Editions Follow Me, 2004), 15, 16.
of unfinished art that is being carefully crafted by the Divine Master. He has not finished with us yet and his work will not cease. until he has made us in the perfect image of his Son (1 John 3:2). The The energy used to carry out their work is grace. Sometimes the process It is slow and difficult, but at times it is immediately victorious. Be like I am convinced of this: that he who began the good work in you He will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 1:6).
Cheap grace? No way. When it comes to grace authentic, nothing is cheap: it cost God His Son; its value is invaluable and its eternal effects, but it is free ("he gave us freely in the Beloved"), Ephesians 1:6) and '[abounded] for many' (Romans 5:15), raising us to the kingdom celestial where God has established that we should walk.
1. Dietrich Bonhoeffer,El perdón de la gracia: El seguimiento(Salamanca: Editions Follow Me, 2004), 15, 16.
2.Ibid., 15-16.
3.A. W. Tozer,El conocimiento del Dios Santo, trad. Andrés Carrodeguas (Deerfield, FL: Editorial Vida, 1996), 101.
4.Louis Berkhof,Teología sistemática(Grand Rapids, MI: Libros Desafío, 2005), 531.
5.Ibíd.
6.This contradicts the surprising claims of Zane Hodges: "Here is It is inherently contradictory to talk about 'grace' as the 'gift of God'. the granting of a gift is an act of 'grace', but when it is viewed As a principle or basis for divine action, it is never said to be a 'gift'. it is part of a gift" (CL). The Bible is full of statements that they contradict this statement: 'the LORD will give grace and glory. He will not deprive of "Well to those who walk in integrity" (Ps. 84:11); "...to the humble he will grant "grace" (Prov. 3:34); "he gives greater grace" (James 4:6); "God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble" (1 Peter 5:5; cf. also Rom. 15:15; 1 Cor. 1:4; 3:10; Efe. 4:7).
7.This explains why Reformed theologians universally support the salvation of lordship. Most of them consider it a bit foolish.
arguments against lordship, because they understand correctly both faith and repentance, submission and holiness are parts of the saving work of the grace of God.
8.I am not explicitly suggesting aordo salutis, an order of salvation, a topic that has been written about, but goes beyond my purposes with this book. One of the materials that best addresses the issue is the book by Anthony A. Hoekema, Saved by Grace (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989), 14-27.
Hoekema shows that salvation is not so much a series of steps successive but in the simultaneous application of various aspects of grace salvadora. The order of salvation must first be a logical arrangement and not chronological, since at the very moment we are regenerated we we convert, we repent, we believe, we are justified, we are sanctified and we embark on the life of faith and obedience in which we will persevere until glorification.
In a broad sense, regeneration (or new birth) is a term used as an acronym for salvation (Titus 3:5; cf. John 3:3, 5, 7; 1 Peter. 1:23); in its specific and theological sense, it is the work of the Holy Spirit that gives new life to the sinner. The word is never used in the New Testament to refer to some limited act of God prior to faith that it can be differentiated as an autonomous event or a product independent. From the point of view of reason, regeneration by logic it has to begin with faith and repentance, but the operation of the salvation is a unique and instantaneous event.
The crucial point that must be clarified in this regard is that it rules out the idea to convert sanctification, consecration, the baptism of the Spirit or any other aspect of the conversion into a second-level experience. No stage of the conversion is postponed or offered as a second. work of grace. 9.A very important defect of the theology of the denial of lordship is its a tendency to consider that grace operates only in justification and make works the foundation of sanctification. Zane Hodges teaches that "the gift of life granted by God" and the "potential" for sanctification are gifts of grace 'absolutely free', 'but from there on' growth, the fruit, and sanctification in practice require hard work
human effort (CL).
10.Charles Ryrie may be an exception to the rule at this point, since in one of his writings acknowledges that 'all salvation, including faith, is a gift' of God" (USTG). Unfortunately, it only mentions this crucial reality as "an interesting clarification" and does not address the implications of it. in your system.
