The Way of Salvation
will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you;
I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and
give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgments and do them.
EZEKIEL 36:26-27
The Way of Salvation
(Qiflestioiris in This Sections:
Why did God save me?
When did God decide to give us eternal life?
If I'm happy with my life, why do I need Jesus?
What is true repentance, and why should it be emphasized in our
lives?
Can you repent at the moment of death and still have the same
salvation as someone who's been a Christian for many years?
If someone has rejected Christianity for his entire life, but then on his
deathbed decides to play it safe and profess Jesus as his Savior and
Lord, will that person really be accepted into heaven?
Is it possible for a Christian to lose his salvation because of sins he
commits?
Is there salvation for a Christian who has turned away from Christ
and does not seem to want to repent?
Does grace give us a free ride to salvation?
How can I understand God's grace and forgiveness of my sins?
How serious is it that people, upon receiving Christ, are being told
only of Christ as Savior and not as Lord?
In Mark 16:16 Jesus says, "He who has believed and has been baptized
shall be saved." How does baptism fit into our salvation?
105
R.C. SPROUL
What do good deeds have to do with salvation?
What role does human achievement or good works play in salvation?
In what way does God use guilt today?
Does God put a curse on us if we disobey, or does he merely withhold
his blessing?
Help me understand the doctrine of election
My understanding of the doctrine of predestination is that natural
man will only accept Christ if God plants the desire in his heart. If
God never plants that desire, is it fair for that man to be eternally
lost?
In John 670 Jesus says he chose the Twelve. Does this mean Judas
was one of the elect?
How has God kept his promise to Abraham that his offspring would be
saved?
What is the doctrine of eternal security?
If justification is by faith alone, how can we apply James 2:24, which
says a person is justified by what he does, not his faith alone?
Isn't it being narrow-minded for Christians to say Christ is the only
way?
196
The Way of Salvation
Why did God save me?
I know of no more difficult a theological question to deal
with than this one. I've been studying theology for many
years, and I still can't come up with any exhaustive reason
to explain why God would save me, or anyone else for
that matter.
Some people give a very simple answer to this question.
They say that God saved you because you put your trust
and faith in Christ when you answered the summons of the
gospel. On the surface that's certainly a legitimate answer
because we are justified through faith and we are called to
make that response.
But the deeper question is, Why did you respond to the
gospel when you heard it, but someone else who heard it
even the very same presentation at the same moment — did
not respond to it? What was there in you that caused you to
respond positively while others are caused to reject it? I ask
that about my own life. I could say the reason I responded
was that I was more righteous than the other fellow. God
forbid that I ever say that on the Judgment Day. I might
think I'm more intelligent than somebody else, but I
wouldn't want to say that either. Some might say that I rec-
ognized my need more than somebody else recognized his
need, but even that recognition is a mixture of at least
some measure of intelligence and some measure of humil-
ity, most of which would find its ultimate roots in the grace
of God. I have to say with the ancient man, there but for
107
R.C. SPROUL
the grace of God go 1. 1 can't give any reason other than
God's grace for why I am saved.
The Bible says many things about why God initiates sal-
vation of people: He loves the world; he has a benevolent
attitude toward his fallen creatures. We know that. But
when we get down to the specifics, the Bible speaks of
God's sovereign work of redemption and uses the terms
predestination and election. These are biblical words. What
is behind God's predestinating grace or his election?
Some say that God foresees the choices of people. I think
that takes the very heart out of the biblical teaching.
When the Scripture speaks about God's electing
people, God speaks of electing people in Christ; our sal-
vation is rooted and grounded in Jesus. What that makes
me think is this: You and I are saved not only because of
God's concern for us but chiefly and ultimately for God's
total determination to honor his obedient Son. We are
the love gifts that the Father gives to the Son so that the
Son, who lived a life of perfect obedience and died on
the cross, will see the travail of his soul and be satisfied:
That's the main reason I think God has saved you: to
honor Jesus.
When did God decide to give us eternal life?
When is a time word, and the Bible uses words like that.
And when the Bible speaks about the time frame in which
God's decision is made in respect to our eternal life, it gen-
erally puts the decision at the foundation of the world; that
is, from all eternity God has chosen us to be among the
redeemed.
108
The Way of Salvation
I think Paul emphasizes that very clearly, particularly in
the first chapter of his letter to the Ephesians. We were
chosen in Christ from the foundation of the world to be
conformed to Christ and to be brought into a state of
redemption. This, of course, touches immediately on the
very difficult and controversial doctrine of predestination.
I will say in passing, as we skate over the surface of it, that
every church has some doctrine of predestination. There
are great variances among the churches in terms of how to
understand predestination, but every church historically
has had to hammer out and forge some doctrine of predes-
tination because the Bible speaks of it. So there is a certain
sense in which from all eternity God has chosen his people
for salvation.
Now, obviously, that gets into some very complicated side
issues. On what basis does God make a decision like that
from all eternity? Did God make a decision from all eternity
that certain people would be damned? Does he destine
people for hell? Does he destine people to fall? I think the
church has shrunk from that concept and rightly so. I think
God knew from all eternity that man would fall, that man
would rebel against him, and he also knew that he was going
to make a provision to redeem people from all eternity.
God's knowledge is as ancient and his omniscience is as eter-
nal as he is. Everything that God knows, he knows from eter-
nity. We need to keep this idea in front of us.
I would say that God's decision to choose us was made
prior to the fall of mankind but in light of the Fall. Let me
say it again. He made the decision before the Fall, with the
knowledge that the Fall will come and with the knowledge
of its consequences. In other words, God couldn't possibly
109
R.C. SPROUL
make it his choice to save persons who were in no need of
salvation. Only sinners are in need of salvation, so God
must have considered us as being sinners and fallen as we
were considered in the divine mind for salvation. Ulti-
mately, the decision to save us was made in eternity, accord-
ing to God's divine knowledge of us.
If I'm happy with my life, why do I need Jesus?
I hear that from a lot of folks. They say to me, "I just don't
feel the need for Christ." As if Christianity were something
that were packaged and sold through Madison Avenue!
That what we're trying to communicate to people is
"Here's something that's going to make you feel good, and
everybody needs a little of this in their closet or in their
refrigerator," as if it were some commodity that's going to
add a dash of happiness to our lives.
If the only reason a human being ever neededJesus was
to be happy and a person is already happy withoutJesus,
then they certainly don't needJesus. The New Testament*
indicates, however, that there's another reason you or some-
body else needs Jesus. There is a God who is altogether holy,
who is perfectly just, and who declares that he is going to
judge the world and hold every human being accountable
for their life. As a perfectly holy andjust God, he requires
from each one of us a life of perfect obedience and of per-
fect justness. If there is such a God and if you have lived a
life of perfect justness and obedience — that is, if you're per-
fect — then you certainly don't need Jesus. You don't need a
Savior because only unjust people have a problem.
The problem is simply this: If God is just and requires
110
The Way of
Salvation
perfection from me and I come short of that perfection
and he is going to deal with me according to justice, then I
am looking at a future punishment at the hands of a holy
God. If the only way I can escape punishment is through a
Savior and if I want to escape that, then I need a Savior.
Some people will say that we're just trying to preach Jesus
as a ticket out of hell, as a way to escape eternal punish-
ment. That's not the only reason I would commendJesus
to people, but that is one of the reasons.
I think that many people in today's culture don't really
believe that God is going to hold them accountable for
their lives — that God really does not require righteousness.
When we take that view, we don't feel the weight of the
threat ofjudgment. If you're not afraid to deal with God's
punishment, then be happy as a clam if you want. I would
be living in terrible fear and trembling at the prospect of
falling into the hands of a holy God.
What is true repentance, and why should it be
emphasized in our lives?
Before I define true repentance, I'll answer the second
question, "Why is it important in our lives?" The reason it's
of supreme importance in our lives, according to the New
Testament, is because it is the indispensable requirement
for entrance into the kingdom of God. I stress that point
because the view is widely held in our culture that God
forgives everybody of all their sins whether or not they
repent. That concept simply does not come from Scripture.
IfJesus taught anything, he taught that it is absolutely
essential for someone who has offended God to turn from
111
R . C. S P R O U L
that sin and repent. In fact, when Jesus began his public
ministry, the very first words he preached were "Repent,
for the kingdom of God is at hand." There's nothing more
urgent and necessary than repentance if one is going to
escape the wrath of God. God calls every human being to
repent — it's not an option.
Paul spoke of the former days of ignorance that God
overlooked; but now God calls all people everywhere to
repent. Who does that include? Everybody. We all have
that responsibility, and not all of us are doing it. God
meant what he said. He requires repentance.
You ask what is true repentance? I don't know if you've
ever heard the Roman Catholic prayer of contrition, but I
think it's an excellent prayer. Virtually every Roman Catho-
lic person knows it by heart. I don't know it by heart, but I
have heard it a number of times and have some elements
of it by memory. "O my God, I am heartily sorry for having
offended Thee . . . not only because of loss of reward, or
fear of punishment, but because I violated you."
We make a distinction in theology between what we call
attrition and contrition. Attrition is turning away from
your sin or from your guilt by a motivation simply to
escape punishment. The child has no remorse about steal-
ing cookies until he's caught with his hand in the cookie
jar and the mother comes with the paddle. There's some-
thing suspicious about that kind of repentance. It's the
repentance to avoid punishment — what we would call a
ticket out of hell. True repentance goes beyond a mere
fear of punishment to what we call contrition. When
David's heart was broken before God and he said, "O God,
a broken and contrite heart you will not despise," he felt
112
The Way of Salvation
real sorrow, a godly sorrow. True repentance is an aware-
ness that we have done wrong, and it brings us to a choice
to turn from our wrong.
