|
Who Carries
Out the Plan of Salvation?
What is the true “plan of salvation”? Is this plan something God follows,
or is it what He requires of us? Do we follow it as a joint project along
with God? Is the plan of salvation the entire cosmic design which God laid
out before time and then followed in order to Redeem Mankind? Or, is it
the one, two or three steps of response we are required to make in order
to “apply” salvation to our personal lives? Is the plan a progressive
series of eras in human history in which one is saved by obeying all the
truth they know? Do we “carry out” the plan of salvation or did Jesus
Christ fulfill it alone? Is it a plan “of” salvation, or is it the plan
“for” salvation? Does the plan of salvation come to the believer in
installments: First, the simple Gospel and then a more “full Gospel”?
These questions came to mind after reading Jim Yohe’s statement
about the plan of salvation:
His death, burial, and resurrection typified the
forthcoming plan of salvation preached by Peter on the Day of Pentecost:
“Repent (death), and be baptized (burial) everyone of you in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of
the Holy Ghost (resurrection)” (Acts 2:38).”[i]
This United Pentecostal Church minister submits that the “plan of
salvation” comes AFTER Jesus’ death burial and resurrection. He claims
that when Jesus died, was buried and rose again, it “typified” the
“forthcoming plan of salvation preached by Peter on the Day of
Pentecost.” “Forthcoming,” means that it had not come yet. In other words,
Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection were not the
“plan” of salvation. For Yohe, the “plan” is the three steps of Acts 2:38:
Repent, be baptized, and receive the Spirit. Rev. Yohe holds this view
because it is the standard teaching of the UPCI. For example, a prominent
teacher in UPCI history, S. G. Norris, stated in reference to Acts 2:38:
“Thus, the Book of Acts consistently presents the same keys – the same
plan of salvation.”[ii]
This plan of salvation is called the only plan and the “true gospel:”
This apostolic pattern – faith, repentance, water baptism,
and infilling of the Holy Spirit – is still the pattern of salvation
for us today. There is no other plan of salvation, no other true gospel.[iii]
This historically and theologically unique interpretation of the “plan of
salvation” lies at the heart of the UPCI’s doctrinal identity. It is the
issue which predominated and defined the 1945 merger which formed the UPCI:
These men had been ministers in their respective
organizations for many years. They knew, therefore, that the main problem
to be worked out concerned the fundamental doctrine of the proposed new
organization. It was brought out in chapters seven and eight that both the
Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ and the Pentecostal Church,
Incorporated believed in repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus
Christ, and receiving the Holy Ghost with the initial sign of speaking
with other tongues. To be a minister in either organization, one must have
obeyed these gospel precepts, and must teach and preach them. But in
general, the two groups differed in the spiritual significance attached to
each of these “steps” in the plan of salvation. The vast majority of the
ministers in the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ believed that
water baptism in Jesus’ name remitted sins and was the birth of the water.
They further believed that the baptism of the Holy Ghost was the birth of
the Spirit. The belief of some in the Pentecostal Church, Incorporated was
identical with this. Others, however, believed that the word “for” in Acts
2:38 meant “because of,” and that one was baptized because his sins had
been remitted, through the efficacy of Jesus’ shed blood, at the time of
repentance. The Pentecostal Church, Incorporated had accepted ministers
who believed either way, seeking to keep the unity of the Spirit until
they all came into the unity of the faith. So it is easy to see that
before a merger could be effected, there must be a fundamental doctrine
relative to the plan of salvation that ministers in both groups could
conscientiously accept.[iv]
However, the major question here is not concerning the unique way that the
UPCI interprets these three elements separately [we’ve addressed that
elsewhere; [cp. “Hearts Purified By Faith”[v];
“How Did Paul ‘Wash Away’ His Sins?”[vi];
“Remission of Sins in Acts 2:38"[vii];
“How Many Stages?”[viii];
“What Does it Mean to be ‘Born Again’?
”[ix]]
. It is that they see them as THE plan of salvation. Ostensibly for Yohe,
Jesus’ work is not even part of the plan (which I am sure he did not
intend). According to his statement, the plan of salvation - Acts 2:38 -
was not known until it was preached by Peter on Pentecost Day. Instead of
a plan which Jesus followed and fulfilled, it was a plan to be followed by
those who heard Peter preach. It pertains more to what they had to
do to be saved, than to what Christ did to save them. The UPCI
views the plan of salvation as what one must obey in order to be saved:
There are several things man must do in order to be saved.
He must hear the gospel preached, he must repent, he must believe, he must
obey God’s Word, and he must be baptized in Jesus’ name.[x]
It is this writer’s
conviction that the Bible teaches that the plan of salvation is all
about God and what He has done to save His people. It is not about the
sinner’s response. The Scriptures present the plan with a stress on
what God has done. Yes, the Bible speaks strongly that the sinner must
respond with repentance and faith. Nevertheless, what we must do is not
the chief Scriptural accent. The Bible’s call to repentance and faith are
consumed with the magnificence of God’s sovereignty and grace in
salvation. The focus is not on repentance, nor is it on faith. The Bible's
emphasis is on the object of that faith. The focus is on Christ. Faith is
the way the believer looks at Christ. Whereas, the UPCI places great
stress on one’s obedience to Acts 2:38 as the plan of salvation, the
Gospel places the stress on Christ’s obedience in fulfilling God’s plan
on the Cross and through the Resurrection. There are a number of
reasons why the UPCI position is wrongly focused. We will address some of
those reasons in the next pages.
Outline of this Paper
There are some very important issues, pertinent to the plan of salvation,
which we will cover in this paper. Firstly, I will address the fact that
the essence of God’s plan of salvation revolves around His Purpose
and His Decrees, and not
our responses. Secondly, I will suggest that the “full gospel”
theology has shaped the UPCI “plan of salvation.” Thirdly, I will try to
explain that the Gospel is our rehearsal, in faith, of Christ’s
work and not a reenactment,
through acts of obedience, of His death, burial and resurrection.
Fourthly, I will attempt to convey that an improper “reading” of
the Bible can cause one to miss the proper meaning of the “plan of
salvation.” Fifthly, I will try to show how: 1) the phrase “plan of
salvation” is not applied consistently and means different things
at different times, as illustrated in the writings of a leading UPCI
writer; and; 2) that this confusion of several plans of salvation
demonstrates that a conflicted method of interpretation is being
used to define the “plan of salvation.” Sixthly, we will address how
Dispensationalism has contributed to a serious misinterpretation of
the plan of salvation. Seventhly, we will answer whether the Gospel, or
Christ himself, can ever be called a “type.”
Lastly, we will make a case that Christ, as the eschatological
fulfillment
of all things, can never be called the precursor of any plan of
salvation. The overarching theme of this paper is this: What God has
done in and through Jesus Christ, is the true plan of salvation. It
is Jesus who is God’s plan. Jesus fulfilled God’s plan in His doing
and dying. By this He obtained for us all God’s benefits for our
salvation. What remains for us is to place our faith in Jesus to receive
these benefits by grace.
