Who Is A Christian?
If someone were to ask you—as they may have done on
occasion—"Who is a Christian?", how would you respond? Tragically and
inexplicably, there is enormous controversy surrounding the word
"Christian." Did you know, for example, that there are people who
call themselves "Christian atheists?" Will Durant, America's greatest
historian of philosophy, originally intended to become a Roman Catholic priest,
but could not harmonize his religious convictions with Darwinian evolution. He
became a secular humanist and an atheist. In his book, Transition: A
Sentimental Journey of One Mind and One Era (New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1927), Dr. Durant professes great respect and even love for Jesus
Christ. He explains: "What stones we should have been not to be touched by
this noblest story ever told, this finest flower that ever blossomed in the
jungle of the human soul, this magnificent symbol of genius for daring to
redeem mankind" (p. 21). Dr. Durant concludes: "I thrill yet at the
mention of his name, and hunger yet for the ideal life he wished mankind to
live; if to love him and to hear him gladly is to be a Christian, then, skeptic
and pagan though I be, I am a Christian too and Christ is still my God"
(p. 22). Is it possible for a man to be an atheist and a Christian too? Are not
those terms hopelessly contradictory?
If a man is not an avowed atheist, but denies all—or most—of the
fundamentals of the faith, is it legitimate for him to call himself a
Christian? For example, former Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong denies
virtually every fundamental of New Testament Christianity and still thinks of
himself as a Christian. In his autobiography, Here I Stand: My Struggle
for a Christianity of Integrity, Love and Equality (San Francisco:
HarperSanFrancisco, 2000), Spong provides a list of changes Christianity must
make if it is to survive. He argues that the Bible God, a supernatural being,
is dead. He denies our Lord's incarnation, that is, that God became a man. The
whole idea is bankrupt. He insists that the Bible's account of a perfect
creation and man's subsequent fall into sin is "pre-Darwinian and
post-Darwinian nonsense." The virgin birth and other biblical miracle
stories are simply impossible. The Bible's teaching about the cross is
barbarian. The bodily resurrection of Christ did not occur. "There is no
external, objective, revealed standard writ in Scripture or on tablets of stone
that will govern our ethical behavior for all time" (pp. 453-454). But
does the former bishop still claim to be a Christian? In one of his latest
books, The Sins of Scripture: Exposing the Bible's Texts of Hate to
Reveal the God of Love (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005), Spong
writes: "As a committed Christian who has spent a lifetime studying the
Bible and whose life has been deeply shaped by that study, I am not interested
in writing what was beginning to sound like a negative, Bible-bashing
book" (p. xiii of the Preface). If John Shelby is justified in claiming to
be a Christian, then virtually everyone in the universe can make the same
claim.
The Tennessean (Saturday, August 6, 2005) published an article with the title,
"The Scripture has the last word on who is and who isn't a
Christian." The author of the article points out that many in the media,
in politics and in the general population do a great amount of talking about
what a "Christian is, what a Christian believes and what a Christian
does." She defines a Christian as "a person who believes and accepts
the authority of the Bible." If her definition is valid, then neither Will
Durant nor John Shelby Spong could be a Christian, regardless of their
pretensions to the contrary. She affirms her belief in the Bible as the word of
almighty God and quotes Paul's statement about the inspiration of scripture (2
Tim. 3:16). She then proceeds to outline some of the fundamentals of the faith.
She believes that God created man in his own image (Gen. 1:26-27).
She accepts the Genesis account of the fall of man. She does not deny the
universal sinfulness of the human family. "All have sinned and come short
of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23). She acknowledges that man cannot save
himself. He must be born again in order to enter the kingdom of heaven (John
3:3). She knows that the Bible teaches the dual destiny of man.
She says, "There is eternal life and eternal death." She
quotes the Golden Text of the Bible—John 3:16. She argues that faith in Jesus
Christ as our Lord and Savior is the only way to heaven. According to the
woman, Jesus was the only person in the history of the world who never sinned.
His death on the cross redeems those who accept him as the Lamb of God who
takes away the sin of the world. "Without the shedding of blood there is
no remission" (Heb. 9:22) (p. 13-A).
Generally speaking, most people who call themselves Christians
would accept what the woman has said thus far in her article. Her eighth point
raises some very serious questions about her knowledge of the scriptures. I
shall read point number 8 in its entirety. Please listen carefully to ascertain
if what she has written harmonizes with the accounts of conversions recorded in
Acts of the Apostles—the great book of conversions. "Every person must
confess to God that he or she is a sinner, ask Jesus to come into his or her
heart. A prayer similar to this must be prayed: Lord Jesus, I confess that I am
a sinner. I believe Jesus died on a cross and shed his blood for me. Come into
my heart and save me, I pray. In Jesus's name, Amen" (p. 13-A).
