question. And he says you must repent. His case is very strong. I read it 12 years ago. But there are also many books written that attack it and all you have to do is look online for discussions of "Lordship Salvation."

I would never condemn or make a big deal about it with someone who said that this is how you get saved: "By grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone." That is a simple statement, but it has a lot of truth packed into it. I wish you a heartfelt word of hope and joy as you think, pray and study the scriptures on this. Just don't read David Cloud or David Hunt. They are weak.

Wikipedia on Lordship Controversy

[That'sWhatItSays]

The change of mind and heart that results in the repentence of unbelief involves a turning from one's sins, so I think it's always a tricky distinction to make. That being said, the overwhelmingly biblical argument that most Christians can see from the scriptures is that salvation is a free gift given by faith in the finished work of Christ, and that once you are saved, you can know that you are predestined to meet your savior one day. I think the word predestined is sadly neglected in the IFB for fear that even mentioning it is equal to being a Calvinist. But, there it is. It's a good doctrine, and it puts our mind in line with God's work.

Sanctification is also taught in the Bible, however, so we can't neglect passages that talk about the washing of regeneration, the renewing of our mind, old things passing away, putting away youthful lusts, etc. That is sanctification, however, not salvation.

Truly believing in Christ is going to be very difficult for a mature person who has tasted a bit of sin in his life, sin being defined as the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It seems as though we sense that children are able to believe without "much" repentence, because in our dealings with them, they are able to accept the gospel on the terms you described, simply by faith. Adults will only accept the gospel with a good measure of repentence, having built their life on some substitute (we all live by some kind of ethic). I suppose you have to make a call for repentence from unbelief, at the least, to give an honest gospel presentation.

[redhot]

(04-30-2012 08:38 PM)Bob M Wrote:  John macarthur wrote a book called "The Gospel according to Jesus." It addresses that question. And he says you must repent. His case is very strong.
Just don't read David Cloud or David Hunt. They are weak.

Agree about David Cloud. I'm not familiar with the MacArthur book, but you say that "he says" you must repent. On what does he base this? And I'm still working through this myself so I'm not disagreeing, but what "people" say is not really of interest to me unless they back it up. Just wondering what verses he uses.

[Bob M]

He uses a lot of scripture. Like I said, I read it 12 or so years ago so I do not remember it all. It was fairly well written and fairly easy to read. I don't agree with all of it, but the caricature "Lordship Salvation" is not a good one. The people I have read (Mainly Zane Hodges) who oppose what the book brings out, mischaracterize his arguments.

I will pull my copy out later tonight and post a few salient points.

[Donb123]

Acts 2:38

[SomethingFundy]

macarthur is a reformed legalistic, it's hilarious, one extreme from another?

[Malchus' Ear]

Faith and repentance are two sides of the same coin. Consider Jesus' first words in the Gospel of Mark to repent and believe the Gospel. Or, Paul laying things out to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20 where he said that he was, "Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." The act of turning from sin has always been a part of putting one's trust in Jesus.

I've found the conspicuous absence of ongoing repentance in the IFB circles where I have been involved. With them, it was the usual, "Say this prayer and now you're a Christian." And then those people who were touted as being saved are weeks later engaging in all sorts of sin once more. While the word may come up in songs ("Then I repented of my sins and won the victory..."), the theology of repentance was sorely lacking.

--
The Ear

[NotUnderLaw]

If you connect the phrase "repent" with the action "turn from your sins", and say repentance is required for salvation, than you have made salvation a work, or a preemptive work in order to receive the grace of God (this is what we were discussing in another thread where Jenni posted a video from a preacher who adores John MacArthur named Tim Conway, who said that people must bring themselves to a place of acceptance before God through repentance). That is absolutely wrong.

If the word repent means change your mind concerning who God is and your sin, there is no work there. You will not find the phrase "repent of your sins" anywhere in the Bible. It might be in some of the paraphrased versions where people have written beliefs back into their paraphrase, but in any translation that takes itself seriously, you won't find it.

Zane Hodges is not the opposition to MacArthur, although MacArthur would like him to be, because Zane Hodges is crazy, and believed in all kinds of weird things like Millennial Exclusion, and Zane also wrote the first book that attempted to dispel the false teaching in "The Gospel According to Jesus". Other men also attempted, from the Free Grace view, who I mostly disagree with as well.

I believe MacArthur is a legalist, a fearmonger and a doubt sower, and did a lot of damage with that book. His "tests for a true believer" are nothing more than a checklist of do's and don'ts, which any cult member could pass with flying colours (I posted it here once before, but didn't say where I got it from).

Yes, repentance is a must. But what is it? If it is a turning from sin, I submit that noone has ever done that totally, so their repentance must not be totally real.

I also take issue with the phrase "a change of mind that results in a change of life". If the latter is true, it's not necessary to say it, because by saying it, it places an unnecessary burden on the believer to ensure that his life has changed, when if it WILL change, then he shouldn't be worried about it and let God just do it, instead of trying to speed up the process. Yes, it will change, but if you keep telling people that, then people keep trying to measure the change, and then failing to come up to the standards that they think a Christian should be meeting.

The change is love, joy, peace, faith, hope, charity, etc. Fruit requires no effort to bear. However, keeping laws and constantly making sure your repentance is true and all that requires a ton of effort that no man can bear.

I know. I tried. For years. To keep the laws of God. To make sure I was a good Christian. I didn't drink, I didn't smoke. I evangelised. I tried not to lust and when I did I would basically do penance. I hated homosexuals, I hated everything in fact. I only watch Christians movies, and I loved "Way of the Master" and Ray Comfort and swallowed up every message he preached. And then one day, I woke up and thought "I am nothing like I preach a Christian should be".

I was telling people "keep the law, if you aren't keeping the law, you aren't a real Christian. Repent of your sins etc etc". Was I keeping it? Nope. Not even when I tried my hardest. It just shone more and more on my failures. This was even after I was a Christian. I had been told that God would put his laws in my heart and MAKE me keep them. I obviously wasn't, so the only conclusion I had was that I hadn't truly repented. And for three years I wept and slept uneasy, fearful of dying that night because I would be consumed by an angry God that actually hated me and that no matter how much I tried to repent, I could never find peace. False comforters would quote scary verses at me, hoping to scare some sense into me.

By God's Grace, I am past that now. The fear stopped when I stopped trying to repent, when I stopped trying to analyse my faith, and just let my belief be belief, and my faith be faith, and I saw that I had repented many years back, when I had my conversion and saw that God wasn't just this guy I grew up learning about, but that He was real, my sins were real and He had bled and died for them.