Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 7
He critiques the bumper sticker theology, “Christians aren’t perfect, they’re just forgiven,” claiming early Christians expected real inner change rather than merely a new legal standing; what does that do to common evangelical notions of assurance, “once saved always saved,” and the line between struggling and settling into sin?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
He argues assurance should not rest mainly on a legal declaration that leaves you unchanged, but on real cleansing and transformation; that challenges “once saved always safe” comfort when it’s used to excuse ongoing sin. The line between struggling and settling becomes sharper: struggling still aims at cleansing, while settling treats sin as normal because “the only difference is… forgiven.”
- He critiques penal substitution as producing “a new legal standing before God” while the person “still lives in sin.”
- He quotes the slogan and explains its message: Christians “sin just like everybody else. The only difference is that they're forgiven.”
- He denies God needed changing: “It wasn't God's heart that needed to be changed. Rather, it was our nature that had to be changed.”
- He insists sin creates a real barrier: “sin… alienates us from God,” so reconciliation requires cleansing.
- He describes atonement not as “bookkeeping” but real change: “We are actually free from the stain of sin… We really are cleansed from sin.”
- He warns of “dire consequences” when people are taught “you can live in sin” and “once you've been saved, you're always safe.”