Can Man Obtain Salvation?
Maybe twice a year I stop by a "Used Book" store just to see what religious books might be available. (I'm so far behind in reading I shouldn't have to buy a new book for the next decade.) One of those on my last quest for bargains was Portraits of Christ in Genesis by Richard DeHaan, whose name I had heard years ago. In fact, this one was published in 1966. Its interpretation of Scriptures falls between the range of plausible and fanciful. But it is not the portraits of Christ that stood out. It was his insistence that no one can do any act of obedience in order to obtain salvation. This idea was adamantly repeated.
The person who takes this approach has a problem that he usually cannot see as he insists his claim is true. DeHaan correctly states that there are only two types of religion in the world—true and false. However he soon errs when he tried to classify these as: "(1) a religion of works; and (2) a salvation by grace" (75). These are not the only two choices! No one could ever be saved by a religion of works because man never keeps the laws of God perfectly—either before or after becoming a Christian. If, on the other hand, salvation is entirely by grace, then no response is required from us, period.
Few people actually believe that we are saved by grace only. Even Ephesians 2:8 says we are saved by grace through faith. But some insist, then, that God supplies the faith. The Holy Spirit will perform a direct operation on a person's heart, and he will then be able to believe. For DeHaan, this notion is not a matter of speculation; consider how vehemently he states the following:
Every church or denomination or religious group which teaches that man has anything at all to do with obtaining or earning or meriting his salvation is a false religion, regardless of its denominational or sectarian names (75).
Notice that the idea of Christians being divided into various denominations does not bother him—just that someone might need in some way to respond to God's grace. No one would argue that we cannot earn or merit salvation, but he also threw in the word obtain. How do we obtain what God by His grace offers? If the answer is a huge, "Nothing!" then salvation must either be universal (everyone is saved) or God must arbitrarily save some while condemning others. The fact is that no one can consistently hold the position set forth above—and DeHaan proves it!
For example, just seven pages later, he claims: "There is no salvation possible for that individual who does not accept and believe the book of Genesis as literally inspired, and a historical account of its contents" (82). Wait a minute! Isn't that doing something? Isn't that a response on our part?
On page 83, a heading reads: "It is All of Grace." He emphasizes that "Noah had no part in the planning of" the ark, which is true. So is the following statement: "All the blueprints and specifications were furnished by God." Therefore, he concludes: "Man must have had no part in the plan of salvation." Man did not have any part in the planning of it or the design of it. God took care of that without asking any of us our opinions in the matter.
The question his readers should ask, however, is: Did God build the ark, or was there work done by Noah? Likewise, does God just arbitrarily save us, or is there some kind of response that we need to make, such as, oh, say, repentance? Since Jesus said, "I tell you, no: but unless you repent you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3), it sounds rather important. And it is not something that God does for us. He originated the plan, but we must do the repenting!
The reader will look in vain for DeHaan to mention something about Noah's role in making the ark a reality. He quotes Hebrews 11:7 but does not comment on the fact that Noah prepared an ark to the saving of his house. That was quite a chore for someone who can have no part in obtaining his own salvation. The writer acknowledges that Noah believed, but even that is a response to God. "He just believed God's word," DeHaan affirms. He ignores the fact that Noah spent one hundred years building the ark. He didn't just believe; he labored.
DeHaan slips up in a later paragraph, when he writes that Noah "had nothing to go on but the Word of God, but he believed it, acted upon it, and was saved" (86). Acted upon it? What happened to man has nothing to do with obtaining his salvation (paraphrasing the quote in the previous column)? Having broken the ice, he actually does acknowledge Noah's role in building the ark, which contradicts his earlier position.
Salvation is believing the record God gave of His Son, and acting upon it. It was no different with Noah. He had nothing to go on but the Word of God, but he believed and acted upon it, and was saved (86).
Why is not acting upon what we believe the means by which we obtain salvation? He cannot have it both ways. Either we can or we cannot obtain salvation. Either there is nothing a person can do, or there is something a person can do. The fact that DeHaan had to admit that Noah acted upon what he was told to do demonstrates that mankind must make some kind of response. However, DeHaan never cited Genesis 6:22 and 7:5, which show Noah's full obedience: "Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did"; "And Noah did according to all the Lord commanded him."
What Does Grace Mean?
