Free Grace Theology versus Repentance

Posted on February 19, 2026 by chfordenterprises

          Free Grace Theology is somewhere between Calvinism and Ar­mini­anism. Contrary to Calvinism, Free Grace Theology teaches that peo­ple can freely choose to be saved by putting their faith in Jesus Christ. Contrary to Arminianism, Free Grace The­ol­o­gy teaches that a saved person cannot lose their salvation—no matter what they do after they are saved.

            This is the most disturbing part of Free Grace Theology. The Scrip­tures teach that people are saved by grace through faith alone (not by good works) but true faith is never alone: it is always accompanied by repentance and the pro­duc­tion of good works. Free Grace Theology rejects this.

Reflecting upon one’s works diminishes the eternal nature of the saving work of Christ on the cross, since Christians, being in the flesh, can have both good and bad works throughout their lifetime. Consequently, if one has believed in Christ but upon examining his works, he concludes that he is not saved, what does this say about the power of Christ’s sacrifice to keep him? Was Jesus not able to save him completely? After all, faith is the only condition put forward in the Scriptures by which one receives eternal life.[1]

The proponents of Free Grace Theology teach that any in­sis­tence that a true believer also repents of his or her sins and pro­duces good works is the same as saying that we are saved by faith and good works. A per­son is saved by grace through faith alone. The only proof that a per­son is saved is God’s promise that all believers receive eternal life as soon as they believe. There­fore, a person enters heaven simply be­cause he or she chose to believe, even if he or she has never re­pented or pro­duced good works.

            Good works are done by the believer who wishes to be re­warded when we Christians are judged by Christ at the bema seat judgment (2 Cor. 5:10). In that case, the believer has become a disciple of Christ. That’s right: Free Grace Theology makes a distinction between be­liev­ers and disciples. As Jody Dillow states, “Salvation is by faith alone and is totally apart from works. Works are condition for discipleship and not all Christians are dis­ciples.”[2] All disciples are believers, but not all be­lievers are disciples. Believers get into heaven but receive no rewards; dis­ciples are given rewards after they get into heaven.

            Zane Hodges, who is often cited as the founder of Free Grace The­ol­ogy, teaches that discipleship is an educational process which “can be hard,” so hard that many Christians drop out of the process. “The simple fact is that the New Testament never takes for granted that be­lievers will see discipleship through to the end. And it never makes this kind of perseverance either a condition or a proof of final salvation from hell.”[3] He interprets the warning passages in the Epistle to the He­brews as a warning to not drop out of the educational process, not as warnings that it is possible to lose one’s salvation. He notes that Paul thought of himself as being in a race, but even he was not sure that he would finish it (1 Cor. 9:24, 26-27). “Again, there is no thought here of the loss of eternal life. Such a loss is impossible, as our Lord Himself made clear.”[4]

            Hodges’ followers also teach that the believer who does not per­se­vere to the end still gets into heaven. David R. Anderson says, “[E]ven for the believer that loses his way and does not per­se­vere faithfully to the end of his life, God won’t let go of him. Only this kind of gospel is greater than all our sin.”[5] Charles Stanley, the late pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, agrees: “Even if a believer for all practical purposes be­comes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy. Christ will re­main faithful…. [B]elievers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation, for God remains faithful.”[6] Thus, according to the pro­po­nents of Free Grace Theology, a person enters heaven simply be­cause one day he or she chose to believe, even if he or she im­me­di­ately becomes an unbeliever. To this, Clement of Alexandria, would say, “It is neither the faith, nor the love, nor the hope, nor the endurance of one day, but ‘he that endures to the end will be saved.’”[7] Did not Je­sus say the same thing (Matt. 10:22)?  So, for the sake of their doc­trine, the Free Grace proponents are willing to contradict our Lord.

            Much has been said and written about Free Grace Theology. YouTube has numerous videos defending and critiquing it. Free Grace Theology: 5 Ways it Magnifies the Gospel, edited by Grant Hawley, provides an explanation and defense of this theology. On the other hand, “Free Grace” Theology: 5 Ways it Diminishes the Gospel, by Wayne Grudem, and Christ the Lord: The Reformation and Lordship Salvation, edited by Michael S. Horton, provide insightful critiques of this theology.

            However, it seems to me that the critiques overlook the fact that the theology is based on at least two false assumptions. The first is that the proponents of Free Grace Theology assume that eternal life is a gift that is separate from God and Jesus Christ, which is why they can picture someone walking away from God and still have the gift of eternal life in hand. This is not true. As we saw in chapter 13, God is eternal life. And this life is in his Son: “And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life” (1 John 5:11-12). To have eternal life, we must have God and Jesus Christ. We must enter into a deep, intimate, marriage-like relationship with both God and Jesus Christ. Jesus him­self said, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17:3). We enter into this relationship through faith, which means that we sever this re­la­tion­ship through unbelief.