[Top]
Confounding the Gospel
The “plan of salvation” is a phrase that is frequently used by
certain Christian groups in referring to the “steps[xi],”
“keys[xii],”
or “stages” “How Many Stages?”[xiii]
a
person must follow in order to be saved. It is a confounding of what Jesus
did with what we must do. Is it biblically and theologically correct to
speak of the Christian’s response as a “plan” of salvation? I do not
believe it is. It is not the way the biblical writers speak about
salvation. Paul states emphatically that the Gospel is Jesus’ own death,
burial and resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1-4). Rather than what God requires
of us, the Gospel is what Jesus has already
done for us. Since the Gospel is so clearly stated by Paul in 1
Corinthians 15, it is hard to see how anyone can redefine it[xiv].
Therefore, the corruption of the Gospel must come by how the believer
“applies” it. This is exactly what happens with certain groups when
they add to the Gospel by saying one must apply the Gospel by
obedience to “something,” rather than simply believing God for what He has
done in Jesus Christ. This confounding happens too often among
Evangelicals as well as other Christian groups:
The expression “God’s eternal plan of salvation” is often
used in gospel tracts to refer to three or four things God wants the
sinner to do in order to be saved, such as: (1) “Acknowledge that you are
a sinner and need to be saved,” (2) “Believe that Jesus died on the cross
for sinners,” (3) “Ask God to forgive you of your sins,” (4) “Put your
trust in Jesus.” While these are things which the sinner must surely do in
order to be saved, they hardly constitute the content of God’s “eternal
plan of salvation.” And it is only a debased level of theological
awareness, but one quite current in our day, that would suggest that it
is. What the expression more properly designates is “the order of decrees”
in the mind of God (Eph. 3:11).[xv]
In the case of the UPCI, faith in the biblical Gospel is confounded by
their unique interpretation of Acts 2:38 as the plan of salvation.
[Top]
The Purpose of God
Interestingly, the word “plan” is not found in the King James Version of
the Bible. The word “purpose” is used instead. Often, when “plan” is used
in other translations it refers to human “schemes”rather than those of
God. The words that best parallel the idea of “plan” in the New Testament
are found in these verses:
Acts 4:28 They did what your power and will had decided
beforehand should happen. NIV
Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined
to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn
among many brothers. NIV
Romans 8:30 And those he predestined, he also
called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also
glorified. NIV
1 Corinthians 2:7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a
wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory
before time began. NIV
Ephesians 1:5 he predestined us to be adopted as his
sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will-- NIV
Ephesians 1:11 In him we were also chosen, having been
predestined
according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity
with the purpose of his will, NIV
As we see, the word “plan” is found in the New International Version
translation of Ephesians 1:11. The word used here for plan (prothesis)
refers to “that which is planned or purposed in advance - 'plan, proposal,
purpose,'”[xvi]
and is also found in the following verses, which speak about God’s eternal
purpose or will:
Romans 8:28 And we know that in all things God works for
the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his
purpose. NIV
Ephesians 3:11 according to his eternal purpose
which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord. NIV
2 Timothy 1:9 who has saved us and called us to a holy life
– not because of anything we have done but because of his own
purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the
beginning of time, NIV
The word “purpose” is translated from the Greek verb prooridzo,
which means “to come to a decision beforehand - 'to decide beforehand, to
determine ahead of time, to decide upon ahead of time.”[xvii]
The truth that God is a personal God assumes the idea of purpose. An
eternal God would have an eternal purpose:
That God acts upon a plan in all his activities, is already
given in Theism. On the establishment of a personal God, this question is
closed. For person means purpose: precisely what distinguishes a person
from a thing is that its modes of action are purposive, that all it does
is directed to an end and proceeds through the choice of means to that
end.[xviii]
It would be an irresponsible if not an irrational God who
would create the world and direct its course of events with no prior plan
or purpose behind such activity – or who would not direct it at all.[xix]
If God is a personal God, as we believe, he therefore has a purpose. And
being God, He, by His very nature, has all power and wisdom to make sure
His purpose or plan is completely carried out.
If we believe in a personal God, then, and much more if,
being Theists, we believe in the immediate control by this personal God of
the world he has made, we must believe in a plan underlying all that God
does, and therefore also in a plan of salvation. The only question that
can arise concerns not the reality but the nature of this plan.[xx]
Many Christians (as evidenced by the “Openness of God” debate[xxi])
have a severe allergy to the idea of God’s exclusive, sovereign control of
the world. They chafe against the notion of an eternal plan and of Divine
decrees. They cringe at the thought that God has unilaterally ordained
specific things for our lives according to His sovereign will. I have
personally heard teachers who instructed their class not to read from
certain passages, such as Romans chapter nine, because they said it would
be too confusing for people to understand. This thinking has grave
implications for one’s knowledge of Scripture, and ultimately of one’s
faith in God. Does this imply that God’s Word is too confusing for His
people? If so, I am compelled to make this strong response: God has placed
in His Word all that is necessary for us to know His will and be comforted
by His salvation. If, then, we claim there are statements of His
foreknowledge, foreordination, and predestination which we should avoid or
neglect, then we usurp God. We suppose that we know more than God. And by
avoiding or neglecting these portions of Scripture, we impugn the very
character of God, because we say He has put things in His Word which are
confusing, unnecessary or detrimental to our understanding. Who are we to
tell God that these inspired passages of His Holy Word are too confusing
for the “average” Christian?
Therefore we must guard against depriving believers of
anything disclosed about predestination in Scripture, lest we seem either
wickedly to defraud them of the blessing of their God or to accuse and
scoff at the Holy Spirit for having published what is in any way
profitable to suppress. . . Whoever, then, heaps odium upon the doctrine
of predestination openly reproaches God, as if he had unadvisedly let slip
something hurtful to the church.[xxii]
One of the most tragic developments among a number of Christians is a
hurtful and irrational prejudice against the biblical doctrine of
predestination. Whatever one’s interpretation of predestination may be,
all readers of Scripture must acknowledge that God has placed the idea of
predestination in His Word (Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:5, 11[xxiii])
and intended it to bring faith, hope, comfort and security to his
children. Instead, being ignorantly misunderstood, it has fomented a near
hostility and bitter denunciation among unwitting detractors. What is most
tragic is that God intended it for the assurance of salvation for His
people, but it is unskillfully obscured and dismissed by those who find it
unsavory to their human sensibilities.
[Top]
The Decrees of God
The general idea of a salvation plan in the Bible pertains more to the
idea of the decrees of the one Holy God in eternity, than it does to a
temporal order with which we must comply. The text of Scripture which
expresses this most succinctly is Ephesians 1:9-12:
Having made known unto us the mystery of his will,
according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: That in
the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one
all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth;
even in him: In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being
predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after
the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his
glory, who first trusted in Christ. (KJV)
This passage contains several words which communicate the idea of a plan
of salvation. In Ephesians, Paul uses words from two Greek word-groups to
express the majestic scope of God’s plan. The first group (thelema;
boule) speaks mostly of God’s “will” or intention and decision. The
second group (proginosko; prothesis; prohoridzo) deals with the
notions of foreknowledge, predestination and plan or purpose, as something
set forth before time. The fact that Paul uses such a complex of words,
compacted into a few verses in Ephesians, reveals the immensity and
richness of the subject. Notice that:
the emphasis for Paul is on what God does and not
what we must do.
