Question 88: What is the true repentance or conversion of man?

Answer 88: It is the dying of the old nature
                   and the coming to life of the new.

At one time Jews came to Jesus with the shocking news that Governor Pilate had brutally murdered a number of Jews. As a warning, Jesus told the survivors that they too would perish if they did not repent. He reminded them of another disaster — not a deliberate crime, but an accident. In Jerusalem, a tower of the city wall had collapsed. It had killed eighteen people in its fall. For the second time he said: “unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:1-5). He was referring to the final judgment.¹ Without repentance, one might escape all kinds of disasters with luck or wisdom, but not the divine final judgment.

That is why Jesus considers conversion so urgent, that his first appeal to the Jews was: “Repent!” (Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:15). What does this repentance or conversion entail?

Dying and Coming To Life⤒🔗

The Bible uses different words for repentance. In themselves, these words can indicate any potential reversal, even a turning toward a worse situation. They do not tell us what is typical of true conversion.² We need to understand this in what the Bible says in its various contexts.³ From there it is evident that repentance is in every case a turning or returning toward God. This return is accompanied by a radical change in peoples’ thinking, feeling, speaking and in their whole way of life.⁴

According to Paul, conversion is — somewhat loosely rendered — dying to what you basically are, and rising as a new person (Rom. 6:4-6). This is what the Catechism connects to when it speaks of “the dying of the old nature and the coming to life of the new”. At another occasion Paul is thinking of someone who takes off his old clothes and puts on new clothes. Then he speaks of “putting off the old self (or ‘man’)” and “putting on the new self” (Eph. 4:22-24). And yet another time he speaks successively of “putting to death” and “putting away” the evil practices and of “putting off the old self and putting on the new self” (Col. 3:5-14).

All of these terms indicate a profound change. Nothing remains of the former existence. The baptismal form speaks of “putting off our old nature”. That old nature with all its wants and desires represents you as you are. So it has to come to the point where you no longer pursue whatever you want.

Our society agrees that not everything is permissible. It too calls certain practices to be shameful. There are norms and values. The licentiousness of people needs to be curbed as much as possible. On the other hand, people cry out for as much room as possible to express their human nature. In light of this, true conversion is a radical impossibility. We are not merely aiming to keep our old nature within reasonable bounds, but need to put it to death. So what is left of us?

Many people consider conversion as a total clear cut of the human nature. People would be forced to give up all the nice things and be content with a joyless existence. Perhaps this is the greatest and most widespread misconception about conversion. People act as if a converted person can no longer be a real person. In reality, it is no loss at all when we lose our old nature. In its place comes a new yet equally human nature, with equally human desires. True conversion is not an unnatural twist. Conversion does not imply any dehumanization, but renewal into a perfectly happy human being. Christ causes us to become like him. He renews us into his image. He changes us again into normal and joyful people such as Adam and Eve were before the fall into sin. Therefore, no one should think: I will keep far away from conversion; it is not for me — I would just as well remain human. Only those who come to conversion become perfect human beings again.

True Conversion Knows No Standstill←⤒🔗

Sometimes Christians can tell a lot about the start of their conversion. They experienced this turning point in their lives in a very conscious way. This rich experience strengthens them in their conviction that they are truly converted. Others, on the other hand, came to know God from childhood and therefore usually do not know when or how their conversion began. That does not make such a conversion any less real. Every Christian has his/her own history of conversion, even if it does not necessarily lend itself to a story. Nowhere does the Bible demand that someone has to be able to name the time and circumstances of the start of their conversion. Moreover, true conversion never coincides with a finished episode from the past.

This is where the Catechism makes a connection. It speaks of a conversion not as if it has been achieved and completed at some time in the past, but as something that continues into the present. No one can continue to look back on his conversion of the past. Every former conversion requires a continuation.⁵ This is because the old self does not die a sudden death, but a very slow death. Moreover, the old self can come back to life just like that. Therefore a conversion is not finished after someone, with full conviction, has at one time made the choice to follow Jesus. True conversion knows no standstill. Lord’s Day 33 speaks of “more and more” and thus clearly thinks of an ongoing, daily process. Conversion consists in dying and coming to life. What does this imply?

Question 89: What is the dying of the old nature?

Answer 89: It is to grieve with heartfelt sorrow
                   that we have offended God by our sin,
                   and more and more to hate it
                   and flee from it.

Question 90: What is the coming to life
                      of the new nature?

Answer 90: It is a heartfelt joy
                   in God through Christ,
                   and a love and delight
                   to live according to the will of God
                   in all good works.

What does a Christian notice about his own conversion? It should be the biggest change he can experience. He switches over to totally different values and standards. This process goes right against his old nature. The old self even has to die. He becomes a radically different person. But now let us take a look at the practical implication! How can he conclude that this radical process of “dying and coming to life” is actually at work in him?

Sorrow and Joy←⤒🔗

The Catechism further characterizes dying and coming to life as sorrow and joy. That helps us in our understanding. Everyone knows what sorrow and joy are. Because of these added keywords, conversion becomes much more recognizable. Someone who rejoices in God and is excited about his law, finds it sad — precisely for that reason — that he so often goes his own way. Both in that heartfelt joy and in that sorrow he may experience something of conversion. By it he proves that he wants to turn back to him. That is at the core of all conversion. Not all sorrow over one’s own failures is proof of conversion to God.

