Doctrine of Repentance: Attitude or Action

Status
Not open for further replies.

Antipas_14

Puritan Board Freshman
Hi everyone,

I'm having a little trouble understanding the doctrine of repentance, and was wondering if anyone would be able to help. Just for a little background, I was born and raised in a devout Roman Catholic family, and converted to reformed theology about 2.5 years ago. I try to teach my family everything I am learning, especially the doctrine of justification by faith alone. But when specifics come up, such as my questions below, I would like to strengthen my ability to explain to explain the hope that I have. Also, I do find myself falling into old ways, at times unknowingly thinking in terms of mortal/venial sin, so understanding this will be beneficial to my life application of the truth.

My question is rooted in providing a distinction between an attitude of repentance versus the action (or bearing fruit) in repentance. If an individual believes he is part of God's elect, trusting in Christ for salvation bears some fruit of repentance for some time, yet falls into a season of unrepentant sin and then dies, (I'm using extremes to illustrate a point) is that an indication that the person was never saved? The assumption I would want to call out here, is, the person did persevere in faith, and never came to a point of final apostasy.

Using the same example, but changing a few of the variables: if the same person mentioned above fell into unrepentant sin, but then over time began to feel remorseful for the sin, mourned over it and longed to be granted repentance, but never saw the fruit of that attitude change become a reality in his life, is that person still saved?

In summary, I am trying to understand the distinction between an attitude of repentance versus the action of repentance. What is the mark of true repentance, a change in attitude alone or a change in attitude followed by taking action, thus bearing fruit of repentance?

The answer I have in mind is that the attitude would produce the action (thereby putting sin to death by the Spirit). But what are we to make of an individual with an addiction, in which he or she no longer wishes to be bound by the sin and hates it because they long to please God, but for whatever reason, never bear the evidential fruit of repentance? What if the sinner dies before he can take action? 1 John 3:9 seems pretty clear, that person would be condemned, even though they hated the sin, they never bore fruit of repentance as we are called to do (not in a meritorious way).

I have Luke 23:40 in mind, in which the criminal on the cross comes to faith, but dies before he can repent. One could argue that the criminal did somewhat bear fruit of repentance by the words he said on the cross to the other criminal and Jesus, but I'm not sure what to make of this.

I apologize if this is somewhat elementary, but am really looking to gain an understanding for both myself and my family. Any insight or resources you can provide would be appreciated!
 
Since justification is by faith, to sin and then die, does not condemn.

Furthermore, consider that the attitude is the result of action in the mind, renewing the mind and heart. A true heart towards God is only the work of God, and is saving. When one confesses Christ, think of the fruit of the lips. The person has in one sense borne fruit. The behavior is essential to glorifying God, however, though it and words are all men can see, God knows what he did to the heart.
 
Acts 26:19-20 says, "So, King Agrippa, I did not prove disobedient to the heavenly vision, but kept declaring both to those of Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance."

Paul is speaking to King Agrippa. Paul taught that people should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance. This implies that there is a distinction between one's deeds and repentance. One's deeds are a manifestation of repentance. Repentance is a change of heart and one's deeds is a manifestation of one's repentance. If one dies before having the opportunity to show some outward behavior, it can still be said that he repented.

As soon as a person trusts Jesus to save him from his sin, he is declared righteous by God. A person is justified before he even does any good works. Someone could have a repentant heart and die before having the opportunity to live out a changed life or to manifest some outward behavior.

What if the sinner dies before he can take action? If he trusts Christ for salvation, then he is justified even if he dies before having the opportunity to take action.
 
Thanks for the reply! That makes sense, I guess I am struggling with, when the Christian is converted, yet falls into something like addiction, thus, he is mourning of the state he is in, yet, unable to produce fruit of repentance, what assurance does he have? He may cling to Christ, grieve the addiction that has overcome him, but struggle for his whole life. Does this sinner have any assurance?
 
Thanks for the reply! That makes sense, I guess I am struggling with, when the Christian is converted, yet falls into something like addiction, thus, he is mourning of the state he is in, yet, unable to produce fruit of repentance, what assurance does he have? He may cling to Christ, grieve the addiction that has overcome him, but struggle for his whole life. Does this sinner have any assurance?

A believer is changed, but that does not mean that he can live a life of sinless perfection. The believer can still sin and still struggle with sin, but there will be growth at various stages. There will be change, but not sinless perfection on this earth.
 
Thanks! Never thought of the profession of faith being a form of fruit. But my question then becomes, In Matthew 3:8 John the Baptist “Bear fruit in keeping with repentance.” Here, he emphasizes a pattern of bearing fruit with repentance. The fruit that is produced as an outcome of true regenerative faith, then, is not one time. There are many other examples of this, that the lifestyle of a Christian is marked by a progression of fruit-bearing. Yes, there are seasons where the tree is barren, but if it is barren for too long, is it not a sign to the person that his faith may not be true?

