The Novelty Of Free Grace Theology, Part 1

By Kenneth Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Columbia, SC]

I. Introduction

One of the major objections against Free Grace Theology is the supposed novelty of teachings such as the Judgment Seat of Christ; that there will be rewards and loss of rewards for believers;[1] that assurance is the essence of saving faith; and that true believers can commit and persist in sin. Opponents claim that if such doctrines were true, church history would record them.

Associated with these charges is the contrary assertion that the Lordship Salvation teaching about good works being necessary to obtain final salvation is an old view, and that this is attested by the early church. For example, Wayne Grudem says that, “It is misleading to brand ‘Lordship salvation’ as if it were some new doctrine.” He says that Lordship Salvation has always been the historic, orthodox, view of the Church.[2]

The historical objection against Free Grace views is neatly summarized by D. A. Carson’s remark on Zane Hodges’s understanding of Jas 2:14-17:

…not one significant interpreter of Scripture in the entire history of the church has held to Hodges’s interpretation of the passages he treats.

That does not mean that Hodges is wrong; but it certainly means he is probably wrong…[3]

Is this a valid objection? Did the early church teach Lordship Salvation? Did anyone in the early church believe in Free Grace? In this article, I will look at how the early church looked at the Gospel, and attempt to show that the church fathers did not agree with either Free Grace theology or Lordship Salvation theology in important respects.

II. The Apostolic Fathers

Outside of the NT writings, the earliest record we have of doctrine in the Church is through the writings of the Apostolic Fathers. The dates of these men are a matter of some debate, but most say that they are a small group of writers who lived in the last part of the first century or in the early part of the second century. They obtained the title of Apostolic Fathers because they may have had contact with the original Apostles or heard them speak. They belong to a generation that links the Church with the original Twelve.

It is, of course, impossible for an article this size to discuss all that the Apostolic Fathers wrote concerning justification and works. However, I remember a seminary professor who commented that one of the first things the early Church abandoned was a strong stance on grace. This runs against both the Free Grace and the Lordship positions. Very few, if any, contemporary Lordship Salvation or Free Grace proponents would accept certain things the Apostolic Fathers said about justification, the sacraments, and the role of works in eternal salvation.

A. The Shepherd Of Hermas

The author is unknown, but most agree that it was either written at the end of the first century or the early part of the second. The author receives a number of divine revelations. An older woman appears to him, who then turns into a younger woman.

He also receives revelation from a shepherd (from whom the book gets its title), who turns out to be an angel of repentance.

Repentance, which is clearly turning from and feeling sorry for sins, plays a large role in the book. Believers can only be forgiven if they repent of their sins with their whole heart (Hermas 6.4). Baptism is linked with salvation and gives the forgiveness of sins. After a person is baptized they can only repent once. After that, there is no hope for salvation for the person (Hermas 31.1ff).

The author is tormented by an angel of punishment, because of the sins of his family. They have repented, but not sufficiently. Forgiveness of sins is not given immediately to the believer who repents during the one opportunity he has. There must be a period of time where the believer torments his or her soul, becomes humble in every way, and experiences tribulations before God will grant forgiveness (Hermas 66.4ff).

A practical example of repentance is given. If a believing wife commits adultery and repents, the husband should take her back. But this can only happen once. If she commits adultery again, he is not to take her back (Hermas 29.4-8).

It is clear that for the author, a “true” believer can lose his or her salvation. Self-control is necessary for salvation. He also says that some sins are worse sins than others. We evidently see here the beginning of the Catholic Church’s distinction between mortal and venial sins (Hermas 38.4-8).

Many in the early Church held The Shepherd of Hermas in high esteem. Early Church Fathers at the end of the second century, Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria, quote from the book authoritatively and as inspired. In the fourth century, Athanasius, who is famous for his orthodox views in church history concerning the deity of Christ and the Trinity, did as well. In addition, the oldest known complete manuscript of the New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus, includes The Shepherd of Hermas.[4] Another book within the Apostolic Fathers is similarly present in the Codex Sinaiticus. It also says that baptism results in the forgiveness of sins.[5]

Clearly Grudem and other Reformed Lordship Salvation advocates do not agree with much that is in The Shepherd of Hermas. Indeed, they strongly disagree with much in it.