Grace does not imply that man does nothing by way of response. Certainly that was not the case for Noah. What if the great patriarch had mused, "Salvation is by God's grace. Therefore, why should I build the ark? Wouldn't that mean earning salvation or meriting it?" No! Even though Noah had to comply with God's commands, everyone understands that he was saved by God's grace. And no one is so bold as to suggest that Noah was a Legalist. One can hear some of the professors at ACU (who have apparently feasted on the writings by men such as DeHaan) mocking him: "Noah, do you think you can be saved by law-keeping? You should be saved the way we will be—by grace. What's that—a measuring tape? What's the matter? Are you afraid you'll have an ark that's 301 cubits and that God won't save you? Haha. You need to take a few courses at one of our fine "Bible" colleges. All the professors agree that God will save us whether we enter your ark or not. We're not a bunch of Legalists. And we're not the least bit afraid." Noah would not have needed to answer them, had they said such tripe. He just obeyed God and was saved aboard the ark.
However, this imaginary discussion brings up a question: "How much of what God said for Noah to do did he actually need to accomplish?" Obviously, if he had only built half an ark, the project would not have gotten off the ground. But what about the other details? Suppose he did not build it to the specifications God gave him. What if it was ten cubits higher or the same amount less in its width? Might it have had a hard time floating? What if he had made six doors, or four decks? How about if he ran out of gopher wood and it was easier to use some other kind to finish it? Jesus provided some principles for His disciples to follow?
"But why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46).
"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, 'Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven" (Matt. 7:21).
In the first of these verses, Jesus used the plural. To call Jesus, "Lord," one must do the things that He says. Well, which things? 50% of them? 90%? The things we find easiest to do? The things that we don't mind doing? The things we think are good and approve of doing? Like Noah complying with God's commandments for the ark, don't we need to do all that Jesus says? Which commandments can we comfortably omit? In the second verse, Jesus says that in order to be saved we must do the will of the Father Who is in heaven. Which part of it? If we argue that we only must be obedient to half of it, which half is that, and who is qualified to choose that half? Wouldn't such a person have had to die on the cross in order to have that right to choose? And who authorized such a presumptuous person to select what we obey?
Initial Salvation
No doubt the cries of, "Legalism!" will be sounded forth again. First, in response to that erroneous notion, it must be asked, "What makes us obeying the perfect law of liberty any more legalistic than Noah building an ark?" If he built the ark according to the specifications God gave him, why do we not need to worship the way God instructed us to do? Did He give us the liberty to change what is done in worship to suit ourselves? Or do we need to follow the Biblical pattern? Isn't there a penalty for teaching error, also (Rom. 16:17-18)? Being obedient to God's commands is required, and it does not make us Legalists.
Second, being obedient does not merit salvation for us any more than it did for Noah. God saved Noah by His grace. He offered him the opportunity to save himself and his household by building the ark. We are offered salvation through God's grace and the blood of Jesus. We ought to know that worshiping each week and abiding in the doctrine of Christ does not make God owe us salvation any more than it did our brethren in the first century (Acts 2:42).
Third, God's grace continues to operate in our lives when we fall short. Our goal is to walk in the light (1 John 1:7), and when we fall short, we confess those sins to God, and He is faithful and just to forgive us (1 John 1:9). We are constantly cognizant of His grace. We do not need someone with advanced religious degrees to tell us about it. Nor should we listen to those who continually harp on the ill-conceived notion that we are saved by grace—plus nothing.
Sooner or later, most everyone who holds that view (except for fervent Calvinists) must do precisely what DeHaan did—contradict himself. In the movie, Escape From Hell (which is excessively denominational), grace only was preached throughout. Anyone who said man must respond to God's grace was labeled a Legalist: "You can't do anything to obtain salvation." But when it came time for someone to be saved, the poor bloke (being chased by a demon) was asked if He believed in Jesus. He affirmed that he did. "Then all you need to do is pray this sinner's prayer." It may have been asked in the form of a question, but it matters not. He still did something—even though it was not Biblical, was minimal, and it could not save him.
When Peter convinced the Jews, through the Scriptures, that Jesus had been raised from the dead and had received His kingdom, thousands then asked, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (Acts 2:37). Peter should have told them to quit being so Legalistic—that salvation is entirely by God's grace—and they could do nothing. That's the message of many spiritual "leaders" today. Peter told them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38). They had to do something. Just to make it even clearer that they must respond, he added: "Save yourselves from this crooked generation" (Acts 2:40, ASV). Man has always needed to respond to God's grace.
Those who do not know what they are saying shouldn't be: