Chapter 6.3

The Source of Saving Faith

Divine Gift through Regeneration & Not a Human Work

Table of Topics

A) Human Inability to Produce Saving Faith: Eph 2:1-5

A.1) Biblical support for human inability

A.2) Human ability is not implied by biblical requirements to believe

A.3) Limited progression of salvation supports human inability

B) Divine Necessity to Provide Saving Faith: Eph 2:8-9

C) What It Really Means to be Saved by Grace & Not by Works: Saved by God’s works alone

Extras & Endnotes

Primary Points

• The Scriptures clearly teach that spiritually dead humans are incapable of responding to God for salvation.
• It is clear in Scripture that a merely human ability to believe is not implied by biblical requirements to believe.
• God demands several requirements for salvation, including saving faith, but then grants and works all of them Himself.
• Salvation is not a random process depending on a choice that all humans are able to make, but one controlled by God such that it even goes against the equality, fairness, randomness, and universality suggested by fairism.
• The Apostle made it clear that saving faith is the gift and work of God when he wrote: “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Eph 2:8-9).
• The fairist belief that we had a determining part in our salvation is the very kind of boasting that Paul prohibits, that unavoidably grants us some credit for our salvation, and violates salvation by God’s grace and work alone.
• Fairists do not believe in salvation by God’s grace, but rather His generosity. God takes the little faith, humility, fear, repentance, etc. that we supposedly freely choose to exercise toward Him and He gives us a whole lot more in return.
• Being saved by grace does not simply mean that God was kind enough to provide a way for us to save ourselves.
• When the Apostle says our salvation “is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8) he does not mean it is merely a gift offered by God, but one given by God, along with the regeneration and saving faith necessary to experience it.
• The reason that saving faith is not a meritorious human work is not because it is a morally neutral or rather mundane act as fairists claim. Saving faith includes all kinds of moral acts and attitudes including repentance, fear of God, and humility. The reason saving faith is contrasted with human works is that all the moral and meritorious ingredients of saving faith are the work of God.

A) Human Inability to Produce Saving Faith:

Eph 2:1-5

A.1) Biblical support for human inability

Because the Apostle Paul knew that the idea of salvation ultimately by God’s grace and works alone would be constantly and subtly attacked, he wrote:

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, ² in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. ³ All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.

⁴ But because of His great love for us, God, Who is rich in mercy, ⁵ made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. . . .

⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph 2:1-5, 8-9)

Despite all the efforts by fairism to make our salvation ultimately depend on a choice we made (“accepting Jesus”), or an action we performed (i.e. “putting faith in Jesus”), or an ability and responsibility we have, the Apostle clearly denies any of these to be the case.

First, we are taught that before salvation we were spiritually “dead in . . . sins” “but” then “God . . . made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions” (vs. 1, 4-5). Notice that we had no spark of spiritual life, but it was “when we were” still spiritually “dead” that “God . . . made us [spiritually] alive.” All humans, without exception, are born into sin and are therefore born spiritually dead (cf. Rom 5:12) and have to be “made . . . alive with Christ” before they are able to respond to Christ in any way.

The best way to understand spiritual death is comparing it with physical death. And, no doubt, this is precisely what the Apostle intended. Just as a physically dead person has absolutely no physical abilities whatsoever, a spiritually dead person has absolutely no spiritual abilities as well.

Those who would question this analogy need to answer the question: Why did the Apostle use the word “dead [nekrous]” to describe the spiritual state of unregenerated people if he only meant their spiritual state was merely impaired or perverted? On the contrary, as NT scholar Francis Foulkes writes in his Tyndale Commentary concerning Ephesians 2:1: “This death is . . . the loss of the . . . capacity for spiritual activity,” including saving faith. ^[1]

Likewise, Dr. Barnes commented:

A [physically dead] corpse is insensible. It sees not, and hears not, and feels not. . . . So with the sinner in regard to the spiritual and eternal world. He . . . hears not the call of God; he is unaffected by the dying love of the Saviour . . . [N]o human power can arouse him to act for God, anymore than human power can rouse the sleeping dead, or open the sightless eyeballs on the light of day. The same power is needed in the conversion of a sinner which is needed in raising the dead; and one and the other alike demonstrate the omnipotence of Him Who can do it [and the impotence of the humans who cannot]. ^[2]

Likewise John MacArthur, in his commentary on Ephesians, relates the story of a crying, desperate mother hopelessly trying to rouse her dead infant, and writes: “There was no life there to respond, not even to the powerful love of a mother.” ^[3] Dr. MacArthur continues:

That is the way of spiritual death as well. A person who is spiritually dead has no life by which he can respond to spiritual things, much less live a spiritual life. No amount of love, care, and words of affection from God can draw a response. . . .

When Paul counseled Timothy about widows in the church, he said of those who were profligate, “She who gives herself to wanton pleasure is dead even while she lives” (1 Tim. 5:6). [Spiritually] dead while they [physically] live is the sad state of every unredeemed human being. . . .

That all men apart from God are sinful does not mean that every person is equally corrupt and wicked. Twenty corpses on a battlefield might be in many different stages of decay, but they are uniformly dead. ^[4]

After saying that unregenerate humans are “dead in . . . sin” (v. 2), he says that, “the spirit” “of the ruler of the kingdom of the air” who is satan, “is now at work in” them (vs. 2-3). Elsewhere we have written regarding Ephesians 2:2-3:

Here, unbelievers are described as being led by the devil’s “spirit” which is “at work in” them. Before regeneration it was not merely a free human spirit at work in us, and certainly not the Holy Spirit, but the “spirit” of the devil. NT scholar F. F. Bruce (1910–1990) comments that this Greek verb (energeō) to describe how satan’s “spirit” works in unbelievers is the same word used in Ephesians 3:20 to refer to “His power that is at work within us” believers. ^[5]

In other words, the influence and power that the Holy Spirit exercises in the believer is the same kind of influence and power that the devil’s “spirit” exercises in the unbeliever. In addition, however, while the Christian has a choice whether or not to be influenced by the Holy Spirit, the unregenerate do not, because the devil’s “spirit” is the only “spirit” the unbeliever possesses. ^[6]

Accordingly, the Apostle describes this state of spiritual death as being in bondage to “the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts” (v. 3). Accordingly, the “sinful nature” is the only nature someone has before being indwelled with the Spirit, and its “cravings . . . desires and thoughts” are the only options for the source of their attitudes and actions.

Remarkably then, God . . . made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions” (vs. 4-5; cf. Rom 6:13; Col 2:12). He made “us alive” because “we were dead.” Accordingly, we see again that spiritual death is much like physical death in that a dead person cannot make themselves alive, God must make them alive before they can do absolutely anything but rot. Did Lazarus do something to bring himself back to life (cf. John 11:43-44)? On the contrary, it was the command, power, and mercy of God that healed his deadness, and so it is with our spiritual deadness. ^[7]

In the state of spiritual death, the only walking, or living, a person can do is according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. . . .

Sinful men have many different ideas and standards, but they are in total agreement that the network of things in this world is more important than the divine perspective of God. In this most basic world outlook they are of one mind. They resolutely work to fulfill the goals and values of their system, though it defies God and always self-destructs. . . .

They are of one mind because they have a common leader and lord, the prince of the power of the air. . . . The power [or authority] of the air probably refers to Satan’s host of demons who exist in the heavenly sphere. Paul has this in mind in Ephesians 6:12, where he warns of “the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.” During the present age he and his demon host dominate, pressure, and control every person who is unsaved. . . .

Not all unsaved people are necessarily indwelt at all times by Satan or are demon-possessed. But knowingly or unknowingly they are subject to Satan’s influence. Because they share his nature of sinfulness and exist in the same sphere of rebellion against God, they respond naturally to his leading and to the influence of his demons. They are on the same spiritual wavelength. . . . Men are not free and independent; they are totally dominated by the hosts of hell. . . .

Because fallen mankind and Satan’s hosts exist in the same spiritual realm, it is quite natural that his spirit is the same spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. The prince of disobedience works in . . . those . . . called the sons of disobedience of whom he is the spiritual father (John 8:38-44). Paul makes clear this identifying characteristic of disobedience to God when he states absolutely that “you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness” (Rom. 6:16). . . .

As with trespasses and sins, lusts and desires are . . . used synonymously to represent fallen man’s complete orientation to his own selfish way. By nature he is driven to fulfill the lusts and desires of his sinful flesh and . . . mind. ^[8]

Does this sound like people who are able to humble themselves before Christ to put their faith in Him? For considerably more on the spiritual deadness and inability of unregenerated humans see the relevant chapters in Book 4: Biblical Psychology. ^[9]

Accordingly, and contrary to the very foundation of fairism, even our pre-Creation election is by grace, unconditional, and not because of anything we have done (cf. Eph 1:4-14). Along these lines the Apostle wrote: “there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace” (Rom 11:5-6).