            This is why Charles Stanley is wrong. The believer who be­comes an unbeliever does not retain his or her salvation. That per­son no longer has eternal life because that person no longer has a relationship with God and Jesus Christ.

            The second false assumption is that the proponents of Free Grace Theology think that faith in Jesus Christ only gets you into heaven, which means that salvation only saves you from the lake of fire. Sal­va­tion actually saves us from what is sending us to the lake of fire: sin. This is why the person who truly believes in Jesus Christ turns away from sin and starts to do the good works. The pro­ponents of Free Grace Theology reject this statement. They say that insisting that a believer proves his or her salvation by do­ing good works is the same as saying that the believer is saved by faith and good works.

            The leaders of the Early Church, however, disagree with them. To be sure, they teach that we are not saved by good works, that we are saved by God’s grace through faith alone. Clement, the bishop of Rome, wrote,

All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by our­selves, nor by our own wisdom, or un­der­standing, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the be­gin­ning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.[8]

Ignatius was born around 35 AD and died a martyr in 105 AD. He was a disciple of one or more apostles and became the bishop of Antioch. He wrote, “Let us not, therefore, be insensible to His kindness. For were He to reward us according to our works, we should cease to be.”[9]

Justin Martyr wrote,

For Abraham was declared by God to be righteous, not on ac­count of circumcision, but on account of faith. For before he was cir­cum­cised the following statement was made regarding him: ‘Abraham believed God, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness.’ And we, therefore, in the uncircumcision of our flesh, believing God through Christ, and having that cir­cum­cision which is of advantage to us who have acquired it —namely, that of the heart—we hope to appear righteous be­fore and well-pleasing to God: since already we have received His testimony through the words of the prophets.[10]

            Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyon, wrote,

For He did not set us free for this purpose, that we should de­part from Him (no one, indeed, while placed out of reach of the Lord’s benefits, has power to procure for himself the means of salvation), but that the more we receive His grace, the more we should love Him.[11]

            These same men also knew that the ones who are truly saved will produce good works. Clement of Rome wrote, “Take heed, beloved, lest His many kindnesses lead to the condemnation of us all. [For thus it must be] unless we walk worthy of Him, and with one mind do those things which are good and well-pleasing in His sight.”[12] He also wrote,

How blessed and wonderful, beloved, are the gifts of God! Life in immortality, splendour in righteousness, truth in perfect con­fidence, faith in assurance, self-control in holiness! And all these fall under the cognizance of our understandings [now]; what then shall those things be which are prepared for such as wait for Him? The Creator and Father of all worlds, the Most Holy, alone knows their amount and their beauty. Let us therefore earnestly strive to be found in the number of those that wait for Him, in order that we may share in His promised gifts. But how, beloved, shall this be done? If our un­der­stand­ing be fixed by faith towards God; if we earnestly seek the things which are pleasing and acceptable to Him; if we do the things which are in harmony with His blameless will; and if we follow the way of truth, casting away from us all un­right­eous­ness and iniquity, along with all covetousness, strife, evil prac­tices, deceit, whis­per­ing, and evil-speaking, all hatred of God, pride and haughtiness, vain­glory and ambition. For they that do such things are hateful to God; and not only they that do them, but also those that take pleas­ure in them that do them.[13]

            Ignatius wrote, “They that are carnal cannot do those things which are spiritual, nor they that are spiritual the things which are carnal; even as faith cannot do the works of unbelief, nor unbelief the works of faith.”[14]

            Justin Martyr wrote,

For, impelled by the desire of the eternal and pure life, we seek the abode that is with God, the Father and Creator of all, and hasten to confess our faith, persuaded and convinced as we are that they who have proved to God by their works that they followed Him, and loved to abide with Him where there is no sin to cause disturbance, can obtain these things. This, then, to speak shortly, is what we expect and have learned from Christ, and teach.[15]

And let those who are not found living as He taught, be un­der­stood to be no Christians, even though they profess with the lip the pre­cepts of Christ; for not those who make profession, but those who do the works, shall be saved, according to His word: “Not every one who saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter in­to the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of My Fa­ther which is in heaven. For who­so­ever heareth Me, and do­eth My sayings, heareth Him that sent Me. And many will say unto Me, Lord, Lord, have we not eaten and drunk in Thy name, and done wonders? And then will I say unto them, De­part from Me, ye workers of iniquity. Then shall there be wail­ing and gnashing of teeth, when the righteous shall shine as the sun, and the wicked are sent into everlasting fire. For many shall come in My name, clothed outwardly in sheep’s cloth­­ing, but in­ward­ly being ravening wolves. By their works ye shall know them. And every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire.”[16]

And Irenaeus wrote,

And for this purpose did the Father reveal the Son, that through His in­strumentality He might be manifested to all, and might receive those righteous ones who believe in Him into in­corruption and ever­last­ing enjoyment (now, to believe in Him is to do His will); but He shall righteously shut out into the darkness which they have chosen for themselves, those who do not believe, and who do consequently avoid His light.[17]