In Ephesians 3:9, the word “will” (qelhma[xxiv])
conveys the idea of intention. God has decided to do something. The force
of the word is that God resolved to do something which He will not fail to
do. Next, in the same verse, Paul speaks of God’s “good pleasure” (eudokia[xxv]).
This word connotes that which is good in its nature and what God is
pleased to do. That mystery which pleases God is that He will gather
together all things in Christ at the fullness of time. The next word
“purposed”
(protiqnmi[xxvi])
- is that which God sets before Himself to accomplish. It is
the goal of God’s work. He sets before himself a goal or “purpose” toward
which He is working. That which God decides to do, which pleases Him and
which He sets before Himself to accomplish, is called a “plan” (Proqesis).
This plan was formulated within God’s own counsel (Boulh[xxvii]),
known (proginosko) by Him before
time, and established - “predestined” (proorizo)
by God sovereignly before all created things. The result of all of this is
to bring praise to God’s glorious grace as it is revealed in those who
trust in Christ.
If we are to stay close to the Bible’s way of articulating God’s salvation
“plan,” we should focus more on the prothesis - the preordination
or predetermined plan of God, worked out in and through Christ Jesus. We
should avoid applying it to anything that we do in response to what God
has done. It is never presented in the Bible as a prescription of personal
responses for obtaining personal salvation. It is not a plan “for”
salvation, as is supposed by Yohe’s treatment of Acts 2:38. One could say
that our response to Jesus (such as Acts 2:38) was planned by God. It is
true, that by placing faith in Jesus we do “participate” in God’s plan.
But we cannot say that our faith in Christ is the plan “for” salvation. It
is Jesus who actively works to fulfill the plan, while we passively
through faith receive it. We do not receive it by performing a series of
steps. By trusting in Jesus we are, in effect, saying it is Christ who
does the work. That is what saving faith truly means. The plan of God
always refers to those eternal decrees fulfilled in history by God in the
Person and Work of Jesus Christ.
Certainly, all who use the phrase “plan of salvation” are not referring to
a set of steps. It is not wrong to use the phrase “plan of salvation,”
because God does have a plan for saving the lost. The problem comes with
how some define it. Unfortunately, not all who espouse a “plan of
salvation” present it as God’s plan revealed in the Gospel of Christ.
There are several serious mistakes made when the Gospel (the culmination
of the true plan of salvation) is turned into a subordinate pre-figuring
type, while the commands of Acts 2:38, a plan of action that humans must
follow, is made the fulfillment of God’s salvation. It is God himself who
carries out the plan of salvation which he purposed from all eternity. He
carries out His plan in and through the Person and Work of Jesus Christ.
The last two sections addressing the purpose and decrees of God establish
that the emphasis or focus of God’s plan is on God. This is the truth of
sola deo gloria - all glory to God alone! The plan of God is cosmic in
scope involving Heaven and Hell, angels and Satan, time and eternity, and
the whole course of human history. It is about far more than one person’s
individual response. The focal point is the work of God to give us
redemption and not on what we must do to receive it. It is about the steps
God took in his incarnation – to live, die and live again as our
Savior. It is not based on whether or not we have obeyed certain commands,
kept the right procedures, or followed the correct steps. The cosmic,
holy, eternal plan of God is more than a multi-step instruction sheet for
do-it-yourself salvation. It is a mega-story of the purpose, decrees and
consequent mighty acts of God carried out in the Person of our great God
and Savior Jesus Christ.
[Top]
The Error of “Full Gospel” Theology
The teaching of “full Gospel” salvation is greatly responsible for many of
the errors in some current views of the plan of salvation (as coming in
stages). It also has contributed to the idea of the plan of salvation as
something the believer follows or does. The “full gospel” expression is
based on two notions: 1) there are more benefits for the believer after
conversion for which justification by faith is insufficient; and, 2) this
“more,” or these additional benefits, are to be included in the essence of
the Gospel.
The fundamental theme of full salvation was that there is
more for the believer after conversion. Indeed, the Christian life cannot
be lived fruitfully unless the “more” is appropriated.[xxviii]
I agree with the idea that there are more benefits obtained by Christ, for
all believers, which we do not have in the present Christian state. Also,
the Christian experience is one of growth, maturity and progress. Thus,
the experience of the benefits of salvation which come by faith is in some
sense progressive, based upon our growth and maturity. This should be an
obvious fact to the studied reader of the New Testament. We are undeniably
called to a life of maturity (Ephesians 4:13), obedience (Romans 6:19) and
righteousness (1 Peter 2:24). The Christian is called to be, “filled with
the Holy Spirit.” (Ephesians 5:18) It is our call “to be strengthened with
might by his Spirit in the inner man.” It is significant that the Apostle
asserts that this comes by the indwelling of Christ:
That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye,
being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all
saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know
the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with
all the fulness of God. (Ephesians 3:17-19 KJV)
Yes, we indeed are called to be “filled with God’s fulness.” Notice
carefully, however, that this is to bring glory to Christ, and not
an increased attention to the Christian’s spirituality or the Holy
Spirit: “Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all
ages, world without end. Amen.” This means that our faith is to be
directed to Christ in seeking the fulness of God. He is the “Alpha and the
Omega,” the “Beginning and the End,” the “First and the Last,” the
“Almighty.”
Still, can we separate the work of justification from this progress in
Christian living? A better question is, “How does justification function
in the advance of the Christian life?” I would assert that all of the
growth or filling out of the Spirit’s work in the Christian life is the
direct result of faith in the one, biblical, simple Gospel - which is in
essence, faith in Christ alone. Therefore, since the ongoing work of the
Spirit is dependent upon faith in Christ, justification is central to all
phases of the Christian life. The growth in our experience of the benefits
of salvation is a direct result of our ongoing
justification.
All of the blessings of Christ belong to the justified through faith
alone. Problems emerge when justification is viewed as a one-time
conversion rather than an ongoing, moment-by-moment, day-by-day,
relationship with Christ. This is in fact what I believe occurs in the
thinking of the exponents of the “full Gospel.” Under the influence of
Revivalism, they relegate justification to merely an initiatory step of
the Christian life. Then, because they do not understand the profound
function of justification as an on-going work in the Christian’s life,
they look beyond it for the means to appropriate what is already
rightfully theirs as a justified believer. At the same time, Perfectionism
which was prevalent throughout American Christianity, urged Christians to
concentrate their faith on post-conversion holiness, experiences and
spirituality. In some cases justification disappeared from the vocabulary
of various Christian denominations and movements. For most, justification
became a muted and disfigured caricature of its biblical self. I will
return to these issues later.
The Just Shall Live By Faith
The famous Reformation insight claimed by Martin Luther comes from the
phrase in Romans 1:17: “the just shall live by faith.” This was not only
the fundamental assumption of Luther’s reformation teaching, but it is the
central motif or theme of Paul in Romans. The truth of this statement
over-arches all the instruction and theology found in this book. The
believer is not merely justified by faith as an initiation or conversion
event, but the believer lives by this justifying faith. Every
dimension of the Christian life is effected by justification.