Can you repent at the moment of death and still have
the same salvation as someone who's been a Christian
for many years?
That's a tricky question, but I think it's a fascinating one
and certainly one that many people are concerned about.
We talk about foxhole faith, when people cry out in desper-
ate moments of crisis or postpone to their deathbed the
moment of committing their lives to Christ. Some people
say that it doesn't make sense for somebody who has been
a Christian all their life to be in the same state as some-
body who did as they pleased all their life and waited until
the last second to get their accounts square with God.
There's a parable in the New Testament in which Jesus
speaks about those who agree to work for a certain wage,
and then at the last minute some other people are hired
and only work for a few minutes but they get the same pay.
The first group is really bent out of shape, and they say,
"What's going on here? There's no justice in this!" Does
the second group receive the same salvation? Yes and no.
They are brought into a state of salvation; that is, they
escape the punishment of hell and enter into the kingdom
if indeed that last-breath repentance is genuine. The
requirement for entrance into the kingdom of God is to
repent and believe in Christ.
The thief on the cross did it in the last minutes of his
life, and Jesus assured him that he would be with him in
113
R.C. SPROUL
paradise. There we have Exhibit A in the New Testament
of somebody who actually did that and who was promised
by our Lord himself that he would participate in Jesus'
kingdom. Certainly it's possible for a person at the last
moment of their life to repent sufficiently, believe, and be
justified and enter into all of the benefits of membership
of the kingdom of heaven.
However, Paul speaks of those who make it into the king-
dom by the skin of their teeth. I think a "deathbed"
believer would be in that category. We tend to think that
all that matters is getting there because there is an
unbridgeable chasm between getting into heaven or miss-
ing it altogether. Yet Jesus tells us to work and to store up
treasures for ourselves in heaven because he promises
emphatically that there will be rewards dispensed to his
people according to their obedience and their works. You
don't get into heaven by your works, but your reward in
heaven will be according to those works, according to the
New Testament. What that says to me is that although .
people can make it by the skin of their teeth by repenting
in their last dying breath, nevertheless, their degree of felic-
ity will not be nearly as great as that of those who have
been serving Christ faithfully for many, many years.
If someone has rejected Christianity for his entire life,
but then on his deathbed decides to play it safe and
profess Jesus as his Savior and Lord, will that person
really be accepted into heaven?
Absolutely not. That person has no hope of going to
heaven on the basis of the action as you have described it.
114
The Way of
Salvation
First of all, let's understand that redemption does not
come through a profession of faith but through a possession
of faith. Those of us who have faith are called to profess
that faith; however, the mere profession of it does not
guarantee that the genuine article is present. This is par-
ticularly so when somebody makes this verbal profession
strictly as a means of covering his bets or to play it safe and
guard against the negative consequences. From a biblical
standpoint, salvation requires authentic repentance. Justify-
ing faith is a repenting faith. If there is no repentance,
then that indicates that the profession of faith is fraudu-
lent.
If we turn your question around and ask if a person
could live his whole life in sin, rebellion, and disobedience
and then on his deathbed truly repent and go to heaven,
the answer is yes — -just as the thief on the cross met the
Savior in his dying moments and was guaranteed eternity
with him. The New Testament speaks of those who are
saved by the skin of their teeth. It's certainly not a wise
course of action to postpone your repentance until the day
of your departure because we don't know when that day is
on the schedule. Even though making a confession simply
out of fear is not enough, that fear should give pause and
cause us to think seriously about our future state.
Is it possible for a Christian to lose his salvation
because of sins he commits?
The question of losing one's salvation is one that is a mat-
ter of great controversy within the household of Christian
faith. There are many Christians who live in mortal fear
115
R.C. SPROUL
every day of losing what they have found in Christ because
the Bible gives serious warnings about falling away, and
Paul himself says that he has to be very careful lest he him-
self become a castaway. There are biblical warnings about
what would happen if we turn our backs on Christ after
we've come to a knowledge of him.
On the other hand, there are also many Christians who
believe that we will, in fact, never fall away, and I'm num-
bered among that group. I'm persuaded from a study of
Scripture that we can have an assurance of our salvation
not only for today but for all time. But the assurance that
we have, or confidence in our future estate in salvation,
must be based upon the right foundations. In other words,
if my confidence that I will persevere is based on my confi-
dence that I will not sin, it's on very shaky ground. One
thing the Bible makes clear to me is that even though I am
a redeemed person, I will in all likelihood, and inevitably,
continue to sin to some degree. If it were up to my
strength to persevere to guarantee my future salvation,
then I would have very little hope of persevering.
But I'm convinced that the Bible teaches that what God
begins in our life, he finishes. Paul teaches, for example, in
Philippians, "He who has begun a good work in you will
perfect it to the end." My confidence rests in the fact that
Jesus promises to intercede for me daily as my Great High
Priest. My confidence for my future salvation rests in my
confidence that God will keep his promise and that Christ
will intercede for me and preserve me. Again, if it were left
to me, I would obviously fall away. I like to look at it this
way: I'm walking the Christian life with my hand in God's
hand. If my perseverance depended upon my holding
116
The Way of Salvation
tightly to God's hand, I would surely fall away because at
some point I would let go. But I believe that the Scriptures
teach us that God is holding my hand, and because he is
holding my hand, I don't have to fear that I will fall ulti-
mately and finally.
Now that doesn't mean that Christians don't involve
themselves in serious sins and what we would call in theol-
ogy "serious and radical fall," but the issue we're discussing
here is whether a Christian will ever fall totally and finally.
In the New Testament John tells us, for example, that
"those who went out from us were never really with us,"
and that "Christ does not lose those whom the Father has
given to him." So my confidence again rests in the interces-
sion of Christ and God's ability and promise to hold on to
me. In and of myself I am capable of sinning even unto the
loss of my salvation, but I'm persuaded that God in his
grace will keep me from that.
Is there salvation for a Christian who has turned away
from Christ and does not seem to want to repent?
I believe that once a person is authentically redeemed, is
truly in Christ, that person will never be lost to Christ. That
person has what we call eternal security — not because of
the person's innate ability to persevere, but I believe that
God promises to preserve his own and that we have the
benefit of our Great High Priest who intercedes for us
every day. Now, at the same time, Christians are capable of
gross and heinous sin. They're capable of very serious falls
away from Christ. They're capable of the worst kind of
denial and betrayal of our Lord.
117
R.C. SPROUL
Consider, for example, Exhibit A — the apostle Peter,
who denied Jesus with cursing. He was so emphatic that he
uttered profanities to underscore the fact that he never
knewJesus. If you talk about somebody who didn't seem to
want to repent and who had turned away from Jesus, Saint
Peter is your classic example. Yet his fellow disciple Judas
also betrayed Jesus and turned away from him, and of
course, both of the betrayals were predicted by Jesus at the
Last Supper. When Jesus spoke ofJudas, he said, "What
you have to do, do quickly. Go." And he dismissed him to
his treachery. He mentioned in the Scripture that Judas
was a son of perdition from the beginning. I think it's clear
in Jesus' High Priestly prayer that he understood Judas was
never a Christian. Sojudas's betrayal was not the case of a
Christian turning on Christ.
When he announced to Peter that Peter would also
betray him, he said to him, "Simon, Simon, Satan has
asked for you. He would have you and sift you like wheat,
but I have prayed for you so that your faith should not fail;
and when you turn, strengthen the brethren." And then
Peter says, "Oh no, Lord, not me. I'll never betray you."
Then, of course, he did. But notice that when Jesus pre-
dicted it, he said, "When you turn" — not, "If you turn" but
"When you turn, strengthen the brethren." Because Jesus
had prayed as he did in his High Priestly prayer, no one
would be able to snatch his people out of his hand.
The New Testament promises that he who has begun a
good work in you will perfect it to the end (Phil. 1:6). I
know there are many Christians who believe that a true
Christian can lose his or her salvation. I don't. I'd say with
the apostle John, "Those who went out from us were never
118
The Way of
Salvation
really with us." I think a Christian can have a gross and
serious fall but not a full and final fall — that he or she will
be restored even as David realized his sin, as the Prodigal
Son came to himself, as Peter ultimately repented.
Does grace give us a free ride to salvation?
We can look at the concept "free ride" in many ways. Grace
by definition is something that is free in the sense that we
can't earn it, we can't buy it, we can't deserve it, and
there's no merit in us by which God bestows his mercy
upon us. Anytime God dispenses mercy or unmerited
favor, which is how we define grace, he's doing something
that he has no obligation to do. I'm convinced that when
we receive the grace of salvation, our eternal destiny is
secure. I'm convinced that once we are clothed with the
righteousness of Christ and have his merit imputed to our
account by God (which is an act of God's grace) and we
are redeemed, then I believe we are virtually guaranteed
eternal life. In other words, I don't think that a Christian
can lose his salvation. I say this because I'm persuaded that
God has promised he will keep us to the end. If it were up
to us to persevere, to hang on, and to be faithful and obedi-
ent to the end in order to be saved, I don't think any one
of us would persevere enough to merit salvation. But God
promises to finish what he has begun.
Does that mean it's a free ride? So often the concept of
free ride means that since God has given me grace and
since God has started this work and he promises to finish
it, there's nothing left for me to do. I can do whatever I
want. I'm saved and I don't have to worry about a thing.
119
R.C. SPROUL
It's free from here on in, I'm on a roller coaster without
any brakes, and I can do whatever I want. I can sin as I
please and enjoy it the rest of my life. It's a license to sin.