… those who believe God and follow His word receive that sal­vation which flows from Him. Those, on the other hand, who depart from Him, and despise His precepts, and by their deeds bring dishonour on Him who made them, and by their opin­­ions blaspheme Him who nourishes them, heap up against themselves most righteous judg­ment.[18]

Now the law has figuratively predicted all these, delineating man by the [various] animals: whatsoever of these, says [the Scripture], have a double hoof and ruminate, it proclaims as clean; but what­so­ever of them do not possess one or other of these [properties], it sets aside by themselves as unclean. Who then are the clean? Those who make their way by faith steadily towards the Father and the Son; for this is denoted by the steadiness of those which divide the hoof; and they meditate day and night upon the words of God, that they may be adorned with good works: for this is the meaning of the ruminants. The unclean, however, are those which do neither divide the hoof nor ruminate; that is, those persons who have nei­ther faith in God, nor do meditate on His words: and such is the abom­ination of the Gentiles. But as to those animals which do in­deed chew the cud, but have not the double hoof, and are them­selves unclean, we have in them a figurative description of the Jews, who certainly have the words of God in their mouth, but who do not fix their rooted stedfastness in the Father and in the Son; where­fore they are an unstable generation. For those animals which have the hoof all in one piece easily slip; but those which have it divided are more sure-footed, their cleft hoofs succeeding each other as they advance, and the one hoof supporting the other. In like manner, too, those are unclean which have the double hoof but do not ruminate: this is plainly an indication of all heretics, and of those who do not meditate on the words of God, neither are adorned with works of righteousness; to whom also the Lord says, “Why call ye Me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say to you?” For men of this stamp do indeed say that they believe in the Father and the Son, but they never meditate as they should upon the things of God, neither are they adorned with works of right­eous­ness; but, as I have already observed, they have adopted the lives of swine and of dogs, giving themselves over to filthiness, to gluttony, and recklessness of all sorts. Justly, therefore, did the apostle call all such “carnal” and “animal,”—[all those, namely], who through their own unbelief and luxury do not receive the Divine Spirit, and in their various phases cast out from themselves the life-giving Word, and walk stupidly after their own lusts: the prophets, too, spake of them as beasts of burden and wild beasts; custom likewise has viewed them in the light of cattle and irrational creatures; and the law has pronounced them unclean.[19]

According to nature, then—that is, according to creation, so to speak— we are all sons of God, because we have all been created by God. But with respect to obedience and doctrine we are not all the sons of God: those only are so who believe in Him and do His will. And those who do not believe, and do not obey His will, are sons and angels of the devil, because they do the works of the devil. And that such is the case He has declared in Isaiah: “I have be­got­ten and brought up chil­dren, but they have rebelled against Me.” And again, where He says that these children are aliens: “Strange chil­dren have lied unto Me.” According to nature, then, they are [His] chil­­dren, because they have been so created; but with regard to their works, they are not His children. For as, among men, those sons who disobey their fathers, being disinherited, are still their sons in the course of nature, but by law are dis­in­her­ited, for they do not become the heirs of their natural parents; so in the same way is it with God,—those who do not obey Him being disinherited by Him, have ceased to be His sons.[20]

            With these statements, the Scriptures agree. Free Grace The­ol­ogy correctly teaches that we inherit the kingdom of God (enter heaven) by faith alone. It also correctly teaches that all Christians will stand before the bema seat of Christ to receive rewards based on what we did here on earth. Jody Dillow, therefore, con­cludes, “The Bible teaches that there is a dual-inheritance: One inheritance by faith alone (entrance into heaven, the salvation-inheritance) and one which comes to us by faithfulness of life (the reward-inheritance).”[21] The reward-inheritance is earned by the disciples for their works. The salvation-inheritance (inheriting the kingdom of God) is a gift given to all believers. Works have nothing to do with it.

            That’s not what Jesus said.

When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, “Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hun­gry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me’” (Matt. 25:31-36).

The goats, of course, do not inherit the kingdom but are sent into the everlasting fire (v. 41). Jesus ends the parable by saying, “And these (the goats) will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (v. 46).

Notice the word “for” in verse 35. The sheep inherit the king­dom because they did all of these good works. The sheep go into eternal life because they did all of these good works. The goats do not inherit the kingdom because they did not do all of these good works. The goats go into everlasting punishment because they did not do all of these good works. As Keith Green, a Chris­tian singer during the 1980s, said in his song, The Sheep and the Goats, “And my friends, the only difference between the sheep and the goats, according to this scripture, is what they did, and didn’t do!!” Or as Justin Martyr said, “…each man goes to ever­last­ing punishment or salvation according to the value of his ac­tions.”[22]

Jesus, of course, is not contradicting the doctrine that we are saved by grace through faith and not by works. Nor is he con­tra­dict­ing all of the times that he said that eternal life is obtained by believing in him. He is saying that the true faith produces good works. The good works of the sheep are proof that they had put their faith in him. Therefore, they get to inherit the kingdom.