Justification is a seamless reality in the believers existence. It is
an ongoing relationship with God, from the first moment of saving faith
until the return of Christ. The “just” is not merely converted by
faith, nor
initiated by faith, but the just lives
by faith, and that faith is in Christ alone. Every aspect of
salvation has been obtain by Christ. Hence, every aspect of our salvation
must come by faith in Christ. We must be right with God through Christ -
justified - in order to receive any of the benefits of our salvation. It
is because of the fact that we are justified - right with God through
Christ - that we can obey God’s Word and live the life of faith.
Re-justification?
A gross misconception of justification is too often seen among “full
Gospel” advocates. It is the mistaken idea that, after a Christian has a
serious lapse of faith or behavior, that one would need to be re-justified
in the form of a second conversion. At the heart of this whole issue is
the question of the status of the lapsed Christian. It appeared to those
of the Roman Catholic tradition that the answer is to view justification
as synonymous with sanctification. This means the believer cooperates
with Christ’s grace by obedience to cause justification.
Justification would not occur until one is completely transformed into the
image of Christ. Of course, this would only occur (except for some saints)
at the Consummation. Thus, no one (again, except for a few rare saints) is
truly justified in this life. In their view, the lapsed Christian would
need the sacraments of Confession, Penance, and the Mass in order to be
restored, if they had not committed the unpardonable sin. Justification is
viewed as the process of transformation, the “renewing of the Holy Ghost,”
by which a person is actually made righteous.
This teaching of “transformational justification” is the opposite of what
the Reformers saw. They saw justification as the state of the believer by
which he is right with God because of the merits of Christ. Rather that
being made perfectly righteous, the believer is counted
righteous on Christ’s behalf. This enables the sinner to enter into favor
and right standing with God, so that the work of the Spirit can proceed
within the justified. This made it possible for the Holy Spirit to
transform the believer. This transformation would advance, never perfect
in this life, to a perfection received at the Coming of Christ. It is
justification that makes sanctifying transformation possible and not the
other way around.
Fault of Revivalism & Perfectionism
One of the faults of Revivalism[xxix]
was to equate justification with a conversion experience. This mistaken
notion has been handed down to many of children of Revivalism. The logic
followed, that if one were brought into the Church by a dramatic,
experiential conversion, then a lapsed Christian would need to come back
the same way. Added to Revivalism was a from of Perfectionism popularized
by Charles Finney[xxx]
and his ilk. It popularized the idea that a person is fully capable, in
his own strength, to choose to be converted. It denied the depravity of
the sinner. With this, it dismissed the truth that sinners are dead in sin
and need God’s merciful “quickening” to come to Christ (Ephesians 2:5).
And since one is self-sufficient to come to Christ in conversion, one is
equally capable to do what is necessary to stay “right” with God. This led
many perfectionistic, revivalist traditions to teach that the Christian
remains “justified” by doing righteous things. Of course, this was exactly
the position that Rome took against the Reformers and Protestantism.
The writers of Scripture did not teach that the lapsed Christian would
need to be re-justified, i.e. re-converted, as in many revivalist circles.
Neither did they teach that the Christian maintained his justification by
doing right things. Instead, they taught that a lapsed Christian should be
pointed to Christ alone, who is his Advocate:
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not
sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our
defense-- Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for
our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
(1 John 2:1,2 NIV)
Subsequent Experience of the Spirit
The “full Gospel” understanding that one needs “more” of the Spirit to get
all of the Gospel
is one of the distinguishing marks of Pentecostalism. It treats
justification as a conversion event or experience, while concentrating the
post-conversion faith on an increased work of the Spirit in the Christian
life. Essential to being Pentecostal is the belief that it is necessary to
have an experience subsequent to justification in order to receive “all”
or the “rest of” the Spirit. This is a result of the profound impact which
Perfectionism had on Pentecostalism. A chief Pentecostal tenet is the
conviction that there exists a difference between receiving the Spirit at
conversion and FULLY receiving the Spirit after conversion: “The baptism
in the Holy Spirit, then, is simply the full reception of the Holy
Spirit.”[xxxi]
Gordon Fee, a respected New Testament scholar raised in Pentecostalism,
lists the two chief Pentecostal distinctives:
(1) the doctrine of subsequence, i. e., that there is for
Christians a baptism in the Spirit distinct from and subsequent to the
experience of salvation .... and (2) the doctrine of tongues as the
initial physical evidence of baptism in the Spirit.[xxxii]
The reception of the Spirit as an event that is “distinct from and
subsequent to” the New Birth, is fundamental to Pentecostal faith.[xxxiii]
This identifies Pentecostalism as a “full gospel” movement. It assumes
that one who is justified is not yet baptized in the Spirit:
Pentecostals believe that the Spirit has baptized every
believer into Christ (conversion), but that Christ has not yet baptized
every believer into the Spirit (Pentecost).[xxxiv]
This addition to the Gospel of an experience subsequent to conversion
opened the door for the potential of other things being included. Over
time, even more was added to the full Gospel. As Donald Dayton explains in
his study of Pentecostalism, there were four components which became
generally received by Pentecostals as part of the full Gospel:
During the Reformation God used Martin Luther and others to
restore to the world the doctrine of justification by faith. Rom. 5:1.
Later on the Lord used the Wesleys and others in the great holiness
movement to restore the gospel of sanctification by faith. Acts 26:18.
Later still he used various ones to restore the gospel of Divine healing
by faith (Jas. 5:15, 15), and the gospel of Jesus’s second coming. Acts
1:11. Now the Lord is using many witnesses in the great Pentecostal
movement to restore the gospel of the baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire
(Luke 3:16; Acts 1:5) with signs following. Mark 16:17, 18; Acts 2:4;
10:44 – 46; 19:6; 1:1 - 28:31. Thank God, we now have preachers of the
whole gospel.[xxxv]
Thus, the foursquare elements of the Gospel are justification,
sanctification, physical healing, and the coming of Christ.
The addition of these elements of the Christian faith to justification
proper, led many to create a more complex gospel.
More Righteousness / Holy Spirit
There is a very significant connection between the failure to understand
justification by faith and the constant search for more of the Spirit.
This connection is rarely understood among “second work” and Pentecostal
people. Because justification is thought of as being made righteous
(as in Catholicism), rather than being
counted righteous on the basis of the imputed righteousness
of Christ, there is a constant anxiety or insistence to “do more” in order
to “be right.” This lack of understanding about the true nature of
justification leads to an unsatisfied quest for more personal
righteousness. This phenomenon turns the hearts of Christian, who are
taught this faulty view, to constantly search for saving holiness (which
they never seem to find). The focus of their lives can become an
inordinate obsession to be more and more “holy.” (Usually they are more
“holy” by following their movements “house rules” rather that following
the requirements of the Law or the New Testament.) This obsession is the
result of an ignorance about the righteousness of Christ that is
imputed to us by faith.
