COMMON ASSAULTS ON THE GOSPEL (Part 2)
“BELIEVE AND REPENT OF YOUR SINS” Pt. 2
Since
our English word is a translation of the Greek of the New Testament, we need to
look at the original language. “There are two New Testament Greek words which
are translated repentance in the modern English translations: metanoia
(and its verbal counterpart metanoeo) and metamelomai. The former term is so translated fifty-eight
times in the New Testament; the latter only six times.”5 This study will be concerned primarily with metanoia.
Metamelomai means
“to regret, change the mind” and may connote the idea of sorrow, but not
necessarily. It is translated by
“regret, change the mind, and feel remorse” in the NASB and NIV, and in all but
one of the passages where it is used, the primary idea is a change of mind (cf.
Matt. 21:29, 32; 27:3; 2 Cor. 7:8; Heb. 7:21).
Metanoia, the
primary word, without question, means “a change of mind.” It refers to the thinking of people who
thought one thing or made one decision and then, based on further evidence or
input, changed their minds. So, the
basic sense is “a change of mind.” This
is its meaning and use outside the New Testament and in the New Testament. It is a change of mind that leads to a
different course of action, but that course of action must be determined by the
context. In a context that deals with
forgiveness of sin or receiving eternal life as a gift from God, the course of
action is a change of trust because one now sees Jesus as the only means of
salvation from sin.
Ryrie writes:
Sorrow may well be involved in a
repentance, but the biblical meaning of repentance is to change one’s mind, not
to be sorry. And yet that change of mind must not be superficial, but genuine.
The presence or absence of sorrow does not necessarily prove or disprove the
genuineness of the repentance. 6
That
sorrow does not necessarily prove or disprove the genuineness of repentance is
clear from 2 Corinthians 7:9-10. Sorrow may lead to a genuine change of mind,
or as in the case of Judas, it may not. The point being that sorrow and
repentance are not the same thing.
But
again, the nature of the change and what is changed must be determined by
the context. So, another question must be asked. About “what do we
change our mind?” Answering that question will focus the basic meaning on
the particular change and issue involved.
Many
today make repentance and faith two distinct and necessary requirements for
salvation. In his book, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God, J. I.
Packer writes:
The demand is for repentance as
well as faith. It is not enough to believe that only through Christ and His death
are sinners justified and accepted.… Knowledge of the gospel, and orthodox
belief of it, is no substitute for repentance.… Where there is … no realistic
recognition of the real claims that Christ makes, there can be no repentance,
and therefore no salvation. 7
Is this
what the Bible really teaches? Believe and repent are never used together as if
teaching two different requirements for salvation. When salvation from eternal
condemnation is in view, repent (a change of mind) and believe are in essence
used as synonyms. Dr. Lewis S. Chafer
wrote:
Too often, when it is asserted –
as it is here – that repentance is not to be added to belief as a separated
requirement for salvation, it is assumed that repentance is not necessary to
salvation. Therefore it is as dogmatically stated as language can declare, that
repentance is essential to salvation and that none could be saved apart from
repentance, but it is included in believing and cannot be separated from it. 8
Roy B. Zuck writes:
Repentance is included in
believing. Faith and repentance are like two sides of a coin. Genuine faith
includes repentance, and genuine repentance includes faith. The Greek word for
repentance (metanoia) means to change one’s mind. But to change one’s mind
about what? About sin, about one’s adequacy to save himself, about Christ as
the only way of salvation, the only One who can make a person righteous. 9
In
Luke’s rendering of the Great Commission he uses repentance as a single
requirement in the same sense as believing in Christ (Luke 24:46-47). As Dr. Ryrie says of this verse, “Clearly,
repentance for the forgiveness of sins is connected to the death and
resurrection of Christ” (p. 97).
The repentance comes out of the recognition of one’s sin, but the object
of repentance is the person and work of Christ, or faith in Christ. Interestingly, in Luke 8:12 he uses believe
alone,
“Those along the path are the
ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their
hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved.”
A
comparison of other passages clearly supports the fact that repentance often
stands for faith in the person and work of Christ. Compare Acts 10:43 with
11:17-18; 13:38-39 with 2:38. Also, note Acts 16:31 which uses “believe” alone.
The
stated purpose of the Gospel of John is to bring men to faith in Christ
(20:31), yet John never once uses the word repent, not once. If
repentance, when used in connection with eternal salvation, is a separate or
distinct requirement from faith in Christ, then John does not give the whole
Gospel. And if you can believe that, you can believe anything. Speaking of the
absence of John’s use of repent in His gospel, Ryrie writes:
And yet John surely had many
opportunities to use it in the events of our Lord’s life which he recorded. It
would have been most appropriate to use repent or repentance in the account of
the Lord’s conversation with Nicodemus. But believe is the word used
(John 3:12, 15). So, If Nicodemus needed to repent, believe must be a synonym;
else how could the Lord have failed to use the word repent when talking to him?