B. The Didache

The Didache dates from either the first or early second century. It is generally thought to be written by a Christian community in Syria.[6] In the fourth century, Athanasius says that it was said by the Apostolic Fathers that new Christians should read the Didache in order to receive instruction in godliness.[7] He evidently says that these writings are the “teachings” of the Apostles and are thus to be held in high regard. Around AD 200 Clement of Alexandria probably quotes it as Scripture.[8]

The Didache has 16 chapters and deals with issues such as baptism and the Lord’s Supper. One of the features of its teaching is that it adds to the commands of Scripture. When it comes to baptism, it speaks of when it is appropriate to use cold water or hot water, and when it is appropriate to use running water or not. In addition, the person being baptized, as well as the one performing the baptism, should fast a day or two before the actual event (Didache 7.1ff).

It also seems to indicate that baptism results in the forgiveness of sin. Specifically, it states that only those who have been baptized are pure. Only the pure can take the Lord’s Supper (Didache 9.5).

The Didache does not represent the theology of Reformed Lordship Salvation in any shape or form.

C. Polycarp

Polycarp was the bishop of Smyrna who suffered martyrdom around AD 155. There are indications that he heard the Apostle John speak. Since he was in his 80s when he died, his life certainly overlapped the lives of some of the Apostles.

Polycarp wrote a letter to the church at Philippi. The letter has numerous allusions to the Scriptures, with little commentary. As a result, one does not find much on how he interprets the NT.[9] He does, however, seem to indicate that a believer can lose his or her salvation since it is conditional. He tells the Philippians that we (does this include himself?) will be raised if we do God’s will, keep His commandments, and keep ourselves from all unrighteousness.[10]

In a latter chapter, he seems to support this idea when he says Polycarp and the Philippians will gain the world to come if they please God. However, he may also show inconsistency in the same context, where he is addressing deacons, when he says that they will also reign with Christ if they live worthily as Christ’s citizens (Philippians 5.2). This appears to be a clear allusion to 2 Tim 2:12. Does Polycarp see a difference between living in the coming Kingdom and reigning with Christ and thus indicate some kind of reward for faithfulness?

Perhaps Polycarp is more gracious towards elders. In one instance, an elder named Valens has strayed from the faith due to the love of money. He is clearly not keeping the commandments of Christ. However, Polycarp says that the church is not to treat him as an enemy, but as one who is weak. He hopes the Lord will give Valens repentance so that the church at Philippi may be whole (Philippians 11.2-4).

Reformed Lordship Salvation advocates like Grudem do not agree with much that Polycarp wrote. It is hard to see how anyone might claim that Polycarp taught Reformed Lordship Salvation.

D. Ignatius And Clement

Ignatius was the bishop of Antioch in the early second century. He wrote a series of letters. In one, he seems to believe that the waters of Christian baptism are purified in some kind of mystical way by the death of Christ.[11] As a military chaplain, I once heard a Presbyterian chaplain use this terminology when baptizing an infant.

In another letter, Ignatius makes a distinction between the elders of a church and the bishop. The local church elders are to be subject to the bishop. Without the bishop there is not a church (Smyrnaeans 2:2; 3:1). Baptisms and the Lord’s Supper cannot take place without the authority of the bishop. To do anything apart from his knowledge is to worship the Devil (Smyrnaeans 8).

Clement was the bishop of Rome at the very end of the first century. He agrees with Ignatius on the importance of baptism. A believer can lose the salvation he gains at baptism. In a letter to the church at Corinth he says that if Christians do not keep their baptism pure with good works, they will not enter the Kingdom (2 Clem. 6.3-9). It is of interest that Clement’s writings were considered inspired by many later writers, particularly in the east.[12]

Clement of Rome was not a Calvinist in any sense. He believed in works salvation. How Grudem or any Calvinist might claim Clement as an early representative of his theology is hard to fathom.

III. After The Apostolic Fathers

The period from the Apostolic Fathers to the Protestant Reformation covers almost fourteen centuries. The vast writings from this period obviously contain many different theological views. As it is in Christendom today, it would be impossible to state what Christians universally believed.

As a low church Dispensationalist, as well as a proponent of Free Grace Theology, whenever I have read the literature of the ancient church, I have looked for statements that supported my theology. I have also read attempts by others to discover such statements.

I have found such attempts unsatisfying. Any possible support was very limited and open to interpretation. If such support were indeed present, it would only be an extremely minor part of the writings of this period. Such support would include teachings on the independence of the local church, the rapture of the Church, a future Millennial Kingdom, salvation by grace through faith alone, assurance of salvation, and a judgment seat of Christ where believers would receive rewards for their faithfulness to Christ.

Instead, what one finds is that the views expressed by the Apostolic Fathers seem to gain strength during the following centuries. Bishops become even more powerful. One does not read of justification by faith alone. Grace and salvation are given through baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The loss of eternal salvation is a definite possibility. Superstition, church tradition, and mysticism gain strong footholds.

Perhaps Tertullian, an early church writer and famous Christian apologist in Africa in the third century, is an illustration. He writes that the unbeliever must turn from his sins in order to experience salvation. However, a probation period must be entered into first. The unbeliever must amend his or her life prior to baptism. Evidently following the teachings of the Shepherd of Hermas, Tertullian says that after baptism one can only repent once. After that, salvation is lost. He suggests that believers should not be told they have the opportunity to repent once because they can use that as excuse to sin.[13]

In looking at the writings of the ancient church, it is not just Free Grace people who find very little support for their beliefs. It seems to this writer that anybody who believes that the Bible is our rule of faith and that it teaches salvation by grace through faith alone that cannot be lost finds little or no support for their views in these writings. This would certainly include those who hold to a Lordship Salvation viewpoint.

To put it bluntly, when it comes to grace and forgiveness, the writings of the ancient church often seem to have been written by men who completely missed the spirit of the NT. There seems to be no understanding of Jesus’ conversation with the woman at the well in John 4, with Nicodemus in John 3, or with Martha in John 11:25-26. The idea that a believer can only find forgiveness after salvation once, or that one believer is to forgive another only once, is completely contrary to the Lord’s command that we forgive others as often as they sin against us (seventy times seven) and John’s statement that if we simply confess our sins the Lord forgives us and cleanses us from all unrighteousness (Matt 18:21-22; 1 John 1:9).

But how can these things be? If indeed the Bible teaches salvation by grace through faith, why don’t these ancient writers reflect such teaching? How could men who lived so close to the time of the Apostles, for example, distort what the Apostles taught? Was the gospel lost for at least 15 centuries? There are some possible answers to these questions.

IV. The Gospel In The Early Church

If, starting from the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, one is exposed to a gospel of works, does this mean that the gospel of grace was not proclaimed and believed during the early Church? No. In fact, it would be impossible for that to be the case because the Lord said His Church would prevail over the gates of hell (Matt 16:16). But how was the Gospel of grace proclaimed? There are a few possibilities.

A. The Ancient Writers Changed Their Views

The Apostolic Fathers cited above may have believed in a gospel of grace in the years before they wrote. All of these men wrote later in their lives. If indeed they were exposed to the teaching of the Apostles, the Fathers could have initially believed the biblical gospel, but changed their views as time went on. A similar situation occurred to the believers addressed in the book of Galatians.

It is also noteworthy that some of the writers exhibit inconsistencies in what they write. They speak of the grace of God and the need for faith in Jesus Christ, but then deny that grace by saying that without works one loses their salvation. This inconsistency was noted in Polycarp’s letter. He says in one place that if we don’t keep the commandments of Christ we are lost. Later, however, he refers to an elder that has not kept the commandments. He loves money and has fallen from the faith. However, he is not an enemy of the church and should be dealt with in a loving manner. His treatment of this sinning elder is much more gracious than his earlier comments would warrant.

It is a fact concerning all teachers of God’s Word that they are sometimes not careful in their teaching. Even today, one often hears Lordship and even Arminian teachers tell their listeners that all they need to do to have eternal life is believe in Jesus Christ. It is all by grace through faith. Later, they will then say that without works “final salvation” is not possible. Works either prove one’s salvation, are necessary to keep it, or even earn it. In any case, such teachings are inconsistent and can lead to confusion.[14]

Related to the idea that writers and speakers are not careful in choosing their words, it seems that some writings of the early Church were maybe more concerned with practical concerns instead of theological consistency, purity, and accuracy. In the Shepherd of Hermas, for example, the author seems to be addressing an audience that was concerned about post-baptismal sins. How should a teacher instruct Christians living in a pagan society about sins committed after they believe? To tell them that God’s grace in these matters is infinite (even if the writer believed it!) would perhaps give a license to sin. But sin is a reality in the life of every Christian, so there must be some grace given. The expedient solution would be to say that you can repent, and grace is available, but there is a limit to God’s grace.[15]

The good news is that in the early church, there would have been times when the common person heard of God’s grace and eternal life in Christ. Most importantly, the Word of God existed during these centuries.