On one occasion, the people asked Jesus, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” His answer was, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent” (John 6:28-29). In other words, if you believe in Jesus, you will do the works of God.

Picture, if you will, a lamp. The cord is plugged into the wall, so electricity, which represents God’s grace, is always available to the lamp. Turning on the switch allows the electricity to flow through the light bulb, just as putting faith in Jesus allows God’s grace to flow through us. The light bulb produces both heat, which cannot be seen, and light, which can be seen. So, too, putting faith in Jesus produces both salvation, which cannot be seen, and good works, which can be seen. The light is proof that the switch has been turned on, just as good works are proof that we have put our faith in Jesus. The lack of light is proof that the switch has not been turned on. A person can claim all he wants that the switch has been turned on; the lack of light says other­wise. The lack of good works is proof that one has not put his or her faith in Jesus. A person can claim all he wants that he has put his faith in Jesus; the lack of good works says otherwise. This is precisely what James means when he says, “What does it profit, my breth­ren, if some­one says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? …But someone will say, ‘You have faith, and I have works.’ Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works” (James 2:14, 18).

Because of the word “profit” in verse 14, the proponents of Free Grace Theology want to say that James is only talking about getting re­wards: the good works which are motivated by faith will save the person from losing his rewards. He is not talking about the faith that saves us from the lake of fire. This is only one example of how they twist the Scrip­tures to make them fit their doctrine.

Gen. 15:6 says, “And he (Abram) believed in the LORD, and He ac­counted it to him for righteousness.” Jeremy Edmondson says this verse proves “God’s righteousness has been made known apart from works.”[23] In other words, Abraham’s faith was the saving faith, the faith that lets the believers enter heaven, the faith that gives the believers eternal life. This is the salvation-in­her­i­tance faith, not the reward-inheritance faith. But James says that there is more to this story.

But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for right­eous­ness.” And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only (James 2:20-24).

Abraham’s saving faith was perfected by his works. Yes, he was de­clared righteous apart from works because of his faith, but that right­eous­ness obtained by faith then produced good works. That is how he proved that his faith was not dead.

            Paul also said that professing faith in God is not enough. Speaking of unbelievers, he said, “They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work” (Tit. 1:16). Those who truly know God will prove it by the good works which they do. This is why Paul also says that God will render “eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality” (Rom. 2:5-7).

            Then there is this warning in the Epistle to the Hebrews: “Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14). This warning seems to say that if we do not do the work of pursuing holiness, we will lose our salvation. However, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews knows that we are saved by grace through faith and not by works; therefore, we do not lose our salvation by the works which we do or do not do. What the writer is implying is if we are not pursuing holiness, if our hearts do not desire to be holy as God is holy, if we do not want to do the good works which a holy Chris­tian would do, then we are not saved.

            John’s writings also demonstrate that the true faith produces good works. Jesus said in John 17:3, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” We have eternal life if we know God. How do we know that we know God? “Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His com­mand­ments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His com­mand­ments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:3-4). Keeping his com­mand­ments is proof that we know God and, therefore, have eternal life. We can come to the same conclusion through another chain of passages. How else do we know that we know God? “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and every­one who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love” (1 John 4:7-8). We know that we know God when we love one another, that is, since we are all the chil­dren of God, when we love the children of God. How do we know that we love the chil­dren of God? “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments” (1 John 5:2). To have eternal life, we must know God. To know God, we must love his children. To love his children, we must love God AND keep his com­mand­ments. In short, keeping his com­mand­ments is proof that we know God and, therefore, have eternal life. Free Grace Theology can­not get around these chains of passages. True faith gives us eternal life and produces good works, which is de­fined as “keeping God’s com­mand­ments.” If our faith does not produce good works, then it has not given us eternal life, either.

            Will we keep his commandments perfectly? Not in this lifetime. We will fail, perhaps more often than we will succeed. This is why Free Grace Theology rejects using good works as proof that we are saved. Measuring good works is too subjective to be mean­ingful, according to them. Charles Bing wants to dismiss using good works as proof of salva­tion by asking, “How many good works does a person need to dem­on­strate to be sure of salvation?”[24] That is the wrong ques­tion. The Scrip­tures tell us that God has prepared good works for each and every one of us (Eph. 2:10), but which works and how many works God re­quires will vary from person to person. So, the question is not “How many?” but “Is the person doing the works which God has given that per­son to do?” And, “Is the person making prog­ress? Is the person run­ning the race that God has set before him or her?”

Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set be­fore us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:1-2).

The righteous runs the race with endurance and if the righteous falls, the righteous gets back up and runs again, and again, and again, look­ing to Jesus for help, until the righteous crosses the finish line. The wicked never gets there. Neither does the so-called believer who never does good works.