However, the apostle Paul points out that where sin
abounds, grace abounds much more. That is to say, the
more I sin the more I see the grace of God because more
grace is necessary for me to get into heaven.
Some people say that if the more you sin the more grace
you get, the best thing to do is to keep sinning and that
way you'll get more grace. Paul asks the question "Should
we continue in sin that grace may abound?" How does he
answer it? He says, "God forbid." Sinning all the more is a
totally opposite response to one that is pleasing to God. As
a matter of fact, the more grace we receive, the more we
are to be moved toward a sense of gratitude; the more grati-
tude we experience, the more we should be moved to the
pursuit of righteousness through obedience to the law of
God. As Paul says elsewhere, "We're to work out our salva-
tion with fear and trembling" because God promises to
work within us to will and to do what is right. But along
with God's grace comes the challenge for us to fight with
all of our might to resist the temptations of sin and to pur-
sue a life of righteousness and obedience. My salvation
doesn't depend on my obedience, but my obedience is to
be a response to that grace of God.
How can I understand God's grace and forgiveness
of my sins?
It's easy for us to come up with a theological definition of
grace. We say that grace is unmerited favor — to receive
120
The Way of
Salvation
something positive from the hand of God that we don't
deserve. But to understand the graciousness of grace in
any depth I believe is a lifelong enterprise for the Chris-
tian. When I was studying theology at the doctoral level in
Europe, our professor at the Free University of Amster-
dam, G. C. Berkouwer, once made this statement when we
were studying systematic theology: "Gentlemen, the
essence of theology is grace." I think he's right. When we
get to the very essence of what our study of theology is, we
are studying the grace of God, because it's by God's grace
that we are Christians in the first place. It's by God's grace
that we even draw a breath every moment, and it's by
God's grace that we receive every benefit from his hand.
I don't think we understand this when we become Chris-
tians. The Bible talks about a progression. We're supposed
to move from life to life, from faith to faith, from grace to
grace. From beginning to end the whole Christian life is
grace, and that's why I say that the more we study grace,
the more we see grace.
I've said a thousand times that it's easy to understand
justification by faith alone — in the head. It's not so easy to
get it in the bloodstream, to realize that the reason I can
exist in the presence of a holy God is that I am a forgiven
person — that forgiveness is something I couldn't possibly
buy or steal or beg or borrow or earn. I have no merit
before God. The only merit I ever enjoy is the merit that
was won for me by Christ. I live and move and have my
being by virtue of Christ's righteousness, Christ's merit,
which is given to me gratuitously, graciously by God.
We talk about the doctrines of grace. What other doc-
trines are there but the doctrines of grace? It all calls atten-
121
R.C. SPROUL
tion to the fact that God is just and I am not just. The only
way an unjust person can possibly exist in a universe gov-
erned by a just and holy God is by grace. But it's so hard to
get this through because we are a stiff-necked people, just
like people in the Old Testament. We harbor these feelings
deep down that God owes us a better deal than we're get-
ting or that God owes us the gifts and the blessings that
we've received. We feel that somehow we have deserved
them. It's only proper and appropriate that I have a better
job than you or more talents than you have, or live in a
better house, because that's just God's justice prevailing
here in the world. Whenever things go wrong, then that's
something that I get mad about. That is when we discover
we haven't learned grace.
How serious is it that people, upon receiving Christ,
are being told only of Christ as Savior and not as Lord?
It's inconceivable to me that such a question would ever
even arise in the New Testament church — as if we could
separate the saviorhood of Christ from his lordship. I
mean, the very first confession of faith in the New Testa-
ment was Iesous kurios, 'Jesus is Lord."
But when a person receives Christ as Savior, he not only
acknowledges his need and necessity of having a Savior, he
comes in humble faith and repentance, trusting Christ.
How can a person trust Christ to be a Savior and at the
same time utterly ignore or repudiate the clear teaching of
Jesus that he is not only Savior but also Lord?
I'm afraid that what we have lurking here in this dichot-
omy between Jesus as Savior and Jesus as Lord is a very
122
The Way of Salvation
serious distortion of the Protestant doctrine ofjustification
by faith alone, a distortion called antinomianism. Antinomi-
anism means simply anti-lawism. Some people have been so
zealous to propagate the doctrine that we are saved by
faith and not by works that they have concluded that the
kind of faith that saves is bare, naked faith. They believe
that faith doesn't ever have to have any works follow from
it and that obedience is inconsequential to the Christian
life. In other words, I can sin all I want without repentance
and still have remission of sins because heaven's a free gift
and justification is by faith, so what difference does it make
whether I continue to sin?
This type of interpretation is the very reason Luther and
the Protestant fathers were so careful to point out that justi-
fication by faith alone involves, not a cheap profession of
faith, but an authentic faith — the kind of faith that displays
its genuine character by the fruits of obedience. The works
of obedience do not merit salvation for us, but if there is
no fruit of obedience to the lordship of Christ, that's the
clearest indication that the faith is a dead faith, the faith of
which Saint James says profits nothing. So if people are say-
ing, "You don't have to believe in the lordship of Christ in
order to be saved," what I'm hearing is a false doctrine of
justification. It purports that we can believe certain things
but then live any way we want.
Sometimes new converts miss the significance of Christ's
lordship, mainly because it isn't explained to them clearly.
Particularly if they are unfamiliar with these Christian
terms, and Christians around them assume that "accepting
Christ as Savior" is understood to include his lordship,
these new converts suffer from a serious gap in their knowl-
123
R.C. SPROUL
edge of basic doctrines. We need to be careful and thor-
ough as we teach new believers.
In Mark 16:16 Jesus says, "He who has believed and has
been baptized shall be saved." How does baptism fit
into our salvation?
This is not only a principal point of dispute between the
Roman Catholic Church and general Protestantism, but it
has been argued strenously even within Protestantism.
Rome, for example, teaches that baptism is the instrumen-
tal cause of one's justification. In other words, it is the instru-
ment by which a person is given justifying grace and placed
in a reconciled relationship with God. That sacrament
becomes very important. That's why the Church will hurry
to baptize children that are born dying or will even baptize
them as they expire. Because of a text like that, Rome does
not go so far as to say that it is absolutely essential for salva-
tion because they allow for what they call the votum baptisma,
or the desire for baptism. There may be a person who is
believing and wants to be baptized, but is hindered on his
way to church. For example, he's struck by a car or he dies
before he can have the sacrament. He is considered bap-
tized just like the thief on the cross, who had no opportunity
to be baptized. Yet when the thief manifested his faith, Jesus
promised him redemption that very day. The text doesn't
say that baptism is an absolute prerequisite for salvation.
Jesus simply says that those who believe and are baptized
will be saved. All who have A and B will receive C. You
could say all who have faith and who repent might be
saved, too.
124
The Way of Salvation
The general Protestant view, however, is that baptism is
commanded and is necessary because Christ commands
every believer to be baptized. It's a serious matter and it is
a means of grace, and we certainly should be diligent in
availing ourselves of it.
The general Protestant notion is that justification is by
faith alone; that is, the absolutely essential prerequisite for
redemption is to place one's trust in Christ. The assumption
is that if you do trust Christ and submit to his lordship and
you understand that he commands you to be baptized, you
will add baptism to that faith. It's not the baptism that causes
your salvation, and baptism is not necessary for salvation.
What do our good deeds have to do with our salvation?
From one perspective our good deeds have absolutely
nothing to do with our salvation; from another perspective
they have everything to do with it. This is the core debate
that has been raging among Christians ever since the Prot-
estant Reformation.
I am persuaded that our good deeds never merit salva-
tion. To merit salvation would mean to earn it or to
deserve it. The deeds would have to be so good, so perfect,
with no mixture of sin in them, that it would impose an
obligation upon God to grant us salvation. I believe that
the New Testament is abundantly clear that none of us
lives a life that is good enough to earn salvation. We
receive God's salvation while we are sinners (Eph. 2:1-6).
That's why we need a Savior, an atonement — and why we
need grace.
People often say, "Nobody's perfect." We all agree on
125
R.C. SPROUL
that. But not one person in a thousand realizes how signi-
ficant that statement is. Somehow they think that God is
going to grade on a curve and "as long as my life is less sin-
ful than somebody else's, then relatively speaking it's good
enough to make it into God's kingdom." We forget that
God requires perfect obedience to his law, and if we fail to
obey him perfectly, then we're going to have to look else-
where for a way to get our salvation. That's where Christ
comes in. Christ makes his merit available to us. When I
trust him by faith, then his righteousness becomes my
righteousness in the sight of God. So it's his good work
that saves me and that saves you — not our good works.
Nevertheless, in a response of gratitude we are called to
obey. Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments."
Martin Luther taught that justification is by faith alone. But
he expanded the concept by saying that justification is by
faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. A person who is
truly trusting Christ and resting on Christ for redemption
receives the benefits of Christ's merit by faith. But if that
.
person has true faith, that true faith will manifest itself in a
life of obedience. Simply put, I get into heaven byJesus'
righteousness, but my reward in heaven will be distributed
according to my obedience or the lack of it.
What role does human achievement or good works
play in salvation?
Human good works play a tremendously important role.
There can be no salvation whatsoever without good works,
and your good works are crucial to your salvation. Now,
how can a Protestant make a statement like that?
126
The Way of
Salvation
First of all, good works are absolutely crucial and are,
indeed, necessary for salvation because God requires good
works to save anybody. Those good works are supplied and
provided by Christ, who in his perfect humanity earned
the infinite merit of God — the reward of which is the very
basis of my salvation. Without Christ's righteousness, I am
in very big trouble. So my salvation, initially, is grounded
upon good works — -Jesus' good works.