B. The Common Man And Exposure To God’s Word

Of course, the extant writings of the Apostolic Fathers and other writers during the first fifteen centuries of the Church represent a very small percentage of Christendom. It would be a mistake to assume that these writings reflected the theological beliefs of all in Christendom, or even a majority. The beliefs of religious people are never monolithic in any age, including our own.

A danger to be avoided is to assume that Christians throughout history had copies of, and read, the writings of church leaders. To assume that is to assume a level of literacy that probably did not exist. Ehrman, relying on the work of Harris, states that until the Industrial Revolution of the eighteenth century only a small percentage of people could read and write. He suggests that in the first century it would have been only around ten percent.[16]

As Harris points out, to state such statistics requires that we define terms. Some people were completely illiterate, some semi-literate, and others proficiently literate. In other words, some could only write their names and read simple sentences. Craftsmen were literate in their fields, but only as needed. There was no need for the majority of people to be able to read and write, especially on a very proficient level. With the coming of Christianity and the emphasis on the inspired writings of the Apostles, there was probably a slight increase in such proficiency, but only among the professional clergy and the especially pious.[17]

Related to this issue is the availability of books/parchments/codexes. At the beginning of the Church, most people did not have a personal copy, for example, of the Old Testament. It would have been very expensive and bulky.[18] Harris refers to the statements by Eusebius and his son Jerome in the fourth and fifth centuries that copies of the books of the Bible were difficult to come by in Palestine.[19]

Even though most people did not have copies of the writings of the early writers or even the Bible, and wouldn’t have been able to read them on a proficient level if they did, they were still exposed to the gospel. Justin Martyr, in the second century, tells us that the Scriptures were read publicly in the churches (1 Apology 67). The NT also bears this out (1 Thess 5:26-27; Col 4:16; 1 Tim 4:13). Harris points out that even though most people did not have copies of books and literacy rates were low, Christianity brought about an important change. Prior to Christianity, among the pagans, the written word was not important in matters of religion.[20] To Christians, the Scriptures were important and were read aloud in worship services.

This reading of God’s Word would have allowed the gospel of God’s grace to be heard. When people heard the account of Nicodemus in John 3, the woman at the well in John 4, John 5, John 6, Jesus’ words with Martha at Lazarus’ tomb, Paul’s encounter with the Philippian jailor in Acts 16, or Paul’s instruction to the Ephesian Church in Eph 2:8-9, they would have heard a message of grace.

The Holy Spirit uses the Word of God to reveal truth to the minds of unbelievers (John 16:8-11). The mind of unbelievers are supernaturally darkened concerning God’s grace in the Gospel of Christ (2 Cor 4:4), but the Spirit of God can, and does, lift that blindness.

We should not underestimate the ability of God’s Spirit to reveal the truth of the Biblical gospel to people who heard it proclaimed in God’s Word throughout the centuries. That Word proclaims a gospel of grace. The Spirit of God was at work in the process. The gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. As a result, untold numbers of people believed.

C. An Argument From Silence?

Admittedly, to say that there were people in the first fifteen centuries of the church that believed they were saved by grace alone through faith alone, or that they knew they had eternal life, is an argument from silence. The fact is, we do not have any clear writings that reflect such an understanding of the gospel. However, it is also an argument from silence to claim that no one held Free Grace views. The illiterate masses did not leave a record of what they believed.

Moreover, even though certain church leaders taught certain things, history and experience tells us that people do not always believe what the leaders of their day expound. Millions of Christians were not exposed to the writings of the Church Fathers. Throughout the history of the church, and even today, lay people and ordinary pastors have come to an understanding of God’s Word on their own.

V. Conclusion

In the extant writings of the Apostolic and Church Fathers, one is hard pressed to find a Free Grace understanding of the gospel. Assurance of salvation, eternal security, and justification by faith apart from works all seem to be foreign concepts.

However, it seems clear to this writer that the same could be said about Lordship Salvation. It seems strange to me that Grudem would claim that a Lordship view is the historic view of the ancient Church[21] since the Church Fathers teach many things with which both Grudem and MacArthur (and Carson) would strongly disagree. Lordship advocates teach that salvation cannot be lost and that baptism is not required for justification. They reject that grace is given through the elements of communion, that salvation can only come after a probationary period, or that forgiveness is only offered to the believer once after salvation. While they agree with the extant early church writers that works are necessary for salvation, there are still major differences.[22] It is also safe to assume that the vast majority of Lordship teachers would find troublesome the lack of grace in the extant writings of the early Church.

