Getting Repentance Right
There has been the big raging battle for repentance. For one, there is the repentance controversy and before I shifted my view to Lordship salvation from easy believist, I simply had to think that some people are severely misrepresenting other preachers who say that sinners must be willing to turn from sin to be saved. The problem these days is that some Independent Fundamental Baptists are sunk into the low level of a wrong definition of repentance that while I am not saying these people are Antinomians but they are prone to embracing false converts as brethren and two, prone to welcoming false pastors as well. In fact the rift between Independent Baptists and Baptists like Paul Washer, John MacArthur, James Lyman and Ray Comfort or their rift from Presbyterianism like Robert Charles Sproul and the late D. James Kennedy. It's just crazy how I admired Charles Haddon Spurgeon but tend to lean on the easy believist side until I reexamined my beliefs like you definitely CANNOT have Christians living the they way they want and still go to Heaven but rather Christians will live the way God wants because they belong to Heaven.
Also, I do get hammered every time I preach this, "To receive Christ as Lord and Savior." Really have they READ the New Testament carefully? Peter in Acts 2 preached Christ as Lord, Romans 10:9-13 addresses confessing with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lordship of Christ CANNOT be separated from Him. I used to think I was an opponent of Lordship salvation because the phrase has been misused by conditional security preachers. The reality is that, unless people know Christ as Lord, they CANNOT know Him as Savior. The reason why I will never stop preaching a Lord and Savior terminology is that Christ is Lord, He is Lord! It's whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved. Christ is not just Savior, He is Lord. It's absurd to even think of just receiving Christ as Savior without knowing Him as Lord which again results to several false conversion.
But until the Lordship of Christ is preached, there is no real repentance. Submission to Christ as Lord is not optional, it's what every guilty sinner does when they realize they can't do anything but trust Christ and it becomes a DAILY submission as proof of possessing eternal security. Eternal security should NEVER be taught as a live the way you want doctrine because you're saved, that is crooked!
The problem can also be this, preaching a very watered down Gospel. For one, the problem with a no repentance of sins model, no use of the Law model, just an easy repeat-after-me evangelism is this- it creates a whole new generation of false converts that will eventually fall away. Like somebody I knew got out of Roman Catholicism and supposedly joined a Baptist church. The problem was however because of watered down preaching from the Baptist church, he was actually a false convert. He fell away from his being a "Baptist" and ended up joining the damnable cult of the Ang Dating Daan (The Old Path) with Eliseo Soriano. For one the pastor who debated against Eliseo Soriano DID NOT get repentance right. The result was that later, some people joined Eliseo Soriano's Arminian cult and conditional security preaching.
While reading the book "Why I Believe" I began to read the "repent of your sins" and it's really absurd how this is already confused with works salvation. D. James Kennedy used terms like "surrender" which was played in the song "I Surrender All" an old hymn. The problem with the quarrel over the word "surrender" is pretty much debated upon.
Unless you surrender to Christ as a guilty sinner, you are done for! The problem with the modern repentance was stated by this by MacArthur who I used to wrongly accuse as a works salvation teacher UNTIL I began to read everything from his website Grace to You in the article "What is Biblical Repentance":
But the predominate no-lordship view on repentance is simply to redefine repentance as a change of mind--not a turning from sin or a change of purpose. This view states, "In both the Old and New Testaments repentance means 'to change one's mind' " (Ryire, So Great Salvation, 92). "Is repentance a condition for receiving eternal life? Yes, if it is repentance or changing one's mind about Jesus Christ. No if it means to be sorry for sin or even resolve to turn from sin" (SGS 99). Repentance by that definition is simply a synonym for the no-lordship definition of faith. It is simply an intellectual exercise.
Note that the no-lordship definition of repentance explicitly denies the emotional and volitional elements in Berkhof's description of repentance. No-lordship repentance is not "be[ing] sorry for sin or even resolv[ing] to turn from sin." It means simply "changing one's mind about his former conception of God and disbelief in God and Christ" (SGS 98). Again, one could experience that kind of "repentance" without any understanding of the gravity of sin or the severity of God's judgment against sinners. It is a remorseless, hollow, pseudorepentance.