What about my own good works? Do they have a role?
Most Protestants would say no. Justification is only one part
of salvation. Salvation is the big word. Salvation is the word
that covers all of the process by which God fully brings us to
total redemption. Justification is that point in the process
when God declares me a person who is in a state of redemp-
tion. The fact is that you are alreadyjustified, and you are in
a state of salvation to a degree, but there's still more of your
salvation yet to come. You still haven't gone to heaven. You
still haven't been perfectly sanctified. You haven't been glori-
fied. None of those things will happen to you until you die
and go to heaven. When you die and go to heaven, God will
give you a reward for whatever degree of obedience you have
rendered to him in your Christian life. The reward that God
bestows upon you in heaven will be given according to your
works but not because your works are so righteous and merito-
rious that they impose an obligation upon God to reward
them. God has graciously given us the promise that he will
reward whatever obedience we give him. He doesn't have to,
but out of his goodness and grace, as Augustine said, he
crowns his own gifts. Our entrance into heaven is strictiy by
the righteousness of Christ. Our reward in heaven will be
granted according to the works of obedience that we render.
127
R.C. SPROUL
In what way does God use guilt today?
When we talk about God's using guilt, it sounds strange to
many people in our society because there's a widespread
notion that guilt is something that is intrinsically destruc-
tive to human beings and that to impose guilt on anybody
is wrong. The idea then emerges that God certainly would
never use such a thing as guilt to bring about his will with
human beings. If he did, that would be beneath the level
of purity we would prefer in our deity.
In biblical terms, guilt is something that is real and is
objective, and I think it's very important that we distin-
guish between guilt and guilt feelings. Guilt feelings are
emotions that I experience subjectively. Guilt is an objec-
tive state of affairs. We see that in our law courts. When a
person goes on trial for having broken the law, the ques-
tion before the jury and before the judge is not Does the
accused feel guilty? but Is there a real state of affairs that
we call guilt? Has a law been transgressed? So it is with
God. Guilt is objective in the eyes of God whenever his law
is broken. When I break his law, I incur guilt, but I may or
may not have guilt feelings about my guilt.
I suspect that behind your question is a concern about
how God uses the guilt feelings as well as the actual guilt
itself. One of the most important works of the Holy Spirit
in the life of the believer is what the New Testament calls
the conviction of sin. We can be guilty and not feel guilty.
David, for example, when he got involved with Bathsheba
and went even so far as arranging for her husband to get
killed, felt no great remorse until Nathan, the prophet,
came to him and told him a parable. The parable was
128
The Way of Salvation
about a man who took for himself a little lamb that
belonged to a poor man. David was furious and wanted to
know who this man was so that he could be punished.
Finally Nathan pointed his finger at David and said, "You
are the man." With the realization of the full import of his
guilt, David was broken instantly and then wrote that mag-
nificent song of penitence, Psalm 51, in which he cried out
in his conviction of sin before God.
What God does with our guilt and guilt feelings is to
bring us to that state in which we are convicted of sin and
of the righteousness we've fallen short of; he uses those
feelings to turn us from disobedience to obedience. In that
regard, guilt and guilt feelings are healthy. Just as pain is a
necessary sign of the presence of disease, so guilt feelings
may often be the divine way of awakening us to our need
for redemption.
Does God put a curse on us if we disobey, or does he
merely withhold his blessing?
What could possibly be worse for you than if God abso-
lutely and utterly withheld all blessedness that flows from
God and God alone? You would be in the worst possible
situation of cursedness. So, in my opinion, to withhold his
blessing is the same as cursing us.
Does God curse us when we disobey him? In the Old
Testament God makes a covenant with his people, and he
gives them his law. When he gives them the law, he gives
along with the law what we call dual sanctions; that is, a
positive sanction and a negative sanction. He says very
clearly, "If you obey my law, then I will bless you." In effect,
129
R.C. SPROUL
"Blessed will you be in the city, blessed will you be in the
country, blessed will you be in the living room, blessed will
you be in the dining room, blessed will you be in the
kitchen, blessed will you be when you get up, blessed will
you be when you go home, etc." If you read those passages
in Deuteronomy, for example, you will see that God prom-
ises a blessing to those who obey his commandments.
Then God says, "But if you break my law, then cursed
shall you be in the country, cursed shall you be in the city,
cursed shall you be when you wake up, cursed shall you be
when you go down, etc." So the God of Scripture is a God
who gives blessing and curses. In fact, the whole scope of
redemption as the New Testament explains it is developed
in terms of this motif of blessing and cursing. What is the
cross of Christ all about? Paul tells us in Galatians that on
the cross, when Jesus is forsaken by the Father, Jesus
receives in himself the full measure of God's curse upon
disobedience. We have a Savior who takes that curse for us.
And the whole drama of redemption is this: Christ takes
my curse upon himself and gives to me and you and all
who will embrace him the blessing that God promises for
those who obey.
Help me understand the doctrine of election.
To try to answer that question in this short format would
almost do more damage than good. I could put in a com-
mercial here that Tyndale House published a book I wrote
titled Chosen by God, which devotes itself entirely to a study
of this very difficult biblical doctrine of election.
When we discuss the question of election, better known
130
The Way of Salvation
as predestination, so often that word is associated with Pres-
byterian theology or Calvinism. The apostle Paul tells us in
Ephesians that we have been predestined in Christ to be
his craftsmanship and also follows that theme very closely
in the book of Romans. So as Christians we have to strug-
gle with the concept of divine sovereign election.
I think, again, that we have to understand the basic
point of election — that God considers the human race in
its fallenness and he sees all of us in a state of rebellion
against him. If he were to exercise his justice totally and
completely toward the whole world, then all of us would
certainly perish. The Scriptures tell us that in our natural,
fallen state, we are in a state of moral bondage. We still
have the ability to make choices, but those choices follow
the desires of our hearts, and what we lack as fallen crea-
tures is a built-in desire for God. So Jesus said, for exam-
ple, "No man can come to me unless it is given to him by
the Father." I think that what election is all about is that
God sovereignly and graciously gives the desire for Christ
to those whom he calls out of the world. The difficulty
and the great mystery is that apparently he doesn't do
that for everyone. He reserves the right, as he told Moses
and as Paul reiterates in the New Testament, to have
mercy upon whom he will have mercy — -just as he chose
Abraham and not Hammurabi, just as Christ appeared on
the road to Damascus to Paul in a way that he didn't
appear to Pontius Pilate. That is to say, God doesn't treat
everyone the same. He never treats anyone unjustly.
Some receive justice and some receive mercy, and God
reserves the right eternally to give his executive clem-
ency, if you will, to those whom he chooses. There's a
131
R.C. SPROUL
great debate on this, as you know, but I believe that the
choice God makes is not based on my righteousness or on
your righteousness but is based on his grace.
My understanding of the doctrine of predestination is
that natural man will only accept Christ if God plants
the desire in his heart. If God never plants that desire,
is it fair for that person to be eternally lost?
I would say that the natural man needs more than God
planting a desire in the heart before he will come to Christ.
I think God has to bring that desire to fruition before a per-
son will ever choose Christ. It's not such that God just plants
the seed. He fertilizes the seed and brings the fruit of it.
Jesus made the statement that "no man can come to me
unless it's given to him of the Father." What did he mean?
Certainly human beings have a will, and we have the
ability to choose what we desire. I think what Jesus meant
was simply that, left to themselves, people don't have the
desire to come to Christ. They don't have the desire to
repent, and they don't have the desire to embrace the
things of God. That's what the Bible means when it says
that we are in bond service to our own sin and that we are
by nature dead in our sins and trespasses. Unless God
makes us alive to himself, we're never going to have a
desire for Christ.
Let's say that God sees a whole human race who has no
desire for him whatsoever and he knows that unless he does
something to intervene in their lives and to bring life out of
their spiritual death, they're never going to heed his call,
they're never going to respond to his invitation, because
132
The Way of Salvation
they simply don't want to. It's their very freedom that's
keeping them away from Christ. They have the freedom to
choose what they desire and to refuse what they don't
desire, and they are steadfastly refusing to come to Christ.
So God decides that for some of these people he will pro-
vide a special work of grace. He's going to change the dispo-
sition of their hearts. I think that's exactly what happens. I
think that God does overcome my hostility and my lack of
desire for him and does more than plant a desire for him.
He gives me a desire for Christ so that what was formerly
despicable and repugnant to me is now sweetness and light,
and I can't wait to embrace Christ. I think that is what hap-
pens. That's the testimony of every Christian heart.
We ask about being fair. I don't think God owes it to any-
one who doesn't want Christ to give them the desire to
want what they need. He doesn't owe that to anybody. The
problem is that if God does it for some, why doesn't he do
it for all? I can only say to you that I have no idea why he
doesn't do it for all. But this I do know and ask you to
think about carefully: Just because he does it for some in
no way requires that he do it for everybody else — because
grace is never required. God spoke to Moses, and Paul
reminds us that God always reserves this prerogative: "I will
have mercy upon whom I will have mercy." It's not up to us
to direct God's mercy.
In John 6:70 Jesus says he chose the Twelve. Does this
mean Judas was one of the elect?
Election involves God choosing people, but that does not
mean that everything God chooses is a matter of election.
133
R.C. SPROUL
When Jesus says of the Twelve, "I chose each one of you.