Simply put, the gospel as understood by Lordship Salvation proponents is not found in the extant writings of the early church. The same charge they direct towards Free Grace teachers can be charged to them. If the view argued above, that a Free Grace understanding of the gospel existed in the church, is an argument from silence, then the same is true of a Lordship understanding. In fact, the same could be said about any gospel that claims justification is by faith alone in Christ alone, or that teaches salvation cannot be lost.[23] Lordship adherents would also disagree with the power that the bishop has in early Church writings as well.

However, some would argue that during the Reformation things changed.

They would say that at that time, Lordship Salvation came to the forefront. The Reformers, it is maintained, give a relative basis for the antiquity of, and thus validity to such theology. Part two of this series will take up that issue.

Notes

1. Thomas R. Schreiner and Ardel B. Caneday, The Race Set before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance & Assurance (Downer’s Grove, IL: Zondervan, 2001), 184-88.
2. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 714f, n.5.
3. D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1996), 137 (emphasis added). Carson refers to the views expressed in Dead Faith: What Is It? (Dallas, TX: Redención Viva, 1987).
4. William Jardine, “Introduction” to The Shepherd of Hermas: The Gentile Apocalypse (Redwood City, CA: Proteus, 1992), 15f.
5. Epistle of Barnabas 11.11.
6. Jaroslav Pelikan and Valerie R. Hotchkiss, eds., Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition, vol. 1 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003), 41.
7. Athanasius, Festal Letters 39.7.
8. Kurt Niderwimmer, The Didache: A Commentary, trans. Linda Maloney. Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1998), 4f.
9. Jack N. Sparks, ed., The Apostolic Fathers: Modern Translations of These Early Christian Writings (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1978), 124.
10. Polycarp, Philippians 2.1f.
11. Ignatius, Ephesians 18.2.
12. Clayton N. Jefford, Reading the Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1996), 100.
13. Tertullian, Of Repentance6f. It should be noted that later in his life Tertullian joined the heretical Montanist group. This letter, however, was written during his “orthodox” days.
14. In my opinion, such inconsistencies and confusion are seen in some of the views expressed in a recent book on the role that works play in the Christian’s eternal salvation, Bob Wilkin’s contribution excepted. See Alan P. Stanley, ed., Four Views on the Role of Works at the Final Judgment (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013). Schreiner’s essay seems especially inconsistent.
15. Tertullian, as cited above, is in agreement with the teachings of the Shepherd. He admits that the teacher must be careful not to emphasize the grace of God because that could lead the believer to sin. To this writer, it seems that the writer of the Shepherd is also inconsistent. In describing the sins of his own family, he seems to be describing a situation that requires more than one offer of God’s grace after salvation. It makes one wonder if the author believed what he wrote or was simply giving what he saw as practical admonition to a problem he saw in his day. Such teaching, however, presents its own problems. People indeed need grace more than once. In the early church, people exposed to this teaching sometimes waited until their deathbeds, or old age, before being baptized. This would, they believed, limit the time that they would be Christians and therefore they would be less likely to need to repent more than once after baptism.
16. Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus: The Story behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2005), 37-39.
17. William V. Harris, Ancient Literacy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989), 4f, 19, 220, 322.
18. A. D. Nock, Conversion: The Old and New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (London: Oxford University Press, 1933), 79.
19. Harris, Literacy, 299; Jerome, Adv. Rufin 1.9.
20. Ibid., 220.
21. He refers to MacArthur’s writings, and indeed MacArthur makes that point. He finds support for his theology in the Didache, as well as in the writings of Ignatius and Clement. See John F. MacArthur, Jr., The Gospel According to Jesus: What Is Authentic Faith?(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008), 254.
22. Some Lordship advocates admit the necessity of works, but most would say that they are not the cause of salvation, but the result. Practically, however, there is no difference. Without works, one would not enter into the kingdom.
23. I spent over twenty years in the military as a chaplain and worked with people from many different denominations, including Catholic chaplains. I have witnessed people convert from different Protestant denominations to Catholicism. Sometimes the reason given is that for the first fifteen centuries of the Church a gospel of justification by faith alone with eternal security was not preached. The whole Protestant movement, it is claimed, is a new invention. Salvation, according to these “converts,” was always taught as coming through the Catholic Church, with its understanding of the sacraments and repentance. History, it is said, is not on the side of any Protestant understanding of the gospel.