But laying aside the sin which so easily ensnares us and running the race with endurance until one wins is the very definition of repent­ance. Repentance is the com­mit­ment to turn from sin, to start doing the good works, to start obeying God’s commandments, to get back up when one has fallen, to keep press­ing on until the bat­tle is won. This is why re­pent­ance and good works always accompany true faith. This is also why Clement of Al­ex­an­dria says, “…it is the will of God that he, who is obedient to the commands and repents of his sins should be saved….”[25]

            The two assumptions upon which Free Grace Theology is based are, therefore, false. We obtain eternal life only through a deep, in­ti­mate, marriage-like relationship with God and Jesus Christ. We enter into this relationship through faith in Jesus Christ. If we turn to unbelief, we sever this relationship and lose eternal life. But if we stay in this re­lationship, we will love God, love his children, and keep his com­mand­ments. Good works do not produce salvation, but salvation does pro­duce good works.

[1] Jeremy Edmondson, “Free Grace is Returning to Scripture as Our Sole Authority,” in Grant Hawley, editor, Free Grace Theology: 5 Ways it Magnifies the Gospel, 2023, p. 41.

[2] Jody Dillow, “Free Grace Interpretations Have Great Explanatory Power,” in Hawley, pp. 165-166.

[3] Zane Hodges, Absolutely Free: A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation, Grace Evan­gel­i­cal Society, Kindle Edition, p. 74.

[4] Hodges, p. 76.

[5] David R. Anderson, “Foreword,” in Hawley, p. 15.

[6] Charles F. Stanley, Eternal Security, Zondervan, Kindle Edition, pp. 92-93.

[7] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 600.

[8] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 13.

[9] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 63.

[10] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 245.

[11] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 478.

[12] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 11.

[13] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 14.

[14] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 53.

[15] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 165.

[16] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 168. Justin is citing Matt. 7:21; Luke 13:26-28; Matt. 13:42; Matt. 7:15, 16, 19.

[17] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 468.

[18] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 511.

[19] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 534.

[20] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, pp. 524-525. Irenaeus is citing Is. 1:2 and Ps. 18:44 (both from the Septuagint).

[21] Dillow, p. 166.

[22] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 166.

[23] Edmondson, p. 44.

[24] Charles Bing, “Full Assurance Produces Godly Living,” in Hawley, p. 92.

[25] Schaff, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 363.

Posted in Repentance | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Lesson 1

Posted on July 12, 2024 by chfordenterprises

From A Brief Word of Exhortation, Volume 1

Why is Jesus Called “The Word”?

Heb. 1:1-4

I want to show you how the opening of the Epistle to the He­brews shares concepts which we find in the Gos­pel of John. In the process, we will find out why John called Jesus, “The Word.”

The Epistle opens with a long sentence which takes up the first four verses. The theme of the Epistle is that the new cov­e­nant is better than the old covenant, that God is doing some­thing new and better through the new covenant.

The writer hints at this difference in these verses by stating that God has now spoken to us in a new way. Before, in the old covenant, he spoke through the proph­ets. Now, in the new covenant, he speaks to us through his Son.

God, in this passage, must be the Father because the passage also talks about his Son. It starts by saying that God spoke in various times and in various ways. A more literal translation is that he spoke in many parts and in many ways. God spoke to the fathers (the Jew­ish ancestors, the Israelites of the past) through the proph­ets in various ways but gave them only a part at a time. This means that no one prophet got it all. God did not reveal everything all at once. He spoke the truth a little at a time.

He spoke “by the prophets,” literally, in the proph­ets. The prophets did not just hear God and re­peat what they heard; God was in them, speaking his words through them.

But now, in these last days, he has spoken to us by his Son. “These last days” could mean the end times, which would indicate that the end times started 2000 years ago. The Greek is literally, “at the last of these days,” possibly meaning the last days of the old cov­e­nant. The Son, Jesus, appeared during the last days of the old covenant to introduce the new covenant.

“By His Son” is literally, “in a son.” The emphasis here is not on Christ’s divinity (the writer will get to that) but his position. Not a prophet, but a son. Not many sons, but a son. This Son has the final and complete rev­elation.

The writer says three things about this Son:

  1. God spoke to us in him;
  2. God made the worlds through him;
  3. The Son is the brightness of his glory and the express image of his person.

We find all three of these concepts in the Gospel of John.

1. God spoke to us in him.

God spoke in him: God was in Christ speaking through him. Jesus says the same thing in John 14:10, “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.” Jesus is saying that the Father is in him and the words he speaks are not his words, but the Fath­er’s. Jesus also repeatedly says else­where that he spoke only what the Father commanded him to speak (John 14:23-24; 12:48-50).

2. God made the worlds through him.

The Gospel of John says the same thing: “All things were made through Him [Jesus], and without Him noth­ing was made that was made” (John 1:3).

3. The Son is the brightness of his glory and the express image of his person

“Brightness,” more literally, is “shining forth.” The Son is not just bright; he is shining forth, sending out, the glory of the Father. In Christ, we can see the glory of the Father. Jesus mentions this in his prayer in John 17: “And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Your­self, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:5). Jesus ac­knowl­edges that he had the Father’s glory.