Do you remember her earlier words: "A Christian is a person
who believes and accepts the authority of the Bible?" Where in the Bible
does one find authority for what is commonly called "the sinner's
prayer?" Although the dear lady who wrote the article I am reviewing does
not use the term, "the sinner's prayer," that is precisely what she
had in mind. Not one time in the book of Acts or elsewhere in the word of God
is an alien sinner instructed to pray for the remission of sins. If there were such an example, those who urge
people to pray the sinner's prayer would have provided it a long time ago. They
cannot give an example of the sinner's prayer and they know it. So why not tell
men and women to do what the apostles urged men and women to do in apostolic
times?
The apostle Peter preached the very first gospel sermon ever
recorded. I shall not take the time
today to review all of the events on that first Pentecost after our Lord's
resurrection. But as every serious Bible student knows, Peter convicted the
Jews of having slain their own Messiah. He climaxed this great sermon by
telling the Jews: "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly,
that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and
Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said
unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we
do" (Acts 2:36-37)? Please remember that Peter and the other apostles
spoke as the Holy Spirit gave them utterance (Acts 2:4).
What was Peter's inspired answer to the Jews' question? Dr. John MacArthur,
Jr.'s book, The Freedom and Power of Forgiveness (Wheaton:
Crossway Books, 1998), quotes Peter as saying, "Repent and trust
Christ." Dr. MacArthur does mention the fact that "those who received
the word were baptized, and there were added unto them about three thousand
souls" (p. 50). I am not accusing Dr. MacArthur of being dishonest, but
Peter did not say, "Repent and trust Christ." He told the Jews:
"Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for
the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit"
(Acts 2:38). I have some questions for the lady who wrote the article for The
Tennessean.
Did the apostle Peter give the right answer to the Jews? Was he
operating by the authority of him who said, "All authority is given to me
in heaven and in earth" (Mt. 28:18)? Our Lord commissioned his disciples
to "go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who
believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he who does not believe shall be
condemned" (Mk. 16:15-16). Did Peter and the other apostles understand
what Jesus taught in the Great Commission? Do modern preachers and theologians
imagine they know more about the mind of Christ than an inspired apostle knew?
If the so-called "sinner's prayer" had scriptural
authority, why did not one inspired preacher—Peter or Paul or Philip—tell alien
sinners to pray for the forgiveness of their sins? The day of Pentecost would
have been a wonderful time for Peter to have said to the Jews: "Confess to
God that you are sinners and pray: I believe that Jesus died on a cross and
shed his blood for me. Come into my heart and save me, I pray." If Peter
had taught the sinner's prayer, how could anyone find fault with his
recommendations? But that is not what he taught. There is no way under heaven
any person can get the sinner's prayer from God's inspired book. If we believe
and accept the Bible as our authority, we shall teach only what Christ and his
apostles taught. The sinner's prayer does not belong in that category.
Max Lucado, a one-time gospel preacher, labors diligently to
embrace denominational teachings and practices. For example, the church where
in preaches in San Antonio, Texas, worships with instruments of music on Sunday
evenings—not on Sunday mornings—although I cannot understand why they make that
distinction. In a radio sermon several years ago, Max Lucado encouraged his
listeners to call God Father. He said, "That is all you have to do. Just
call God Father." Have you ever wondered why neither Peter nor Paul nor
Philip ever thought about telling alien sinners just to call God Father? The
Jews already recognized God as their Father (John 8:41). Peter commanded the
Jews: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus
Christ for the remission of your sins" (Acts 2:38). There simply is no way
to get around that answer. Why should anyone try? Why not accept the word just
as it has been given?
The author of the article in The Tennessean leaves
the impression that we have nothing to do to be saved and to stay saved. She
writes, "Christian character is produced by the Holy Spirit and not by
self-effort" (p. 13-A). We know we cannot earn salvation, but does that
eliminate all self-effort? I wonder if the dear lady who wrote the article has ever
bothered to discover how many times the word "do" appears in the New
Testament. The New Testament writers use the word "do" five hundred
seventy-six times—five hundred seventy-six times! For example, as I have
already mentioned, the Jews on Pentecost asked Peter and the other apostles,
"Men and brethren, what shall we do?
If Peter had believed the Calvinistic doctrine of salvation by grace
alone through faith alone, he would have responded, "You are not required
to do anything." Do you think I might be exaggerating the Calvinist
position? Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, a well-known Greek preacher from Chattanooga,
reported that a young man asked him, "What must I do to be saved?"
Dr. Zodhiates said he told the young man, "There is nothing you can do to
be saved." The young man asked further, "Do you mean it is too late
for me to be saved?" Dr. Zodhiates responded: "O no, I mean it is too
late for you to do anything. God has already done it all." I wonder
why Peter never thought of that. He commanded the Jews to repent and be
baptized to have their sins forgiven. I say this without any ill will: But I
had much rather take Peter's answer on the day of Pentecost than that of a
Calvinist preacher, even a Calvinist preacher with a doctor's degree.