A.2) Human ability is not implied by biblical requirements to believe

Biblical commands do not imply that spiritually dead humans are able to obey them. This includes all the humility, repentance, and trust required in saving faith. God is indeed that Judge Who demands several requirements for salvation, but then grants and works all of them Himself.

God has commanded that, “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb 9:22), but our defiled blood is not able to pay for our sins, so God provided Christ’s perfect blood as a “ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Heb 9:28; cf. 1 John 4:10; 1 Pet 2:24; 3:18).

Jesus commanded, “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Matt 4:17), and such moral repentance is necessary to be saved (cf. Acts 2:38). However, spiritually dead humans are not capable of the repentance that is commanded and required of them, and therefore, it is described in Scripture as a divine gift (cf. Acts 5:31; 11:18; Rom 2:4; 2 Tim 2:25).

Jesus said, no one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again” (John 3:3). But this requirement is something humans cannot do and must be performed by God and is therefore given by the Holy Spirit and is solely and completely His work (cf. John 3:3-6; Tit 3: 4-7).

Believing in Who Christ is, especially in relation to who we are, is a commandment and requirement for salvation (cf. John 1:12; 3:15-16, 36; 5:24; Acts 13:39; Rom 3:22; 10:9-10). However, spiritually dead, unregenerated humans are not capable of all the moral acts and attitudes involved in believing in Christ in a saving way, and therefore, such believing is also described as a gift from God (cf. Eph 2:8-9; Phil 1:29; Rom. 4:16; John 6:44; Acts 3:16; 16:14; 18:27; 1 Pet. 1:21; Heb 12:2).

Of course, “whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life,” (John 3:16) and “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom 10:13). But do such statements imply, as fairists contend, that spiritually dead humans are capable of saving faith, and therefore responsible for calling on Christ for salvation? Not if we take into account Scripture’s clear teaching that we are ultimately saved purely by God’s grace and works alone and not any works of our own. Not if we give the intended weight to Scripture’s testimony regarding the spiritual deadness, deafness, blindness, and impotence of unregenerated humanity. “Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin,” both its power and condemnation. Therefore, “There is . . . no one who seeks God” (Rom 3:10-11) on their own power or from their own free will, and only those He first calls, enables, draws, and regenerates will call and believe on Him.

All of the above are requirements for salvation, but because spiritually dead humans are not capable of them, and God wanted salvation to be purely and ultimately by His grace and work, for His glory, all of the ingredients of our salvation must be given to us apart from any work or merit of our own.

Accordingly, Augustine (354-430) wrote: “God bids us do what we cannot, that we may know what we ought to seek from him.” ^[10] Also, Augustine said: “Everything that is commanded to human beings by the Lord in the holy Scriptures, for the sake of testing human free will, is either something we begin to obey by God’s grace, or is demanded in order to show us our need of grace to do it.” ^[11]

Likewise, the Puritan theologian John Owen (1616-1683) wrote: “To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect.” ^[12]

The claim that biblical commands imply that spiritually dead humans can obey them was perhaps the foremost argument that the fairist Erasmus used in his Discussion, or Collation, concerning Free-Will (1524) and which Martin Luther (1483-1546) answered in his Bondage of the Will. Luther responded to Erasmus as follows:

If now God, as a Father, deals with us as with His sons, with a view to showing us the impotence of which we are ignorant; or as a faithful physician, with a view to making known to us our disease; or if, to taunt His enemies, who proudly resist His . . . laws [then we should expect God to] say: . . . ‘if thou art willing’, ‘if thou shalt do’.

Can it be fairly concluded from this that we can do these things freely, or else God is mocking us? Why should not this conclusion follow rather: God is trying us, that by His law He may bring us to a knowledge of our impotence . . . For this, as Paul teaches, is the intent of the divine law (cf. Rom. 3:20; 5:20; Gal 3:19, 24). . . .

[Erasmus] dreams that man is whole and sound; and that in the [biblical] phrases: ‘if thou art willing’, ‘if thou shalt do’, . . . that a man is being mocked, unless his will is free [to respond]. But Scripture describes man as corrupted and led captive, and furthermore, as proudly disdaining to notice . . . his own corruption and captivity; therefore it uses these phrases to goad and rouse him, that he may know by sure experience how unable he is to do any of these things. . . .

[Erasmus] thinks that man is mocked by an impossible commandment, whereas I maintain that by this means man is admonished and awakened to see his own impotence. . . . So the words of the law are spoken, not to assert the power of the will, but to illuminate the blindness of [unregenerated] reason, so that it may be seen that its own light is nothing, and the power of the [unregenerated] will is nothing. . . .

Wherefore, my Erasmus, as often as you confront me with the words of the law [i.e. biblical commands], so shall I confront you with Paul: ‘By the law is knowledge of sin—not power of the will! ^[13]

Likewise, the influential Puritan Bible scholar Matthew Henry (1662-1714) wrote: “What God requires of us he himself works in us, or it is not done. He that commands faith, holiness, and love, creates them by the power of his grace.” ^[14]

D. M. Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981), considered the last great Puritan preacher, wrote:

Our Lord did not come to tell us what we have to do in order to save ourselves; He came to save us . . . The Christian doctrine of salvation and redemption is this – that Christ Himself is the salvation. ^[15]

To further illustrate our point, we would remind us of the resurrection of Lazarus which, in our opinion, is intended to be a metaphor for salvation in several ways. At the dead man’s tomb Jesus commanded, “Lazarus, come out!” and “the dead man came out” (John 11:43-44). But do any of us assume the physically dead man “came out” under his own power? Do we even assume the dead man had a choice in the matter? And would we assume such things simply because the dead man was commanded to do it? No, no, and no. And the very same is true of spiritually dead people because God had to “make us alive in Christ even when we were dead in transgressions” (Eph 2:4-5).

This is because, “The man without the Spirit does not [and cannot] accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, [including the Gospel] for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them [let alone put faith in them], because they are spiritually [even supernaturally] discerned” (1 Cor 2:14). “Without the Spirit” accurately translates the Greek psychikos which means “natural” ^[16] as in a human without the supernatural Spirit in them. Accordingly, NT scholar C. K. Barrett translates: “he is a man who has not received the Holy Spirit” ^[17] and Gordon Fee likewise writes: “It refers to those who do not have the Spirit, and thus to the merely human” ^[18] as opposed to the regenerated human.

Notice that nothing less than the indwelling and regeneration of the Spirit of God is sufficient to heal the spiritual deadness of a person who is “without the Spirit” and therefore “does not accept” and “cannot understand” the things of the Gospel. The Apostle says that such people do not possess the Spirit, not that they have not been merely influenced or convicted by Him. Therefore, popular notions of a ministry of the Spirit short of indwelling that enables spiritually dead humans to “accept” and “understand” the things of the Spirit, fall short of Paul’s meaning. This is why Paul said a couple verses earlier: “We have . . . received the . . . Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us” (v. 12). In other words, we must “have” or possess the Spirit to savingly “understand” the Gospel, and those “without the Spirit” or not possessing the Spirit, “cannot understand” and will not “accept” the saving Gospel.

While the bottom line of fairism is the claim that saving faith is a saving act or work that humans are capable of and responsible for, the Scriptures teach otherwise because salvation is ultimately and solely by God’s grace and works. All of which is why we have grave concerns regarding whether fairism really teaches that we are ultimately saved by God’s grace instead of human works.

A.3) Limited progression of salvation supports human inability

In addition to the biblical/theological arguments against fairism and the claim that humans are able and responsible for saving faith, are historical arguments. If, as fairist commonly claim, God has: 1) Given human beings the ability to exercise saving faith; and 2) Their eternal destiny ultimately rests on their choice to exercise that human ability; then 3) We would expect salvations to be fairly randomly and equally distributed, historically and geographically, throughout the human race. But this is not so.

For example, what did God intend to teach us about salvation through grace in the life of Noah? Henry Morris (1918-2006), the recognized founder of modern creation science, carefully calculated that an estimated 10 billion people were living on Earth at the time of the Flood. ^[19] God had favor on only one person and saved eight.

Do we really think God had favor on Noah, and saved his family, ultimately because Noah did something of his own choice and ability that was so uniquely different from every single one of the other 10 billion people? If one person in 10 billion “found favor in the eyes of the Lord . . . was a righteous man [and] walked with God” (Gen 6:8-9), should we not conclude that God uniquely initiated and enabled (cf. John 6:65) a relationship with this one man that resulted in his faith and righteousness? Isn’t the fact that we have been uniquely enabled to have a relationship with God the only reason that we are “righteous” and “walk with God”? Otherwise we would not be that way, and neither would have Noah. The sheer mathematics of Noah’s story proclaims that salvation is completely and only a result of God’s choice and work and not because of something we do.