A man like Esau is proof of that. He sold his rights as the firstborn son. When he realized that he had shortchanged himself by doing so, he became bitterly sorrowful but did not turn to God. Paul calls this “worldly sorrow”. We can think of people who have become completely stuck through their own fault. They recognize that too and sincerely regret their actions. They look everywhere for help but they do not find it. They suffer deeply and end up in a situation of indifference or despair. Their sorrow does not lead them to the God of salvation. That is why this kind of sorrow lacks mercy and joy. It does not bring “repentance unto salvation,” but ultimately “death”.⁶ The wealth of “true repentance” is that a person is not only frustrated and stressed out because he has made such a mess of things, but also that he is relieved and happy because he has found the way to God.

A beautiful example of true repentance is found with the prodigal son from the parable in Luke 15. At one point he got stuck. Starvation was a real threat. That is when “he came to himself”. It occurred to him that his father’s hired hands had bread in abundance. Like Esau, he thought about how foolish he had been. He should never have left. But unlike Esau, he was not thinking only of his own wellbeing. The thing that he had done to his father (God) weighed on him more than his hunger. And what made him increasingly happy was not the prospect of bread but of reconciliation with his father. Finally, we hear him say that he will not ask his father for bread, but for forgiveness and to be allowed to return home, if necessary as a servant. The best part is that the father is no less happy than the son. He had been waiting for him for a long time. It was this father who fell around the son’s neck. After that it was celebration time.

Sorrow and Joy Go Hand In Hand←⤒🔗

We must be careful not to regard these two concepts — sorrow and joy — as each other’s counterparts. Church history teaches us how easily that can happen. One group emphasizes all the time that we have angered God on account of our sins. Repentance then gets stuck in a depression over our sins. In reaction to this gloomy kind of Christianity, another group emphasized that the gospel only brings joy.⁷ Both groups are too one-sided. In fact they act as if the “heartfelt sorrow” and the “heartfelt joy” are in each other’s way.

Even today, serious Christians can easily be inhibited in their joyfulness in God. They are afraid that this joy will cause their sense of guilt to become implausible. In contrast with this there are others who believe that Christians should always radiate joy and therefore not be concerned about their guilt before God.

The Bible does not make us choose between this sorrow and joy. Once he was home and at the banquet — with joyful music being played — the prodigal son must have felt intense joy. This did not diminish his sorrow over his past, but gave it greater depth. Thus, true sorrow over sin will not put a damper on our joy in God. And conversely, this joy will not make our sadness about sin to become superficial.

In practice, sometimes it is the sorrow and at other times the joy that will be more emphasized. When Peter had denied the Lord Jesus, he was in tears. All his joy was gone. Yet his bitter sorrow had everything to do with his “love and delight” to serve Christ.

The Catechism only briefly outlines the basic pattern of daily conversion. Every conversion is different. Every person is different, with unique personal weaknesses and faults. Moreover, every time and age raises its own temptations. For that reason it is impossible to declare one type to be a standard model of conversion and to hold it up to others to follow.⁸

Question 91: But what are good works?

Answer 91: Only those which are done
                                     out of true faith,
                                     in accordance with the law of God,
                                     and to his glory,
                   and not those based
                                     on our own opinion
                                     or on precepts of men.

True conversion results in that a person has a heartfelt desire to do what God wants him or her to do. What does God want? What does he pay attention to? What are good works?

Out of True Faith←⤒🔗

God does not primarily pay attention to what people are doing, but to what motivates them. He is very sensitive to their deepest motives. He only finds good what is done “out of true faith”. If that is not present then even the most praiseworthy actions are not good works for him. “For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23). These are the words that the Catechism is referring to.

In Rome, Christians thought differently about whether one could eat anything — including meat — (v. 2) and whether one could put one day above another (v. 5). It may well be that this concerned one specific issue and that Paul is referring to their eating behaviour on certain special days of fasting. Was one allowed to eat meat then? We do not know the details of it. Nor are we told what arguments people had for their positions. This much is certain that they could not convince each other from the Bible. The one person ate only fruit and vegetables on a given day, while another also ate meat. Who did the right thing?

Paul gets himself involved in the discussion, but does not prescribe a uniform code of conduct. He does not mention any substantive objection to “eating anything”. As far as he is concerned that is all right (v. 14). Yet he does not encourage the others to get over their objections. They should not eat meat because Paul allows them to. He finds it much more important that they stay within the boundaries of their own faith. What they are doing should be done in the firm confidence that God approves of it, because whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

This means that for some there is room for “eating anything” while for others there is no room to do so in their faith. A not-so-simple question arises here. The faith of both groups comes from the Holy Spirit. So can everyone decide for themselves based on their own faith as to what good works are? This is not what Paul claims.⁹ He means that the church members need to be sure for themselves what God considers good according to his Word.¹⁰ When they have doubts about it they should not do it, even though Paul would allow it.¹¹ If they are to eat meat, they must do so in personal faith that God wants it that way. Otherwise their harmony with God is disturbed.