When we look at what Jesus says about bearing fruit with repentance, it seems like one struggling with unrepentant sin (sin he mourns over, but actions on putting it to death have been futile) may have false assurance.

“And he told this parable: "A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. And he said to the vinedresser, 'Look, for three years now I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none. Cut it down. Why should it use up the ground?' And he answered him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and put on manure. Then if it should bear fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.'""**Luke‬ *13:6-9‬.

Paul then urges the Christian to examine himself, to test whether of not he is in the faith:
“Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”** 2 Corinthians‬ *13:5‬.

I have heard multiple ways of the examination, one being using 1 John, second being Matthew 5-7 (Paul Washer, John McArthur respectively). So if the Christian reads these, feels he fails in a specific way (primarily in that one does not make a practice of sin) wouldn't the Christian conclude he is has false assurance. So the sinner caught in addiction (to keep using the same example) though he mourns, he has no assurance and perhaps false faith and/or hope. Am I wrong in this conclusion?

The problem is, when I compare this to Romans 7, my thoughts get unorganized. Unless my understanding is incorrect, Paul here is addressing the battle with sin, mourning over and praising God for the redemptive work of Christ Jesus. To conclude, I'm unable right now to understand these concepts systematically. On one hand, John the Baptist makes the necessity of progressing in repentance clear and a sign of true faith. John's first epistle confirms this, in that one born of the Spirit does not make a practice of sin. Paul addresses the struggle, but what if we fail the test amidst that struggle?
 
I have heard multiple ways of the examination, one being using 1 John, second being Matthew 5-7 (Paul Washer, John McArthur respectively). So if the Christian reads these, feels he fails in a specific way (primarily in that one does not make a practice of sin) wouldn't the Christian conclude he is has false assurance. So the sinner caught in addiction (to keep using the same example) though he mourns, he has no assurance and perhaps false faith and/or hope. Am I wrong in this conclusion?

The way to think about it is that there is change, but not sinless perfection. I don't know for sure if he has a false faith. Believers can still sin. To what degree or to what depth should someone doubt that they have been regenerated? I don't know. Has he been changed even though he is caught in addiction?

The problem is, when I compare this to Romans 7, my thoughts get unorganized. Unless my understanding is incorrect, Paul here is addressing the battle with sin, mourning over and praising God for the redemptive work of Christ Jesus. To conclude, I'm unable right now to understand these concepts systematically. On one hand, John the Baptist makes the necessity of progressing in repentance clear and a sign of true faith. John's first epistle confirms this, in that one born of the Spirit does not make a practice of sin. Paul addresses the struggle, but what if we fail the test amidst that struggle?

Failing the test amidst the struggle means you are not living a life of sinless perfection. Has there been change even though you still sin?
 
In my opinion, it is both.

First repentance: Action of God.
Subsequent repentance (personal begging of forgiveness of sins): Attitude and action.

God bless.
 
Christian,

Thanks for the response. I agree that the first repentance (coming to true faith) is by God's grace alone. But I am trying to help counsel someone who has fallen into a physiological addiction and not sure how to proceed. Despite numerous attempts to stop, he has been unable to, and mourns the state he is in. He seeks help properly both through prayer and through professionals, but there has been no victory. So as long as this continues to rule, what are we to make of the state he is in? He bore fruit for sometime when coming to the faith, but has fallen. Can we properly conclude he has truly come to faith? Or is it possible that he is being deceived/deceiving himself?

I am reflecting on James 1:22-27 (being doers of the word, not just hearers) and James 2:14-26 (faith without works is dead). Or as Martin Luther once put it, "We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone."

How are we to advise such a person, who knows the gospel, believes in justification by faith alone, and has fallen into a sin that has a strong grip?

Conversely, in Galatians 6:1, Paul gives this bit of advice: “Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.” To make an inference here, I would assume that there is a pattern of transgression (based on his usage of the term 'caught'). With that verse and my assumption (please correct me if I am in error) in mind, the restoration he mentions, to me, can only mean that the sinner needs to return to the state he was in before fell into transgression, perhaps when he first heard the Gospel. As Christ says in Revelation 3:3, “Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you.” So that would make me conclude that there is a chance that the believer never had the proper faith, he heard the truth, but didn't come to trust in Christ properly.

Again, I apologize if this is overly elementary, I just am hoping to clarify this in my mind so I can advise properly. As I said, I grew up Roman Catholic, so the doctrines of mortal sin/venial sin and penance still convolute things for me at times.

Any insight would be appreciated!
 
Because of sin, there can always be doubt from the perspective of another. At what point the sin proves a false faith is hard for me to tell in a lot of cases, and I hope the elders of my church are doing a good job at that. Maybe I will be able one day to make tough calls like that if I am called to the office.

Brendan
OPC
Florida
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top