A New Theology of Assurance

Chafer Theological Seminary website ^ | 1998 | Reviewed by Dr.Stephen R.Lewis

[fortheDeclaration]

No Condemnation: A New Theology of Assurance. Michael Eaton. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995. 261 pp. Paper, $16.99.

In a postscript to his commentary, Ecclesiastes (IVP), Eaton concluded by citing the words of Luke in Acts 17:32-34: Some . . . sneered . . . others said, 'We want to hear you again,' . . . A few . . . believed.

I believe the responses to his new book will draw the same diversity. Many will sneer, others will want to know more and still others will consider the evidence and believe, as a scholar from the Reformed tradition takes on one of the "sacred cows" of Calvinism and Arminianism: the theology of assurance. In doing so, he defends unlimited atonement. He demonstrates a "resistible" link between justification and sanctification, and sharply distinguishes salvation from inheritance. He sees disobedience as a loss of inheritance, but not loss of justification, and believes neither the legalistic (as found in Arminianism) nor the introspective (as found in Calvinism) is the approach to assurance. Justification, for Eaton, is by faith alone. Eaton is "doubly encouraged" in that one's present and future salvation is sure and motivating, and that upon this secure base one may reach for inheritance. He sees this position as liberating because the experience of the Spirit now occupies the place once occupied by the Law (see chart p. 184).

Michael Eaton serves as the Senior Pastor of Lusaka Baptist Church, located in Nairobi, Kenya. He received his B.D. from Tyndale Hall, Cambridge; and his Ph.D. from the University of South Africa. This book is a revision of his doctoral thesis presented to the University of South Africa in 1989 under the title, A Theology of Encouragement—A Step Towards a Non-Legalistic Soteriology. He is the author of the Tyndale Old Testament Commentary, “Ecclesiastes,” and of Baptism with the Spirit: The Teaching of Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones.

Eaton states that Arminians must not "assume the continuance of their faith, and scholastic Calvinists must not assume the reality of theirs. In the one case awareness of sin threatens the Arminian's confidence about continuance in the faith; in the other case awareness of sin threatens confidence about the reality of salvation" (p. 20). Although some may believe he has gone too far, he says "Is it not a fact of history that the Calvinist has tended to have less assurance of salvation than the Arminian? The Arminian is at least sure of his present salvation. As the result of the high Calvinist doctrine the Calvinist often doubts his present salvation and thus has a less contented frame of mind than his evangelical Arminian friend" (p. 20).

So where is the Calvinist's assurance? Eaton believes "it has died the death of a thousand qualifications" (p. 23). He believes the more one knows the complete teaching of what he calls "scholastic Calvinism," the more it raises questions that one would ask himself concerning his own salvation, which he calls introspection. "This is the snag of scholastic Calvinism. It leads into an abyss of ever-increasing introspection . . . The introspective variety is decidedly not totally derived from the New Testament, and its all-pervasive view of the law needs reconsidering" (p. 25).

When he compares Arminianism and Calvinism, he sees little difference between the two when dealing with assurance.

Arminian theology takes the warnings of Scripture as relating to salvation and as warning against apostasy or forfeiture of salvation. Final salvation hinges upon the Christian's good works. Calvinism likewise has also taken the warnings of Scripture as relating to salvation. If a high Augustinian doctrine of perseverance is maintained, then the Calvinist sees the warnings of Scripture as addressed to the danger of pseudo-salvation . . . Both assume that salvation and good works are tied together. In the one case salvation requires good works; in the other salvation inexorably and irresistibly produces good works. In both theologies salvation and good works stand and fall together (p. 38).

Eaton's goal is to present a "non-legalistic" theology where a person finds assurance in Christ's completed work at the cross. "What I am urging, on the basis of this biblical material, is that there may be an approach to security and admonition that does not imply justification by works and yet which does not have the in-built legalism and introspection of developed Calvinism" (p. 185).

As Eaton sees it, the Christian position is one of "invincible assurance of salvation combined with awesome warnings concerning forfeiture of blessing (but not of salvation itself). There are both reassuring and admonitory aspects" (p. 37).