The writer of the Epistle also says that the Son is the ex­press image of the Father. The phrase, “express image,” in the Greek is character. This word referred to a mark or im­pres­sion burned or stamped on something else, such as a coin. The image left on the coin would be an exact replica of the image on the stamp. Char­ac­ter was also used of the im­pres­sion left in melted wax. If a king did not want anyone to read an important doc­u­ment without his permission, the doc­u­ment would be rolled up and then hot wax would be poured on it to seal it. The king would then press his ring into the hot wax. The impression left in the wax would be an exact replica of the design on the ring. What the writer of the Epistle is say­ing is that God took his image, his per­son­al­ity, his character, and im­pressed it upon Jesus so that Jesus is the exact image of the Father. Seeing Jesus, therefore, was the same as see­ing the Father.

Jesus said the same thing about himself: “Philip said to Him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and it is suf­fi­cient for us.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, “Show us the Father’’’?” (John 14:8-9).

So, the Son spoke the words of God, he created the worlds, and he is the express image of God the Father so that when you see him you see the Father. Those are also the functions of the being or force known as the Word, which is why John calls Jesus “The Word” in John 1:1.

The Greek word for “word” is logos, but logos does not mean simply “a word.” It means a collection of things. It refers first to a collection of thoughts or ideas. Hence, it also means the ability to think and to reason. Since thoughts and ideas are expressed in words, it also means a collection of words. It can mean a saying, a speech, a doctrine, or a narrative. For example, Luke writes in Acts 1:1, “The former account I made, O The­ophi­lus, of all that Jesus began to do and teach.” The former account, of course, is the Gospel of Luke, but the word “account” in the Greek is logos. Luke re­fers to his entire Gospel as a logos.

By the time John wrote his Gospel, the Jews and even some of the Greek philosophers had developed the concept that the Logos was a being or a force that acted as the in­ter­me­diary between God and the uni­verse. This concept de­veloped over a long period of time.

In 600 BC, a Greek philosopher named Heraclitus said that the Logos was the universal truth which held the universe together. He did not see the Logos as a person but he did see it as a truth which everyone should know.

In the Old Testament, the word of the Lord is some­times seen as a force that God sends out and therefore has an existence of its own. For example, Ps. 107:20 says, “He sent his word and healed them,” as if the word itself did the healing. In Isaiah 55:10-11, the word accomplishes what the Lord sent it out to do. It departs from the Lord, accomplishes its task, and then returns to him, as if it could exist in­de­pend­ent of him.

The Jews developed this idea that the word of the Lord existed apart from him even further after they returned from the Babylonian exile when they wrote the Targum, which is a collection of paraphrases of the Old Testament. These par­a­phrases would be read in the syn­­agogues, so the people became familiar with these par­aphrases as well as the Old Testament. This col­lec­tion of paraphrases, the Targum, was written in Ara­ma­ic. The Aramaic word for “word” is memra. Where the Old Testament would use God’s name, the Targum would sometimes use Memra. For example, Deut. 9:3 says that the Lord is a consuming fire, but the Targum says that the Memra is a consuming fire. The Targum also says in several places that the Memra created the world. It has been argued, therefore, that Memra is simply another name for the Lord.

But there are places in the Targum where the Lord and the Memra are two separate entities. Thus, in Ex. 25:22, the Lord says to Moses that he will meet with him at the mercy seat, but in the Targum, God says, “I will order my Memra to be there.” In the Targum, the Memra also appears quite often to deliver a message from God. Thus, one of the functions of the Memra was to speak the words of God. The Memra, there­fore, was not God himself nor divine but was a messenger, like one of the angels.

Interestingly, where the Old Testament says that Abram believed the Lord (Gen. 15:6), the Targum says that Abram believed the Memra. It also says that the Memra will justify Israel.

A Jewish philosopher who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, in the time of Christ and was named Philo com­bined these Jewish ideas about the Memra with Greek philosophy. He taught that God was separate from the universe and was therefore hidden and unknowable. He also said that the universe has always existed and is inherently evil, which is why God keeps himself sep­a­rate from it. But the universe has a sense of order to it because of God’s Reason (the Logos). The Logos con­ceived how the universe should run and imposed that idea upon the universe. The Logos also holds the universe to­geth­er and makes sure that it operates cor­rectly. The Logos is also the mediator between God and men and can atone for sins and be man’s advocate before God. He actually describes the Logos as the par­a­clete, a word which the Gospel of John uses to de­scribe both Jesus and the Holy Spirit. It means “one who is called alongside to help” and is translated as “com­forter” or “advocate.” The Logos is also God’s en­voy to man, meaning that the Logos reveals the un­know­­able God to men. Philo also refers to the Logos as the firstborn of God.

By stating that Jesus is the Logos, John was saying that Jesus is all of this and more. He did not have to explain what he meant to his readers because he knew that these ideas were already well known to them.

