006 What do we mean by Grace Alone? – part 1

Romans 5:12-14

May 14, 2017

As you know we are embarking on a study called

“500 Years of Reformation”

We are seeking to examine the gospel

Which was rescued during the reformation

So as to make sure we defend the true gospel today.

By now you are well aware of the 5 pillars which emerged from that Reformation period.

· SOLA SCRIPTURA – Scripture Alone

· SOLA GRATIA – Grace Alone

· SOLA FIDE – Faith Alone

· SOLUS CHRISTUS – Christ Alone

· SOLI DEO GLORIA – Glory to God Alone

Now I should tell you that if you just read those statements

WITHOUT REALLY THINKING THEM THROUGH,

Almost everyone will easily affirm them as true.

However, if you really start pondering them and what they are saying,

Then you find that there are great many of professing believers

Who don’t actually believe them at all.

For example:

We have spent the last month on SOLA SCRIPTURA.

And I could talk to many believers and say that “Scripture Alone

Is our sole source of authority and revelation from God.”

AND MOST WOULD AGREE.

HOWEVER when I tell them that “This means that their private revelation, or private experiences, or prophetic words, have no weight”,

There are many who then turn and deny the concept of SOLA SCRIPTURA

I have had many who will fight on this point.

We have even had some who have left our church over this point.

I have had several who have told me that they believe God speaks to them outside of the Bible.

It is the “I know what God told me” idea.

And so while they might say they believe SOLA SCRIPTURA,

When they think about it a little deeper they then go back and reject it.

They would be willing to say SCRIPTURA, but not SOLA SCRIPTURA

It is that “Alone” which they reject.

And that one isn’t the only one.

Many of you knew Tommy Bailey who pastored the Hwy 70 Church of Christ.

He published on Facebook that he did not believe in “Faith Alone” (SOLA FIDE). He held that it wasn’t Biblical.

For he said that Scripture demands more than just faith

For a person to be justified in the sight of God.

He would hold that baptism is required, obedience is required, repentance is required, participation in the Lord’s Supper is required,

And all as a part of the justification process.

So he would definitely hold to FIDE, but not SOLA FIDE

He would reject the word “Alone”

Now I tell you that because tonight we begin looking at the second SOLA.

That is SOLA GRATIA; Grace Alone.

And you immediately begin to ponder, does anyone really have the audacity to not believe in Grace Alone?

· Is there really anyone who would cry “Grace” who would also deny “Grace

Alone”?

And I’m going to tell you “Yes”.

· And then I’m going to tell you that we are locked in a major battle over this

very doctrine to this very day.

· And then I’m going to shock you still further by telling you that this very battle is

occurring within the Baptist denomination.

There are a great many today who believe in grace,

But if pushed to the very brink

Cannot say they hold to “Grace Alone”.

And I’ll explain it to you.

(And this will take many weeks to work through)

So tonight, I simply want to challenge your thinking a little.

One of the great weaknesses of the American church

Is our refusal to want to think deeply about anything.

We are a culture addicted to 20 minute sermonettes

Which just sort of give us 3 spoon fed points about better living,

But rarely do we want to ponder anything deeply.

(Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I am grateful for you, for you have shown yourselves willing to push beyond a nominal understanding into the depths of God’s truth)

Well, that is where we are going to go.

And just like we did with SOLA SCRIPTURA,

I want to begin this study with a question.

When we looked at SOLA SCRIPTURA I asked you: “What dictates what you believe?”

Well in order to study SOLA GRATIA I need to ask you:

“What is the source of your faith?”

I ask you that because there are many in our world today (even our denomination) who whole-heartedly agree that we are justified by faith alone, but they cannot agree on where this faith originates.

· We know that Abraham believed God and that as a result righteousness was

credited to him.

· We know that Paul teaches that we are “justified by faith” and not works.

But the question that we must begin to ponder is

WHERE DOES THIS FAITH COME FROM?

Let me ask it another way:

· When God requires faith for salvation, is that faith something God first

gives to you or something you first give to God?

· Regarding salvation: is faith a gift to you or a contribution from you?

THIS IS ACTUAL A MASSIVE ISSUE

THAT IS CENTRAL TO THE GOSPEL

AND ESPECIALLY THE WAY WE GO ABOUT EVANGELISM.