But here is the connection for Pentecostals. Their misunderstanding of
justification leads them to seek more of the Spirit, like the Holiness and
“second work” proponents sought for more holiness/righteousness. Among
Pentecostals there is often a lack of assurance as to whether they have
enough of the Spirit. I believe this directly results in many of the
bizarre and extreme excesses that have come through the years (soaking in
the Spirit, filling of teeth, barking, unfulfilled prophecies, social
purity, et. al.) They are driven to more and more of the Spirit because,
just like the Holiness person tries to get more righteousness to please
God, the Pentecostal seeks more of the Spirit to be sure they are
spiritual enough to be accepted by God. I believe much of the impulse
behind Pentecostalism is created by an inadequate teaching of the reality
and dynamics of justification by faith, and its accompanying indwelling of
the Spirit. This does not mean they are not sincere, dedicated, and honest
people. That is not what is under question. One could not find more
intensely religious and committed people than in Pentecostal or Holiness
circles. The question is, how much greater would be their faith if they
fully appreciated the meaning of Christ’s righteousness for them.
UPCI Plan of Salvation & “Full Gospel” Theology
The plan of salvation as understood by the United Pentecostal Church
follows closely the theology of the “full Gospel.” A unique feature of the
UPCI understanding is that they combine the problems of the Holiness
tradition with those of the Pentecostal. Their misunderstanding of
justification by faith creates a lack assurance concerning righteousness.
Rather than trust in the righteousness of Christ imputed by faith, they
seek and demand rigorous practices of behavioral holiness which they
believe directly determines their salvation. At the same time, this lack
of assurance for righteousness profoundly impacts their view of the Holy
Spirit. Like other Pentecostals, they are driven to more and more
experiences, fillings, manifestations, baptism, etc. of the Spirit,
because they do not understand the indwelling Spirit of Christ that comes
through justification. In fact, their position is more extreme, because
they differ from most other Pentecostals by relating their reception and
subsequent fillings of the Spirit directly to their salvation status.
Rather than trust in Christ to supply the Spirit (John 7:38, 39;
Philippians 1:19) and to be their righteousness, they have a compulsion
for forms of personal righteousness and experiences of the Spirit, which
are often not found in Scripture. I cannot help but recall the words of
Paul in Romans 10:
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel
is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal
of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's
righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have
not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the
end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. (vv 1-4
KJV)
The UPCI believes the plan of salvation contains the steps a sinner needs
to take to be saved. They also believe the plan of salvation includes the
stages a believer goes through in his Christian life. This subject is
taken up at great length in my paper “Can the Gospel Be Fractured?”[xxxvi]
[Top]
Do We Reenact Christ’s Work
or Do We
Rehearse It?
We move to another important question we must ask concerning the plan of
salvation. Is the biblical focus concerning the plan of salvation on God’s
glory and what great things He has done through Christ? Or is it on what
we must do to deserve or receive salvation? This is the larger
question in the issue of the plan of salvation and one’s understanding of
Biblical Theology (the over-arching theology of the Bible). We need to
ask, “How does one’s Biblical Theology shape one’s view of Soteriology?”
(the theology of salvation). I don’t intend to “snow” the reader with high
sounding terminology. My intent is to share concepts that will help us to
grasp the deeper issues and problems. What I mean is: How one perceives
the meaning and flow of the doctrines of salvation throughout the whole
of Scripture will directly determine how one defines New Testament
salvation.
It will also regulate how one interprets each particular (favorite)
passage used in constructing one’s definition of salvation.
Reenactment is By Our Works
For example, if one understands that, from the Old to the New Testament,
salvation consists of following certain qualifications to achieve
acceptance with God, then New Testament texts, such as Acts 2:38, would be
interpreted as “steps” of obedience in order to gain salvation. On the
other hand, if one sees that the coming of Christ was a radical shift in
God’s approach to salvation (John 1:29). And if one sees that Humanity’s
attempt to achieve salvation through obedience to the Law was a failure
(Romans 3) until God came and lived the Law perfectly in Christ (2
Corinthians 5:19). And if one sees that only Christ is qualified before
God (Matthew 3:17; John 8:29) through obedience to the Law (Romans
10:3-11). Then, salvation will be understood as a work performed by Christ
(Hebrews 9:2-28; 10:10) and offered to Humanity out of the grace of God
(Ephesians 2:5-9), and it must be received by faith alone (Romans
4, 5). The focus will be on the greatness of the gift offered and not on
the status, conditions or responses of the receiver of the gift. One will
then interpret Acts 2:38 more as responses of gratitude than as “how to
get saved.” It is a confession or recital of what Jesus has
accomplished, rather than a reenacting of some portion of Jesus’ life that
we accomplish through our obedience.
The idea that Acts 2:38 is our death, burial and resurrection, as
suggested by Yohe, implies that the plan of salvation consists of our
reenacting the work of Christ, rather than our trusting in the plan
which Jesus followed. It is said that one “obeys the Gospel” by obeying
Acts 2:38 because one repeats in one’s own life the death, burial
and resurrection of Jesus through repentance, water baptism and Spirit
baptism:
Obedience to the gospel is absolutely essential to
salvation. It is impossible for a man to be saved unless he obeys the
truth. . . . Just as disobedience ends with judgment and death, so
obedience to the gospel results in eternal life. . . . It is impossible to
be in Christ unless we are willing to be obedient to the gospel. There is
only one gospel which will save a soul. There is only one way which was
provided at Calvary. There is the clear choice of either accepting and
obeying this one message of truth, or continuing on down the broad road to
a lost eternity. There is no neutral ground. There is no way to have peace
with God except by surrendering, and submitting our wills to His and
obeying.[xxxvii]
Certainly, I do not assert that the UPCI teaches that Jesus dies, is
buried, and is resurrected every time Acts 2:38 is followed. That would be
foolish. They would say that Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection are
finished and past events. However, the UPCI does not believe that it is
sufficient to merely look in faith to Jesus’ death, burial and
resurrection as for one’s acceptance before God. They say that, although
Jesus made salvation available, we must still appropriate or apply (these
words are red flags) it through obedience to Acts 2:38. This makes
following Acts 2:38 just as necessary for salvation as what Jesus did. It
is a reenactment of Christ’s work because the steps of Acts 2:38 are
considered part of the saving work of Jesus. Is this biblically sound?
Many, including this writer, would say not:
The church in every age is in danger of confusing the
‘gospel’ of reenactment with the gospel of rehearsal.[xxxviii]
Reenactment Impossible
Reenactment is impossible because Jesus died once to sin. He rose only
once. We do not repeat or reenact Jesus’ death, burial or resurrection.
We, on an individual level, simply confess and rehearse it. We rehearse it
in water baptism. We rehearse it in the Lord’s Supper. We rehearse it in
the preaching of the Gospel every week. We rehearse it in worship by
exalting the work of Christ rather than focusing on our own actions or
experiences. We rehearse it in living lives dead to sin, but alive to God
through Jesus Christ. In repentance we turn from what we could not do, to
accept and claim what God has done for us. Water baptism is not an
application of the death of Jesus but a recital which shows forth the
death, burial and resurrection of our Lord. It was done for us two
thousand years ago. We cannot distort or pervert holy baptism by making it
a way to qualify people for salvation. Water baptism is the telling of
the Gospel of Jesus in visual language, not the means of obtaining
salvation. Our salvation was obtained by Jesus on the Cross long ago.
The means of salvation is humble faith IN Christ, not obedience TO
baptism. We do not baptize out of fear of falling short of salvation.