Because he is the Logos, Jesus spoke the words of the Father. And because he is the Logos, he created the worlds. But, unlike the Memra, he is not a being who is less than divine. He, too, is God, just as much as the Father is. And because he is God, because he has been with the Father from eternity and therefore knows the Father intimately, be­cause he has the char­ac­ter of the Father impressed on him, because he is in the Father and the Father is in him, he can ac­cur­ately represent the Father and accurately reveal to us the Fath­er, who is otherwise hidden from us: “No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared him” (John 1:18). Notice that Jesus “declared him,” that is, he did not just show us who the Father is; he also used words to tell us who the Father is.

Jesus spoke the words of the Father, the Father cre­ated the world through him, and Jesus revealed the Father to us and showed us his glory. Those are the func­tions of the Logos, which is why John calls Jesus the Word, the Logos.

The writer of Hebrews is saying that because God has changed how he speaks to us, not through more prophets, but through the Son who created the worlds and is the express image of the Father, the old way of doing things, the old cov­e­nant, has been done away and a new way of doing things, a new covenant, has been implemented. He ends verse 4 by saying that Jesus is better than the angels. He will spend the rest of chapter 1 proving that statement and then, in chap­ter 2, he will tell us why that is important.

Posted in A Brief Word of Exhortation | Leave a comment

Context! Context! Context!

Posted on November 21, 2019 by chfordenterprises

2 Cor. 10:3-5 is the classic example of why we need to read and study the Scriptures in context. Many preachers and teachers of the Bible tell us that this passage means that each of us Christians have been equipped with spiritual weapons that should be used to pull down the strongholds in our minds, to cast down the arguments in our minds, to cast down every high thing in our minds that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and to bring every thought in our minds into captivity to the obedience of Christ. Joyce Meyer even wrote an entire book based on this understanding of this passage. It all sounds so good and so spiritual—except that is not what Paul is talking about at all.

Now it is true that the Bible tells us to guard our thought life. It tells us to meditate on (that is, think about) the things that are true, noble, just, pure, lovely, of good report, virtuous, and praiseworthy (Phil. 4:8). It also tells us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Rom. 12:2). But we do not stop evil thoughts by changing our way of thinking. Jesus said that the source of our evil thoughts is our heart (Matt. 15:19). Seeing an attractive woman and having a fleeting thought about her is not the problem; lusting for her from the heart is the problem (Matt. 5:28). Eliminating evil thoughts, therefore, requires a change in heart, not a change in mind. So, too, the cure for double-mindedness is not fixing the mind but purifying the heart (James 4:8). Proverbs tells us to “Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it spring the issues of life” (Prov. 4:23). How do we keep our hearts? The peace of God will guard (keep) our minds and hearts if we make our requests known to God through prayer and supplication with thanksgiving (Phil. 4:6-7). So we fight our evil thoughts by purifying our hearts and guarding our hearts through prayer, not by tearing down strongholds and taking captive our thoughts.

The context of 2 Cor. 10:3-5 begins at verse 1 and continues to the end of the book. Verse 1 begins with “Now,” which is a signal that Paul is beginning a new subject. Not only have the preachers and teachers taken verses 3-5 out of context, they have not even let Paul finish his sentence. The sentence that begins in verse 4 ends not in verse 5 but in verse 6, which says, “and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.” If verses 3-5 are addressed to each of us, then verse 6 must be also. But are we ready to punish all disobedience? And when did we become authorized to punish disobedience?

Paul says that “we” are ready to punish all disobedience when “your” obedience is fulfilled. Who is “your”? Obviously, the Corinthians. Who, then, is “we”? Not us Christians. “We” must be Paul and those with him. Or possibly this is an editorial “we.” Paul is saying, in verses 3-6, that he does not war according to the flesh, that his weapons are not carnal but are mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, that he will cast down arguments, that he will cast down every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, that he will bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, that he will punish every disobedience when the obedience of the Corinthians is fulfilled. The word “thought” in verse 5 is actually a mistranslation. The Greek word used here, noēma, can mean “thought,” but it is used in the New Testament only by Paul in 2 Corinthians and Philippians and he uses it to mean “purpose” or “mind.” He intends to bring every purpose or mind into captivity to the obedience of Christ. But whose purpose and mind does he intend to bring into captivity? And whose disobedience is he ready to punish?

Paul starts the passage in verse 1 by reminding the Corinthians that he is meek and gentle and lowly when he is with the Corinthians, but bold towards them when he is absent from them. But when he returns, he intends to be bold “against some, who think of us as if we walked according to the flesh” (v. 2). When we read the rest of the context past verse 5, we find that false apostles had come to Corinth and the Corinthians had fallen for their false teachings. Paul intends to confront and to take captive the purposes or minds of these false apostles and those who follow them and to punish their disobedience, but only after the Corinthians have repented and have again become obedient to the gospel which Paul had preached to them. Otherwise, he would have to punish them also. Paul is writing to the Corinthians and telling them of his intent so that they have time to repent before he gets there. This passage, then, is about Paul taking a stand against certain people in Corinth, not about us taking captive our own thoughts.

