Stephen Barkley
Sola fide. By faith alone. These words were the rally-cry of the Reformation and still inspire passion (and more than a few sermons) today. Matthew W. Bates’ central argument is simply put: Evangelicals have largely misunderstood the meaning of faith.
The word faith (Greek: pistis) in the Bible is not an easy word to translate. In addition to faith, translators also use belief and trust. These semantics for Bates are partially true, but do not represent the whole truth. Taken alone, faith-as-belief can lead Christians to divorce faith from works. A more deeply biblical term to translate pistis (as you’ve probably guessed by the title) is allegiance.
I submit that the gospel is not primarily about the necessity of the human response of “faith” in Jesus’s saving work, but rather about how Jesus came to be enthroned as Lord of heaven and earth. Allegiance alone is required for salvation. (13)
Listen to how these familiar scripture passages sound with allegiance swapped in:
It is by grace you have been saved through allegiance. (Ephesians 2:8)
Therefore, since we have been justified by allegiance, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus the Christ. (Romans 5:1)
Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through the allegiance of Jesus the Christ, so we also have given allegiance to the Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by the allegiance of the Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. (Galatians 2:16)
For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God was pleased through the folly of the proclamation [of a crucified king] to save those who give allegiance (1 Corinthians 1:21)
Bates’ central theme has ramifications in other areas of theology including salvation and eschatology. Bates frames the gospel not as the good news about how individuals can perform mental gymnastics to avoid eternal perdition. Rather, it’s the story about the eternal Christ who condescended to die on the cross and was subsequently raised and enthroned. The gospel is the story of someone worth giving your allegiance to!
Pentecostal Thoughts
I found it interesting to reflect on how Bates’ eightfold gospel narrative (adapted from C. H. Dodd) resonates and diverges from the classical pentecostal four- or five-fold gospel. Look for yourself:
Bates’ eight-fold gospel (52): Jesus the king …
- preexisted with the father,
- took on human flesh, fulfilling God’s promises to David,
- died for sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
- was buried,
- was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
- appeared to many,
- is seated at the right hand of God as Lord, and
- will come again as the judge.
The classical pentecostal ‘full gospel’:
- Jesus saves
- Jesus sanctifies
- Jesus baptizes in the Spirit
- Jesus heals
- Jesus will return
Bates’ gospel tells a story about Jesus while classical pentecostals tell a story about what Jesus does for us. More significant for pentecostals, Bates ignores Jesus’ sending of the Spirit (Frank Macchia might have something to say about that)! To be fair, these are two different approaches to one truth. Still, the differences are worth thinking through.
This book does have its weaknesses, especially in the practical working-out of his theology. He suggests that churches should recover the tradition of reading the Apostles’ or Nicene Creed during the worship service as a Christian pledge of allegiance. So far so good. Although he admits that nonliturgical churches may resist this sort of formality, he simply says they should “do it anyway” (212). Clearly there are more nuanced ways to integrate such a profound shift in Soteriology into the life of nonliturgical churches!
I imagine that Bates’ work has ruffled a lot of Reformed feathers. His work is carefully argued and deserves to be worked through (see what I did there) by anyone concerned with what committing to follow Jesus really means.
Bates, Matthew W. Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King. Baker Academic, 2017.
This is one of the most important books I’ve read over the past few years. You’re right that Bates doesn’t really mention the Spirit’s outpouring, which is clearly part of the gospel story. I’m guessing it wouldn’t do any injry to his thesis to include it, and may actually make it stronger. The Spirit has been poured out by the true Lord to enable loyal followers to live faithfully and proclaim Jesus’ kingship!
You’re also correct that the Pentecostal “full gospel” is, to borrow from Scot McKnight, a “soterian gospel,” more so than a NT gospel. I’ve often thought that Pentecostals simply assumed too much from the revivalistic tradition concerning the relevance of the gospel. Ironically, the Pentecostal “full” gospel (implying other versions are incomplete) is actually significantly incomplete in the sense that revivalists were far too individual-focused. But on the other hand, I think Bates’ call to allegiance would easily fit into typical Peentecostal arminianism.
Thanks for the comment—and for recommending this book to me in the first place. It’s so interesting to reread Paul’s letters with Bates’ work in the background.
I agree with you that Bates’ understanding would fit well into a pentecostal framework. There is certainly some interesting research to be done in that direction.