The apostle is therefore not arguing for the inviolability of everybody’s views. Those who want to act “out of true faith” will continue to seriously consider whether God is standing behind their way of acting. And so we have arrived at his law.

In Accordance With the Law of God←⤒🔗

The conversion of man implies that he will gladly — with love and delight — live according to the will of God. Why then is he presented every time again with the “you shall” and the “you shall not” of the law?¹² Or is the law merely an advisory directive?

Indeed, several attempts have been made to take away the imperative nature of the law. In this vein someone has emphasized that the law contains no commands, but only gentle hints for those who love God.¹³ According to another, the law has gone down so deeply into the gospel that it practically disappears in it. In its commandments God no longer says what he requires of us, but what he gives to us.¹⁴ Be that as it may, in our opinion the New Testament shows quite clearly that the law of God consists of real commandments.¹⁵ It offers no room, according to the Catechism, for our “own opinion” about good works or for “precepts of men”. Why should it? God’s law is perfectly good. Therefore, it demands absolute obedience.

This does not alter the fact that God is not satisfied with an enforced obedience. He wants people to regard his law as so good that they will gladly obey it. We will to try to explain this important point in some more detail.

When a mother has finished her meal preparations, she calls her children to come to the table. That is a commandment, even though it is music to the ears of the hungry children. In a comparative way, God’s commandments are like music to the composer of Psalm 119. Sometimes he gets out of bed in the middle of the night in order to praise God about his laws; that is how much he likes them; and they are as sweet as honey (Ps. 119:54, 62, 103).

Unfortunately, situations can happen where such a commandment from God does not taste all that good to us. The Catechism refers to the example of King Saul. At God’s command he had to kill the livestock he had captured from Amalek. He thought that was nonsense. He claimed that he had saved the best sheep and cattle to sacrifice these to the LORD. It seemed like such a great motive to deviate from God’s clear command, but he was immediately dismissed. He was told that “to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen is better than the fat of rams” (1 Sam. 15:22). God did not think that Saul was too spontaneous, but that he was too self-willed. Anyone who wants to serve him spontaneously will first of all “listen to the voice of the LORD”, even if his commandment does not always sound like music to your ears.

We come back to those hungry children for a moment. They have no problem whatsoever to go to the table at mother’s command. This is the most ideal situation, both for this mother and for her children. But sometimes a child prefers to continue playing with his toys. Then it is not at all happy with mother’s command. Nevertheless, he has to come. When all is said and done, all the children — whether they like it or not — have to come and sit at the table. Mother’s will is law.

God’s law too is wholesome. Those who know this should obey it gladly. Unfortunately they do not always feel like it. This is because of the after-effects of their old nature, their old self (or “flesh”). It has no appetite for God’s commandments. Nevertheless, that “flesh” has to obey God’s rules. God’s will is law. That is why Calvin said: “The Law acts like a whip to the flesh, urging it on as men do a lazy sluggish ass.”¹⁶ It certainly does not give a glowing description of believers. It certainly does not fit with the composer of Psalm 119. Yet even with him things apparently did not always come naturally, for he prayed: “let me not wander from your commandments!” (v. 10). He too knew moments in his life when God’s commandments did not suit him. The “flesh” with its illicit desires was not yet dead. Therefore, the law also had to keep this psalmist away from enticing situations; sometimes this had to be done forcefully.

On the other hand, the “coming to life of the new nature” is no less real. Christ renews those who belong to him through his Spirit into his image. As a result “a love and delight” grows in them “to live according to the will of God”. Thus the law becomes less and less a stinging whip for the flesh and more and more of an eloquent rule for their gratitude.

To His Glory←⤒🔗

God’s honour and glory must be the highest aim of all our actions. The Catechism again refers to a statement of Paul in a matter of eating and drinking (1 Cor. 10:25-33). Was a Christian allowed to buy meat in a meat market? Chances were pagan priests had supplied it. If so, it had been “dedicated” to the idols, although it was sold as ordinary meat. According to Paul, you could safely buy and eat such meat. You did not have to make a point of whether it was consecrated or not and you did not even have to inquire about it. It was a different matter if someone at your table explicitly referred to that meat being served as consecrated meat. Then Paul would not eat from it. He did not want to give thanks to God for what a fellow Christian at his table regarded — even though unjustly — as polluted meat. Such thanksgiving and eating would not promote God’s honour. Therefore, the motive for all situations is: “whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God (v. 31). This general rule teaches us that our own rightness does not give us a green light for our actions.

We are already being prepared for the fact that the Ten Commandments do not contain ready-made commands for every situation. We should not covertly pity that. This is no loss. We should not pretend that the Bible is out of date on ethical matters. It is precisely because the law has not been extended into an endless series of regulations that we are forced to delve into it. This keeps us on our toes. God wants us to meditate on his law “by day and by night” (Ps. 1:2). People of this age are to listen intently to his voice and thus maintain a living relationship with him in all their walk and talk.