Likewise, under the Old Covenant, were there just as many Philistines, Canaanites, and Edomites who came into a saving relationship with God as there were Israelites? Did these different races of people have equal ability to be saved? Were the Israelites chosen for salvation because they did something special they were able and responsible to do? Not if salvation has always ultimately been by God’s grace.

Who would claim that in the last several decades there has been proportionately just as many Iranians, Iraqis, and Syrians who have exercised saving faith in Christ as there are Americans? Missions historians will agree as well that there have been whole generations of certain people groups who were not even given the opportunity to hear the Gospel by which they must be saved.

Why then has God withheld the Gospel to whole races, nations, and generations, if humans are generally able and responsible for their salvation, and God is equally desirous to save them as fairists contend? It is because salvation is not a random process depending on a choice that all humans are able to make, but one controlled by God such that it even goes against the equality, fairness, randomness, and universality suggested by fairism. (cf. 1 Cor. 1:23-31; Rom 10:17; Acts 4:12; James 2:5). ^[20]

The fact that who gets saved is ultimately decided, controlled, and accomplished by God is demonstrated in humanity’s “insanity” regarding the Gospel which we have discussed elsewhere. Accordingly, we have written:

There is no better human explanation [than insanity] for why people would refuse the Gospel, than there is for why they would refuse to believe that there is a Creator. And the fact that this very thing happens constantly with the Gospel message should be noticed by those who think that getting saved is simply a matter of someone exercising their free will in order to make a choice, for or against the Gospel.

Likewise, those who think that getting someone saved is simply a matter of persuasion need to take heed as well. No doubt, in itself, the Gospel is one of the most persuasive, inviting messages known to mankind, and if its acceptance were simply a matter of persuasion and the exercise of freewill, many, many more people would choose the King, in the same way they believe a lot of things on a lot less evidence. People, in fact, are quite gullible and eager to believe things which contain far fewer promises than believing in the Gospel. ^[21]

B) Divine Necessity to Provide Saving Faith: Ephesians 2:8-9

The Apostle Paul believed: 1) humans are completely incapable of any of the spiritual acts necessary for salvation, including saving faith, and 2) we are ultimately saved solely by God’s grace and works alone, not something we do, and 3) humans in their “worldly wisdom” would always be trying to add a human ingredient in our salvation in order to make it seem fair. Therefore, the Apostle wrote the Ephesians:

It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and [even] this [faith is] not from yourselves, it is the gift of God [given, not just offered] —not by [any human] works [but solely by God’s works], so that no one can boast” (Eph 2:8-9) about why they were saved.

While some deny that the Apostle intended to say in Ephesians 2:8-9 that the saving faith being described here is a gift from God, he could hardly be clearer. Accordingly, the highly regarded 19^th century theologian Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) said concerning this passage:

Allow us to put our readers on their guard against the thoughtless prattle of shallow school-learning. It should be remembered that while our exegesis is and always has been the one accepted almost without exception, the opposite opinion is shared by only a few expositors of later times. Nearly all the church fathers and almost all the theologians eminent for Greek scholarship judged that the words “it is the gift of God” refer to faith. ^[22]

Even if someone claims that the “this” that is “not of yourselves” refers to “grace” or being “saved” in general, it must therefore include the saving “faith” through which we are saved so that “It is by grace you have been saved . . . it is the gift of God—not by [any human] works, so that no one can boast” (Eph 2:8-9). Accordingly, Dr. MacArthur comments on Ephesians 2:8-9:

Our response in salvation is faith, but even that is not of ourselves [but is] the gift of God.  [Saving] Faith is nothing that we do in our own power or by our own resources. In the first place we do not have adequate power or resources. More than that, God would not want us to rely on them even if we had them. Otherwise salvation would be in part by our own works, and we would have some ground to boast in ourselves. Paul intends to emphasize that even faith is not from us apart from God’s giving it. ^[23]

The context and intended meaning of Ephesians 2:8-9 demand that we understand the Apostle as saying that saving “faith” is “not from yourselves” but “the gift of God.” In addition, we believe that Paul was specifically, not just implicitly, referring to saving faith as “this” which is “not of yourselves.” There are several reasons. First, the Greek grammar of the phrase allows such an interpretation. ^[24]

Secondly, we notice the most obvious meaning of the order of Paul’s wording (in both the Greek and English text) when he writes: “through faith and this not from yourselves.” The fact that the noun which immediately follows the pronoun “this” is “faith” suggests that the latter is the intended subject of the former.

Thirdly, to say that being saved “by grace” is “not of yourselves” is redundant, as God’s grace is, by definition, “not of yourselves.” It makes better sense that the Apostle was referring to the “faith” by which we were saved to be “not of yourselves.” And this would better fulfill Paul’s purpose in being so intentional about defending the fact that salvation is a gift and work of God’s grace rather than a work of humans. We believe the same critical and dangerous debate that is occurring today regarding who is ultimately responsible for our saving faith was occurring in the Apostle’s own day. The Apostle desired to make it as clear as possible that our salvation “is by [God’s] grace” and works, “not of yourselves,” and “the gift of God-not by [human] works.”

Accordingly, the most important point he is making here is that the saving faith “through” which we are saved is also, “not of yourselves.” Otherwise, the Apostle’s doctrine, and the core doctrine of the Protestant Reformation, that salvation is by God’s grace and work alone, is destroyed. If saving faith through which we are saved is ultimately from ourselves then our salvation is no longer by God’s grace and works alone, but ultimately because of a decision or work on our part that we could quite honestly boast about, because most humans never make that decision or perform that saving work. Surely the Apostle was aware of that and wrote specifically to combat it, including emphatically stating that, “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Eph 2:8-9).

It is important to note here that when the Apostle says our salvation “is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8) he does not mean it is merely a gift offered by God, and which any merely physically born human is able and ultimately responsible to exercise the humility or faith to accept. Our salvation “is the gift of God” because He gives it, along with the saving faith necessary to receive it. Otherwise, because of the universal inability of spiritually dead humans to produce saving faith, we would never possess it if it were merely offered to us.

Those who deny that the Apostle intended in Ephesians 2:8-9 to say that saving faith is a gift given by God, seem to neglect that he said the same elsewhere. The Apostle wrote the Philippians: “It has been granted [by God] to you . . . to believe on Him” (Phil 1:29), implying that if such faith had not been “granted” and given by God, they would not have possessed it. It is the fact that saving faith is a gift that caused Luke to describe Christians as “those who by grace had believed” (Acts 18:27).

Paul described the experience of his own salvation when He wrote: “The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the [saving] faith that are in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 1:14). Not only the “grace” to be saved was “poured out on” Paul by the “Lord,” but “the faith” as well. Elsewhere the Apostle describes this giving of salvation in spiritual regeneration, rather than just offering it, when he writes: “He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, Whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior (Tit 3:5-6).

At this point, we can take a closer look at some of the terms the Apostle uses in this critical and clear statement regarding saving faith. In opposition to saving faith, the Scriptures contrast human “works.” Such works are something that: 1) humans have the ability to do apart from any special enablement by God; and 2) humans choose to do apart from any special enablement by God. Which is why we are rewarded for works. But salvation is not a reward, but a gift. Accordingly, the Apostle writes: “When people work, their wages are not a gift. Workers earn what they receive. But people are declared righteous because of their faith, not because of their work” (Rom 4:4-5 NLT). And this is because saving faith is not a human work, but the work and gift of God.

Unfortunately, when saving faith is described as something unregenerate humans are capable of, it makes salvation a reward for something we did, and that others have not, instead of a gift purely of God’s grace. The ultimate reason we are saved is because of what God was able to do and chose to do, not because of what we were able to do and chose to do. This is precisely what it means to be saved by God’s grace alone and not human works. If there is a requirement for salvation (i.e. saving faith) that ultimately we supply, how can we say that we are saved by God’s grace alone? We claim, with the Protestant Reformers, that the only honest way that we can claim that our saving faith was not a human work, is to admit that it was purely, only, and ultimately an unmerited, unconditional gift from God.

This is why we cannot “boast” about being saved. If exercising saving faith is something all humans are equally able to do, but only the saved have chosen to do, why isn’t it something we can boast about (cf. Rom. 3:27-28; 1 Cor. 1:29-31; 4:7; Jms 2:5)? As discussed below, fairists commonly reply that the reason we cannot boast of our salvation is because there is nothing special or moral about saving faith. On the contrary, the reason we cannot boast about saving faith is because the meritorious repentance, fear, submission, and humility it involves is the work of God in and through us, not a work we produce.

Unfortunately, many fairists make the mistake of interpreting this boasting about our salvation as merely a verbal public act and contend they would never do that. However, the Apostle is also speaking of an attitude which would violate giving God all of the credit and glory for our salvation. Therefore, the fairist claim that we had a determining part in our salvation is the very kind of boasting that Paul prohibits, that unavoidably grants us some credit for our salvation, and violates salvation by God’s grace and work alone. The Apostle sums it all up clearly when he writes of: “God, Who has saved us . . . not because of anything we have done [“not according to our works” NASB] but because of His own purpose and grace” (2 Tim 1:9).

