As I write and re-write my chapters for our upcoming systematic theology, Doctrine for Disciples, I am beginning to cross-reference other theology books. In doing that I came across an excellent chapter on salvation by George Meisinger, called “Salvation by Faith Alone” in The Fundamentals for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Mal Couch. Meisinger makes
Question I’ve gotten a little confused regarding faith not being a choice. Say, for example, someone believes Jesus is the Christ, believes that He gives eternal life to everyone who believes in Him for it, but refuses to believe in Him for it. Wouldn’t that be a choice? Because that person understands and believes that
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of ways to deny or to confuse the message of faith alone in Christ alone for everlasting life that cannot be lost. I recently heard a new one. Someone who identifies as Free Grace recently told me this (I am paraphrasing): You can believe that John 3:16 is true
Someone recently challenged the idea that assurance is of the essence of saving faith by quoting 1 John 5:13. That question has been answered before (see here and here). But I’d like to put an answer in my own words. The verse in question reads: These things I have written to you who believe in
Question Is there a difference between intellectual assent and saving faith? Take, for example, the very many churches each Sunday which have the entire congregation recite the Apostle’s Creed. What percentage of those persons who recite orally the Apostles Creed are saved? Is reciting the Creed orally or silently a guarantee that one has saving
I received a handwritten letter (yes, some people still do that!) asking the question which is the title of this blog. The question concerned a November-December 2017 Grace in Focus magazine article by Bill Fiess and me entitled, “Saving Faith Is Not Heartfelt Trust.” The article was not discussing trust per se, but heartfelt trust.