11.Contrast Hodges' statement: 'The Bible never claims that faith "Salvadora is a gift in herself" (CL).
Chapter 5
THE NEED TO PREACH THE REPENTANCE
Our ears have gotten used to hearing that men are told that "receive Jesus as your personal Savior," a play on words that does not find in the Bible and has turned into an empty phrase. "Savior" "personal" may be beautiful words for the Christian, but they turn out completely inadequate when it comes to instructing a sinner on the path towards eternal life, as they completely ignore one of the essential elements of gospel, repentance, a necessary ingredient for preaching the good news that is quickly evaporating from the evangelical pulpits, to despite the fact that the New Testament is full of it.
Pablo confronted the intellectuals of the Areopagus in Athens preaching that [God] at this time commands all men, everywhere, to be "repent" (Acts 17:30). This was not an optional note for the trumpet. apostolic, but the melody, the theme of his instructions for sinners. Speak simply removing this crucial imperative of 'receiving a personal Savior'.
1 WALTERCHANTRY
For about the last five years, I have had opportunities to to minister in many of the nations we used to refer to as countries behind the 'iron curtain', and there I found an evangelical church surprisingly vigorous, solid in the Bible, doctrinally orthodox and long live. Western Christians generally do not understand or appreciate the vitality of the churches of Eastern Europe if they are not visited personally. These churches are full (often so crowded that one is uncomfortable), the People even stand outside the temple and look through the windows. They are people who take their commitment to Christ very seriously, from one an uncommon way among Western Christians: their worship services are filled of worship and consecration, and yet they are intensely passionate; the spontaneous crying is as common as laughter; the prayer for the lost and the
personal evangelism is in the heart of these people more than the social activities or sports; the emphasis of their message to the world is a clear call to repentance.
Eastern European Christianity generally refers to Christians new ones as 'repentants', because when someone comes to Christ, the others Christians say that he has 'repented' and it is common for new ones to... believers are given the opportunity to stand before the church and express his remorse. In almost all the services in which I participated in the former Soviet Union, at least one convert made his confession public display of remorse.
It is entirely biblical for the church to make repentance the the most important characteristic of his message for the lost world, since, in the end, the gospel invites people to come to Him who can free from sin. Those who do not feel guilty but want to be released from the power and punishment for sin will not even want a liberation.
Have you realized that the Great Commission of our Lord demands that we preach repentance? Luke is the only one of the gospels that record the content of the message that Jesus ordered his disciples to they will preach: "Repentance and the remission of sins in all the nations" (Luke 24:47). As we will see shortly, repentance was the substance of the church's message to a hostile world throughout the book of Facts.
The Bible is clear: repentance is found in the heart of call of the gospel and if we did not preach it we would not be preaching the gospel that the Lord entrusted to us. If we fail in our task of inviting to the people to turn away from their sins, we will not be communicating the same gospel that the Apostles proclaimed.
The Western church has subtly changed the fundamental idea of gospel, for instead of urging sinners to repent, they Evangelicals in our society invite the lost to 'accept Christ'. This converts sinners into sovereigns and places Christ at their disposal; in fact, subject this to trial and grant the people the investiture and the judge's hammer, just the opposite of what it should be. It is ironic that who should be concerned about whether Christ accepts them or not are receiving from Christians the message that it is the prerogative of sinners to receive
Christ". This modified gospel presents conversion as a "decision for Christ" instead of a vital transformation of the heart that involves genuine faith, repentance, submission, and the new birth for a new life.
A. W. Tozer wrote:
That is why the formula 'Accept Christ' has become a panacea for universal application. And I believe this has been something fatal for many... The problem it consists of the entire attitude of 'Accepting Christ' may be wrong. It shows to Christ reaches out to us more than we reach out to Him. It makes Christ be hat in hand waiting for our verdict regarding Him, more than for us kneeling before Him with broken hearts waiting for His verdict of us. It can allow us to accept Christ by an impulse of our mind or our emotions, without greater shame or pain, without loss for our ego and without affecting our way of life in any way.