Now, I know we are talking about the events of the Reformation

Which occurred in the 16th century,

But this conversation really needs to go back about 1,100 years

To the 5th century and an early theologian named Augustin

Augustin of Hippo was a North African theologian

· Who was widely the noted as the most influential theologian of his time, and possibly the most influential theologian of all time.

Regarding salvation Augustin held a view known as MONERGISM

“MONO” means “one”

“ERGO” means “to work”

Simply put that is to say that salvation is “THE WORK OF ONE” (God).

The opposite would be SYNERGISM (“SYN” – together)

Which says that salvation is the result of “working together”.

Salvation is the cooperative work between God and the human will.

Monergism says: “God is the sole active agent and energy, and humans – both collectively and individually – are tools and instruments of God’s grace and wrath.”

[Olson, Roger (The Story of Christian Theology, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, 1984) pg. 256]

Synergism says: “God’s agency and human agency cooperate in some way to produce by history and salvation.”

(ibid. 256)

Augustin was the first to really express MONERGISM.

He believed that salvation was all God’s doing

With no help whatsoever from the sinner.

You could ask Augustin about “Free Will” and Augustin would define it like this: “Man is absolutely free to do whatever he wants to do.” The problem is that all man ever wants to do is sin. He said, “A man’s free will avails for nothing except to sin.”

(ibid. pg.272)

He believed that “human beings retain free will even after the Fall. But that free will is conditioned by sin so that it is always turned toward disobedience unless God’s grace intervenes and turns the will in another direction.”

(ibid. pg. 273)

Now in this view Augustin had a famous prayer

Which he taught and often prayed.

He said, “My whole hope is in Thy exceeding great mercy and that alone. Give what Thou commandest and command what Thou wilt. Thou commandest continence [abstinence from immorality] from us, and when I knew, as it is said, that no one could be continent unless God gave it to him, even this was a point of wisdom, to know whose gift it was.”

(ibid. pg. 267)

Augustin believed that whatever God commanded was right,

But he also believed that the only way he would ever be able

To live up to what God commanded

Was if God granted the ability to do so.

And this was the basic belief and doctrine and practice of the 5th century.

However there was a British Monk named Pelagius

Who arrived in Rome around 405

And was appalled by the apparent immoral living of the believers there.

When he read Augustin’s confession in his prayer,

He blamed Augustin’s view for the problem.

· Pelagius rejected Augustin’s view of original sin and held that man is totally able and free to live a righteous life.

· Pelagius held that the sin of Adam affected only Adam and that every person is born without a bent or predisposition toward sin.

· Pelagius simply believed that righteous man was born into a sinful environment which corrupted him through temptation, but sin was totally the choice of man’s free will. (Incubator Effect)

So whereas AUGUSTIN defined free will as “doing what one wants to do”

PELAGIUS defined it as “ability to do otherwise.”

Now, in the great controversy Pelagius was condemned as a heretic by the church as he saw absolutely no essential need for grace whatsoever and Augustin won the day.

BUT PELAGIUS DID OPEN THE DOOR

There arose another man named JOHN CASSIAN

Who sought to sort of bridge the middle ground on the issue.

He by no means wanted to deny the necessity of grace,

He just didn’t want to totally deny the contribution of man either.

His view has been labeled Semi-Pelagianism or “Orthodox Synergism”

Basically Cassian held that:

Man is in absolute need of grace and would be totally lost without it,

But man does in fact contribute to salvation by means of his decision

to accept that grace.

The question could be asked “Does God have compassion on us because we have shown the beginning of good will, or does the beginning of good will follow because God has compassion on us?”

(ibid. pg. 283)

Augustin would say we only have good will

Because God has been compassionate.

Cassian would say God shows compassion

Because we show good will.

If you want Cassian’s view in MODERN DAY TERMS it would be like this:

“God helps those who help themselves.”

Also rooted in CASSIAN’S view was the necessity that a sinner “make a decision for Christ”.

He would see grace as essential,

But also saw grace as resistible

(The human will can accept it or reject it),

Therefore salvation really becomes “up to us”.

Now, I hope you are following with me here,

Because I have just outlined for you a battle that continues even today.

