An Otherwise Good Read...

Law and Grace (J.N.D. Anderson, O.B.E., M.A., LL.D.)
Inter-Varsity Fellowship Press. Nov. 1954.

"Then is there no hope for those who have never heard the good news, who have had no real opportunity to embrace the gospel? That does not necessarily follow. It seems clear, indeed, that a Muslim, for instance, cannot be saved by trying to be a good Muslim, or a Confucianist by striving to be a consistent Confucianist. But then neither can a Baptist be saved by trying to be a good Baptist, nor an Anglican by striving to be a consistent churchman. But suppose the Muslim, the Confucianist or the pagan were to come to realize - by the gracious working of God's Spirit - that he is a sinner, and suppose he were to cast himself, in his sin and need, on the mercy of God, to the best of his knowledge? Does not the Scripture say that 'there is no distinction ... For, "everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved" '? (Rom.10:12,13, R.S.V.) Such would, of course, be saved through Christ, the only Saviour - just as the Old Testament saints were saved through Him alone. And if they should ever really hear the good news on earth, they would surely be among the company of those who accept the gospel with joy at its first hearing. But if they should never hear at all on earth, I suppose they would awake on the other side of the grave to know and worship the One to whom they owe their salvation. Is not this what St. Peter meant when he said, in the house of Cornelius, 'Truly I perceive that God shows  no partiality, but in every nation any one who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him'? (Acts 10:34,35 R.S.V.) Not, of course, that any one can earn acceptance by their good works. The teaching of Scripture is quite clear regarding this. But from the passage just quoted it would seem that men are accepted on the grounds of their 'fear' of God and their consequent abandonment of themselves to His mercy - an abandonment which, like the understanding faith of the Christian, must always issue in righteous living.
Two further points must be stressed. Firstly, this line of reasoning, if it be true, by no means lessens our missionary responsibility*. We need only remember how we ourselves were brought to this commitment of faith. Was it not by the appeal of the gospel story? And did not St. Paul, as soon as he had declared that 'Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved', immediately add: 'But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? ... And how are they to hear without a preacher?' (Rom. 10:13,14, R.S.V.)  And if there be some who, like Cornelius, grope their way to an abandonment of themselves to God's mercy, is it not our privilege and responsibility, like that of John the Baptist, to 'go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins'? (Lk. 1:76,77, R.S.V.)
Nor secondly, does this lighten the responsibility of those who have heard the gospel message but not accepted it. On the contrary, it accentuates that responsibility - for such have no manner of excuse, and no semblance of alternative. There is no other Saviour, and no other way; there is a real salvation, but through grace alone; and that salvation, when truly experienced, must always show itself in practical obedience to the moral law."

The above is quoted verbatim from the last three pages of Professor Anderson's otherwise very helpful discourse on Dispensationalism; on how this aberrant theology separates law from grace and the consequences thereof. However, his handling of Acts 10:34-35, I find to be utterly opposed to what is the clear Scriptural meaning of these verses,** and I wasn't hitherto aware of theologians that teach "this line of reasoning" as he calls it. It is not too difficult to see how "this line of reasoning" energizes liberal theology, is it not?  Of those who hadn't heard the Gospel Truth in this life Prof. Anderson says "I suppose they would awake on the other side of the grave to know and worship the One to whom they owe their salvation." (my emphasis) Now, I for one, would never restrict the free sovereign grace of God, for it is as wide, long and high as the heavens and the earth! Nevertheless, how could someone who wasn't brought down to his knees in this life ever feel indebted to God in Christ in the next? There is no forgiveness without repentance*** - perish the damnable thought that it should ever be otherwise! How could the Baptist's clarion call of "Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt.3:2) be understood aright? Likewise, would not Peter's inspiring and definitive call of "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins" (Acts 2:38) be rendered meaningless? "thrown under the bus" to borrow a modern secular proverb! Many, many, more examples from the Scriptures could be adduced, but these two will suffice. Could a soul ever really and truly appreciate the redemptive blood of Christ "on the other side of the grave"? How could such an one feel saved? To me, at any rate, salvation has lost its meaning if one were to "awake the other side of the grave" without knowing to Whom his salvation was due. Not only this, but if Anderson's "line of reasoning" was biblical truth, was the crucifixion even necessary? Hardly!

* I would wholeheartedly disagree! Why bother with any missionary endeavour if the same results can be attained regardless?

** These verses teach that in every nation, Jew and Gentile alike; those that come to fear Him (through the Gospel message-Rom.10:17 etc.) will upon repentance and faith in Him, through the blood of Christ alone be "acceptable to Him."

*** We often hear these days of Christian forgiveness; that is professing Christians forgiving men and women for all sorts of vile atrocities committed against them and their family members, and this is all very good, proper, and liberating. Nevertheless, it matters not one whit that a fellow man has forgiven the offender, what of God, has He? This is where the rubber really hits the road, as it were! does the offender think he is forgiven, regardless of whether or not he has "...repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." Acts 20:21? If this be his case, is not his "conscience seared with a hot iron" 1 Tim.4:2? What hope has he if he believes that he is forgiven by God through His erring representatives down here on earth?