Reference: http://old-baptist-test.blogspot.com/2011/11/jasons-improvement.html
I want to flesh out some of the problems of Brother Garrett's views of soteriology, and how, though some modern PB's have gone to extremes, they nevertheless have a key insight on what the Bible means by "salvation". This was originally going to be "part 2" to his comments on 11-10-11.
Brother Garrett wrote:
"Jason believes that Paul's statement that "calling upon the name of the Lord" will bring salvation is a "magic word recital." Is confession that Jesus is Lord a "magic word recital"? Does Jason not denigrate confessing Christ with words? Are the words of the publican - "God be merciful to me a sinner" - also a "magic word recital"?
Romans 10: 9, 10 do not give a plan of salvation? How can he deny such plain teachings? Confess Christ and be saved, said the apostle. And, how does Jason view that statement of the apostle? He thinks it is a "magic word recital"! What belittling of the apostle's teachings! Does Jason deny that confessing Christ is supernatural? Issupernatural not a better word than "magic"? Do the words of Paul not give us a condition for salvation? Believe and be saved? Call upon the Lord and be saved? Confess and be saved? True, for a man just to recite the words "I believe in Jesus," apart from the heart, and from conviction and faith, would avail nothing. But, to scoff at those who do so genuinely, with the expectation of salvation, is a terrible sin. Why don't we simply call it a healing prescription? What is "confession" but the verbal affirmation of what is true? A stating to be true what God says is true?"
Garrett misses the point here, and in the rest of the post referenced. The contradiction presented is that Garrett believes Romans 10:9,10 is a plan by which mankind obtains a heavenly home. This is a simplistic view of Biblical salvation, especially as presented in Romans, and Peter's denial of Christ would logically demonstrate that Peter was unregenerate, according to Garrett's view. However, both Garrett and I know that Peter was regenerate from his confession in Matt. 16:16. There is an aspect in which Garrett's view of salvation is correct, but it needs to be evaluated within the whole text of Romans. As he understands it, it fails as a definition because regenerate men like Peter contradict 10:11.
How can Peter's failure to confess Christ as Lord be reconciled with Paul's statement that he that believes will not be ashamed? Garrett needs to deal with this, and if he cannot, he should reevaluate his position. Peter's denial destroys Garrett's interpretation of Romans 10:9-11.
It is certain and manifest from Peter's unbelief that it is not necessarily true that a lack of confession means that a person is unregenerate. The only logical solution is that the salvation of Romans 10:9,10 has a temporal, conditional aspect that may possibly be missed by some of the elect, family of God at certain points post-regeneration, especially in the case of infants, the mentally handicapped, or those deprived of outward revelation. Garrett is forced to concede that Paul is giving a broad canon by which those looking for salvation with a zeal of God can find it; I would agree with Garrett that we could refer to it as "prescriptive healing".
Now, one can go too far with this idea to the unscriptural extreme of totally dividing confession or even belief itself from being in a state of grace, like some modern PB's. But this is unwarranted. All of the regenerate are temporally conformed to the image of Jesus Christ (Romans 8:8-14, 29).
I recall Elder David Pyles, while considering Romans 1:16, stating that the best definition of salvation in the Scripture was Romans 8:29 - to be made conformable to the image of Christ. He eschewed defining salvation as "timely" or "eternal", and I think there is wisdom in this.
Let me add here, that it is error to interpret Paul to mean by "being made conformable", only the final glorification of the saints, omitting or undermining the concept of progressive sanctification. This idea is not feasible given Paul's own contextual indication of what it means to be made like Jesus throughout the entire chapter in Romans 8:8-14 and in the necessity and certainty of temporal suffering that is the mechanism of this conformation in verse 17.
Many Primitive Baptists have an errant tendency to completely separate the "timely" from the "eternal", as if the Scripture treats them as two, alien concepts. Sons are led by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:14) in sanctification and discipleship; if they are not led, they are not sons. The text does not present being led as a hypothetical. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God". True sons are led, as a general characteristic. They can backslide for a season, of course.
Consider as well Hebrews 9:28 and 10:36,39. These texts plainly teach that the realization of eternal salvation or the promised rest of God is at the final coming of Christ to those who look for Christ (28), to the just who live by faith (38), to those doing the will of God (36), not to those who fall away into temporal perdition, but to those that believe to the saving of the soul (39).
These texts destroy the idea that it is typical, characteristic, or the norm for sons to reject the gospel. They destroy the idea of complete and utter separation between "timely" and "eternal" salvation.
However, the degree of insight Primitive Baptists have is shown in their recognition of the conditional and varying nature of the conformation of sons to Christ in time, and their use of it to explain what Brother Garrett cannot explain about Peter's denial of Christ in contradiction to Brother Garrett's understanding of Romans 10:9-11.
Notice that even though Paul states that the sons of God are predestined to be conformed to the image of His son in Romans 8:29, in just a few chapters later in Romans 12:2, the Apostle then commands professing Christians to, "be not conformed to this world". How does this make sense? Why does Paul command what he believes was predestined? Yet, what is the point of this exhortation if professing Christians cannot really resist the sanctifying influence of the in-dwelling spirit, conforming them to the image of Christ?
Of course, Christians can quench the spirit, and disobey the gospel. Obviously, though we know that all of God's children are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, we simply do not know how God has decreed this, or the specifics of this decree. So professing Christians walk by faith, knowing it is God that worketh to will and to do of His good pleasure.
The point is, however, that Paul's idea of "being made conformable" entails the free will of the regenerate man. It is manifestly not something that man is irresistibly drawn to, as the Scriptures make plain that man can and does quench and disobey the influence of the spirit.
The entire process is predestined, which is Paul's point in 8:29, but God incorporates the will of man to realize this decree (12:2). Though all children of God will be sanctified in this life, being made more and more conformable to the image of Christ, this conformation is of varying degrees and diverse process. Peter's denial of Christ shows the difference in the sanctification among the Apostles. He was the only one to publicly deny him, though the others were unbelieving as well to the news of Christ's resurrection.
So, salvation is ultimately defined by Paul in the ordo salutis text Romans 8:29,30, and we observe that that salvation is a preparation for eternity in time by belief in the gospel, as it is the power of God unto the conformation of the elect (under the sound of it) to the image of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:16, 8:29).
It is manifest that this process of conformation that ultimately culminates in glorification can be resisted at certain points by those that are truly regenerate, as Peter resisted it, forgetting what manner of man he was (James 1:23,24). If the salvation in Romans 10:9-11 can be resisted at points, it is to that same degree conditional on confession and belief in the gospel.
Though this salvation and the conformation of the elect by which it is achieved, is conditional on obedience in terms of the degree, it is not conditional at all in that it must happen to some degree - it will happen to the elect, as it has been predestined by God.
It is in this manner that Biblical salvation incorporates both "timely" and "eternal" aspects. This is also why it is ludicrous to suppose that truly regenerate children of God, under the sound of the gospel, can completely (for the sum of their life) reject it because the gospel is God's ordained means of sanctification and change in the elect, fashioning them into the image of His Son (Romans 1:16, 8:29-30).
2 Corinthians 3:18-4:3 makes this very clear as well. The glass of 3:18 must be the gospel as it is the only place that God can be beheld, and it is this that is hid from them that are damned (4:3). And it is only by the manifestation of the truth of the gospel (4:2) that the glory and power of the Lord is revealed - a glory and power that works in His people both to will and to do of His good pleasure, and that fashions them into the image of the glory of God found in the gospel in Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 3:18).