We could think of certain parallels that would illustrate what a bad way is. to address something so important. For example, thinking of Israel 'accepting' the value of the blood of the lamb but remaining a slave of Egypt. Or the prodigal son, "accepting" the father's forgiveness, but still drowning among the pigs of pigsty in the distant country. Isn't it logical to think that if 'to accept' has to have some meaning, should there be a moral attitude in accordance with it?2
The 'moral action' referred to by Tozer is repentance.
The regret in the lordship debate
Repentance is not a meritorious deed, nor is its the counterpart of faith, but an internal response. Genuine repentance has ask the Lord for forgiveness and deliverance from the burden of sin and fear of judgment and hell; it is the attitude of the publican who, even with fear of raising the I looked to the heavens, struck my chest, and cried out: 'God, be merciful to me, that I am a sinner" (Luke 18:13). It is not merely a reform of conduct, but like True repentance involves a change of heart and intentions. It is inevitable that a change in behavior will occur.
Just like faith, repentance has intellectual ramifications. emotional and volitional. Berkhof describes the intellectual element of repentance as 'a change of mind, a recognition of sin with personal guilt, corruption, and the incapacity that surrounds it; emotional element "a change of feeling that manifests in
sadness for the sin committed against a holy and just God; elements of will is "a change of purpose, an intimate turning away from sin," and a willingness to seek forgiveness and purity Each of these three 3 elements is insufficient separated from the others. The regret is a complete person's response, which is why some refer to him as a total delivery.
It is obvious that this perspective of repentance is incompatible with the theology of the denial of lordship. What is it that the teachers who deny the What does lordship have to say about repentance? They are not completely in... agreement between them.
Some radical protagonists of the denial of lordship simply they deny that repentance has anything to do with the message of the gospel: "Although true repentance may precede the salvation... it doesn't have to be this way. And since it is not essential for the salvador transaction as such is in no way a condition for the same" (CL). This perspective is based on making the "transaction "savior" a simple forensic justification (the merciful statement of God that all the demands of the law are fulfilled through justice of Jesus Christ in the name of the sinner who believes), something one-dimensional that neither at least provides the sinner with a healthy relationship with God. So the perspective The radical of the denial of lordship presents the following formula: 'If the the question is simply 'What must I do to be saved?', the answer is believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31). If the problem is broader ('¿De qué manera puedo restaurar mi relación con Dios?') la respuesta es 'repentance before God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ' (Acts 20:21)
The hidden implications beneath these statements are surprising. How or why would one ask the question of what one must do to be saved? A person who has not regretted? What would they be looking to save themselves from? person? In what sense is salvation a matter separate from the restoration of the relationship with God? Is it possible to attain eternal salvation? without becoming aware of the seriousness of personal sin and separation from God? These are the implications of the teachings of denial of radical lordship.
However, the prevailing perspective of the denial of lordship in as for repentance, it simply consists of redefining it as a change of mind, not in an abandonment of sin or a change of intentions.
This perspective declares: 'Both in the Old and in the New Testament ' regret means ' to change one's mind '" (USTG); "Is the repentance a condition to receive eternal life? Yes, if it is a repentance or change of mindset about Jesus Christ, but not if it means to regret having sinned or to decide to leave sin behind" (USTG). Repentance according to that definition is simply a synonym of the definition of faith as the denial of lordship, a mere intellectual exercise . 4 Notice that the definition of repentance from the denial of lordship denies. explicitly both the emotional and the volitional element of the description from Berkhof about this concept. The repentance of the denial of lordship it's not about 'regretting the sin and resolving to turn your back on it', it simply means change our mind about our previous concept of God and our "incredulity about God and about Christ" (USTG 98). That is to say, we could to experience that type of 'regret' without coming to understand the gravity of sin or the severity of God's judgment against sinners, Well, it would be a hollow pseudo-repentance free of remorse.