MacArthur further reveals what it means to to turn from sin:
As that verse demonstrates, the issue in repentance is moral, not merely intellectual. What repentance calls for is not only a "change of mind" but a turning away from the love of sin.
Did you read that? That's what it means to turn away from sin to be saved. Unless people are sorrowful for their sins, I don't see any reasons they will come to Christ. Men loved darkness (John 3:20) and in John 5:40 we read of people who will NOT COME. That is reality... sin is what is preventing people from turning to the Savior. When the drunkard wants to be saved so he can get drunk all he wants or the adulterer wants to be saved yet cling to his paramour and still be saved, when such a person realizes that getting saved will change his lifestyle, he turns away. It's a pity how I knew some adulterers when preached with the Gospel and addressed the fact they are sinners, they say, "Well I am perfectly fine, I am a good person. Even if I have my affairs I give plenty of money to the coffer." and after being told of James 2:10 that they have already been guilty as everybody, they get mad and even threaten to fight the soulwinner.
I have experienced that myself with people who refuse to get saved because they REALLY love sin. Every time I tell them the power of God's life changing Gospel, sinners ran away because they don't want the life changing Gospel. Folks SIN MUST BE DEALT WITH. That's why I meet people who hate my style of old-fashioned, sin hating self because while I reject conditional security and accept eternal security, I say those who possess eternal security will NOT live a life of sin by God's grace even if they will sin. Perseverance of the saints by John Calvin states that no Christian can truly fall away but rather they will endure to the end which explains Matthew 24:13 on what it means to endure to the end to be saved. Only true believers endure to the end, fakes ones DO NOT (1 John 2:19).
As much as I admire Independent Baptist movements but their corroding into a "debating personality" has been going from bad to even WORSE. I mean great Baptist preachers like Jonathan Edwards and Charles Spurgeon stated repentance as such. It's pretty absurd how these watered down IFB preachers could actually admire Charles Spurgeon, Harry Allen Ironside and Jonathan Edwards but teach a wrong repentance. For one, if repentance were just limited to a change of mind that does not result to a change of purpose, we are preaching a no repentance of sin salvation. For one, people MUST realize they are guilty sinners. Chares Spurgeon in "Turn or Burn" which was preached on December 7, 1856 said:
"There must be a true and actual abandonment of sin and a turning unto righteousness in real act and deed in every day life. Repentance, to be sure, must be entire. How many will say, Sir, I will renounce this sin and the other...but there are certain darling lusts which I must keep and hold? Oh, sirs, in God's name let me tell you, it is not the giving up of one sin, nor 50 sins which is true repentance. It is the solemn renunciation of every sin. If thou dost harbor one of those accursed vipers in thy heart and dost give up every other, that one lust like one leak in a ship will sink thy soul. Think it not sufficient to give up thy outward vices, fancy it not enough to cut off the more corrupt sins of thy life, it is all or none which God demands. Repent, says He, and when He bids you repent, He means repent of all thy sins otherwise He can never accept thy repentance as real and genuine. All sin must be given up or else you will never have Christ. All transgression must be renounced or else the gates of heaven must be barred against you. Let us remember then that for repentance to be sincere, it must be entire repentance. True repentance is a turning of the heart as well as of the life. It is the giving up of the whole soul to God to be His forever and ever. It is the renunciation of the sins of the heart as well as the crimes of the life."
Another misrepresentation is done against Paul David Washer. In fact, it's very sad that some IFBs have misrepresented him very much. Here's what Paul Washer says:
"What is repentance? Days and days of lectures could not tell you all that is in this word. But it is an important word and you are called to do it, and if you have not done it and do not continue doing it is the evidence that you have never known the Lord."