To the Samaritan harlot, Christ did not say repent. He told her to ask (John
4:10), and when her testimony and the Lord’s spread to other Samaritans, John
recorded not that they repented but that they believed (vss. 39, 41-42).
There are about fifty more occurrences of “believe” or “faith” in the
Gospel of John, but not one use of “repent.” The climax is John 20:31: “These
have been written that you may believe … and that believing you may have
life in His name.” 10
What
about Acts 20:21? “…solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of
repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.” Some would say, “Doesn’t this passage teach
that faith and repentance are not synonymous and that repentance is a separate
requirement?” NO! Paul is summarizing his ministry in Ephesus
and what he solemnly proclaimed to both Jews and Greeks, specifically,
repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. The two words, repentance and faith,
are joined by one article in the Greek text which indicates that the two are
inseparable, though each focuses on a different aspect of the one requirement
of salvation, namely, faith in Christ.Editors 1
We can
legitimately translate it like this.
“Solemnly testifying …a change of mind about God, and faith in our Lord
Jesus Christ.” Repentance, metanoia,
focuses on changing one’s mind about his previous conception of God and
disbelief in God or false beliefs (polytheism and idolatry) about God (see 1 Thess.
1:9). On the other hand, belief in
Christ, as an expression of a change of mind, focuses on the new direction that
change about God must take, namely, trusting in Christ, God’s Son, as personal
Savior.
It has
also been suggested that in this summary Paul is emphasizing the distinction
between the particular needs of Gentiles and Jews. Gentiles who were polytheistic needed to change their minds about
their polytheism and realize that only one true God exists. Jews needed to change their minds about Jesus
and realize that He is their true Messiah (Ryrie, p. 98).
Metanoia is
sometimes used through a metonymy as a synonym for eternal salvation. A
metonymy is a figure of speech by which one name or noun is used instead of
another to which it stands in a certain relation. These involve a metonymy of
cause for the effect. The CAUSE is a change of mind about Christ and His
gospel. The EFFECT is eternal salvation (compare 2 Pet. 3:9, 1 Tim. 2:4, Luke 5:32). 11
Under
this category we might also include repentance in the sense of remorse, regret
with the use of metamelomai. This aspect of non-saving repentance is a
repentance or change of mind that does not lead to eternal life or the
spiritual blessings sought. Two
examples are Judas (Matt. 27:3) and Esau (Heb. 12:17). Compare also Matt.
21:28-32.
Salvation
repentance is a change of mind that results in eternal salvation. This involves a change of mind about self,
about one’s sinful condition and inability to save oneself combined with a
change of mind about Christ, that He is the Messiah Savior and the only one by
whom man can find salvation (Acts 2:36-38; 17:29-31). Salvation repentance means a change in confidence; it means
turning away from self-confidence to confidence in Christ, faith alone in
Christ alone. The irony of all of this
is that any other viewpoint is really not biblical repentance because it
virtually borders on faith in oneself.
“In this use metanoia occurs as a virtual synonym for pistis
(faith).” 12
This is
a change of mind regarding sinful behavior. An illustration of this kind of
repentance is found in 2 Corinthians 7:8-11; 12:21; Revelation 2:5, 16, 21;
3:3, 19. By Paul’s use of lupeo (to distress, grieve) and metamelomai
in 2 Corinthians 7:8-11 he clearly illustrates that metanoia does not
mean to feel regret, but involves a change of mind.
For though I caused you sorrow
(lupeo) by my letter, I do not regret (metalomai) it; though I did regret
(metalomai) it – for I see that that letter caused you sorrow, though only for
a while – I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful (lupeo), but that you
were made sorrowful (lupeo) to the point of repentance (metanoia); for you were
made sorrowful (lupeo) according to the will of God, in order that you might
not suffer loss in anything through us. For the sorrow (lupe) that is according
to the will of God produces a repentance (metanoia) without regret
(metamelomai), leading to salvation; but the sorrow (lupe) of the world
produces death. For behold what earnestness this very thing, this godly sorrow
(lupeo), has produced in you: what vindication of yourselves, what indignation,
what fear, what longing, what zeal, what avenging of wrong! In everything you
demonstrated yourselves to be innocent in the matter (2 Cor. 7:8-11).
Wilkin writes:
On some occasions metanoia is
used in contexts where the change of mind in view is clearly indicated as
having to do with one’s sinful practices. For example, in Luke 17:3-4 Jesus
taught the disciples that they were to forgive all who sinned against them if
they came and indicated that they had changed their minds regarding their sin.