Repentance in the Bible
Does this definition of the denial of lordship fit within regret? from the Bible? It is clear that it is not. It is true that lamenting sin is not repentance (Judas did not repent despite feeling remorse, Mat. 27:3), but repentance is not just about deciding to do the better things; all of us who have ever made New Year's resolutions Now we know how easy it is to break human determination. Regret is certainly not a developed activity. to try to redeem oneself for the sins one may have committed.
However, it is not purely an intellectual matter either, for surely even Judas changed his mind, but that didn't make him give the turning one's back on sin and entrusting oneself to the Lord in search of mercy. The repentance is not only a change of opinion but also a heart change; it is a spiritual turn, a complete half-turn. In the In the context of the new birth, repentance means turning your back. to sin to go to the Savior. It is a response to the outside and not a external activity, but its fruit will be evident in the believer's behavior true (Luke 3:8).
It has been said many times that remorse and faith are two sides of the same coin called conversion. Regret discards the sin to entrust oneself to Christ, while faith clings to him like the the only hope for salvation and justice. In short, that is what it consists of. conversion.
Faith and repentance are two separate concepts, but they cannot succeed independently of one another, so that regret genuine is always the other side of faith and true faith accompanies the regret: "the two are inseparable" . 5 Isaiah 55:1-13, the classic call to conversion from the Old Testament, it shows both sides of the coin, for the passage mentions the faith of different ways ("Come to the waters!... Come, buy without money and no price for wine and milk," v. 1; "Eat of the good, and your soul will delight in delicacies", v. 2; "Seek the LORD while He may be found! Call upon Him As long as it is near!", v. 6), but includes repentance: "Let the the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts. Let him return to LORD... (v. 7).
As this verse demonstrates, repentance is a moral matter and not merely intellectual, since it requires not only a 'change of opinion' but also a repudiation of love for sin. A dictionary of the New Very important testament emphasizes that the New Testament concept of Regret is not predominantly intellectual: "Rather, it is emphasized the decision that the whole man takes a turn of one hundred eighty degrees. It is clear that we do not care for a purely superficial twist nor a mere intellectual exchange of ideas Another important theological dictionary defines the 6
regret like this:
A radical conversion, a transformation of nature, an abandonment definitive of evil, a resolved surrender to God in total obedience (Mark 1:15; Matt. This conversion happens at once and there can be no turning back. backwards, but only forward with a responsible movement along the way now taken. It affects the whole person, first and basically the center of his personal life and then his behavior at all times and situations, his thoughts, words, and actions (Matt. 12:33 ff; 23:26; Mark 7:15 par.). All the the proclamation of Jesus... is the proclamation of an unconditional surrender to God, an unconditional abandonment of everything that is against him, not only of what is evidently bad but rather that which, given the situation, makes it impossible a complete delivery. It addresses everyone without distinction and is presented with total
severity in order to indicate that it is the only way to receive salvation. It demands a delivery and an absolute commitment to the will of God... It encompasses everything that in which the new man called by the divine lord walks and accompanies the foundation for a new personal relationship of man with God. Awaken a joyful obedience for a life in accordance with his will. . 7
Repentance in the Gospels
An argument against regret that invariably appears in the books in favor of the denial of lordship is more or less the following: the Gospel of John, perhaps the only book of the Bible whose purpose is explicitly evangelistic (John 20:31), does not mention repentance nor only once. Don't you think Juan would have included a call to the regret if regret were as crucial to the message of gospel?