We baptize, not to recreate
or reenact Christ’s work, but to symbolically show what He has done.
Christians go wrong when they turn from reciting the Gospel
to reenacting the Gospel through baptism. This is where “salvation
is not said to be by God’s act outside us in Christ, but by its
reenactment in us.”[xxxix]
We are commanded to baptize because, it shows that we fell far short by
our sin, but Jesus saves us to the uttermost through his freely
taking away our sins on the Cross. He ever lives to make intercession for
us!
Receiving the Holy Spirit is not something that we do to get saved. It is
a gift, given to those who trust in the finished work of Christ alone.
Instead of laboring in prayer at an altar for days and weeks trying to
“get the Holy Ghost” so that one can know they are saved, the Bible
teaches that we are given the Holy Spirit when we trust in Christ. We
“get” the Spirit when we “get” Christ (Ephesians 1:13). How could it be
otherwise? It is impossible to have Christ and still be missing something
essential to our salvation. The “fulness” is in Christ.
From the fullness of his grace we have all received one
blessing after another. (John 1:16 NIV)
which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything
in every way. (Ephesians 1:23 NIV)
For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,
(Colossians 1:19 NIV)
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily
form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over
every power and authority. (Col. 2:9, 10 NIV)
When we truly trust in Jesus Christ, we receive the fulness of the Spirit
just as much as we receive the fulness of cleansing for our sins. No
arduous labor of praying, seeking, struggling and striving in order to
experience the Spirit or to speak in tongues. Instead, one rejoices
because Jesus ascended to Heaven in power and victory to poured out His
Spirit on those who trust in Him. As His children we have been given the
Spirit of Adoption through faith in Him. (More about this in “What Does It
Mean to be ‘Born Again’?” and “Can the Gospel Be Fractured?”)
“Finished Work” of Christ Cannot Be Reenacted
We must realize that the work of Christ on this earth is finished. It
cannot be repeated or reenacted:
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It
is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. (John 19:30 KJV).
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. (Hebrews 9:28 KJV).
The phrase “it is finished” comes from the single Greek word tetelistai,
which means to fulfill, accomplish or complete. If there is anything we
can say about the work of Christ on Calvary, it is complete. It cannot be
repeated. It cannot be undone. It does not need anything else added to it
to make it more complete.
God’s act in Christ is absolutely unique and unrepeatable.
God Himself cannot repeat or add anything to what He has done. Christ, the
Intercessor at God’s right hand, does not reenact his doing and dying. He
Himself rehearses it.[xl]
When we believe in the “reenacted gospel” we move the attribution of glory
from the finished work of the Cross, to the actions of the Christian done
in response to Christ’s work. The appeal is less to the glory of what
Christ has done for us in His infinite grace, and is more to get people to
follow a series of steps. The preoccupation with Acts 2:38 is evidence of
this very mistake. With this thinking, a church (or Christian) makes the
mistake of thinking that IT is responsible for recreating the gospel. The
stages of Acts 2:38 are acting out in the church service in such a way
that the church is integral to recreating each step. The altar for
repentance, the baptistry for baptism, and the laying on of hands of the
ministry (and laity) to affect Spirit reception. In this way, a
church begins to see itself as responsible for recreating the
Gospel when: 1) the Lord’s Supper is turned into a recreation of the
bloody sacrifice of Jesus; 2) Baptism is the act which takes away
sin, rather than the work of Jesus on the Cross; 3) the “new birth” Jesus
spoke of is turned into the redemptive act itself (rather than the moment
faith is created);4) We think that Christian testimony is telling of
new-found joy, love and peace, rather than telling the work of Christ for
us (outside of us in history); 5) People are excited about a new personal
experience, but are uncomfortable with hearing about the righteousness of
God imputed to them. For a larger article on this subject link to my
article “The Gospel: Our Reenactment or Our Recital.”[xli]
[Top]
How the Bible is “Read”
The UPCI version of the plan of salvation come from an inherited form of
Bible reading. The “see” the plan of salvation in Acts 2:38 because their
inherited theology trains them to see it that way. This issue goes to the
serious question: “Why is it that Christians around the world have
basically the same Bibles, but come up with so many different
understandings of what it says?” Obviously, it is because they “read” or
interpret the Bible differently. Why do Christians read the Bible
differently? That is a very involved subject, but I would like to try in
the next pages to give a few helpful insights and possible answers.
Because this is a large subject, I have written a separate paper entitled
“How We ‘Read’ the Bible.”[xlii]
http://www.inchristalone.org/Books.html This paper
will cover: 1.) All readers are interpreters; 2.) Those with whom we read
the Bible; 3.) How the Bible is used; 4.) The Docetic Bible; 5.) The
“word-within-the-Word” fallacy; 6.) “Revelation” within Revelation; 8) The
problem with the allegorical method; 8) The clarity of Scripture; 9) The
Bible is the story of Redemptive history. I hope that you take the time to
read this paper thoroughly. It is necessary to understand the rest of this
paper. How one reads the Bible is pertinent to the points I make in the
next section. There are systems of reading (interpretation) which act as
templates, to overlay the biblical text. Most of the time, groups and
whole denominations are not aware how they read the Bible through
their system. They are like fish who do not think about the water they
live in. They simply assume the water and never consider how it influences
their entire world. Systems of interpretation can work the same way. A
group can be unconscious about its system and thereby read the Bible
without realizing how much their interpretation or reading restricts and
controls all their conclusions about a particular Scripture text (or
Scripture as a whole). These systems can obscure the message of
Scripture to the point of confusing or obscuring the Gospel itself. One of
those systems is known as Dispensationalism. One’s view of
Dispensationalism will directly shape one’s view of the plan of salvation.
[Top]
Dispensationalism
Obscures the Plan of Salvation
One clue to how a group reads Scripture is
to see how they treat the Old Testament, and how they relate it to the New
Testament. The approach Yohe follows is a pattern closer to the
dispensationalism held by many Fundamentalists and Pentecostals around the
turn of the 1900s, and by Pre-millennialists and Adventist in the early
1800s. The Old Testament was broken into a number of dispensations or eras
of time which progressively offer a better or “fuller” plan of salvation.
They saw the New Testament as the progressive continuation of a series of
salvation eras. Rather than
seeing the Scripture as governed by two covenants[xliii]
and understood as speaking of Law and Gospel[xliv].
A different way to be saved was attributed to each era. Instead of the two
covenants of works and grace, there are covenants assigned to each
dispensation. In the place of salvation by works - which only Christ
achieved - and salvation by grace - which is received by faith - one is
saved by obeying the knowledge or “light” that is offered in each era.
Thus, one is not saved by grace through faith in the Promise of God,
but by appropriating God’s grace through obeying the “revelation” of God’s
will for that particular economy or dispensation.
It should be obvious that the dispensational system is a significant
departure from the Reformation view, and I believe, the biblical teaching.
It is a serious departure from the essential message of the Bible.