There are some who would say that Man is sinful and there is nothing he can do or contribute in order to bring about salvation. If he is to be saved then God must do it all.

And then there are some who would say that God is at work to save sinners by His grace, but the sinner must cooperate with God in order to bring that salvation about.

And I’ll let you stew for a moment to decide which one you believe.

The first is MONERGISM – Man adds nothing, man contributes nothing, God must do it all.

The second is SYNERGISM – God certainly offers grace, but man must at least cooperate by means of his decision to accept it.

And I bring this issue up because in that reality we are asking this:

IS MAN SAVED BY GRACE, OR IS MAN SAVED BY GRACE ALONE?

Does man contribute to God’s grace or is it grace alone?

OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO TURN TO SCRIPTURE

TO FIND OUT WHICH IS TRUE.

Where this issue is first and foremost determined

Is regarding the issue of the fall and the depravity of man.

Let me spell that out even farther so you’ll know what we are discussing.

When Adam fell, did it affect everyone?

And if it did, how did it affect everyone?

Augustin and the monergists would say that as a result of the fall man is DEAD in sin.

· That is to say he is TOTALLY DEPRAVED

· There is nothing within him capable of doing anything to be saved.

· He has no ability to produce the faith which God requires

· Or even to choose to accept that which God offers.

Cassian and the synergists would say that as a result of the fall man is DESPERATELY SICK and cannot recover apart from grace.

· However, when grace is offered, there is enough goodness in that man by which he can respond positively to the offer of salvation and produce the faith which God requires.

Do you see the difference?

That is why I asked you at the beginning:

WHERE DOES YOUR FAITH COME FROM?

Did God give it to you, or did you give it to God?

Was it a gift from God or a contribution from man?

AND YOU ASK WHY IS THIS ESSENTIAL

TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOSPEL OR EVANGELISM?

Because if sinners are capable of responding through their own means then the emphasis of evangelism is on convincing the sinner to respond to grace.

However, if the sinner is incapable of responding on his own then the emphasis of evangelism is on the accuracy of the gospel through which God resurrects that sinner and grants him faith.

In fact, that was one of the arguments of Cassian and remains and argument today, that monergism “cripples the force of preachers and priests”

That is to say, if man can’t be persuaded to accept Christ,

Then of what use are bold and effective preachers?

BUT DO YOU SEE THE RELEVANCE OF THE ISSUE?

I can confidently tell you now which path the BAPTISTS have chosen to walk - SYNERGISM

All of our emphasis has been on doing whatever it takes

To convince the sinner to make a decision for Jesus.

This came from men like Charles Finney, D.L. Moody, even Billy Graham

And the use of the effective altar call and manipulative invitation.

The rise of the modern day altar call and persuasive invitation

Was all rooted in a synergistic belief that not only must God offer grace,

But the sinner must find within himself

The willingness to make a decision for Christ.

And we sing “I Have Decided to Follow Jesus”

And seek to convince sinners to respond.

That has been the basic method and belief of Baptists for many years.

But it presents some major problems, that we need to discuss…

NAMELY THIS: CAN A DEAD MAN RESPOND?

We must examine what the true effects of the fall really were.

For if Adam only weakened us and made us sick, then yes, we have the ability to persuade and convince sinners to make a decision.

However, if Adam successfully killed us, then evangelism takes on a whole new method, for there is no possible way that we can even communicate with the dead, let alone convince him to respond.

So we want to start looking the fall of man, and this issue which we refer to as TOTAL DEPRAVITY (or: Absolute Inability)

And to do that I want to start to tonight by looking at Romans 5.

(We’re going to be on this topic a while,

As there are many texts to look at regarding this issue)

NOW: Romans 5 is very pointed.

It is all about the security of the believer.

We have peace with God

We stand in grace

The Love of God has been poured out within our hearts

Jesus rose from the dead to intercede for us

(Paul has addressed all of that in the first 11 verses of the chapter)

Verse 12-21 also speak of the security of salvation

But still, it is VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND.

FIRST

It is difficult because it contains a “PARENTHETICAL STATEMENT”

The King James actually includes the parenthesis;

Other translations just insert a hyphen.

In verse 12 Paul says, “Therefore just as through one man sin entered…”

When someone says to you, “just as” or “in the same way”,

You naturally expect them to list both items they are comparing.