You didn't choose me," we-can read into that statement
that Jesus is saying, "You twelve people have been elected
from all eternity to receive the grace of salvation." If that's
what Jesus meant by saying, "I chose these twelve," then it
would certainly mean that all twelve disciples, including
Judas, would be numbered among the elect and would
presumably be saved.
But the Scripture seems to take a dim view of the future
condition ofJudas, who, as far as we can discern from the
New Testament, dies without being restored to fellowship
with Christ. I think whatJesus is saying there is that he has
chosen those twelve to be his disciples. He goes on to say
that he knew all along that one of them was the son of
perdition. Jesus reveals that he knew very well the state of
Judas's soul when he chose him to participate in Jesus'
rabbinic school of disciples. Remember that a disciple is
simply a learner. A disciple in the ancient Jewish commu-
nity was a person who attached himself to the school of
a particular rabbi and became his student. Jesus was a
peripatetic rabbi, a rabbi whose school was not in some
building, but out-of-doors. He walked around, and his
disciples literally followed him. They took notes and
memorized the things he taught.
Jesus selected Judas to enroll in his school. Obviously the
purpose of that was to fulfill the Scriptures. Jesus indicates
that — that this man was a "son of perdition" from the
beginning so that the Scriptures might be fulfilled, that
Jesus would be delivered through a betrayal. Jesus selected
one whom he knew would betray him and whom he knew
was not in a redeemed state in his soul. I don't think
134
The Way of Salvation
there's any conflict or contradiction there between the fact
that Jesus said he had chosen Judas and the fact that the
rest of the disciples were presumably not only chosen to be
disciples but also chosen to be apostles. They were chosen
from all eternity to be included as the pillars of the king-
dom of God and therefore chosen unto eternal salvation.
How has God kept his promise to Abraham that his
offspring would be saved?
The way God has fulfilled his promise to Abraham of sav-
ing Abraham's offspring is by saving Abraham's offspring.
That's exactly what God promised, and that's exactly what
God did in early history and is doing today. Paul explains
with much effort in his letter to the Romans that not all of
those who are of Israel belong to the true Israel (Rom.
9:6-13).
In the first instance the promise of salvation to the seed
of Abraham is realized in the salvation that God brings to
the people of Israel. That doesn't mean that every descen-
dant of Abraham receives salvation, but a cardinal point of
both the Old and New Testaments is that salvation is of the
Jews and that the Jews are the descendants of Abraham.
Christ himself is a descendant of Abraham. Non-Jews are
not connected to Abraham by blood; nevertheless, they
are adopted into the household of Israel and become in
biblical terms the spiritual heirs of Abraham and are
counted as children of Abraham through the principle of
adoption.
Much of the difficulty in understanding how God kept
his promise to Abraham is how the promise was to be
135
R.C. SPROUL
understood in the first place. One of the great mistakes of
Israel as a nation in the Old Testament was assuming that
biological descent from Abraham, in and of itself, guaran-
teed salvation. I think that's reading something into the
promises of God that's certainly not there. This was a great
point of dispute between Jesus and the Pharisees. Jesus
said to them, "If you continue in my word, then you are my
disciples. You will know the truth and the truth will set you
free." The Pharisees were very annoyed by those words.
They asked, "What do you mean — we're going to become
free? We're already free. We're in bondage to no man. We
are the children of Abraham."
Jesus said, "No, you are the children of those whom you
obey." This concept of sonship is consistent with Old Tes-
tament theology; it is not defined merely in terms, or even
primarily in terms, of biology but in terms of obedience.
So those who were disobedient were disinherited and were
replaced by those whom God called from the non-Jewish
world, who were adopted into the household of God as the
heirs of Abraham.
What is the doctrine of eternal security?
When we speak of the doctrine of eternal security, we're
using a popular description of a classical doctrine that we
call the perseverance of the saints. What it means is that
once a person has become quickened by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Spirit, and justified through faith in Christ and
therefore placed in a state of salvation, that person will, in
fact, never lose his salvation. That is a very controversial
point within the context of historic Christianity.
136
The Way of Salvation
There are many Christians who do not believe that once
a person is in a state of grace, he will abide in that state of
grace. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, histori-
cally teaches the distinction between venial and mortal
sins. Mortal sin is defined as being mortal because it has
the capacity to kill or to destroy the justifying grace that is
in the soul, and such a sin makes it necessary for a person
to be restored to justification through the sacrament of
penance. Other Christian bodies also believe that it is possi-
ble for a Christian to lose his salvation.
Advocates of eternal security say that our salvation is
secure once it is wrought through faith and that nothing
shall separate us from the love of Christ. It is based on
some passages in Scripture, such as Paul's teaching in Phil-
ippians. It is said that, "He who has begun a good work in
you will perfect it to the end." Also, the Scriptures talk
about the work of the Holy Spirit in the Christian life. Not
only does the Spirit regenerate us, or quicken us, starting
the whole process of Christian living, but as the Bible tells
us, God gives to each Christian the sealing of the Holy
Spirit and the earnest of the Holy Spirit. That term is a little
bit obscure in everyday vocabulary, although when we buy
a home the real estate agent might ask us to make a little
down payment that we call earnest money. That is an eco-
nomic phrase we use, and it is used in Scripture in that
same way. An earnest was a down payment, an absolute
guarantee that the balance would, in fact, be paid. When
God the Holy Spirit puts a down payment on something,
he doesn't renege on the payments. God the Holy Spirit
does not give you an earnest that becomes less than ear-
137
R.C. SPROUL
nest. He's deadly in earnest to finish what he has begun
with you.
Also, the concept of being sealed by the Spirit draws
from the ancient language of the signet ring of the
emperor. When something was sealed and affixed with the
imprimatur of the king or the owner, then it became his
possession. I think we have to make this qualifier: If it were
up to us, I don't think any of us would persevere, and we
would have very little to be secure about. However, the
concept as I understand it biblically is that God promises
that no one will snatch us out of the hands of Christ, that
he will preserve us.
If justification is by faith alone, how can we apply
James 2:24, which says a person is justified by what he
does, not his faith alone?
That question is not critical only today, but it was in the eye
of the storm we call the Protestant Reformation that swept
through and divided the Christian church in the sixteenth
century. Martin Luther declared his position: Justification
is by faith alone, our works add nothing to our justification
whatsoever, and we have no merit to offer God that in any
way enhances our justification. This created the worst
schism in the history of Christendom.
In refusing to accept Luther's view, the Roman Catholic
Church excommunicated him, then responded to the out-
break of the Protestant movement with a major church
council, the Council of Trent, which was part of the so-
called Counter-Reformation and took place in the middle
of the sixteenth century. The sixth session of Trent, at
138
The Way of
Salvation
which the canons and decrees on justification and faith
were spelled out, specifically appealed to James 2:24 to
rebuke the Protestants who said that they were justified by
faith alone: "You see that a person is justified by what he
does and not by faith alone." How could James say it any
more clearly? It would seem that that text would blow
Luther out of the water forever.
Of course, Martin Luther was very much aware that this
verse was in the book ofJames. Luther was reading
Romans, where Paul makes it very clear that it's not
through the works of the law that any man is justified and
that we are justified by faith and only through faith. What
do we have here? Some scholars say we have an irreconcil-
able conflict between Paul and James, that James was writ-
ten after Paul, and James tried to correct Paul. Others say
that Paul wrote Romans after James and he was trying to
correct James.
I'm convinced that we don't really have a conflict here.
WhatJames is saying is this: If a person says he has faith,
but he gives no outward evidence of that faith through
righteous works, his faith will not justify him. Martin
Luther, John Calvin, or John Knox would absolutely agree
with James. We are not saved by a profession of faith or by
a claim to faith. That faith has to be genuine before the
merit of Christ will be imputed to anybody. You can't just
say you have faith. True faith will absolutely and necessarily
yield the fruits of obedience and the works of righteous-
ness. Luther was saying that those works don't add to that
person's justification at the judgment seat of God. But they
do justify his claim to faith before the eyes of man. James is
saying, not that a man is justified before God by his works,
139
R.C. SPROUL
but that his claim to faith is shown to be genuine as he
demonstrates the evidence of that claim of faith through
his works.
Isn't it being narrow-minded for Christians to say
Christ is the only way?
Well, it certainly can be an expression of narrow-minded-
ness for a Christian to say that Christ is the only way. I'll
never forget the first time somebody asked me that. I was
in college, and my college professor looked me straight in
the eye and said, "Mr. Sproul, do you believe that Jesus is
the only way to God?" I wanted to jump out the window or
find a hole to hide in because the question put me on the
horns of a dilemma. It was a terribly embarrassing situa-
tion because I knew what the New Testament said. I knew
that Jesus himself had said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and
the Life. No man comes to the Father except by me." And
other passages in the New Testament say, "There's no
other name under heaven through which men may be
saved."
I was aware of those passages of exclusivity that we find
in the New Testament and that focus on the uniqueness of
Jesus. This professor pressed me on it and asked if I
thought Jesus was the only way. If I said yes, then obviously
I would be understood by everybody in the class to be an
unspeakably arrogant person. I certainly didn't want that
kind of a label during my college career. But if I said no,
then I would be guilty of denying that unique exclusive-
ness that Christ claimed for himself. So I kind of hedged a
little bit and tried to whisper my answer and said, "Yes, I
140
The Way of Salvation
believe that Jesus is the only way." Well, the wrath of that
teacher came on my head, and the teacher just began to
lay me out and said, "That's the most bigoted, narrow-
minded, arrogant statement I have ever heard."