The little book of James gave Martin Luther a great amount of
trouble. He called the book of James "a right strawy epistle." If a
person believes in salvation by grace alone through faith alone, I can
understand why he would call James an epistle of straw. A few verses from James
will show honest Bible students that we must do the will of God. James
admonished his readers: "But be doers of the word, and not hearers only,
deceiving your own selves. For if any man be a hearer of the word, and not a
doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: for he
beholds himself, and goes his way, and straightway forgets what manner of man
he was. But whoso looks into the perfect law of liberty, and continues therein,
he being not forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be
blessed in his deed" (James 1:22-25). Did James really mean we must be
doers of the work? If we shall be blessed in our deeds (literally in our
doing), does that eliminate all self-effort? If we must continue in the perfect
law of liberty, we are not saved by grace alone through faith alone. James also
wrote: "Therefore to him who knows to do good, and does it not, to him it
is sin" (Jas. 4:17).
The dear lady who wrote the article for The Tennessesan either
does not know or has chosen to ignore the following verses from the beautiful
little book of 1 John. Please listen carefully. "And the world passes
away, and the lust thereof: but he who does the will of God abides
forever" (1 John 2:17). If one fails to do the will of God, will he abide forever
anyway? If he will, the words of John are deceptive. John also wrote: "If
you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who does righteousness is
born of him" (1 John 2:29). "Little children, let no man deceive you:
he who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous....In this the
children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever does not
do righteousness is not of God, neither he who does not love his brother..
..And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments,
and do those things that are pleasing in his sight" (1 John 3:7, 10, 22).
Speculating on what it means to be a Christian is a waste of
valuable time in view of the fact no one should miss what the scriptures teach
on that topic. Will you think with me for just a few minutes on the conversion
of the Ethiopian eunuch? Philip the evangelist had been preaching in Samaria.
An angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, "Arise, and go toward the south into
the way that goes down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose
and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under
Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasure, and had
come to Jerusalem for to worship." The eunuch was returning, sitting in
his chariot and reading Isaiah the prophet. The Holy Spirit commanded Philip to
join himself to the chariot in which the eunuch was riding. Philip heard the
eunuch reading from Isaiah. He asked the eunuch, "Do you understand what you
are reading? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he
desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him" (Acts 8:26-31).
The eunuch was reading these words from Isaiah 53:7-8: "He
was led as sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so
he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and
who shall declare his generation? For his life was taken from the earth."
The eunuch asked Philip: "Of whom was the prophet speaking?" Was he
speaking of himself or of some other man? "Then Philip opened his mouth
and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus" (Acts
8:32-35). We have no record of the
exact words Philip used in preaching Jesus. But we know this: As the two of
them went on their way, they came to some water. The eunuch asked, "See,
here is water, what hinders me from being baptized? And Philip said, If you
believe with all your heart, you may. And he answered and said, I believe that
Jesus Christ is the Son of God" (Acts 8:36-37).
Some questions based on this reading are in order. Was Philip
purposefully trying to make the eunuch a Christian? When Philip told the eunuch
about Christ, did the eunuch have to believe in Christ to become a Christian?
When he believed in Christ, was that all he had to do to become a Christian? If
that were all he had to do, why did he ask Philip, "See, here is water,
what hinders me from being baptized?" Was baptism necessarily included in
preaching Jesus? In that same chapter in Acts, we are told that Philip went
down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ to the Samaritans. Do you
remember what their response was to his preaching? "But when they believed
Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of
Christ, they were baptized, both men and women" (Acts 8:5, 12). Again I ask: Was baptism necessarily
included in preaching Jesus Christ? Incidentally, when the Samaritans believed
the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Christ and were
baptized, did that make them Christians? If that did not make them Christians,
what else did they have to do to become Christians?
But obeying the gospel is not all there is to being a Christian.
Many people in Bible times obeyed the gospel and then turned their backs on the
Lord. Paul mentioned a fellow worker in the kingdom, Demas, who had deserted
the cause of the Lord (2 Tim. 4:10). The Christians at Ephesus had left their
first love. Our Lord demanded of them: "Remember therefore from whence you
have fallen and do the first works; or else I will come unto you quickly, and
will remove the candlestick out of his place, except you repent" (Rev.
2:4-5). The author of Hebrews knew the possibility of a Christian's
apostatizing and warned: "Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you
an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God" (Heb. 3:12).
The word "departing" is from the Greek apostenai from
which we get our word "apostatize." You can readily understand that
Christians—true Christians—can apostatize. We must walk in the light as Christ
is in the light so that we may continue to have the forgiveness of our sins (1
John 1:7).
Winford Claiborne
The International
Gospel Hour
P.O. Box 118
Fayetteville, TN
37334