Must I (sic) go home by the way of the Cross?

by Colin Maxwell
September 20, 2007

Must I (sic) go home by the way of the Cross?
Old Time Evangelicals, of whatever school, Calvinist through to Arminian, Dispensationalists etc., have always insisted that saving faith in Christ necessarily included faith in His finished work on the Cross. It was simply inconceivable that a man could profess faith in Christ while ignorant of the work of the Cross or even while opposed to it. Any one who argued otherwise was dismissed either as a member of some heretical cult or a modernist who was as likely as to deny to deny the Deity of Christ or the Virgin Birth.

We have a new breed of Evangelical now. Although they are still on the fringes, yet they are very vocal. They themselves believe in the work of the Cross, along with other fundamental objective truths, but this is all undone when they deny that it is absolutely necessary for a seeking soul to believe in the work of the Cross. This is an optional extra that may or may not be taken on board later. They argue that it really should be believed, yet the act of believing it is not essential to the justifying of the soul.

The challenge that emanates from their quarter is to find a verse of Scripture that clearly states that such a belief is essential to the acquiring of eternal life. Any one up to the challenge? To start us off, the verse that came my mind was Romans 3:25

Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;.

Without trawling through all my commentaries on Romans, both in hard copy and on CD (never mind heading then for the Internet) I came up with the following comments from some noted writers. I wish I had kept my commentary on Romans by HA Ironside, as most of these folk claim to be Dispensationalist also. The standard commentators observe:

"That by faith in his blood we become interested in this propitiation. Christ is the propitiation; there is the healing plaster provided. Faith is the applying of this plaster to the wounded soul. And this faith in the business of justification hath a special regard to the blood of Christ, as that which made the atonement; for such was the divine appointment that without blood there should be no remission, and no blood but his would do it effectually. Here may be an allusion to the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifices under the law, as Exodus 24:8. Faith is the bunch of hyssop, and the blood of Christ is the blood of sprinkling. That all who by faith are interested in this propitiation have the remission of their sins that are past." (Matthew Henry)

"Through faith - Or by means of faith. The offering will be of no avail without faith. The offering has been made; but it will not be applied, except where there is faith. He has made an offering which may be efficacious in putting away sin; but it produces no reconciliation, no pardon, except where it is accepted by faith." (Albert Barnes)

"But the text says, "Through faith in his blood." So, then, this shows you that no propitiation has had any effect with regard to us actually until we have faith in the blood. I can never I know that God has blotted out my sin until I have faith. And what is faith but trust? And then, when I trust the blood of Jesus, my sin is all forgiven me in one moment. When I humbly rely upon my Saviour’s finished work, 'Though sins were as scarlet, they become as wool; though they were red like crimson, they are whiter than snow.'" (Spurgeon MTP # 3488)

"Through faith in his blood: He goes on to show the instrumental cause of justification, to wit, faith; i.e. the close adherence and most submissive dependence of the sinner; together with the peculiarity of the object of faith, viz. the blood i.e. the death and sacrifice, of Christ; in contra-distinction to his dominion (with which yet on other accounts faith is so much concerned,) and in opposition to the blood of beasts slain and sacrificed." (Matthew Poole).

So any ideas anyone? And/or if any one has Ironside on Romans, I would be interested in knowing what he wrote.