If I say, “Just as this pulpit is brown”

You automatically expect me to say, “so is the Lord’s Supper Table”

BUT PAUL SEEMS TO LEAVE US HANGING

He gives us the “just as” in verse 12 but doesn’t finish the statement.

He does finish it, but not until verse 18.

Romans 5:18 “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”

So to help you understand the flow of his writing,

Circle the “just as” in verse 12, and draw a line to the “so then” in verse 18.

The reason they are so far apart

Is because Paul inserts this PARENTHETICAL STATEMENT.

Verses 13-17 make up this statement.

They are not part of Paul’s original thought.

Verses 13-17 are not there to add to the theme of the chapter,

They are there to further explain verse 12.

WHAT PAUL WILL DO HERE

Is line Adam and Jesus up side by side,

And then basically ask you; WHO IS STRONGER?

Of course our answer is that Jesus is stronger than Adam.

The point is that if Adam’s one act was able to spread to all men, And Jesus is more powerful than Adam,

Then can’t the one act of Jesus spread to all men as well?

That’s what Paul says when he completes his thought.

Romans 5:18 “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”

HOWEVER, while writing verse 12, it dawns on Paul

You and I might not realize how Adam’s one act affected all men.

He realizes that you and I might not know

That through one act of disobedience all of us were made sinners.

And Paul knows that if we don’t understand how one act of Adam

Could make us all sinners,

Then we won’t understand how one act of Jesus

Could make us all righteous.

SO, while the text doesn’t seem to have anything to do

With the security of the believer, it does.

For if you first understand this,

Then you will be able to understand better; the worth of Christ.

WE BELIEVE AS CHRISTIANS

That we died with Christ, and were raised with Him.

We also believe that His righteousness is now our righteousness

BUT SOME WOULD ARGUE, IS IT IS REALLY POSSIBLE FOR A DEED WHICH OCCURRED 2,000 YEARS AGO TO EFFECT US TODAY?

How can it be said that you died with Christ 2,000 years ago?

How can it be said that you were raised with Christ 2,000 years ago?

How can it be said that because you died and were raised with Him you

now share in His righteousness?

How can people believe that?

What do people base that belief on?

We based it upon the power of the sin of Adam.

Paul will prove that one act of Jesus can affect us all,

By revealing that the death of Jesus isn’t the first time

That all men were affected by one act.

Before the Second Adam (Jesus) died on a tree,

The first Adam was eating from one, and it powerfully affected us.

#1 THE SOURCE OF SIN

Romans 5:12a

“Therefore just as through one man sin entered into the world”

Romans 5 carries with it the theme of JESUS AS MEDIATOR

Romans 5:1 says, “we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”

Romans 5:2 says “through whom also we have obtained our introduction…into grace”

Romans 5:9 says “we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him”

Romans 5:10 says “we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son”

Romans 5:11 says “we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ”

He is the channel through which the blessings and salvation of God flow.

But Jesus wasn’t the first mediator we have seen in Scripture.

The first was a man named Adam.

And he didn’t bring us blessing or salvation.

Through Adam came sin and condemnation.

“through one man sin entered into the world”

SIN WAS NOT ALWAYS IN THE WORLD.

When God created this world, He did not put sin in it.

Genesis 1:31 “God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.”

Sin was not in the world.

Satan was filled with pride, and had been removed from heaven,

And even that he swept away a third of the angels with him.

BUT SIN STILL WASN’T IN THE WORLD.

Satan needed a mediator.

And of course he approached a woman named Eve

Who was the wife of the man we call Adam.

Genesis 3:1-7 “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'" The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.”

And sin entered into the world

Adam was the mediator between man and Satan.

Adam was the one who allowed sin to enter.

I know Eve ate it first, but Adam was the Mediator

I’ll explain it to you.

1 Timothy 2:13-14 “For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

Eve was deceived. Satan had her fooled.

God never intended for her to be the one to see through Satan’s plan.

But Adam’s failure was far worse.

Adam wasn’t deceived. Adam was rebellious.

The woman “fell into transgression” thanks to her husband,

But Adam willing transgressed against God.

“transgression” is PARABASIS (par-a-bay-sis)

It means “to go beyond or an overstepping”

That insinuates two things.