Lewis Sperry Chafer wrote: "Likewise, the Gospel according to St. John, written expressly to present Christ as the essential object of faith for eternal life, it does not use the word 'repentance' even once Chafer 8 he suggested that the fourth gospel would be left incomplete and misleading if se concediese al arrepentimiento un lugar aparte, o independiente del creer. No sensible person would dare to defend [repentance as condition for salvation] against such a gigantic testimony; and as many as it They have tried, without a doubt they have done so without paying attention to this evidence. not to consider the weakness of the position they held . 9
More recently, Charles Ryrie wrote:
It is striking to remember that the Gospel of John, the gospel of believing, does not use not a single time the term "repentance", although he had many. opportunities to do so in the events he recorded about the life of Sir. It would have been very appropriate to use regret or repentance in the the account of the conversation of the Lord with Nicodemus, but the word used is believe (John 3:12, 15). Therefore, if Nicodemus needed to repent, believing must be synonym of it. If not, how could it be that the Lord forgot to use the word regret talking to him? Jesus did not tell the Samaritan prostitute that she regretted, but asked (John 4:10); when the testimony of this about the The Lord reached out to the other Samaritans, John did not record that they repented, but that they believed (vv. 39, 41, 42). They believed and appear about fifty more times more in the Gospel of John, but repentance is not found even once. The climax is John 20:31: 'But these things have been written so that you may believe'
create. and so that believing they may have life in his name" (USTG).
But no one clung to this concept with more intensity than Zane Hodges:
One of the most shocking facts of the doctrine of repentance is its absolute absence in the Gospel of John. There is not even a reference to she in the twenty-one chapters of the Gospel of John! However, a writer of Lordship writes: 'No evangelization that omits the message of repentance' it can rightly be called gospel, because sinners cannot turn to Jesus Christ without a radical change of heart, mind, and will . 10
That is a shocking statement. Given that the Gospel of John... message of regret, do we have to come to the conclusion that its Is the gospel then not biblical?
The same idea carries its own refutation: the fourth evangelist declares explicitly to be doing evangelism (John 20:30, 31). The deficient not it is the theology of the Gospel of John, but the theology that we find in the salvation of lordship. In fact, the desperate efforts of the masters of the lordship for finding repentance in the fourth gospel they clearly demonstrate that they have identified their own fundamental weakness. It is clear that the message of the Gospel of John is complete and appropriate. despite not having any kind of references to regret (CL).
Hodges suggests that the apostle John was deliberately avoiding the subject of repentance (CL), for in his gospel he finds:
not a single word (not a syllable) about repentance, even though this would be the perfect place for the evangelist to locate a note about it.
But their silence is deafening!... The silence of the first chapter persists until the very end of the book: the fourth. the gospel says nothing at all about repentance, much less about it connects in any way with eternal life.
This fact is the death sentence of the theology of sovereignty. Only one obstinate blindness can resist the obvious conclusion: Juan did not consider repentance as a condition for eternal life. If that had been the case, the I would have said. After all, this book is exactly about that, about obtaining of eternal life (CL).
What should we think about this suggestion? Is it the 'silence' of the apostle Juan regarding repentance is really a death sentence for the defense of the lordship?
Hardly. H. A. Ironside offered an answer more than fifty years when he wrote the following:
The arrangement of the four gospels is perfectly harmonious: in the In the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), the call is to repentance, but in John what is emphasized is belief. Some have thought that there is a inconsistency or a contradiction, but we have to remember that Juan wrote years after the other evangelists, with the defined purpose of demonstrating that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing we would have eternal life in Him. name. It does not dedicate itself to traversing a path already traveled, but rather adds and supplements the previous records, inciting confidence in the testimony that God has given about His Son. He does not ignore the ministry of repentance to emphasize the importance of faith, on the contrary, it shows souls regretted the simplicity of salvation or the reception of eternal life by the means of trust in the one who, like the light, illuminates every man, thus highlighting the fallen condition of humanity and the need for a complete change of attitude towards the ego and towards God . 11
It can be demonstrated that Zane Hodges' assertion that "the fourth "the gospel says nothing at all about repentance" (CL 148) is False. It is true that Juan does not use the word repentance, but as we have observed in the previous chapter, our Lord also did not use the word grace. We can assume that the theologians of the denial of lordship they would reject any suggestion that the doctrine of grace was absent in the teachings of Jesus.
Regret is woven into the very essence of Gospel of John, although the word itself was never used: in the account of Nicodemus, for example, repentance was clearly suggested in the Jesus' mandate to be born again (John 3:3, 5, 7); repentance was the center of the illustration of the Old Testament that our Lord gave him shared with Nicodemus (vv. 14, 15); in John 4 the woman at the well he repented, as his actions in verses 28 and 29 demonstrate.