The Church has historically had a gracist interpretation of Ephesians 2:8-9 rather than a fairist one. Augustine wrote:

In this verse, Paul prevents us from supposing that salvation is by works, by expressly adding, ‘by faith.’ And even further, in case anyone imagines that faith itself is of human origin independently of the grace of God, the apostle says: ‘And that not of yourselves; for it is the gift of God. ^[25]

Elsewhere concerning Ephesians 2:8-9 Augustine said:

The Pelagians might possibly say, ‘We received grace because we believed’ as if they would attribute the faith to themselves, and the grace to God. Therefore the apostle, having said, ‘You are saved through faith,’ added, ‘And that not of yourselves, but it is the gift of God.’ And again, in case they say they deserved so great a gift by their works, he immediately added, ‘Not of works, in case anyone should boast.’ ^[26]

Likewise, John Calvin got Ephesians 2:8-9 right when he commented: “God declares, that he owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but unmixed grace.” ^[27] We like that phrase “unmixed grace.” Unfortunately, throughout history, fairists have attempted to add the human work of faith or choice to God’s grace (theologically referred to as synergism ^[28]), but as the Apostle has said, “there is a remnant chosen by [God’s] grace [for salvation]. And if by [God’s] grace, then it is no longer by [human] works [even a human-produced faith]; if it were, grace would no longer be grace” (Rom 11:5-6).

Several modern NT scholars interpret Ephesians 2:8-9 in agreement with the Protestant Reformation as well. One of the most respected Evangelical Bible commentators of our day, Peter O’Brien, writes in his well regarded Pillar Commentary:

God’s magnificent rescue from death, wrath, and bondage [cf. Eph 2:1-3] is all of grace. It neither originates in nor is effected by the readers. Instead, it is God’s own gift, a point Paul goes out of his way to emphasize. . . . [Salvation] is not because of human initiative (v. 8). . . . The divine intervention in providing salvation apart from any human effort or achievement is to exclude all human boasting. . . . Men and women have nothing which they can bring [for salvation] as their own to the living God [including saving faith]. ^[29]

The popular Bible teacher James Montgomery Boice (1938-2000) wrote:

Paul is writing that . . . we do not contribute to our salvation even in so vital a matter as the faith by which Christ’s work is received. If [saving] faith were [from us], then we would be able to boast in heaven. We would be there because of the grace of God plus [our] faith, and another would not be there because in his case [his] faith was lacking. ^[30]

Andrew T. Lincoln writes in his highly respected contribution to the Word Biblical Commentary series:

[The Apostle] excludes the readers’ causation or authorship of their salvation. . . . “Works” . . . stands for human effort in general. Salvation is not achieved by human performance or any attempt to earn God’s approval. . . . [The Apostle] wants them to have a clear understanding of their privileged position as recipients of a salvation that is totally God’s gracious work . . . a salvation that is not based on human effort. ^[31]

Finally, John Stott writes in his commentary on Ephesians:

We must never think of salvation as a kind of transaction between God and us in which he contributes grace and we contribute faith. For we were dead, and had to be quickened before we could believe. No, Christ’s apostles clearly teach elsewhere that saving faith too is God’s gracious gift (Phil 1:29; Acts 18:27). ^[32]

For those who would still doubt that any kind of biblical faith is solely and completely a gift from and work of God, we would encourage them to read chapter 6.5 on miracle faith which is clearly portrayed in Scripture as a supernatural gift of God. ^[33]

C) What it Really Means to be Saved by Grace & Not Works: Saved by God’s works alone

When Scripture states that a person’s salvation is ultimately by God’s “grace,” it means that every part of salvation is ultimately by God’s work instead of any human “works.” In a Universe created by God and ruled by laws of cause and effect, our salvation must be ultimately produced by someone’s work. And if it is not ultimately caused by any work or act of a human, then it must be accomplished only by the works of God, therefore making it only by the grace of God. As C. S. Storms, former Professor of Systematic Theology at Wheaton has written:

For to say that something is done by grace is simply to say that it is done by God. If salvation is from beginning to end a manifestation of God’s grace then it is from beginning to end a work of God. ^[34]

Likewise, John MacArthur has written:

Because He is gracious, God takes the initiative, drawing the sinner (John 6:44, 65), granting repentance (Acts 3:26; 5:31; 11:18), and awakening the heart to faith (Acts 13:48; 16:14). Every aspect of the believer’s response–conviction, repentance, and faith–is the result of God’s gracious work in the heart. ^[35]

Therefore, the ultimate source of every ingredient required for our salvation is God Himself, including saving faith (cf. Eph 2:8-9; Phil 1:29; Rom. 4:16; 1 Tim 1:14; John 6:44; Acts 16:14; 18:27; 1 Pet 1:21; Heb 12:2).

The fact that the gift of saving faith works through us (not from us) does not change the fact that its ultimate source is God, not us. He is the “author” of it, not us (Heb. 12:2). Along these lines, Bible scholar Albert Barnes (1798–1870) explained:

It is certainly true that [saving] faith is the gift of God. It exists in the mind only when the Holy Spirit produces it there, and is, in common with every other Christian excellence, to be traced to His agency on the heart. This opinion, however, does not militate at all with the doctrine that man himself “believes.” It is not God that “believes” for him, for that is impossible. It is his own mind that actually believes, or that exercises faith. . . . Still this does not conflict at all with the opinion, that if we exercise faith, the inclination to do it is to be traced to the agency of God on the heart. ^[36]

Accordingly we will consistently insert the word “ultimately” in our discussion of the source of our salvation because all recognize that saving faith must operate in and through a saved person. However, if salvation is ultimately by God’s grace, then we must insist that the ultimate source of that faith is the work of God and the only reason we would ever possess it. Only one party in the transaction of salvation can truly and ultimately have a free choice not dependent on the action of the other, and God wants that free choice that ultimately decides a person’s eternal destiny to be His, because He decided salvation would be by His grace and for His glory, rather than our choice and works for our glory. ^[37]

If being saved by God’s grace alone instead of our works doesn’t mean being saved by God’s works alone, what else does it mean? This is certainly what the Protestant Reformers meant by sola gratia. As noted in the previous chapter, we don’t believe fairists are being honest when they say they believe in salvation by God’s grace alone as well. It would be more accurate to say they believe in salvation by God’s generosity—He takes the little faith, humility, fear, repentance, etc. that we supposedly freely choose to exercise toward Him and He gives us a whole lot more in return. A fairist can never truly thank God for choosing and saving them by grace. By generosity, yes, but not grace. Not if he wishes to honor the traditional Protestant understanding of salvation by God’s grace alone. This was reflected in Augustine when he wrote:

The grace of Christ, without which neither infants nor adults can be saved, is not bestowed on account of any virtues, but is given freely, which is why it is called ‘grace’. . . . Consequently, those who are delivered from punishment by grace are called, not vessels of their own virtues, but ‘vessels of mercy’ (Rom.9:23). Whose mercy? God’s, the One Who sent Christ Jesus into the world to save the sinners whom He foreknew, and predestined, and called, and justified, and glorified. Now, who could be so madly insane as to fail to give inexpressible thanks to the mercy which liberates whom it chooses? ^[38]

To say that we are saved by grace means more than the fact that we are not saved by any merit of our own. To be saved by grace also means that we were not ultimately saved by any power, act, or decision of our own. God’s saving grace is not just mercy to save us if we will do something (like have faith), but it is the supernatural power of spiritual recreation that enables and “guarantees” (Rom 4:16) that spiritually dead humans will fulfill every requirement of salvation, including saving faith. ^[39]

The fact that saving grace includes saving power is communicated by the Apostle when he writes: “But because of His great love for us, God, Who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions— [therefore] it is by grace you have been saved” (Eph 2:4-5). Notice the reason here that the Apostle says we “have been saved” “by grace.” It is because He “made us alive . . . when we were dead.” Accordingly, saving grace is not just giving us mercy, but a supernatural power and ability to get saved.

Being saved by grace in Scripture does not simply mean that God was kind enough to provide a way for us to save ourselves by exercising our free will to repent of sin and believe in Christ. This is because, in Scripture, salvation by God’s grace is described as being in exact opposition specifically to being saved by human works, because we are ultimately saved only and completely by God’s works.

The grace by which we are saved was not only the mercy to accept us, but a power to change us into a person that would get saved. Along these lines, B. B. Warfield (1851-1921), of the Old Princeton school of theology, continued to preserve this central tenet of the Protestant Reformation when he wrote: “We confess that it was God who made us men; let us confess with equal heartiness that it is God who makes us Christians.” ^[40]

We would suggest some parallels between our being created and born physically and being born again spiritually for salvation. Did we have any choice, power, or ultimate part to play in our first creation? Obviously it was completely the work of God. Likewise, being “created in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2:10) for our salvation is completely the work of God.