Dispensationalism Defined
What is dispensationalism? Dispensationalism, as a interpretive system,
functions as a hermeneutical template for reading Scripture. It operates
like stained glass letting in sunlight. It colors the light as it comes
through and even bathes everything it shines on with the color of the
glass. In like manner, the UPCI’s interpretation of the plan of salvation
is deeply colored by the “stained” glass of dispensationalism (a
Pentecostal form of dispensationalism) as the light of Scripture is
refracted through it. It is a system of Bible interpretation, distinct
from Scripture itself, that:
. . . builds on the idea of God's administration of or
plan for the world describing the unfolding of that program in various
dispensations, or stewardship arrangements, throughout the history of
the world. The world is seen as a household administered by God in
connection with several stages of revelation that mark off the different
economies in the outworking of his total program.[xlv]
The word dispensation means an ‘‘order of things regarded
as established or controlled by God’’ (Oxford Dictionary, 4th edition,
p.233). According to Walvoord it is a “stage in the progressive
revelation of God constituting a distinctive stewardship or rule of
life.” Ryrie says it is a “distinguishable economy in the outworking of
God’s purpose.”[xlvi]
Dispensationalism is
rooted in early American and British revivalism and the apocalyptic
speculation that accompanied its radical forms. The current versions are
descended from the American Adventism of William Miller in the early 1800s
and the British form advocated by Mary MacDonald (first person to coin the
word “rapture”), Edward Irving, and John Nelson Darby in the 1830s and
later. The former was generally discredited because of the other eccentric
views and practices of Miller’s followers. But, the British version was
accepted and subsumed into evangelical orthodoxy through Fundamentalism.
It was brought to American soil through the Niagara Bible Conferences on
Bible prophecy held by John Nelson Darby. John Brooks systematized Darby’s
views. Then they were popularized by C. I. Scofield, Brooks’ apprentice,
through his Scofield Bible. Many of the Fundamentalist of the Keswick
branch adopted pre-millennial dispensationalism and passed it on to their
descendants in the later Pentecostal movement.
Key Distinction of
Dispensationalism
The key distinction of Dispensationalism is the teaching that God has
two plans at work in salvation history: one for Israel and one for the
Church. One of the leading dispensationalists today, Charles Ryrie makes
this clear:
The essence of dispensationalism, then, is the distinction
between Israel and the Church. This grows out of the dispensationalists’
consistent employment of normal or plain interpretation, and it reflects
an understanding of the basic purpose of God in all His dealings with
mankind as that of glorifying Himself through salvation and other purposes
as well.[xlvii]
This distinction between Israel and the Church has serious implications
for the nature of the Church and the Gospel itself. Since the Church is
considered by dispensationalists to be a “parenthesis” in God’s plan for
Israel, dispensationalists say the promises to Israel in the Old Testament
are not fulfilled in the Church. The Church came about because Israel
rejected the Kingdom Christ offered to them. Thus, Christ went to the
Cross to bring salvation to the Gentiles and create the Church. But, God
will pick His plan for Israel back up after the Church is raptured.[xlviii]
The influence of dispensationalism led many Christians to believe that
Redemptive history was divided up into a number of time periods or
dispensations (usually seven). Within these time periods a person was
saved according to their obedience to the “revealed will of God” for that
period.
A dispensation is a period of time during which man is
tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of
God.[xlix]
This understanding of salvation is truer to Pelagianism, the
semi-Pelagianism of the Roman Catholic view of merit, or to the teaching
of revivalist evangelist Charles G. Finney, than it is that of Scripture.
For them, salvation is predicated, in some measure, on the obedience of
the sinner. Of course, this is what Finney believed and preached. The
title of one Finney’s sermon epitomizes this: “Sinners Bound to Change
Their Own Hearts.” He also rejected original sin:
Finney believed that human beings were capable of choosing
whether they would be corrupt by nature or redeemed, referring to original
sin as an "anti-scriptural and nonsensical dogma"[l]
Tragically, this thinking led him to reject the orthodox view of
justification by faith[li].
Instead he subscribed to a Pelagian form of salvation, that is, one is
saved through one’s own right choices and actions:
[Subhead:] Foundation of the justification of penitent
believers in Christ. What is the ultimate ground or reason of their
justification? 1. It is not founded in Christ's literally suffering the
exact penalty of the law for them, and in this sense literally purchasing
their justification and eternal salvation.[lii]
He defined saving faith as obedience to God rather than
trust (fiducia) in God for what he did to save us:
The Christian, therefore, is justified no longer than he
obeys, and must be condemned when he disobeys or Antinomianism is true ...
In these respects, then, the sinning Christian and the unconverted sinner
are upon precisely the same ground.[liii]
If Salvation comes through obedience to the currently revealed plan, then
it becomes something earned by the “obey-er.” In dispensationalism,
salvation is given to those who meet the conditions:
If, indeed, man is tested in respect to obedience to the
will of God in each of these "dispensations", what is the reward - or
punishment? If the reward is salvation, as obviously Scofield taught
concerning the dispensation of Law, that salvation is not of grace but of
works! The dispensationalist, misunderstanding the concept of Law and
Gospel, offers salvation to those who meet the condition of the
"dispensation" in which they are tested, thus even in the dispensation of
Grace, faith becomes a work which entitles us to Christ. If one can only
muster from the depths of one's heart enough "faith", one can meet the
condition of this dispensation and be rewarded with salvation.
[liv]
Pentecostal ‘Modified’ Dispensationalism
The distinction between Israel and the Church and the belief in
dispensational ages was modified by Pentecostals who divided the
Church Age up into various stages of progressive revelation - a sort of
dispensationalism-within-dispensationalism.[lv]
One was saved according to the how much they walked according to the
“light available to them.” (Based on John 12:35[lvi])
This was not acceptable for most dispensationalists, but it was strangely
logical and consistent to the method of dispensationalism. Since one could
arbitrarily divide the history of salvation in the Bible into different
economies of salvation, why couldn’t one do the same with the Church Age?
If one accepts the former, there is nothing in a Dispensational reading of
Scripture to prevent the latter.
Since there was more light revealed to each stage of Church History it was
logically incumbent upon all Christians to search out what new truth was
waiting to be revealed from the Bible. This contributed to the view of the
Bible as truth-within-Truth. Fused with the restorationist impulse of
Holiness-Pentecostal theology, dispensationalism encouraged many early
Pentecostals to search the Bible for new truth to be revealed in their
day. Not merely fresh understanding and application of the Gospel of
Christ, but a new order or economy of God’s working. This included the
expectation of a fuller salvation - greater light which God required of
people that was not known previously in Church history.
I am not saying that all teachings of dispensationalists are questionable
or wrong. Many Gospel preaching people have been and are
dispensationalists. What I am saying is that dispensationalism is a system
that is brought to the Bible and then, creating a restrictive grid, it
directs the reader to only see certain texts in a way that harmonizes with
dispensational theology. The serious problem with this is that the Gospel
is usually obscured or lost and another agenda, or even a foreign doctrine
of salvation, supplants the biblical one. I believe this has happened in
the case of the UPCI. Their view of salvation and interpretation of Acts
2:38, both in original conception and now as they perpetuate and modify
it, is deeply conformed to and restricted by the dispensationalist view.
For a more thorough treatment of Dispensationalism read my paper
Dispensationalism and the Everlasting Gospel[lvii].
