Does Unconditionality Conceal the Remedy?
J.C. Ryle’s nineteenth century book on Holiness is full of remedies for twentieth century problems. For example, I find these words to be a very needed antidote to much careless talk today about the “unconditionality” of God’s love in the context of healing our sense of distance and disharmony with him.
Above all, grieve not the Spirit. Quench not the Spirit. Vex not the Spirit. Drive Him not to a distance, by tampering with small bad habits and little sins. Little jarrings between husbands and wives make unhappy homes; and petty inconsistencies, known and allowed, will bring in strangeness between you and the Spirit…. The man who walks with God in Christ most closely, will generally be kept in the greatest peace. The believer who follows the Lord most fully and aims at the highest degree of holiness will ordinarily enjoy the most assured hope, and have the clearest persuasion of his own salvation (p. 181).
Can you really “drive [God] to a distance, by tampering with small bad habits”? Do “petty inconsistencies bring strangeness between you and the Spirit”? Is the greatest peace really enjoyed by those who “walk with God most closely”? Is the greatest assurance known by those who “aim at the highest degree of holiness”?
Yes. This is clearly taught in scripture. “Draw near to God and he will draw near to you” (James 4:8).
This means that there is a precious experience of peace and assurance and harmony and intimacy that is not unconditional. It depends on our not grieving the Spirit. It depends on our putting away bad habits. It depends on forsaking the petty inconsistencies of our Christian lives. It depends on our walking closely with God and aiming at the highest degree of holiness.
If this is true, I fear that the unguarded reassurances today that God’s love is unconditional may stop people from doing the very things the Bible says they need to do in order to have the peace that they so desperately crave. In trying to give peace through “unconditionality” we may be cutting people off from the very remedy the Bible prescribes.
Let us declare untiringly the good news that our justification is based on the worth of Christ’s obedience and sacrifice, not ours (Romans 5:19 “For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.”). But let us also declare the biblical truth that the enjoyment of that justification in its effect on our joy and confidence and power to grow in likeness to Jesus is conditioned on our actively forsaking sins and forsaking bad habits and mortifying lusts and pursuing intimacy with Christ, and not grieving the Spirit.
Not to tell people the truth that Ryle is teaching is to mislead people into shallow and weak Christianity. In fact I ask: is the healing technique today (which stresses unqualified “unconditionality”) producing deep, strong, durable, wise people? Or is it helping produce a generation of fragile people whose hold on reality is tenuous because it is based on an oversimplified understanding of how we relate joyfully and sturdily to God?
Reveling in unconditional election,
And reaching for all the (conditional) fullness of God,