In this case and others like it “repentance” would be a good translation choice.
13
Ryrie writes:
To return to the main point of
this chapter: Is repentance a condition for receiving eternal life? Yes, if it
is repentance or changing one’s mind about Jesus Christ. No, if it means to be
sorry for sin or even to resolve to turn from sin, for these things will not
save.. Is repentance a precondition to faith? No, though a sense of sin and the
desire to turn from it may be used by the Spirit to direct someone to the
Savior and His salvation. Repentance may prepare the way for faith, but it is
faith that saves, not repentance (unless repentance is understood as a synonym
for faith or changing one’s mind about Christ). 14
In the third of a series of
excellent articles on the meaning of repentance, Wilkin writes:
I wish we could retranslate the
New Testament. It would make teaching and preaching passages using metanoia
simpler. It would eliminate the confusion many have when they read their Bibles
and see the word repent…
In most cases when the English
word “repent” occurs in the New Testament it is translating metanoia. Metanoia
is not the equivalent of the Old Testament term shub. It certainly does not
mean “penance.” Nor does it normally mean “repentance.” Rather, in the New
Testament it retains its pre-Christian meaning of a change of mind. The English
reader thus generally needs to read “change of mind”—not turn from sins—when he
sees the word “repent” in the New Testament. The context must be consulted to
determine the object of a person’s change of mind.
The only times repent is
actually a good English translation is when the object of metanoia is sinful
deeds. A change of mind about sinful behavior is equivalent to repentance. 15 ¢
In the next edition of the Grace Family Journal, we will continue this study on the “Common Assaults on the Gospel” by examining assault #2, Believe Plus Make Christ Lord. This will be followed by 3 more assaults:
· Believe and Be Baptized
· Believe and Confess Christ Publicly
· Believe and Do Good Works
Footnotes:
5
Bob Wilkin, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 89,
p. 13.
6
Charles C. Ryrie, So Great Salvation,
(Victor Books), p. 92.
7 J. I. Packer, Evangelism
and the Sovereignty of God, pp. 72-73.
8 Vital Theological Issues, Zuck, General Editor,
Kregel Resources, p. 119.
9 Kindred Spirit, Summer 1989, a quarterly
publication of Dallas Seminary, p. 5.
10 Ryrie, p. 98.
11 Bob Wilkin, Journal of the
Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 1989, pp. 18.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Ryrie, p. 99.
15 Bob Wilkin, Journal of
Grace Evangelical Society, Vol. 2, No. 2, Autumn 1989, p. 20.
Editor’s notes:
1 Regarding Acts 20:21, Greek
scholar Daniel Wallace has an excellent note regarding the use of the Granville
Sharp Rule (TSKS construction) in this verse.
Wallace writes…
One major exegetical problem of the text relates to the Pauline kerygma
and the use of
meta,noian’’,vv here.
Two of the most commonly-held views are at odds with each other. On the
one hand, some scholars regard the construction as a chiasmus: Jews were to
have faith and Greeks were to repent.
Although it is true that turning toward God is a typical component in
Paul's gospel presentation to Gentiles (cf. Gal. 4:8; 1 Thess. 1:9), it is
hardly atypical of the message he addressed to the Jews. Nor is it atypical of Luke's theology.
Further, the TSKS construction in the least implies some sort of unity between meta,noian’’,vv and pi,stivj. Those
who embrace the chiastic view do not address this problem. On the other hand,
several scholars argue that the two terms have an identical, or nearly
identical referent, being persuaded apparently by the supposed force of the
TSKS construction. Although this second
view takes into account the structure in Greek, it does not reckon with the
impersonal nature of this construction.
The
evidence suggests that, in Luke's usage, saving faith includes repentance.
In those texts which speak simply of faith, a "theological shorthand"
seems to be employed: Luke envisions repentance as the inceptive act of which
the entirety may be called pi,stivj. Thus, for
Luke, conversion is not a two-step process, but one step, faith-but the kind of
faith that includes repentance.
This, of course, fits well with the frequent idiom of first subset of
second for impersonal TSKS constructions.
J.
Hampton Keathley III, Th.M. is a 1966 graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary
and a former pastor of 28 years. Hampton currently writes for the Biblical
Studies Foundation.
Copyright ©1997, 1998, 1999 Biblical Studies Press. This material is provided for personal study or for use in preparation of sermons, Sunday school classes, or other oral communication. This material may be quoted in written form but give credit where credit is due (author’s name and web site address: www.bible.org). It may not be reprinted for commercial publication. It may be copied or reprinted for distribution as long as it is given away and no charge is made for copies, shipping or handling.