Is Paul Washer teaching works salvation there? No, no and a thousand times no! True believers will KEEP REPENTING OF SINS, unlike Judas Iscariot's selfish repentance which was merely to save his skin. Paul Washer has EVERY RIGHT to be SICK AND TIRED of the Gospel ignorant nation with its watered down Gospel. In fact, I am really tired of hearing preachers who say, "Well you can sin all you want and still be saved." which is as satanic as "When you sin, you lose your salvation." The right message is "I can't live the way I want because I'm saved." which is Ephesians 2:10 and Titus 2:11-14. There can't be an eternally secure salvation that is absent from eternal sanctification. Christians are meant to be sanctified, save to serve and not to sin. Though Christians MAY SIN, but they definitely cannot live like the rest of the world. Sodom's sin vexed Lot and Solomon's Book of Ecclesiastes showed just how repentant he was of his indulgences! That's why I can't buy for a single moment the garbage telling me such unrepentant sinners like rock stars, carnal love song singers and porn models as Christians. What Paul Washer is REALLY saying here is in my own words is, "Except if people are not truly repentant, live in sin and have no remorse, such people are never saved to start with." which is 1 John 2:19 describing such people.
In fact, this incident based from Paul Washer should give me a GOOD REASON to be worried about the possibilities of false conversion:
"3,000 kids came forward… It was just a bunch of kids doing what they’d been trained to do ever since they were in Sunday School. No tears, no repentance, no broken-hearts, no weeping over sin, no self-hatred, no realization of offenses against God given, nothing. A move of God? … I think not. Because when God moves, and particularly when God moves to save, there is repentance. Now what is repentance? The word means to change. Let me ask you a question … Have you changed?"
Again, that is NOT works salvation. For one, while not everybody has tears but I did get a broken heart when I realized I was so sinful. In fact, these tears keep coming every time I slipped down after I got saved. I could no longer enjoy sinning. For one also, how can a person even repent of their unbelief and turn to Christ if for one, they are not sorry for their sins? Jesus said in John 3:18-20 that people love darkness and not life. Now another thing worth bringing up:
"My friend, if you repented and believed only in past tense, you’re lost and going to Hell. There is an initial work of repentance and an initial work of faith that continues on for the rest of your life, and that repentance grows deeper every day and that faith grows stronger. He said repent. Now what did He mean? He meant change. Change from what? From a life without God."
Again this is misrepresented. There is the problem of the believed only in the past tense. True faith in Christ CONTINUES. I don't buy the garbage of, "Believe now and you are still saved even if you stop believing." because folks, true salvation results to continued faith, genuine repentance in Christ CONTINUES. Paul Washer is NOT saying here that people must continue to do good to stay saved, he is an OSAS preacher but not the easy-easy OSAS teacher. Really it's a problem to keep calling a serious Gospel preacher a works salvation preacher. This is really again resulting to countless false conversions.
Like some I knew have strayed away from the faith like some Southern Baptists have ended up supporting evil companies or even became Roman Catholic or any cultist because they didn't have a real, genuine conversion. That repent in the past tense was nor repentance and believed only in past tense that was mere superficial belief. If the heresy of easy believism were true then Judas Iscariot would be saved despite all he did which is absolute garbage. That was a problem to why I got heckled when I argued the fact that Judas Iscariot was never saved to start with. Would have he been saved, he would not betray the Lord Jesus for 30 pieces of silver... and if he were saved and if he did it, he would have fallen to Christ's feet. What Judas Iscariot did was NOT unforgivable and Christ forgives betrayers who come to Him in a repentant spirit. Peter in a way betrayed Christ but later fell to repentance as proof he was truly saved which made a HUGE difference between him and Judas Iscariot. Judas Iscariot only repented before men, not to God.
In fact, that is what Ray Comfort addressed in "True and False Conversion" and "Hell's Best Kept Secret" but thanks to him, it's not Hell's best kept secret anymore. I really can't help but keep mentioning Ray Comfort's method of using his famous "Presentation of the Law" gospel. He's not wrong in doing it, in fact I really love that kind of method. Good Gospel tracts present the real truth of the Law which really, REALLY proves we are all dead sinners without Christ. While I cannot guarantee anybody will get converted with Ray Comfort's method since some people HATE the guts of the Christian preacher, but it will certainly bring real repentance to those who are willing to turn from sin. In fact, truth needs be told that as James Lyman loves to say, "Revival is needed." Yes folks, we need revival. James Lyman is NOT teaching works salvation as some IFBs want us to believe. As a closing note, I really could care less if the church pews were full of people LEAVING because they hate the way the pastors preach the Gospel as it should be. I could care more about the church pews were full of false converts or them leaving because pastors did not preach the Gospel right. All I can say is I will endure not by my power but only by God's grace.