Isn't repentance implicitly included in the following? Juanine descriptions of saving faith?
John 3:19-21: And this is the condemnation: that the light has come into the world, and the Men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. Because everyone who practices evil hates the light and does not come to the light so that their works should not be censored. But he who does the truth comes to the light so that his works may be manifest that are done in God.
John 10:26-28: But you do not believe because you are not of my sheep. My sheep Listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life. added).
John 12:24-26: Truly, truly I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, remains alone, but if it dies it bears much fruit. He who but he who hates his life in this world will have eternal life He will keep. If anyone serves me, let him follow me; and where I am, there my servant will be also. server. If any serves me, the Father will honor him.
Saying that Juan promoted a faith that excluded repentance would constitute an exaggerated misunderstanding of what it means to be a believer for him apostle. Although John never uses 'repent' as a verb, the verbs that Yes, they are even stronger: Juan teaches that all believers love. the light (3:19), come to the light (3:20, 21), obey the Son (3:36), practice the truth (3:21), worship in spirit and truth (4:23, 24), honor God (5:22-) 24), they do good works (5:29), they eat of the flesh of Jesus and drink of his blood (6:48-66), love God (8:42, cf. 1 John 2:15), follow Jesus (10:2628) and keep his commandments (14:15). These ideas hardly fit. with the salvation of the denial of sovereignty, since all of them presuppose the repentance, commitment, and the desire to obey.
As those terms suggest, the apostle was careful to describe the conversion as a complete turn. For Juan, becoming a believer it meant rising from death to life, moving from darkness to light, abandon the lie to hold on to the truth, change hatred for love, and reject the world to follow God. What are those but images of a radical conversion?
The expression that Juan uses most frequently to refer to the The behavior of the believer is "to love God." How can sinners start to love God with true repentance? And what is it that does it involve love?
Finally, remember that the Gospel of John is what emphasizes the ministry of the Holy Spirit to bring conviction to the unbelieving world John 16:8-11. What does the Holy Spirit convince non-believers of? "Of sin, of justice and of judgment" (John 16:8). Does it not seem that the work of the Holy Spirit to convince people of sin and its consequences have the specific purpose of laying the foundations for the regret?
Repentance is an underlying concept in all of John's writings. For this reason, it is understood, but it is not necessarily explicit. Its readers were so familiarized with the apostolic message that they did not need to overemphasize the concept of repentance, and John was emphasizing facets of the gospel message different from those presented by Matthew, Mark and Luke. What we can be sure of is that it was not. writing to contradict them! Of course, it was not intended to develop a doctrine of salvation that denies lordship.
In fact, Juan's purpose was exactly the opposite: he was showing that Jesus is God (e.g. 1:1-18; 5:18; 12:37-41) and his readers they clearly understood the implication of that: if Jesus is God and we must to receive him as such (John 1:12), our first duty to approach him is the repentance (cf. Luke 5:8).
Repentance in Apostolic Preaching
Even the most elementary study of preaching in the book of Acts. it shows that the Gospel according to the Apostles was a wake-up call to repentance. At Pentecost, Peter concluded his sermon (a clear message of the lordship) with these words: 'Know, then, with certainty all the house of Israel, that this same Jesus whom you crucified, God has "made Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). This message pierced the heart of his listeners, who asked Pedro what response was expected of them, what he clearly told them: "Repent and let each of you be baptized" you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins" (v. 38).
Notice that he did not mention faith, which was implied in the call to repentance. Peter was not making baptism a condition for salvation, he simply pointed out the first step of obedience that should be come after your repentance (cf. 10:43-48). The audience of Pedro, familiar with the ministry of John the Baptist, understood that the baptism was an external confirmation of sincere repentance (cf. Mat. 3:5-8) and that Peter was not asking them to perform a meritorious action (something that all biblical teaching makes clear).
However, the message he conveyed to them that day was a direct call. to repentance. As shown in the context of Acts 2, those who They listened to Pedro and understood that he was demanding a delivery.
unconditional to the Lord Jesus Christ.