The spiritual gift of salvation is just like other spiritual gifts of God’s grace. Do those gifted in teaching or serving choose their gift? Do they have to do something to receive it? Are not spiritual gifts given to Christians to serve God, given solely according to the choice, work, and grace of God? Of course, like the gift of salvation, we are responsible to develop our spiritual gifts. But their possession is completely the choice and work of God. So it is with the spiritual gift of saving faith given to dead sinners to humble themselves before God for the forgiveness of their sins.

Unfortunately, one primary way in which fairism maintains their view that humans are capable of saving faith is to dilute the biblical meaning of receiving Christ for salvation into a rather morally neutral act or decision, essentially denying that there is necessarily anything “good” about choosing and receiving Christ for salvation. In fairism, the decision to trust Christ for salvation is rather like other decisions humans are able to make and are responsible for, and often described as merely accepting a simple gift from someone. ^[41]

Contrary to fairism, saving faith in Christ involves a lot more than, for example, a historical belief in George Washington as America’s first President. Along these lines, D. M. Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) said:

Our very believing is the result of the power of God . . . There is a strong tendency to talk in a superficial manner about believing, as if it were an easy thing which any man can do if he feels disposed to it. ^[42]

Accordingly, we need to begin with an honest discussion of what is required to be saved. The Apostle John wrote: “to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12). To receive Christ as Savior requires that we have “believed in His name,” the Lord Jesus Christ. ^[43] This necessarily involves sufficiently recognizing Who He is, particularly in relation to who we are. ^[44]

The Apostle Paul wrote: “If you [sincerely] confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead [for your sin], you will be saved” (Rom 10:9). Sincerely believing that “Jesus is Lord” and our only Savior, requires a great deal of humility including: 1) A humble admission of our disobedience to God, 2) A humble admission that our “good” works are worthless to pay for our sin, 3) a humble admission that we justly deserve Hell, 4) A humble reverence for God and fear of His judgment; and 5) A humble and sincere confession and admission that “Jesus is Lord” and that accordingly we must submit our lives under His rightful authority.

Do we really believe that unregenerated humans, described in Scripture as spiritually dead, deaf, blind, impotent, and hostile to God are capable of any of the very humble, spiritual, and moral acts required for salvation and a sincere confession that Jesus is their Lord? ^[45] Not at all. Accordingly, the same Apostle who wrote that someone must ”confess with your mouth ‘Jesus is Lord’” (Rom 10:9) in order to be saved, also wrote “no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 12:3).

All of the humble acts and attitudes described above are necessary ingredients in saving faith if it is to be saving at all. And if merely physically born humans are not capable of them, then God must do something unique and supernatural to them first to heal them of their spiritual deadness, deafness, blindness, uselessness, and hostility. And if God must do something first for anyone to be saved, on what basis does He do this? What ultimately triggers God choosing to enable someone to get saved?

It clearly is not something a spiritually dead, deaf, blind, impotent, hostile, and sinful human does. Therefore, we are back to the gracist claim that God is ultimately responsible for a person’s salvation and eternal destiny, because He must spiritually resuscitate them. ^[46]

And when He does, salvation is automatic and certain. This is why we prefer to refer to this as “irresistible faith” rather than the traditional theological statement of “irresistible grace.” As we discuss more thoroughly elsewhere, when God opens the spiritual eyes, ears, and heart of a person, they will see Christ for Who He really is and such belief will be automatic just as anything else we see is. ^[47]

Also contrary to a common belief in fairism, the reason that the human contribution to our salvation does not violate salvation by God’s grace is not because these saving acts of faith, repentance, fear of God, and humility are morally neutral. All of the human acts and attitudes involved in salvation are virtuous and deserving of merit in and of themselves.

However, the reason we claim to be saved by grace is because all of these virtuous human acts necessary to get saved are ultimately the gift of God to us, through the work of God in us. God gives His elect these saving virtues purely out of His unconditional grace through indwelling them by His regenerating Spirit, and not because the saved have done anything unique or special to cause or require such grace to be given. Accordingly, the Apostle speaks of: “God, Who has saved us . . . not because of anything we have done but because of His own purpose and grace” (2 Tim 1:8-9). Fairist cannot honestly talk like that because they do not honestly believe that.

Therefore, notice in the following exchange what the Savior says:

Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. . . . Then they asked Him, “What must we do to work [ergazometha] the works [erga] God requires [for eternal life, salvation]?” Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent.” (John 6:27-29)

We believe Jesus is saying at least two things here. First, “to believe in the One He has sent” is required to receive the “eternal life” that Jesus “will give you.” However, such believing ­­is “the work of God,” and not the human. As D. A. Carson comments:

Their question therefore resolves into this: Tell us what works God requires, and we will perform them. . . . They display no doubt about their intrinsic ability to meet any challenge God may set them; they evince no sensitivity to the fact that eternal life is first and foremost a gift [only] within the purview [power, authority] of the Son of Man (v. 27). Jesus sets them straight: The work of God—i.e. what God requires—is faith. . . . And even the faith that we might exercise is the fruit of God’s activity (cf. notes on 6:44, 65 [“no one comes to Me unless the Father drags him”]. ^[48]

Jesus could hardly be clearer that saving faith is the gift and work of God, and we are reminded again of the Apostle’s rebuke to anyone who would claim otherwise: “If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly­­­­­ teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing” (1 Tim 6:3). Jesus said believing in Him for salvation is the work of God, not humans. As Augustine put it, referring to Christ’s invitation to salvation in Revelation 3:20: “The nature of the Divine goodness is not only to open to those who knock, but also to cause them to knock and ask.” ^[49]

And, as demonstrated in the previous chapter (6.2), this is absolutely necessary because there are obviously all kinds of virtuous, meritorious things involved in believing in Christ for salvation and if they were not the work of God, but something we could and did do, then we would have to confess our salvation is ultimately a human work rather than a divine one. The reason it is not, is not because believing in Christ is some sort of morally neutral, mundane believing as fairist would like to think, but because this very virtuous believing is the work of God.

Along the same lines, “God . . . gives grace to the humble” (1 Pet 5:5), even saving grace. However, such humility is not something spiritually dead humans are capable of, and if they were, then we would ultimately be saved by a moral, virtuous work we did. To deny that the humility involved in our conversion is a virtuous, meritorious work is to forget that it was a central requirement of the OT law. Notice how the Prophet Micah sums up the OT law:

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. (Micah 6:8; cf. 2 Kgs 22:19; Ps 51:17; Isa 57:15; 1 Pet 5:6)

We repeat: such saving humility is not something spiritually dead humans are capable of, and if they were, then we would ultimately be saved by a moral work we did. Even the humility involved in conversion is solely the work of regeneration, and nothing we can take credit for, or else we must admit we believe in salvation ultimately by a virtuous human work that was a summary virtue of OT law.

Accordingly, even proponents of some kind of prevenient grace by which God enables a person to choose saving faith if they want to, cannot answer why one is saved and another is not without making the difference hinge on a moral, virtuous, human work. If God did indeed give others the same ability to believe as He did us, but they did not do so, why did we? Fairists can only answer with something that is a moral, virtuous human work that is the ultimate reason we are saved instead of God’s work.

This is why the faith that humans exercise to be saved, is always contrasted in Scripture with human works. The faith that saves us is not a human work. And it is not a human work because it is solely a work of God in us, given as a gift to us. Accordingly, Luther, commenting on the Apostle’s description of salvation as being “justified freely by His grace” (Rom 3:24) wrote to the fairist Erasmus:

You cannot plead obscurity and ambiguity; the matter and the words are as plain and simple as can be. Granted that your friends assign to ‘free will’ [or faith, humility, etc.] ‘as little as possible’, nonetheless they teach us that by that little we can attain righteousness and grace; and they solve the problem as to why God justifies one and abandons another simply by presupposing ‘free will’, and saying: ‘The one endeavored [humbled themselves, believed on Christ as anyone could, etc.] and the other did not; and God regards the one for his endeavor and the despised the other; and He would be unjust were He to do anything else!’

In what they say and write they profess that they do not attain grace to earn merit, nor call the merit in question “earned.” But they are only trying to fool us by a word, for they hold the thing nonetheless. . . . Do they not make God a respecter of works, merits, and persons, when they say that one man is without grace by his own fault, because he did not endeavor [humble himself, believe as anyone could, etc.], whereas another, because he endeavors, obtains grace which he would not have obtained had he not endeavored? If this is not earned merit, I should like to be told what earned merit may be said to be!