1) You knew your boundary.

2) You obstinately chose to break that rule.

Now that was Adam wasn’t it.

Genesis 2:16-17 “The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

Eve wasn’t even created yet. (vs. 22)

It was Adam who knew the command.

It was Adam who knew better.

BUT ADAM CHOSE TO ALLOW SIN INTO THIS WORLD.

HE CHOSE TO BE THE MEDIATOR.

And thanks to him, sin entered God’s creation.

So first, the source of sin

#2 THE SIDEKICK OF SIN

Romans 5:12b

“through one man sin entered into this world, and death through sin”

What Adam failed to realize

Is the same thing many people fail to realize

When choosing to entertain blatant rebellion against God.

AND THAT IS THAT SIN NEVER WORKS ALONE.

Sin has a very intimate friend, and he never travels without him.

THE SIDEKICK OF SIN IS DEATH.

If you hold the door open for sin,

Then sin will get right in the middle of the door,

And hold it open for death.

James 1:15 “Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.”

And certainly Adam learned this.

Not only was the serpent doomed to lick the dust…

Not only was the woman doomed to pain in childbearing…

Not only was creation doomed to futility…

BUT DEATH WAS NOW UPON US.

Genesis 3:17-19 “Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return."

And of course this played a very real role in the life of Adam.

Genesis 4:8 “Cain told Abel his brother. And it came about when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.”

But Adam was staring at more than just the grave of Abel.

Adam was staring consequence for his rebellion right in the face.

When Adam chose to be a mediator for sin,

Sin brought death with him.

And this much we all probably understand.

But it’s the next point that Paul wanted to make sure you and I understood.

The Source of Sin The Sidekick of Sin

#3 THE SPREADING OF SIN

Romans 5:12c

“and so death spread to all men, because all sinned”

Now it is very easy to read that text as though when men were born,

We eventually made the same mistake of Adam, and that is why we die too.

While we do all sin, THAT IS NOT WHAT PAUL IS SAYING HERE.

Look up to the top of the chapter for a moment.

Romans 5:1 “Therefore, HAVING BEEN JUSTIFIED by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”

You see the word “justified” there

It is in the AORIST, or the POINT tense.

That meant Paul was not speaking of an ongoing event,

But rather one event that took place at one instance in the past

At one point, we were instantly and permanently made right with God.

I remind you of that, because

That is the exact same tense that Paul uses here.

When he says that “all sinned”,

HE IS NOT referring to the weakness of mankind to give in to sin.

He is explaining something that happened at one point in the past.

There was an exact point in the timeline of history,

That “all sinned”.

That point was when Adam sinned

It totally infected everyone who would come after him with sin.

Paul will say it a little clearer later in the chapter.

Romans 5:18a “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men…”

Romans 5:19a “For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners…”

Paul doesn’t say in either of those places that we had done anything yet.

But when Adam sinned instantly we were all condemned.

When Adam sinned, instantly we were all sinners.

What Adam did affected the entire human race,

Because the entire human race came from him.

John MacArthur wrote

“[Adam’s] sin became mankind’s sin, because all mankind were in his loins.”

(MacArthur, John; The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Romans 1-8 [Moody Press, Chicago, Ill; 1991] pg. 296)

When Adam sinned, because we are his seed, we all fell with him.

When Adam sinned we all sinned with him.

When Adam was condemned we were all condemned with him.

This is where the sinful flesh came from.

David said

Psalms 51:5 “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.”

Psalms 58:3 “The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth.”

This is why when Jesus showed up He said:

John 3:3 “Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

We sometimes develop an erroneous view about mankind.

WE THINK MAN BECOMES A SINNER AFTER HE SINS.

The Bible says that man sins because HE IS A SINNER.

The deeds don’t affect the heart,

The heart affects the deeds.

Matthew 15:19 "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.”

Jeremiah said:

Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?”

Mankind doesn’t become a sinner after committing his first sin.

Mankind is born sinful.

No one has to teach a newborn to be selfish.

No one has to teach a newborn to have a fit of rage.

No one has to teach a toddler to be self-indulgent.’

He inherited that from his father – Adam.

He is not born righteous until he commits his first sin,

He is born a sinner, and it is only a matter of time until sin evidences itself in his life.