In Acts 3 we find a similar scene in which Peter and John were used by the Lord to heal a paralyzed man at the gate of the temple (vv. 19). When the crowd gathered, Peter began to preach to them reminding them that the Jewish nation had killed its own Messiah. His conclusion was exactly the same as had been given on Pentecost: "Therefore, so that let your sins be erased, repent and return to God, so that let there be times of rest from the Lord, sending them the Messiah that already it had been prepared for you, which is Jesus. It is necessary that he stay in heaven until the time of the restoration of all things things, as God has announced for centuries through His "holy prophets" (vv. 19-21, NIV, emphasis added). The Reina-Valera Updated 2015 says: "Therefore, repent and turn so that you may be erased your sins." Once again, Peter's intentions leave no room to doubts: I was calling for a radical shift of one hundred eighty degrees to to turn away from sin. That is repentance.
In Acts 4, Peter and John, a day after being used in healing of the paralytic, were brought before the Sanhedrin (the Jewish authority). Peter said valiantly: "Let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, what has been in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you they crucified and whom God raised from the dead. Through Jesus this the man is standing healthy in his presence. He is the stone rejected by you the builders, which has become the head of the angle. And in no other there is salvation, because there is no other name under heaven, given to the men, in which we can be saved" (Acts 4:10-12). Although there is no mention any of the word repentance, Peter's message for these the leaders it was obvious: they had rejected and killed their just Messiah, and now they needed a radical change in order to turn their back on the horrible sin they had committed and return to the one against whom they had sinned, for only he could grant them salvation.
When Peter was called by God to proclaim the gospel to Cornelius and his family, the message had a different emphasis: 'Everyone who believes in him you will receive forgiveness of sins in his name" (Acts 10:43).
So Peter overlooked the matter of repentance in his ministry to Cornelius? No way, as it is evident that Cornelius he regretted it. When Peter later recounted the incident to the church in
Jerusalem, the leaders replied: "So God has also to the Gentiles..." given repentance for life!" (Acts 11:18, emphasis added). Obviously, the entire church of Jerusalem considered repentance as an equivalent to the testimony of salvation.
The defenders of the denial of lordship generally resort to Acts. 16:30, 31 to support their perspective that regret is not essential in the call to saving faith. There the apostle Paul responds the famous question of the jailer of Philip: "Gentlemen, what must I do to be saved?" "Saved?" What did Paul say to him? Simply "Believe in the Lord Jesus" and you will be saved, you and your household." It is evident that Paul did not call the jailer to repentance.
But wait! Is that a fair conclusion we can draw from this? passage? Of course not.
The jailer knew very well the cost of being a Christian (vv. 23, 24), moreover to be evidently ready to repent: he was about to take it off life when Pablo stopped him (vv. 25-27) and it is clear that he was in the latest; moreover, Paul gave him a more extensive presentation of the gospel from that which is recorded for us in Acts 16:31 (verse 32 says that "the word of the Lord was spoken to him and to all who were in his house"). The jailer ended up regretting it and his actions demonstrated that repentance (vv. 33, 34). This passage cannot be used to to demonstrate that Pablo will preach the gospel without calling sinners to repentance.
Repentance has always been the heart of evangelistic preaching. of Paul. When he confronted the pagan philosophers of Athens, he proclaimed: Therefore, although God overlooked the times of ignorance beforehand, this time commands all men, in all places, that they "repent" (Acts 17:30). In his famous message to the elders of Ephesus, Pablo reminded them: "And you know that I have not shied away from announcing anything to you that you useful, and teaching them publicly and from house to house, testifying to the Jews and Greeks concerning repentance towards God and faith in our Lord Jesus" (Acts 20:20, 21, emphasis added). Later on, when he was brought before King Agrippa, Paul defended his ministry with these words: "I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision. Rather... and to the Gentiles, I have proclaimed to them to repent and turn to God, "doing works worthy of repentance" (Acts 26:19, 20).