The Pelagians confess and assert earned merit straightforwardly, candidly and honestly, calling a spade a spade and teaching what they really hold. But our friends here [i.e. fairists], who hold and teach the same view, try to fool us with lying words and false appearances, giving out that they disagree with the Pelagians, when there is nothing that they are further from doing! ^[50]

Along these lines, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) said many critical things about saving faith in the following:

[T]he kicking against the doctrine of election is a kicking against the Gospel, because this doctrine is a first principle in the divine plan of mercy, and when rightly known, it prepares our minds to receive all the other doctrines. Or on the contrary, misunderstand this, and you are pretty sure to make mistakes about all the rest.

Take for instance final perseverance; some men say, “If we continue in faith, and if we continue in holiness, we shall certainly be saved at last.” Do you not see at once that this is legality—that this is hanging our salvation upon our work—that this is making our eternal life to depend on something we do?

Nay, the doctrine of justification itself, as preached by an Arminian, is nothing but the doctrine of salvation by works, lifted up; for he always thinks faith is a work of the creature and a condition of his acceptance. It is as false to say that man is saved by faith as a work, as that he is saved by the deeds of the law [like humility]. We are saved by faith as the gift of God, and as the first token of his eternal favor to us; but it is not faith as our work that saves, otherwise we are saved by works, and not by grace at all. ^[51]

More succinctly, Spurgeon preached: “God wrought our deliverance alone, and he alone shall have the praise.” ^[52]

Along the same lines, Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) wrote: “Those who are in a state of salvation are to attribute it to sovereign grace alone, and to give all the praise to him, who maketh them to differ from others.” ^[53]

Likewise, the respected Church leader and teacher D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote:

A Christian is the result of the operation of God, nothing less, nothing else. No man can make himself a Christian; God alone makes Christians. A Christian is one who has been created anew; and there is only One who can create, namely, God. It takes the power of God to make a Christian. ^[54]

More recently, the well known Presbyterian theologian Donald Bloesch has written:

It is not free [human] will but free [divine] grace that saves us. We respond to the message of the gospel but always through the power of the Spirit, not on the basis of our own power or capacity. In conversion we are mastered by God, but we are not hypnotized or pulverized. We are liberated by being overpowered. . . .

Our seeking for salvation is itself a sign of our election by God (cf. in 6:44). Pascal acknowledged this biblical truth: “You would not seek me if you had not found me.” John of the Cross wisely perceived that if we are seeking God, it is because God is seeking us even more.

It is well to recognize that genuine seeking for God is itself a means of grace (cf. Mt 7:7-8). We must seek with all our heart, but this is possible only through the working of the Spirit. Yet seeking for salvation is no guarantee that we will find salvation or that we will be kept in salvation. Seeking will end in belief only if the Spirit infuses us with his grace. The very power to believe is also a gift of the Spirit. ^[55]

The human must never be confounded with the divine, that salvation is never a cooperative affair between willing humans and the Spirit of God but always a surprising work of grace that does not merely negate our will but turns our will in a completely new direction so that we can act and believe yet not to gain salvation but to give evidence that we are indeed recipients of saving grace.

According to Pinnock [and other fairists] we are not dead in sin, but we are drowning and thereby still have the power to reach out when God gives us a helping hand. Yet Scripture irrefragably teaches that the sinful human race is indeed dead in sin (Eph 2:1, 5; 5:24) and that we need to be liberated before we can repent, believe and obey. ^[56]

These men have maintained not only the biblical view of saving faith, but the Church’s historical view. Fairists have abandoned both as demonstrated in the next chapter.

Extras & Endnotes

Devotion to Dad

Our Father in Heaven, we praise You for saving us by Your grace, power, sacrifice, and regeneration. We glory in taking absolutely no credit for our salvation and we joyfully admit that we had nothing to do with it—it was and is all You! May all who have been saved by grace, understand, believe, and proclaim the same.

Gauging Your Grasp

1. What Scriptures do we claim clearly indicate that humans are incapable of saving faith before regeneration? Do you agree or disagree and why?
2. We claim that saving faith actually includes and requires several moral attitudes and acts including humility, fear of God, and repentance. Do you agree or disagree? If this is true, how then can salvation still be said to be ultimately by God’s grace?
3. We claim that Ephesians 2:8-9 make it clear that saving faith is a gift and work of God. Do you agree or disagree? What are the implications in the debate between fairism and gracism if this is true?
4. What are several specific things that we believe being saved by grace means?
5. What are at least two reasons is it important to say we are “ultimately” saved by God’s grace?
6. Why do we believe that a merely human ability to believe is not implied by biblical requirements to believe? Do you agree or disagree and why?
7. We claim that fairist theology inevitable leads to at least an attitude of boasting. Do you agree or disagree and why?
8. What do we mean by “salvation by God’s generosity” rather than by His grace?
9. How does fairist theology often demonstrate that saving faith is not a meritorious human work? Why do we claim that saving faith is contrasted with human works? Which view do you agree with and why?

Recommended Reading

• There is considerably more biblical arguments regarding the spiritual inability of unregenerated humanity and the nature of saving faith in Book 4: Biblical Psychology, chapters 4.12-16. See especially chapter 4.16 concerning the nature of saving faith.
• The classic treatment of the spiritual inability of unregenerated humanity is Martin Luther’s The Bondage of the Will.

Publications & Particulars

1. Francis Foulkes, The Letter of Paul to the Ephesians, TNTC (Eerdmans, 1989), 77. ↑

2. Albert Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, Eph 2:8-9; online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑

3. John MacArthur, MacArthur’s New Testament Commentary, Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM (Parsons Technology, 1997), Eph 2:8-9. ↑

4. Ibid. ↑

5. F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, NICNT (Eerdmans, 1984), 283. ↑

6. Excerpt from section 4.14.B.3. ↑

7. Invariably and understandably, most commentators we consulted focus on the union with Christ in making us alive, instead of what this statement is saying about the state of unregenerated humans. An exception is Charles Hodge (1797–1878) who illustrated the significance of Christ making us alive for salvation when he writes:

   There is an intimate connection between this clause [God . . . made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions”] and the preceding paragraph. In 1:19 . . . the apostle prays that the Ephesians might duly appreciate the greatness of that power which had been exercised in their conversion. It was to be known from its effects. It was that power which was exercised in the resurrection and exaltation of Christ, and which had wrought an analogous change in them. The same power which quickened Christ has quickened you. It serves to connect this clause with what precedes. ‘God raised Christ from the dead, and he has given life to you dead in trespasses and sins.’ Hodge; See also John MacArthur, Eph 2:8-9. ↑

8. MacArthur, in loc. ↑

9. For considerably more on the spiritual deadness and inability of unregenerated humans see chapters 4.12-14. ↑

10. Augustine of Hippo, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

11. Augustine of Hippo, Against Two Letters of the Pelagians, 2:23; quoted online at http://www.monergism.com ↑

12. John Owen, quoted at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

13. Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, trans. by J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston (Baker, 1957), 158. ↑

14. Matthew Henry, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

15. D. M. Lloyd-Jones, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

16. Thus, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Early Christian Literature (BDAG) defines psychikos as: “pertaining to the life of the natural world and whatever belongs to it, natural.” (F. W. Danker, ed., 3^rd ed. [University Of Chicago Press, 2001]). ↑

17. C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, BNTC (Hendrickson, 2000), 77. ↑

18. Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Eerdmans, 1987), 116. ↑

19. Henry Morris, the father of modern Christian science, calculated that in the estimated 1700 years between Adam and Noah, with people having many children until very old age, that around 10 billion people were on the Earth at the time of the flood. Thomas Pickett explains Morris’ calculations and concludes: “Although it is difficult to obtain an actual value of world population at the time of the flood, 5 to 17 billion people would appear to be reasonable populations, with an average of around 10 billion.” See calculations online at http://www.redeemerfw.org. ↑

20. For further discussion on the expanding scope of saving revelation see section 7.5.C. ↑

21. Quoted from section 4.14.A. For further discussion on the logical attractiveness of the Gospel and the wonder that most refuse it see here. ↑

22. Abraham Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit, trans. by Henri De Vries, (Eerdmans, 1946), 407. ↑

23. MacArthur, in loc. ↑

24. David Hunt has written regarding Ephesians 2:8-9:

    Nor will the grammar, as W. G. MacDonald says, “permit ‘faith’ to be the antecedent of ‘it’”. . . . Nor does it require a knowledge of Greek, but simply paying attention to the entire context of Ephesians 2:8-10, to realize that salvation, not faith, is “the gift of God”—as all of Scripture testifies. (453)

    Likewise, Christian theologian Norm Geisler, in his book Chosen but Free (Bethany House, 1999), claims that the “faith” Paul mentions in Ephesians 2:8 should be excluded from this verse as something that is “not of yourselves,” “is a gift of God”, and is “not as a result of works.” He writes:

    It is very clear from the Greek that Ephesians 2:8-9 is not referring to faith as a gift from God. For the “it” (touto) is neuter in form and cannot refer to “faith” (pistis), which is feminine.” (182).