[Top]
The
“Plan of Salvation” As An Accordion Phrase
The plan of salvation is misunderstood and confused in groups like the
United Pentecostal Church because of the way the phrase, the “plan of
salvation,” and accompanying language, is inconsistently used among
its writers and preachers. As we mentioned in the section on
Dispensationalism above and in the paper How We Read the Bible[lviii],
the UPCI sees the plan of salvation as unfolding in a sequence of
revelations (or “illuminations” as some would prefer) in the Church Age.
A person is thus saved by “walking in the light available,” i.e. obeying
all that is required of them within a given dispensation. This salvation
truth increases as “greater light” is given by God until it is
completed at the Second Coming of Christ.
This interpretive grid predominated later Holiness teaching and early
Pentecostalism. This is the system of interpretation which informed Frank
J. Ewart when he formulated the basic Oneness doctrines:
How has the Pentecostal platform been formed as far?
The first plank was “ the Baptism of the Holy Ghost.” How did God
nail down this plank? By giving the Scriptural experience, and this
proved the glorious harbinger of greater light. The planks of
“Divine healing,” “baptism by immersion,” and the “ pre-millennial
coming of the Lord,” were quickly added. God has graciously perpetuated
his work by reconstructing the “Pentecostal platform.” This
platform, in conformity with the name, is the platform given to Peter on
the day of Pentecost, when he used the keys and opened the door into the
present dispensation. This platform must be completed before Jesus comes.
We find God working along the same lines as of old. “He taketh away
the first that he may establish the second,”[lix]
Ewart explains the practical way this shedding of new light occurred:
He first gave the true light to a few, and then signally
expressed His approval by a startling revival through the instrumentality
of the new teaching.[lx]
UPCI Modified Dispensationalism
The most serious argument I have with the dispensational interpretation is
that it confuses and often creates an unbiblical view of the Gospel. In
the UPCI version of “modified” dispensationalism, salvation can be
different for different groups - depending on the era of the Church Age in
which they lived. This understanding requires Pentecostals to use the
word “Gospel” with a number of unbiblical modifiers. The modifier “full”
was commonly attached to “Gospel” by many early Pentecostals. The idea of
the “full Gospel” is a Holiness idea which was passed on to Pentecostals
and applied by Oneness Pentecostals to their view of Acts 2:38. (Cp. “Can
the Gospel Be Fractured?”) As a result of this, UPCI writers speak of the
“entire Gospel” as if, at one time, there was a less than entire Gospel,
and “more entire” Gospel at another:
When Paul returned to Ephesus, he found several disciples
who had not received the entire gospel.[lxi]
The Bible speaks precisely about the Gospel as the death, burial and
resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-14). It also speaks
broadly about the Gospel as all of the blessings of God which pertain to
the Work of Christ in redemption. Thus, as fruit of the Spirit, love, joy,
peace could be seen as part of the good news of Christ. We could say that
the Second Coming of Christ is good news. Everything Christ does for us is
good news in one sense. The problem develops when we begin to define the
Gospel more as the blessing of Christ’s Work rather than as the Work of
Christ itself. Then we begin to speak a strange or foreign language to the
Bible. We begin to think of the Gospel as being applied or coming in
stages. It alters our view of the Gospel into something that occurs
through levels of revelation played out in stages of history.
All the aspects of our redemption were achieved for us by Christ through
His death, resurrection and ascension (Hebrews 9:28). He is our salvation
(Luke 2:30; Acts 4:12). This includes the forgiveness of sins (Matthew
26:28; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14), the imputation of Christ’s
righteousness (Romans 4:24), the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Romans
8:9; Ephesians 3:17), Adoption and Sonship (Romans 8:14; Galatians 4:5;
Ephesians 1:4), Victory (2 Cor. 2:14), spiritual gifts (Ephesians 1:3,
4:8), the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22; Ephesians 5:9), the
ministry of the Church (2 Cor. 5:18), the Second Coming of Christ (Titus
2:13; Hebrews 9:28), Heaven (1 Peter 1:3,4) and eternal life (1 John
5:11). All of these are our’s through what Christ did (Ephesians 1:3).
How do we obtain these things? We receive these things “in Christ.”
(Ephesians 1:6; Galatians 3:26) We are placed “in Christ” through faith.
(Ephesians 1:12,13).This faith consists of trusting in Him alone as the
only Lord and Savior.
All of these are progressively understood and
fulfilled over the course of time. This is where many people misunderstand
the meaning of salvation and the Gospel. The fact that we are not fully
sanctified or mature in the benefits of salvation does not mean that we
need a new revelation or deeper truth than the biblical Gospel of Christ.
It only means that we have not come to full understanding of the richness
of what it means to be in Christ. It means that one has not fully grasped
the depth of one’s justification. We have already been granted all the
blessings of Christ, but we must grow into realizing them. Not through a
new “part,” level or revelation of the Gospel. Rather, it comes through
faith in the Gospel that we already know and believe.
If we admit such a thing as an “entire gospel,” then, there is implied a
partial or incomplete gospel. From the beginning, the language and
teaching of a “full” Gospel was rejected by many non-Pentecostal
Christians:
Finally, Fundamentalists have generally been concerned
about an attitude of spiritual superiority that characterizes Pentecostal
teaching. There is almost an arrogance to the claim that Pentecostalism
has the "full gospel." The implication is that non-Pentecostals have only
a partial gospel. Such an idea is unscriptural. Paul told the Colossian
believers, "And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all
principality and power" (Col. 2:10). The salvation of Christ through the
gospel is perfect and complete. Christians should grow in grace (II Pet.
3:18), but this growth is the realizing of what Christ has already granted
to the believer. As Paul wrote, "I follow after, if that I may apprehend
that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:12).[lxii]
Operating from the assumption that more is discovered to be in the gospel,
as God further reveals it, during the Church Age, the UPCI and other
Oneness teachers claim they have the final or completing part of the plan
of salvation:
Paul did not attack or detract from the message that
Apollos had brought to Ephesus; he only amplified their understanding by
revealing the complete plan of salvation. They needed to believe on Christ
Jesus, be baptized in His name for the remission of sins, and receive the
Holy Spirit.[lxiii]
The result of the “all the light available” doctrine, the partial and
entire or full gospel notion, and the need for a “complete” plan of
salvation teaching, is that the UPCI has to use “plan of salvation” as an
accordion phrase. It is necessary because the phrase has to adapt to the
instances where the idea of the plan of salvation changes in the Church
Age. It has to expand to embrace those who don’t know the Acts 2:38
message and it has to shrink when referring to only those who obey Acts
2:38. Thus, the Gospel is like an accordion, expanded in one instance and
contracted in another.
Conflicted Theologies
These ideas create an unconscious, inherited conflict in the theologies of
those who follow them.[lxiv]
This conflict arises from a struggle between, on the one hand, the UPCI’s
dispensational heritage, and on the other, their Reformed legacy, which
comes to them through the Keswick and Baptistic roots of Pentecostalism.
One of the best examples of this can be found in the writings of David
Bernard. At times he expands the phrase - like an accordion - to include a
more extensive “five steps” or “five phases” of God’s plan:
Romans 8:28-30 describes
five steps in God’s eternal plan of salvation for fallen mankind: (1)
Foreknowledge. God foreknew man would sin and would need salvation. He
also f | 