When the class was over, I went up to the professor and
spoke privately to her. "I know you're not enthusiastic
about Christianity, but do you allow for the possibility that
people who are not arrogant and people who are not
narrow minded could for some reason or other actually
be persuaded that Jesus Christ is at least one way to God?"
The professor said, "Oh yes, I can certainly understand
that intelligent people could believe that." It was the nar-
row-mindedness that was bothering the professor. I said,
"Don't you understand that I came to the conclusion that
Jesus was away to God, and then I discovered that Jesus
was saying that he is ^way?"
If I believed that Jesus were the only way to God just
because it happened to be my way, then the unspoken
assumption would be that whatever R. C. believes must be
true. This would exclude anybody who's not in touch with
what R. C. Sproul believes, and this, of course, would be
unspeakably arrogant. Why should there even be one way
of redemption? Sometimes we act as if God hasn't done
enough.
141
6
Sin and the Sinner
The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one.
PSALM 14:2-3
Sin and the Sinner
©uaestiomis in Tttnis Sectioin:
What is meant by the term original sin?
How is it just that all humanity is born into sin because of Adam's fall?
Are there gradations of sin?
Has original sin changed the essence of our original created
humanity?
I know God has forgiven me for my sins, but how can I begin to
forgive myself?
How should we deal with stubborn pockets of sin in our lives that
won't seem to go away even after much prayer and an honest,
heartfelt desire to change?
The Scriptures tell us that "as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he."
Often my thoughts seem to be sin filled, and yet I'm a Christian. How
do I deal with this?
When the Bible says we will be accountable for all of our actions,
does that include sins we've already been forgiven for?
Is our "old nature" our knowledge of sin and our familiarity with it
from past experiences?
James 5 says, "Whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way
will save his soul from death." Can you explain what James means by
this passage?
145
R.C. SPROUL
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus warns us to "judge not, lest you be
judged." What did he mean? .
In the first chapter of Romans, God "gives sinners over to the lusts of
their hearts." What does it mean for God to give someone over to sin?
Why does the earth bear the curse of the fall of humanity? What
wrong did it do?
146
Sin and the Sinner
What is meant by the term original sin?
Original sin has to do with the fallenness of human nature.
Jonathan Edwards wrote a tremendous treatise on original
sin. He not only devoted himself to a lengthy exposition of
what the Bible teaches about man's fallen character and his
propensity toward wickedness, but he made a study from a
secular, rational perspective that addressed the philosophy
that was widespread in his day: Everyone in the world is
born innocent, in a state of moral neutrality in which they
don't have any predilection toward either the good or the
evil. It's society that corrupts these innocent natives, so to
speak. As we are exposed to sinful behavior around us, our
normal, natural innocence is eroded by the influence of
society. But that begs the question, How did society get cor-
rupt in the first place? Society is people. Why is it that so
many people have sinned? It's almost axiomatic in our cul-
ture that nobody is perfect. And Edwards asked questions
like, Why not? If everyone were born in a state of moral
neutrality, you would expect statistically that approximately
50 percent of those people would grow up and never sin.
But that's not what we find. Everywhere we find human
beings acting against the moral precepts and standards of
the New Testament. In fact, whatever the moral standards
are of the culture in which they live, nobody keeps them
perfectly. Even the honor that's established among thieves is
violated by thieves. No matter how low the level of morality
is in a given society, people break it.
147
R.C. SPROUL
So there is something indubitable about the fallenness
of our human character. All" people sin.
The doctrine of original sin teaches that people sin
because we are sinners. It's not that we are sinners because
we sin, but rather, we sin because we are sinners; that is,
since the fall of man, we have inherited a corrupted condi-
tion of sinfulness. We now have a sin nature. The New Tes-
tament says we are under sin; we have a disposition toward
wickedness, so that we all do, in fact, commit sins because
it is our nature to commit sins. But that's not the nature
that was originally given to us by God. We were originally
innocent, but now the race has been plummeted into a
state of corruption.
How is it just that all humanity is born into sin
because of Adam's fall?
I think the New Testament does teach that the whole world
is born into the consequences of a fallen nature because of
the sin of Adam and Eve. The New Testament repeats this
idea frequently
—
"that through the disobedience of one
man, death comes into the world." This has been an occa-
sion for much theological protest. What kind of a God
would punish all people with the consequences of one indi-
vidual's sin? In fact, it seems to go contrary to the teaching
of the prophet Ezekiel. He rebuked the people of Israel
when they said that the fathers had eaten sour grapes and
the children's teeth were set on edge. The prophet said
that God treats every person according to his own sin. He
doesn't punish me for what my father did, nor does he
punish my son for what I did, although the consequences
148
Sin and the Sinner
may spill out into three or four generations. That the guilt
is not transferred from one person to another seems to be
the message in Ezekiel.
It makes the question all the more puzzling. In protest
we want to say, "No damnation without representation."
We don't like to be held accountable for what somebody
else did, although there are occasions in our own system of
justice where we recognize a certain level of culpability for
what another person does through the means of criminal
conspiracy.
For example, I might hire you to kill somebody. Even
though I'm far away from the scene of the crime and don't
pull the trigger, I can still be tried for first-degree murder.
All you did was carry out my desire. Even though I didn't
pull the trigger, I'm guilty of the intent and malice of fore-
thought that you actually exercised.
You might say that's a poor analogy of the Fall because
nobody hired Adam to sin against God in my name. Obvi-
ously we didn't. He was appointed to be the representative
of the whole human race. Again, we tend to find that diffi-
cult to swallow because I don't like to be held accountable
for what my representative does if I don't have the oppor-
tunity to choose my representative. I certainly didn't
choose Adam to represent me. That's one of the reasons
we like to have the right to elect our representatives in gov-
ernment: The actions that they take in the political realm
have tremendous consequences on our lives. We can't all
be in Washington enacting legislation. We want to elect
our representatives in the hope that they will accurately
represent our desires and our wishes.
There is no time in human history when you were more
149
R.C. SPROUL
perfectly represented than in the Garden of Eden because
your representative was chosen infallibly by a perfectly
holy, perfectly just, omniscient God. So I cannot say that I
would have done differently than Adam did.
One last point: If we object in principle to God's allow-
ing one person to act for another, that would be the end of
the Christian faith. Our whole redemption rests on the
same principle, that through the actions of Christ we are
redeemed.
Are there gradations of sin?
I flinch a little bit when you ask me that question because
I have in my memory not so fond recollections of having
answered that question in the past when people got very
upset with what I said. What mystifies me is that it seems
that there are a lot of Christians who hold the position that
there are no gradations of sin, that all sin is sin and there's
no difference between less serious or more serious sins.
The Roman Catholic Church historically makes a distinc-
tion between venial sin and mortal sin, meaning that some
sins are more heinous than others. Mortal sin is so called
because it's serious enough to destroy the saving grace in
the soul. It kills grace, and that's why it's called mortal.
Protestant Reformers in the sixteenth century rejected
the concept of the distinction between venial and mortal.
Calvin, for example, said that all sin is mortal in the sense
that it deserves death, but no sin is mortal, save the blas-
phemy of the Holy Spirit insofar as it would destroy the
salvation that Christ has achieved for us. In the Protestant
reaction to the Roman Catholic distinction between venial
150
Sin and the Sinner
and mortal sin, the Protestant Reformers did not deny
gradations of sin. They still maintained a view of lesser and
greater degrees of sin. What I'm saying is that in orthodox
Christianity, both Roman Catholic and Protestant denomi-
nations have taken the position that there are some sins
that are worse than other sins. They make these distinc-
tions because it's so plainly taught in the Scriptures. If we
look at the Old Testament law, we see that certain offenses
are to be dealt with in this world through capital punish-
ment and others through corporal punishment. Distinc-
tions are made, for example, between murder and malice
of forethought and what we would call involuntary man-
slaughter. There are at least twenty-five occasions where
the New Testament makes a distinction between lesser and
greater forms of evil. Jesus says, for example, at his own
trial, "Those who have delivered me to you have greater
guilt than you have."
There is abundant evidence in the Scriptures to postu-
late a view of the gradations of sin. Not only that, but the
very simple principles ofjustice would indicate that. But I
think that people stumble on this point for two reasons.
One is Saint James's statement "He who sins against one
point of the law, sins against the whole law." That sounds as
if James is saying that if you tell a little white lie, it's as bad
as killing somebody in cold blood. But James is actually say-
ing that all sin is serious insofar as every sin is an offense
against the lawgiver, so that in the slightest sin I'm sinning
against the law of God. I have violated the whole context of
that law in many ways. So all sin is serious, but it doesn't fol-
low logically that all sin is equally serious.
People also refer to Jesus' statement that if you lust after
151
R.C. SPROUL
a woman, you've violated the law against adultery. Jesus
doesn't say that it is as bad to lust as it is to commit the
actual act. He's simply saying that if you merely refrain
from the actual act you're not totally clean; there are lesser
elements of the law that you have violated.
Has original sin changed the essence of our original
created humanity?
No. If it did change the essence of our created humanity,
then it would be improper to call ourselves human any-
more. There are vast differences of opinion among de-
nominations and religious groups and theologians as to
the extent of damage that original sin inflicted upon the
human race. The debates rage over the extent of it. Most
denominations, in spite of their differences regarding the
degree of fallenness, make some kind of distinction be-
tween what we would call the image of God in which we
were originally created in the wider sense and the image of
God in the narrower sense.
We were created in our humanness in the wider sense in
that certain traits make us human beings: our ability to
think, the fact that we have souls, etc. Even after the Fall
we still think, we still choose, we still have passions, we still
walk, we still look and act like people — we're still human
beings. Our humanity remains essentially intact.