    Interestingly, in Dr. Geisler’s Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics he states: “Faith is a gift of God, and no one can believe without it” ([Baker, 1999], 239).

    Nevertheless, Dr. Geisler’s opinion in his book specifically on the subject of saving faith contradicts both ancient and modern NT scholarship, as one is very hard pressed to find anyone who would agree with him. Again, the text reads: “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8). At the very least, all exegetes we could find recognize that the Apostle is clearly including the “faith” through which we are saved as something that is “not of yourselves,” and therefore rightly understood as included in those things that are “a gift from God.”

    What commentators are divided on is the secondary point of whether or not the pronoun “this” is referring specifically to “faith,” or is it generally referring to being “saved.”

    Many ancient and modern exegetes favor the idea that the Apostle is not referring specifically or primarily to “faith” as that which is “not of yourselves” because of the differing gender of the noun “faith” (feminine) and the pronoun “this” (neuter). Harold Hoehner, Professor of NT at the rather fairist (Arminian) Dallas Theological Seminary, says that commentators in this camp include Theophylact, Calvin, Alford, Schnackenburg, Bruce, Lincoln, Best, O’Brien, Stott, Boice, and Foulkes. Dr. Hoehner describes this view when he writes:

    Paul elaborated, And this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God. Much debate has centered around the demonstrative pronoun “this” (touto). Though some think it refers back to “grace” and others to “faith,” neither of these suggestions is really valid because the demonstrative pronoun is neuter whereas “grace” and “faith” are feminine. Also, to refer back to either of these words specifically seems to be redundant.

    Rather the neuter touto, as is common, refers to the preceding phrase or clause. (In Eph. 1:15 and 3:1 touto, “this,” refers back to the preceding section). Thus it refers back to the concept of salvation (2:4-8a), whose basis is grace and means is faith. This salvation does not have its source in man (it is “not from yourselves”), but rather, its source is God’s grace for “it is the gift of God.” (Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, [SP Publications, 1983], in loc]

    First, if “This salvation does not have its source in man” then neither does the faith through which we are saved, a point that Dr. Hoehner seems reluctant to make. Secondly, it would not be theologically or grammatically “redundant” for “this not of yourselves” “to refer back to” faith. As we have noted, this is the most important point of the text as the Apostle endeavors to make it clear that salvation is by grace.

    Secondly, contrary to Dr. Hoehner, a claim that the neuter pronoun “this” is referring to the feminine noun “faith” is valid. Even Dr. Bruce noted, “the pronoun [“it”] . . . may refer to . . . faith: ‘the difference in gender is not fatal to such a view’” (J. A. Robinson)” (Ephesians, 289). Dr. O’Brien has commented that this view is “grammatically possible” (The Letter to the Ephesians [Eerdmans, 1999], 175). Likewise, Douglas Moo, Professor of NT at Wheaton College, told this writer personally in a conversation, that Dr. Geisler is not representing this rule of Greek grammar correctly. A neuter pronoun can refer to a feminine “concept,” just as “faith” is used in this verse.

    Robert Reymond, Professor of Systematic Theology at Knox explains further:

    To the Ephesians Paul writes: “by grace you have been saved through faith-and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God-not of works, lest any man should boast.” Even though “faith” is a feminine noun in the Greek and “this” is a neuter demonstrative pronoun, it is still entirely possible that Paul intended to teach that “faith,” the nearest possible antecedent, is the antecedent of the pronoun “this,” and accordingly that saving faith is the gift of God.

    It is permissible in Greek syntax for the neuter pronoun to refer antecedently to a feminine noun, particularly when it serves to render more prominent the matter previously referred to (see, for example, “your salvation, and this from God”-Phil. 1:28; see also I Cor. 6:6, 8).

    The only other possible antecedents to [“this” touto] are (I) the earlier feminine dative noun “grace” which hardly needs to be defined as a “gift of God,” (2) the nominal idea of “salvation” implied in the verbal idea “you have been saved,” which Paul has already implied is a gift by his use of chariti, and like “grace” and “faith” is also feminine in Greek, or (3) the entire preceding notion of “salvation by grace through faith,” which, of course, amounts to saying that faith, along with grace and salvation, is the gift of God.

    However the text is exegeted, when all of its features are taken into account, the conclusion is unavoidable that faith in Jesus Christ is a gift of God. (A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith [Thomas Nelson, 1998], 732).

    For this reason, and the ones we’ve cited, many have interpreted the Apostle as specifically referring to “faith” as that which is “not of yourselves.” These include, according to Dr. Hoehner, a collection of some of the best Greek scholars in Church history including Chrysostom, Theodoret, Jerome, Bengel, Moule, and Westcott. Dr. Hoehner adds the treatment of Robert Countess in a JETS article (“Thank God for the Genitive,” JETS 12 (Spring 1969): 118-20). O’Brien adds Caird and Augustine to the list of those who would support our view. Barnes adds Doddridge and Beza. We will add Kuyper (The Work of the Holy Spirit, trans. H. deVries [Eerdmans, 1946], 407-14), Hodge and MacArthur. Dr. Hodge wrote in agreement with several of the points we have made:

    The only point in the interpretation of these verses of any doubt, relates to the second clause. What is said to be the gift of God? Is it salvation, or faith? The words καὶ τοῦτο . . . may relate to faith (τὸ πιστεύειν) or to the salvation spoken of (σεσωσμένους εἴναι). Beza, following the [Church] fathers, prefers the former reference; with most of the modern commentators, the latter. The reasons in favor of the former interpretation are,

    1. It best suits the design of the passage. The object of the apostle is to show the gratuitous nature of salvation. This is most effectually done by saying, ‘Ye are not only saved by faith in opposition to works, but your very faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.’

    2. The other interpretation makes the passage tautological. To say: ‘Ye are saved by faith; not of yourselves; your salvation is the gift of God; it is not of works,’ is saying the same thing over and over without any progress. Whereas to say: ‘Ye are saved through faith (and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God), not of works,’ is not repetitious; the parenthetical clause instead of being redundant does good service and greatly increases the force of the passage.

    3. According to this interpretation the antithesis between faith and works, so common in Paul’s writings, is preserved. ‘Ye are saved by faith, not by works, lest any man should boast.’ The middle clause of the verse is therefore parenthetical, and refers not to the main idea ye are saved, but to the subordinate one through faith, and is designed to show how entirely salvation is of grace, since even faith by which we apprehend the offered mercy, is the gift of God.

    4. The analogy of Scripture is in favor of this view of the passage, in so far that elsewhere faith is represented as the gift of God. 1 Corinthians 1:26-31; Ephesians 1:19; Colossians 2:12, et passim. (Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM (Findex.Com, 2003).

    More recently, Dr. MacArthur has reflected the point of Drs. Moo and Reymond above that a neuter pronoun like “this” can often refer to a feminine concept such as “faith”:

    Paul intends to emphasize that even faith is not from us apart from God’s giving it. Some have objected to this interpretation, saying that faith (pistis) is feminine, while that (touto) is neuter. That poses no problem, however, as long as it is understood that that does not refer precisely to the noun faith but to the act [concept] of believing. Further, this interpretation makes the best sense of the text, since if that refers to by grace you have been saved through faith (that is, to the whole statement), the adding of and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God would be redundant, because grace is defined as an unearned act of God. If salvation is of grace, it has to be an undeserved gift of God. Faith is presented as a gift from God in 2 Peter 1:1, Philippians 1:29, and Acts 3:16. (in loc.).

    Nonetheless, even those who have taken the view that that which is “not of yourselves” in Ephesians 2:8 is salvation in general instead of faith specifically, rightly conclude that it makes no difference, contrary to Dr. Geisler. Calvin wrote:

    [Saving] Faith, then, brings a man empty to God, that he may be filled with the blessings of Christ. And so he adds, not of yourselves; that claiming nothing for themselves, they may acknowledge God alone as the author of their salvation.

