Would Having to Meet Conditions Earn Our Salvation?

In my recent debate with him, Traever Guingrich used a couple of “not saved by works” passages (Rom 4:2 and Eph 2:8-9) to try to prove obedience (specifically to baptism) was not necessary to salvation. My response was that such passages don’t prove a sinner doesn’t have to do anything to be saved, but that what a sinner has to do is not what saves him. See the distinction?

In the debate I illustrated my reply with four examples – the walls of Jericho in Josh 6, the healing of the Israelites’ snake bites in Num 21, the cleansing of Naaman in II Kings 5, and the healing of the blind man in John 9. In all four cases, something had to be done (a condition had to be met) to receive the promised benefit, but what was done did not in any sense earn/merit the benefit received.

Let’s quickly notice the walls of Jericho illustration in particular. The Israelites had to walk around those walls 13 times in 7 days for the walls to fall but the walking is not what knocked the walls down. See the parallel to salvation? It doesn’t matter that this is an Old Testament story and that the blessing received was physical. What the story illustrates for us is that just because a benefit is received “by grace” (Josh 6:2) “through faith” (Heb 11:30) “not of works (Josh 24:13) (paralleling Eph 2:8-9), that doesn’t mean nothing has to be done to receive said benefit.

But Traever responds if God promises something based upon a condition, that means if we meet the condition God would owe that something to us (else God would have lied) and we would earn/merit it. From here on out in this article, I will call that “Traever’s rule” (since there is no Bible verse teaching such).

First, Traever should know his rule is false, because how would that work with God’s many unconditional promises? Like the one in Gen 12:3 that mankind would be blessed through Abraham’s descendant Jesus Christ (Acts 3:24-26, Gal 3:8). Since God promised Jesus would die for mankind (I Pet 1:18-20), does that mean God owes mankind salvation (else God would have lied), and therefore we earn/merit it? Hardly, and Traever knows it. He knows that (for example) just because an engagement ring is a gift conditioned upon the acceptance of a marriage proposal, that doesn’t mean the ring was not a gift – that it was earned/merited. His argument is unsound.

And Traever’s own writings indicate his argument is unsound. He correctly argued in his written debate on baptism with my friend Tommy Thrasher that to earn/merit salvation, one would have to keep God’s law perfectly his whole life. Here is how he put that concept in his comments on Galatians 3:10 and Romans 4:

· Paul upholds the standard of complete obedience in Galatians 3:10. If man’s own law-keeping is involved in his salvation then it undoubtedly must be complete and perfect. But if that were possible then Christ’s life and death were not actually needed. – p.61

· Paul next explains … if righteousness is to be pursued by the law then it must be done in totality. Everything written in the law must be abided in order to escape its curse. – p.60

And so according to Traever’s previous writings, meeting God’s conditions of salvation do not earn/merit salvation; it would take living perfectly your whole life to do that. He’s the one wrote it must be complete, perfect, and in totality; I am just agreeing with him. According to Traever and the Bible, anything less than perfect obedience disqualifies one from earning/meriting salvation. According to Traever then, meeting conditions would not earn/merit salvation.

For my next point let’s begin by noticing grace and gift are basically synonyms, and that both words are used to describe something unmerited:

· grace – unmerited divine assistance given to humans for their regeneration” – Merriam-Webster

· Eph 2:8 by grace are ye saved thru faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God

Next remember Josh 24:13 (“And I have given you a land for which ye did not labour”) and Josh 6:2 (“And the Lord said unto Joshua, See, I have given into thine hand Jericho”). Does “give” (grace) in those two verses mean the Israelites didn’t have to meet the condition of walking around the walls 13 times for God to knock the walls down? Did they earn/merit such by walking, or was it “given” to them? Meaning did their walking knock those walls down? Traever’s rule would say they earned/merited such by walking, but God says just the opposite, that it was a gift (unmerited by definition).

Similarly, did the Jews earn/merit their healing from the snake bites in Num 21:4-9 just by looking up at the bronze serpent (meeting the condition)? Meaning did they heal themselves? Did Naaman earn/merit his cleansing from leprosy in II Kings 5:1-14 by dipping in the Jordan river seven times (meeting the condition)? Meaning did he cleanse himself? Did the blind man earn/merit his healing in John 9:6-7 by washing the mud out of his eyes in the pool of Siloam (meeting the condition)? Meaning did he heal himself? We all know the correct answer to those questions, and so we all know Traever’s rule is false.

Consider also Prov 28:13 – “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” According to “Traevor’s rule,” once a person met the conditions of confessing and forsaking his sin, he would earn/merit God’s forgiveness. But God flatly contradicts that by saying even after one meets these conditions of forgiveness, God is still showing “mercy” by forgiving him. Meeting conditions of forgiveness do not earn/merit forgiveness, at least according to God. Traevor’s rule is demonstrated to be false again.

Let’s next think about the implications of Heb 5:9 – “And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him” (ESV). That verse clearly conditions eternal salvation upon our obedience, but that doesn’t make us the source of that salvation. Jesus is still said to be the source of our salvation even though that salvation is conditioned upon our obedience. Simply put: our obedience is necessary, but does not earn/merit our salvation; this again falsifies Traever’s rule.

So once we’ve taken away his objection (Traever’s rule), we are left with this: The “not saved by works” passages are teaching what Traever taught in his debate with Tommy – our works do not earn/merit our salvation; one would have to live perfectly his whole life to earn heaven. But the “not saved by works” passages are not teaching obedience is not a condition of salvation. The Biblical evidence is overwhelming that obedience is required (Matt 7:21, I Pet 1:22a, James 2:24, II Thess 1:8, II Cor 5:10, Rev 22:14, etc.). As I repeated many times in the debate, texts like Eph 2:8-9 are not teaching one doesn’t have do anything to be saved, but that what we have to do is not the thing that saves us. Instead Jesus’ death/blood does that.

hear Bible Crossfire Sunday nights at 8:00 central on SiriusXM radio Family Talk 131 and 57 local stations across America or at www.BibleCrossfire.com