However, the Fall altered the image of God, in the nar-
rower sense, that we were created to reflect. Originally we
had the unique ability to reflect the character and holiness
of our Creator. That mirroring ability of which the
Scriptures speak was radically clouded by sin so that the
152
Sin and the Sinner
picture of God that we give to the world is now a distor-
tion. We don't reflect God's integrity. We lost significant
moral strength and righteousness, so much so that we are
told in the New Testament that by nature we are children
of wrath, are dead in sin and trespasses, and are by nature
at enmity with and estranged from God our Creator. That
is significant. It doesn't mean, however, that our humanity
has been destroyed. Our humanity is intact, but it is a weak-
ened humanity, a fallen humanity.
I believe that the Fall has penetrated the very heart, the
core, of our spiritual and moral lives. It affects every part
of us. It affects our minds and our bodies. Our bodies
wouldn't age and die if it weren't for sin; death came as a
result of sin. That really touches our humanity. It causes
suffering, pain, wickedness, and all the rest. Human life
has been radically affected by sin, but humanity in its
essence remains.
I know God has forgiven me for my sins, but how can
I begin to forgive myself?
Frequently in his epistles, the apostle Paul goes to great
lengths to describe what we call Christian liberty. In these
matters God allows us freedom; he doesn't set down laws
prohibiting something or commanding something. The
apostle warns us against being judgmental toward our
brothers, giving as an example in the Corinthian commu-
nity the question about eating meat offered to idols. Paul
says this has nothing to do with the kingdom of God. He
says, "Those of you who have scruples about it, don't judge
153
R.C. SPROUL
those who don't" and vice versa. This is a case in which we
just have to respect one another.
In those admonitions, Paul uses as his basis this state-
ment: "We are not to be judging people for whom Christ
died." He reminds us that "your brother or your sister
belongs to Christ. God has forgiven them. Who are you to
withhold forgiveness from someone whom God has for-
given?"
Let's look at it this way. If somebody sins against me and
that person repents, God forgives them. If I refuse to for-
give them, can you think how ghastly that is in the sight of
God? God is not obligated to forgive that person. That per-
son has sinned against God, and God has never sinned
against anybody. Here I am — a person who is a sinner refus-
ing to forgive other sinners while God, who is sinless, is will-
ing to forgive. Have you ever stopped to think about the
arrogance that's in me when I refuse to forgive somebody
that God has forgiven?
Now, how could you forgive yourself after God has for-
given you? I've had people come to me and say, "R. C,
I committed such and such a sin, and I asked God to for-
give me. I've gone to him ten times and asked him to for-
give me, but I still don't feel forgiven. What am I going to
do?" I don't have any brilliant theological answer to that. I
can only tell them to ask God to forgive them one more
time. When they say they've done it, I tell them this time I
want them to ask God to forgive them for their arrogance.
"Arrogance!?" they say. "What do you mean arrogance? I'm
the most humble man in America. I've confessed this sin
ten times." Doesn't God say that if you confess a sin one
time, he'll forgive you? Who are you to refuse the forgive-
154
Sin and the Sinner
ness of God, and who are you to condemn one whom God
has forgiven? That's arrogance. You may not feel arrogant,
you may not mean to be arrogant, you may be rolling in
humility with all of your confession. But I am telling you
that if God has forgiven you, it is your duty to forgive your-
self. It's not an option. You must forgive those whom God
forgives, including yourself.
How should we deal with stubborn pockets of sin in
our lives that won't seem to go away even after much
prayer and an honest, heartfelt desire to change?
One of the great Christian classics is a devotional booklet
written by Saint Thomas a Kempis called The Imitation of
Christ. In that book he talks about the struggle that so many
Christians have with habits that are sinful. He says that the
struggle for sanctification is often so difficult and the victo-
ries that we achieve seem to be so few and far between, that
even in the lives of the greatest saints, there were few who
were able to overcome habitual patterns. We're talking
about people who overeat and have these kinds of tempta-
tions, not those who are enslaved to gross and heinous sin.
Now Thomas a Kempis's words are not sacred Scripture, but
he gives us wisdom from the life of a great saint.
The author of Hebrews says that we are called to resist
the sin that so easily besets us and that we are admonished
and exhorted simply to try harder to overcome these sins.
You say, How do we escape these pockets of sin that we
have such great struggles with, that we have an honest and
heartfelt desire not to commit? If the desire not to do it is
really honest and penetrates the heart, we're 90 percent
155
R.C. SPROUL
home. In fact, we shouldn't be locked into something. The
reason we continue with these pockets of repeated sins is
because we have a heartfelt desire to continue them, not
because we have a heartfelt desire to stop them. I wonder
how honest our commitment is to quit. There's a tendency
for us to kid ourselves about this anytime we embrace a pet
sin. We need to face the fact that we commit the sin
because we want to do that sin more than we want to obey
Christ at that moment. That doesn't mean that we have no
desire to escape from it, but the level of our desire vacil-
lates. It's easy to go on a diet after a banquet; it's hard to
stay on a diet if you haven't eaten all day. That's what hap-
pens particularly with habitual sins that involve physical or
sensual appetites. The ebb and flow of the desire is aug-
mented and diminished. It increases and fades. Our
resolve to repent is great when our appetites have been sati-
ated, but when they're not, we have a growing attraction to
practice whatever the particular sins may be.
I think what we have to do is first of all be honest about
the fact that we really have a conflict of interest between
what we want to do and what God wants us to do. I think
we have to feed our souls with the Word of God so that we
can get what God wants us to do clear in our mind and
then build a strong desire to obey.
The Scriptures tell us that "as a man thinketh in his
heart, so is he." Often my thoughts seem to be sin
filled, and yet I'm a Christian. How do I deal with this?
The verse you have quoted is a very crucial verse. There's a
strange sound to it because when we speak about thinking,
156
Sin and the Sinner
we usually identify thoughts and the thinking process with
the head, the brain. Why does the Bible say, "As a man
thinketh in his heart"? We don't think in our hearts; we
think in our heads. I think the Scriptures use the term
heart to describe what we would call the core. The very
word core comes from the Latin word for heart. It means
that which is most focused in our thinking so that the
center, the core, the heart, of our thoughts is what pro-
duces what we are. In other words, what my mind focuses
on determines what I become as a person.
This is a critical concept because people are always say-
ing to me that they don't want to study theology and they
don't want to study intellectual matters because all they're
really concerned about are the practical dimensions of
Christian living. Yet for every practice there is always a the-
ory. Each one of us is living out some significant theory of
life. We do, in fact, live according to how we think. We may
not be able to articulate that theory in a technical way, but
we do all have a theory by which we live out the practice of
our life. That's whyJesus is telling us to get our thinking
straight. What you see as important will control the practi-
cal patterns of your living.
You mentioned the frustration you have with the conflict
between what you know in your mind are the things you
should be thinking about and the things that actually do
creep into your mind. One of the best treatments of prayer
I've ever read comes from the pen ofJohn Calvin, the
French Reformation theologian, in his Institutes. I always
used to make my students read his chapter on prayer
before they read anything else so that they could become
acquainted with Calvin the spiritual giant, the man who
157
R.C. SPROUL
had such a passion for the heart of God. He had such a
keen devotional life. Calvin* laments the fact that even in
the midst of prayer, his mind is invaded by sinful thoughts.
This is normal to being human, and we must learn to over-
come such invasive thoughts, just as we learn to deal with
other aspects of our sinful nature. The apostle tells us that
whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are true and
lovely, those are the things that we should dwell on. We
have an expression in the computer trade called the GIGO
principle: garbage in, garbage out. If we fill our minds with
garbage, our lives will begin to manifest the stench of that
garbage. I think the key is to fill our minds with the things
of God.
When the Bible says we will be accountable for all of
our actions, does that include sins that we've already
been forgiven for?
I think so. Some people will be quick to point out that the
Bible says, "As far as the east is from the west, so far has
God removed our transgressions from us" and that he has
cast them into the sea of forgetfulness. When God forgives
us of our sins, he forgets them. He remembers them no
more against us. So it would seem that we could conclude
from those passages that once we are forgiven of a sin,
that's the absolute end of it and we never have to be held
accountable for it.
When we are forgiven by God for a sin, there are two
things we have to understand. First of all, when the Bible
speaks of God's forgetting our sins, we have to be careful
how far we push that. That does not mean that suddenly the
158
Sin and the Sinner
eternal God, very God of very God, who is omniscient and
immutable, suddenly undergoes a memory lapse and that
that which he once knew intimately he suddenly becomes
ignorant of. If we push that, it would give us a ghastly view of
God. Rather, the Bible is using this kind of language to say
that he doesn't hold it against us anymore. He treats us with-
out raising the issue in terms of delivering a punishment.
The just punishment for any sin would be eternal separation
from God. When we are forgiven, we are relieved of all eter-
nal guilt and punishment so that we don't have to worry
about going to hell because we have sinned.
At the same time, the New Testament tells us at least
twenty-five times that the distribution of rewards in heaven
will be done according to our relative degree of obedience
or the works that we perform. We are told frequently by
Jesus that on the last day all things will be brought into the
light. Those things we have done in secret will be made
manifest; every idle word will come into the judgment. I
don't think that means that I'm going to be punished for
those sins that I've confessed and have had forgiven. Those
are covered by the righteousness of Christ and by my Medi-
ator. But I will have to stand before God for a full and com-
plete evaluation of my obedience as a Christian.