    Along the same lines, A. Skevington Wood in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary writes:

    Lest faith should be in any way misinterpreted as man’s contribution to his own salvation, Paul immediately adds a rider to explain that nothing is of our own doing but everything is in the gift of God. Does “and this” (kai touto) connect with “faith,” with “saved,” or with the entire clause? Probably the latter interpretation is preferable. Hence Barclay translates: “The whole process comes from nothing that we have done or could do.” The element of “givenness” applies to faith as well as to grace, for faith is a direct outcome of hearing the saving message (Rom 10:17). (Ephesians in Expositors Bible Commentary) ↑

25. Augustine, On the Grace of Christ and Original Sin, 1:34; online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

26. Augustine, On Grace and Free Will, 17; online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

27. John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑

28. At bottom, synergism is the belief that God chooses to save those who respond appropriately to the universal “prevenient” grace given to all humans. In other words, a human act, like faith, cooperates with the work and grace of God to produce salvation such that we are ultimately saved by both ourselves and God. Thus the term synergism. This is in contrast is the Protestant Reformation doctrine of monergism which essentially believes that salvation is by God’s grace and works alone. For an excellent resource on this issue see the website of John Hendryx, “Monergism” at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

29. O’Brien, 175-178. ↑

30. James M. Boice, Ephesians (Baker, 1998), 68. ↑

31. Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians, WBC, (Nelson, 1990), 112-113. ↑

32. John Stott, The Message of Ephesians (Intervarsity, 1986), 83. ↑

33. Miracle faith is the miraculous doubt-free faith that enables its recipient to command or receive a miracle. It is not something that a human has the ability or responsibility to choose and is as supernatural and God-given as the miracle that it produces. Unfortunately, because modern “faith healers” claim that the victims of their ministries are ultimately responsible for miracle faith, they provide themselves with an easy excuse for their dismal abilities. For further discussion on miracle faith see chapter 6.8. ↑

34. Reference unavailable. ↑

35. John MacArthur, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

36. Barnes, Eph. 2:8-9. ↑

37. The fact that only God really has “free will” and every part of a human’s choices are limited by the choices God makes is the topic of Jonathan Edwards’ rather dense but insightful treatise, Freedom of the Will, online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑

38. Augustine, On Nature and Grace, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

39. For the epistemological/psychological reasons that spiritual regeneration automatically results in saving faith in a human see chapter 4.16. ↑

40. Reference unavailable. ↑

41. Salvation by generosity rather than grace is certainly the view of Dave Hunt. Yet because he desires to be accepted as orthodox, he still wants to claim he believes in salvation by grace. For example, Mr. Hunt writes:

    He [God] is the author of salvation, and it is all by His mercy and grace, not by our effort or will, that we are saved. (150)

    To believe the gospel and to receive Christ requires no work or worth [virtue] on man’s part, he contributes nothing to his salvation, gives no credit to man, and detracts in no way from God’s glory. (153)

    Read Mr. Hunt’s book and decide for yourself whether he can sincerely say such things with the rest of orthodox Christianity and not contradict himself.

    Mr. Hunt reconciles his theology as most fairists do: degrading and diluting what saving faith involves. Accordingly, he writes:

    Yes, man is totally unable to contribute one iota to his salvation. It does not follow however that he therefore cannot by faith receive the salvation freely offered in Christ. It is confusion at this point that creates the doctrine of Total Depravity and leads to the remainder of the Five Points [of Calvinism]. (154

    On the contrary, it is Mr. Hunt who is confused and who violates Scripture by making saving faith such a mundane, morally neutral thing. Accordingly he writes:

    No one can purchase, earn, or merit salvation. It must be (and need only be) received as a free gift. What ability is required to accept a gift? Only the capacity to choose—something that daily experience proves is normal to every human being, even to the smallest child. How, then, is it possible for any sinner to lack the “ability” to be saved? . . . Unquestionably, to receive the gift of salvation one must simply believe the gospel. (118)

    Human effort has no part in justification, as many scriptures declare—but that fact has no bearing on the question of free will. . . . No Christian who believes that man has the power of choice sovereignly bestowed by God upon him as a moral agent, imagines that this power has been given to man so that he could become righteous enough to merit salvation or even to contribute to his salvation in any way. (233)

    Simply believing the gospel and receiving its free gift of salvation could hardly qualify as “assistance” to God. (393)

    Mr. Hunt completely ignores all the virtuous humility and submission required to sincerely “confess Jesus as Lord” (Rom 10:9) and be saved. A saving “decision” for Jesus is certainly different than the mundane daily decisions that Mr. Hunt tries to make it. And again, he and other fairists do this so that they can claim simultaneously that saving faith is the ultimate human ingredient in our salvation, but we are not saved by a good work. On the contrary, saving faith requires all kinds of good works, which is why it is the work and gift of God. ↑

42. D. M. Lloyd-Jones, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

43. Regarding the phrase, “believed in His name” in John 1:12, D. A. Carson writes: “The ‘name’ is more than a label; it is the character of the person. (The Gospel According to John [Eerdmans, 1991], 125). Likewise, Leon Morris writes:

    The “name” meant much more to people of antiquity than it does to us. . . . The name for us is a matter of indifference. Not so in the ancient world. There it stood for the whole personality. When, for example, the Psalmist spoke of loving the name of God (Ps. 5:11), or when he prayed, “may the name of Jacob protect you” (Ps. 20:1), he did not have in mind simply the uttering of the name. He was speaking of all that “God” means. The name in some way expressed the whole person. . . .

    It is not believing that what He says is true, but trusting him as a person. It is believing “in” or “on” him. The Greek expression used here is found in the papyri in connection with accounts and the like, it seems to be linked with the idea of possession. If the New Testament retains anything of this usage the expression will convey the additional thought that when we believe we yield ourselves up to be possessed by him in whom we believe. (The Gospel According to John, NICNT [Eerdmans, 1991], 88). ↑

44. Accordingly, contrary to especially fairist theologians, believing in Jesus as Lord, not just Savior, is necessary for salvation (cf. Rom 10:8-9). ↑

45. For further discussion on the spiritual deadness and inability of unregenerated humans see chapters 4.12-14. ↑

46. Fairists, like Dave Hunt, of course, deny that regeneration must precede any of the ingredients we exercise in salvation. However, all that Mr. Hunt proves is that faith precedes salvation. He writes:

    Nowhere, from Genesis to Revelation, does the Bible teach that sinful man, without first being regenerated, is incapable of repenting of his sins, turning to God, and believing the gospel to the saving of his soul. On the contrary, it is all too clear that faith precedes salvation and is in fact a condition of salvation. (124)

    First, Mr. Hunt had better hope his first sentence isn’t true or we are saved by our works rather than God’s grace, and are therefore hopeless. What else do such verses as John 6:65 and 1 Corinthians 2:14 mean? Secondly, after this statement, Mr. Hunt lists several verses that reflect faith precedes salvation. Of course because he believes that unregenerated humans are capable of saving faith, he concludes that regeneration need not precede saving faith.

    Elsewhere Mr. Hunt adds, “the Bible puts believing the gospel before regeneration” and cites 1 Corinthians 4:15, 1 Peter 1:23-25, and Romans 10:17. These verses say nothing of the kind and such a statement is another example of the poor exegesis throughout Mr. Hunt’s book. ↑

47. For further discussion on the “psychological” aspects of saving faith see chapter 4.16. ↑

48. Carson, 285. NT scholar Leon Morris approvingly quotes other commentators here as well:

    [Edwyn] Hoskyns comments, “It would be to misunderstand what the Evangelist has here said, if it were supposed that the Act of faith were an act grounded in an independent, individual decision to believe. The Act of faith is itself the work of God (v. 44, cf. Rom. 12:3). Neither the fourth Evangelist nor Saint Paul is driven finally to a Pelagian or semi-Pelagian conception of faith.” . . . [R. E.] Brown regards faith as “the all important work of God” (p. 265) (The Gospel According to John [Eerdmans, 1995], 319).

    NT scholar Bruce Milne comments concerning Jesus’ audience here:

    They are ‘practical Christians’ . . . whose motto text is ‘God helps those who help themselves.’ To all such Jesus says, The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent (29). At this point Jesus and Paul stand side by side: ‘By grace you have been saved, through faith and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works’ (Eph. 2:8f.). The Message of John , in loc.

    Accordingly, we would suggest several commentators on John 6:44, 65 are wrong. Calvin writes: “Those who infer from this passage that faith is the gift of God are mistaken; for Christ does not now show what God produces in us, but what he wishes and requires from us.” (Commentaries). This seems to be a rather useless distinction. Jesus is clearly talking about the works necessary to be saved and that would clearly include saving faith.

    Likewise, Albert Barnes seems to go out of his way to maintain a fairist view in the face of this passage when he writes:

    Jesus did not tell them they had nothing to do, or that they were to sit down and wait, but that there was a work to perform, and that was a duty that was imperative. It was to believe on the Messiah. This is the work which sinners are to do; and doing this they will be saved.

    How can we interpret Mr. Barnes except that he is saying we are saved by a human work? ↑

49. Augustine of Hippo, ↑

50. Luther, 292-3. ↑

51. C. H. Spurgeon, “Effects of Sound Doctrine,”; online at http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols4-6/vols4-6.htm ), # 324. ↑

52. Charles Spurgeon, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

53. Jonathan Edwards, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

54. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones quoted online at http://www.monergism.com. ↑

55. Donald Bloesch, A Theology of Word & Spirit (Intervarsity, 1992), 246. ↑

56. Donald Bloesch, The Holy Spirit (Intervarsity, 2000), 251. ↑