The Christian's security, as a biblical doctrine, relates to salvation, to justification, to a secure position in grace, to freedom from condemnation, and to eternal membership among God's people. Eaton does not believe that Scripture addresses its admonitions to Christians regarding how to gain or lose eternal life. To him, salvation is so completely and solely of grace that to the one who has already believed, admonitions concerning losing or gaining salvation—in the sense of regeneration or justification—are entirely unnecessary and are not found in Scripture at all. Instead, the admonitions of the New Testament "relate to present experience of the blessings of God's kingdom, to reward in this life and beyond, to usefulness in God's kingdom" (p. 39).

Eaton's position concerning the theology of grace comes through clearly as he concludes his writing with the following statements:

Surely the New Testament balance is one of absolute freedom, an assurance that one will 'never thirst again,' a knowledge that 'nothing in all creation is able to separate us from the love of God in Christ.' Yet from this basis of radical assurance spring profound challenges, the challenge to accept responsibility, the challenge to work out one's salvation, the challenge to lay up treasure in heaven, the knowledge that there is something to be 'laid hold of,' rewards to be won. Yet, all along the way there is no need to fear that I am working for my eternal salvation . . . What paradoxes! Amazing grace and profound challenge; incredible assurance yet awe-inspiring responsibility; freedom to be myself yet the knowledge that Jesus achieves all in me. Here is a theology that motivates but does not discourage—a theology of encouragement. But is not this the gospel? I believe it is (p. 221). I recommend this book as a companion to Joseph Dillow's book, Reign of the Servant Kings: A Study of Eternal Security and the Final Significance of Man (Schoettle Publishing Company [706-896-3333]). Both books address some of the same issues in presenting a free-grace, "non-legal" approach to assurance.

[fortheDeclaration]

Here is a book review on the subject of eternal security.

I had posted that the Calvinist has no more basis for confidence in his eternal security then the Arminian.

This book states that same thesis.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[jboot]

Eaton's goal is to present a "non-legalistic" theology where a person finds assurance in Christ's completed work at the cross. "What I am urging, on the basis of this biblical material, is that there may be an approach to security and admonition that does not imply justification by works and yet which does not have the in-built legalism and introspection of developed Calvinism"

And folks call Calvinism "easy-believism"! How does this fellow interpret James, I wonder?

[fortheDeclaration]

And folks call Calvinism "easy-believism"!

Who calls Calvinism 'easy-believism'?

I have heard that charge leveled at the Arminians, not the Calvinists.

As for James, I cannot speak for the author and have not read the book, so I will give my view on it as one who does believe in eternal security.

James is dealing with how the world sees our faith, Paul deals with how God sees our faith.

That is why Paul deals with Abraham in Gen.15 when he was first justified and James with Abraham in Gen.22 when Abraham made that justification a visible fact to the entire world.

[fortheDeclaration]

For all readers,

There is a chart that goes along with the article.

I do not know how to post charts, so I did not post it along with the article.

you might want to check out the chart.

I am not sure if the author is being totally fair in ascribing 'legalism' to Arminianism.

But the issue of rewards (on the far right side of the chart) is what the Christian loses or gains in his Christian walk, not his salvation.

[f.Christian]

"God has given us this gospel not merely for the purpose of securing to us life hereafter, but of making us sure of this life even now. It is a true and sure gospel; so that he who believes it is made sure of being saved. If it could not make us sure, it would make us miserable; for to be told of such a salvation and such a glory, yet kept in doubt as to whether they are to be ours or not, must render us truly wretched. What a ... poor gospel --- it must be, which leaves the man who believes it still in doubt as to whether he is a child of God, an unpardoned or a pardoned sinner! Till we have found forgiveness, we cannot be happy; we cannot serve God gladly or lovingly; but must be in some bondage or gloom."

"The Bible gives no quarter to unbelief or doubting. It does not call it humility. It does not teach us to think better of ourselves for doubting. It does not countenance uncertainty or darkness."

"Thus the questions about assurance resolve themselves into that of the knowledge of our relationship to God. To an Arminian, who denies election and the perseverance of the saints, the knowledge of our present reconciliation to God might bring with it no assurance of final salvation; for; according to him, we may be in reconciliation today, and out of it tomorrow; but to a Calvinist there can be no such separation. He who is once reconciled is reconciled for ever; and the knowledge of filial relationship just now is the assurance of eternal salvation. Indeed, apart from God's electing love, there can be no such thing as assurance. It becomes an impossibility."