Whether or not at that time of evaluation he will men-
tion the complete track record or just say, "Here's the bot-
tom line, you'll get so many rewards" — I don't know how
that's going to work. But I am going to be brought into a
final accounting, and certainly in God's mind every detail
of my life will be there. Even though I am forgiven and I
am not punished, any sin still means that I will receive less
reward than if I had been obedient.
159
R.C. SPROUL
Is our "old nature" our familiarity with sin from past
experiences and our knowledge of it?
When the Bible speaks of our "old nature," it is easy to
assume that it refers to our memories of what transpired in
our own lives, in our old behavioral patterns. I think it
means much more than that. The contrast between the old
and the new natures that Paul addresses frequently in the
Scriptures is often stated in other terms: the old man, and
the new man. The general way in which the apostle
describes it is between the flesh and the spirit.
I think that when Paul speaks of the old man, he is refer-
ring to the fallen human nature that is a direct result of
original sin; that is, original sin is not the first sin that was
committed by Adam and Eve but is the consequence of
that. The fact is that we are fallen beings and that we, by
this fallen nature, are born in a state of estrangement from
God. We're dead to the things of the Spirit. Paul tells us in
Romans that the mind of the flesh cannot please God. We
have no inclination or disposition to obey God in a spiri-
tual sense. That's our old nature, and we're born that way.
We're by nature the children of wrath; we're by nature in
this state of estrangement. It's out of that nature that the
New Testament describes us as being in bondage to this
inclination, or bent, or disposition to sin.
This was the debate that Jesus had with the Pharisees
when he told them that if they continued in his words, they
would be free, and they became very indignant, saying,
"We're in bondage to no man. "Jesus said, "You are a slave
to those whom you serve." He said to them that they were
slaves of sin.
160
Sin and the Sinner
Paul states that we are under sin; that is, under the
weight of it, under the burden of it, because the only dis-
position and inclination that we have is of the flesh. We
have no natural inclination toward the things of the Spirit
until we're born of the Spirit. When a person is regener-
ated, the Spirit of God comes and acts upon that person,
and he or she is a new person. He who is in Christ is a new
creation. Behold, the old has passed away and all things
become new.
That doesn't mean that the old sin nature, with its dis-
position away from God, is annihilated. For all intents and
purposes, it has been consigned to death. We know that
the battle is over. Paul says that the old nature is dying
daily and that in one sense it has been crucified with Christ
on the cross. There's no question of its ultimate and final
destruction. In the meantime we go through this daily
struggle between the old man and the new man, the old
nature and the new nature, the old desire for sin and the
new inclination that the Spirit of God has brought to life
in our hearts. Now there is a thirst and a passion for obedi-
ence that was not there before.
James 5 says, "Whoever brings back a sinner from the
error of his way will save his soul from death." Can
you explain what James means by this passage?
There are different possibilities for whatJames might have
meant. This text doesn't give us enough precise informa-
tion for us to be too dogmatic about it. He could have
been saying that he who leads a person to Christ — who
brings a person the gospel and leads him into a state of
161
R.C. SPROUL
salvation — has played the role of intermediate and clearly
saved that person's soul. He's not the Savior of that soul,
but he has, in a sense, worked to rescue a person from his
state of lostness and from eternal punishment. Perhaps
that is all this passage means.
It could also mean that whoever brings to repentance a
Christian brother who has erred in his way has helped save
this person's soul from death. Usually when we talk about
saving the soul from death, we automatically assume that
the writer is speaking about heaven or hell because we
think of the soul as that which survives biological death.
We often overlook the fact that there are occurrences of
the word soul in the Bible that simply refer to the whole
person. We still use the word in this way. I might say, "Who
came to the meeting the other night?" and you might say,
"Not a single soul." The meeting wasn't for ghosts; it was
for human beings. Or we'll say, "Pity that poor soul over
there." We're not looking at a disembodied spirit but at a
human being. The Bible does that, so it doesn't necessarily
refer to the state of a person after this life. The death that
it may be referring to here is physical death.
Oscar Cullman, the brilliant Swiss New Testament theo-
logian and church historian, wrote about the passage in
1 Corinthians that deals with the institution of the Lord's
Supper and the admonition not to eat or drink unworthily
of the Lord's Supper. Paul says to the Corinthians, "For
this reason many of you have become sick and died
because you failed to discern the Lord's body." Cullman
says that this is the most neglected passage in the whole
Bible because here is a statement clearly telling us that
people in the New Testament community became sick and
162
Sin and the Sinner
died as a direct result of a violation of the Lord's Supper,
and few people are aware of it.
We read the account in the New Testament of Ananias
and Sapphira, who suffer biological death (Acts 5:1-11).
When the Bible says that God judges people and causes
them to die, that doesn't necessarily mean they're
damned. It may be his capital punishment upon his own
people who are still redeemed; they forfeit a measure of
enjoyment of this earthly life. James may only be saying
that if we get a brother out of his wicked ways, we've saved
him from the premature biological death that is sometimes
the manifestation of God's judgment.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus warns us to "judge
not, lest you be judged." What did he mean?
Jesus enlarges on this short, pithy saying. The measure by
which we judge other people is the sense in which we are
endangered of being judged by God. If I lack mercy and
grace in dealing with other people, then I can hardly
expect God to be inclined toward mercy and grace for me.
One of the parallels is in the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us
our debts as we forgive our debtors." There is to be a spirit
of mercy that's characteristic of the Christian life because
we exist in the kingdom of God solely and exclusively by
grace alone. If any people should be avoiding a judg-
mental spirit, it should be those who have experienced the
mercy of God.
When Jesus says, 'Judge not, lest ye be judged," he uses a
word that in its most technical meaning indicates the judg-
ment of condemnation. We find an important distinction
163
R.C. SPROUL
in the New Testament between what we would call the judg-
ment of discernment or evaluation and the judgment of
condemnation. The passage in which Jesus says, "Judge
not, lest ye be judged" is not an absolute prohibition
against being aware of what is evil as opposed to what is
good or righteous. We are called to know the difference
between goodness and evil, and that means that we have
to make judgments all the time — judgments of truth as
to whether or not my behavior or your behavior or the
group's behavior is in conformity to the principles of God.
Sometimes people get very nervous if I say, "I don't
think that's something we ought to do because it would be
a violation of ethics." Somebody might jump up and say,
"Who are you to judge? Judge not, lest ye be judged." In
fact, what we're trying to do there is to make a discern-
ment and an evaluation of the ethical import of a given sit-
uation. But what Jesus is saying is that we are not to have a
condemnatory attitude toward people — what is called a
judgmental spirit.
One of the best ways I know to deal with that in practice
is to understand the difference between what we call a judg-
ment of charity and a judgment that lacks charity. It's the
difference between best-case and worst-case analysis. The
judgment of charity is that I give you the benefit of the
doubt if you do something that maybe is not obviously the
right thing to do, rather than interpret your behavior in
the worst of all possible light. Unfortunately most of us
reserve the judgment of charity for our own actions, and
we're much kinder to ourselves than we are to others. It's
that spirit and attitude that Jesus is addressing there.
164
Sin and the Sinner
In the first chapter of Romans, God "gives sinners over
to the lusts of their hearts." What does it mean for God
to give someone over to sin? Is this giving over active
or passive?
What does it mean that God gives someone over to his sin?
We find this not only in the first chapter of Romans but
also in the Old Testament. Jeremiah warned the people of
Israel that this was exactly what their punishment would
be, that God was not going to forbear with them forever
but that there would come a time when he would give
them up. There would be a point when he would give
them over to their sin.
Early in Genesis, at the time of the Flood, we are warned
that the Spirit of God does not strive endlessly with men.
God is patient, but his long-suffering is designed to give us
time to come to ourselves, to repent, to acknowledge him,
and to be restored to fellowship with him. But at the same
time, we are warned that that forbearance does not go on
forever and that there can come a point in our obstinate
refusal to repent and to respond to God when he will say
it's too late and will abandon us to our sin, withholding
from us his saving grace. That's a very terrifying thing to
consider.
The idea of giving a person over to his sin is a significant
part of the final chapters of the book of Revelation, in
which we read ofJohn's vision of the inner sanctum of
heaven and of the last judgment. We're told that those
who have responded to Christ receive marvelous benefits,
but those who have obstinately endured in their refusal to
repent receive judgment at the hands of God. God says,
165
R.C. SPROUL
"Let him who is wicked be wicked still." There's kind of a
poetic justice here. To the people who want to be wicked
and refuse to restrain themselves in their sin, God says,
"I'm not going to restrain you anymore. I'm going to take
the restraints away. I'll take the leash off, give you your free-
dom. I'll let you do exactly what you want to do. It'll be to
your everlasting destruction; it'll be to your dishonor and
to your ultimate dismay, but if that's what you want, I'll
give you over to it.
Is this giving over active or passive? It's active in the
sense that God acts to do it. God actually does give a per-
son over to that person's own desires. It's passive in that
God remains passive toward that person's self-destruction.
Why does the earth bear the curse of the fall of
mankind? What wrong did it do?
That's a provocative question, and it's a question I like
because the New Testament does make it clear that the
whole creation is groaning together in travail, awaiting the
redemption of the sons of men (Rom. 8:22). This poignant
verse indicates that there is a sense in which the whole
world of nature suffers as a consequence of the sinfulness
of humanity.
What wrong did the earth do to become cursed along
with its sinful inhabitants? The Bible clearly indicates that
the earth didn't do any wrong. Frequently the prophets of
Israel would call the people of God to pay attention to the
animal kingdom and the elements of nature, which follow
their appointed courses, set by God. When we drop a
stone, it obeys the law of gravity. Nature obeys the laws of
166