"For we are not saved by believing in our own salvation, nor by believing anything whatsoever about ourselves. We are saved by what we believe about the Son of God and His righteousness. The gospel believed saves; not the believing in our own faith. Nevertheless, let us know that assurance was meant to be the portion of every believing sinner. It was intended not merely that he should be saved, but that he should know that he is saved, and so delivered from all fear and bondage, and heaviness of heart."

amen

Grace ... vs (( link )) --- works !

[Frumanchu]

James is dealing with how the world sees our faith, Paul deals with how God sees our faith.

Ed, I don't agree with you often, but amen brother....amen.

[Bellflower]

Ping for later reading.

[maestro]

A New Theology of Assurance

1st John 2:1-2
1st John 5:16-21

Maranatha!!

(Romans 10:17)

[fortheDeclaration]

Ed, I don't agree with you often, but amen brother....amen.

Thank you, brother!

[fortheDeclaration]

but to a Calvinist there can be no such separation

The problem that the Calvinist has is the same that the Arminian has.

You do not know for sure you are the 'elect' and thus, may not make it to the end!

In fact, the good works that you do may be itself a delusion from wrong motives.

Calvinism has no more assurance of eternal security in the practical sense, then does Arminianism.

[f.Christian]

"Religion is fashionable in our age. But is it that which sprang up, after centuries of darkness, among our fathers in Europe? Is it that of apostles and prophets? Is it the calm yet thorough religion which did such great deeds in other days? Has it gone deep into the conscience? Has it filled the heart? Has it pervaded the man? Or has it left the conscience unpacified, the heart unfilled, the man unchanged, save with some external appliances of religiousness, which leaves him hollow as before? There is at this moment many an aching spirit, bitterly conscious of this hollowness. The doctrine, the profession, the good report of others, the bustle of work, will not fill the soul. God Himself must be there, with His covering righteousness, His cleansing blood, His quickening Spirit."

"Without ... this --- religion is but a shell: holy services are dull and irksome."

"Joy in God, which is the soul and essence of worship, is unknown. Sacraments, prayer-meetings, religious services, labours of charity, will not make up for the living God."

"How much of unreality there may be in the religious life of our age, it is for each individual to determine for himself, that he may not be deceived nor lose his reward."(1)

"All unreality is weakness as well as irksomeness; and the sooner that we are ... stripped of unreality --- the better, both for peace and for usefulness."

[f.Christian]

Hope you read the ... ninth --- chapter!

[fortheDeclaration]

Yes, the ninth chapter is parenthetical, dealing with the nation if Israel, not individual election to salvation.

[f.Christian]

Heb.9
[1] Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
[2] For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
[3] And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
[4] Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
[5] And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
[6] Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
[7] But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
[8] The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
[9] Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
[10] Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
[11] But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
[12] Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
[13] For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
[14] How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
[16] For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
[17] For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
[18] Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
[19] For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
[20] Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
[21] Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
[22] And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
[23] It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
[24] For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
[25] Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
[26] For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
[27] And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
[28] So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

[fortheDeclaration]

I am sorry, when you referred to the 9th chapter I thought you meant of Romans.

Peace does not save us, yet it is the portion of a saved soul.

Amen!

The problem the Calvinists have is on an individual basis being sure they are the elect.

There is always a possibility that they are not and they cannot really know this until the reach the end of their lives.

It is always possible that a sin could take them away from God and thus show that in fact, they were never truly 'elect' in the first place.

[fortheDeclaration]

OK, and the point is?

[f.Christian]

I don't think too many people understand the day of atonement ... God is our friend - Savior and not our enemy !

Cain even received a ' blessing ' from God !

[fortheDeclaration]

I don't think too many people understand the day of atonement ... God is our friend - Savior and not our enemy ! Cain even received a ' blessing ' from God !

Yes, God is merciful and doesn't give us what we deserve, even Cain.

However, God is also Holy and will judge those who reject His mercy (Jn.3:36)