2 Cor. 10:3-5 is about engaging in spiritual warfare against false teachers. It is not about engaging in spiritual warfare against our own thought life. Ironically, well-intentioned preachers and teachers derived the second meaning out of this passage because they did exactly what false teachers do to the Scriptures: they read the passage out of its context.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Praying in the Name of Jesus

Posted on November 15, 2019 by chfordenterprises

 A woman who lives in Texas is also a friend on my Facebook. When she posts on Facebook, she writes things like, “My handsome husband and my handsome son and my beauty queen daughter and I visited my handsome daddy at his rest home on Father’s Day in the name of Jesus. Afterwards, we went to a steakhouse and had a delicious dinner in the name of Jesus. We had a wonderful time in the name of Jesus.” Almost every sentence ends with the phrase, “in the name of Jesus.” Why she does this, I don’t know. Many Christians would find this galling and maybe ridiculous. But at least she is being more consistent than they are.

Many Christians insist that we should end our prayers with the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” because Jesus said, “If you ask anything in My name, I will do it” (John 14:14). They understand the command, “ask anything in My name,” to mean, “tack on the phrase, ‘in the name of Jesus,’ to the end of your prayer.”

Yet these same Christians overlook Paul’s command in Col. 3:17 – “And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.” If asking anything in the name of Jesus means that we must tack on the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” to the end of our prayers, does not doing all in the name of Jesus mean that we must tack on the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” to the end of everything that we do?

Can you imagine what that would be like? What if we said, “In the name of Jesus,” every time we took a step? Every time we took a breath? Every time we said something?

Can you imagine a conversation like this:

Clayton: “Hi, Billy, in the name of Jesus. How are you today in the name of Jesus?”

Billy: “Hey, Clayton, in the name of Jesus. I am good, in the name of Jesus. How are you in the name of Jesus?”

Clayton: “I am good, also, in the name of Jesus. Will I see you in church this Sunday in the name of Jesus?”

Can you imagine the pastor trying to give his sermon on Sunday? “Good morning, people, in the name of Jesus. Let’s open our Bibles today to Col. 3:17, in the name of Jesus. Today’s topic is, ‘Doing all in the name of Jesus,’ in the name of Jesus.” No one would be able to hear him because every time the congregation took a breath, they all would be muttering, “In the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus….”

I still have not figured out how we would say “in the name of Jesus” while we are sleeping.

Everyone recognizes that muttering “in the name of Jesus” every time we did something would be ridiculous and maybe even blasphemous because it would quickly become vain repetition. Yet many people insist that we should end our prayers with this phrase. How inconsistent. This is why I say that the woman in Texas is more consistent than they are. If praying in the name of Jesus means that we must tack on the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” to the end of our prayers, then we must tack on the phrase to the end of everything we do. It’s all or nothing.

Obviously Paul did not mean that we should tack the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” to the end of everything we did. He certainly did not tack this phrase to the end of everything that he did. Nor is there a single prayer recorded in the Bible that ends with, “We pray this in the name of Jesus,” or something similar. Nor is there a single recorded prayer from the early Church that ends with that phrase. As far as anyone has been able to determine, the first recorded prayer that ends with that phrase is a Latin prayer from the 5th century.

So what did Jesus mean when he said, “Ask anything in my name”? And what did Paul mean when he said, “Do all in the name of the Lord Jesus”?

The only time the disciples used the phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” was when they were performing miracles or casting out demons. Peter said to the man who had been lame from birth, “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk” (Acts 4:6). A demon possessed girl followed Paul in Philippi for several days before Paul said to the demon, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her” (Acts 16:18). The disciples knew that in and of themselves they did not have the authority to perform the miracles or cast out the demons. That authority had been delegated to them by Jesus (Matt. 10:1). The phrase, “in the name of Jesus,” means, “by the authority of Jesus,” or more correctly, “by the authority delegated to me by Jesus.” The disciples used this phrase at these times because the people around them needed to know that they were performing these acts not on their own authority but on the authority of Jesus Christ, thereby passing all of the credit and glory to him.

In the Old Testament, we find Mordecai writing a decree in the name of King Ahasuerus (Esther 8:10). Mordecai in and of himself did not have the authority to write the decree, but the king had delegated his authority to Mordecai so that he could write the decree. This decree was then sent out by couriers. Whenever Caesar issued a decree, he could not just get on the television or radio and announce the new decree. Copies were made and then sent out by slaves, who ran from town to town. When a slave arrived in a town square, a trumpet was blown to gather the townspeople, and then the slave would announce, “I come to you in the name of Caesar,” meaning, “I come to you by the authority of Caesar.” The townspeople then had to treat that slave as if he were Caesar himself. So the phrase, “in the name of,” also means, “in the character of.”

Therefore, to do all in the name of the Lord Jesus means to do all in the authority and character of the Lord Jesus. It means to do all as if you were Jesus himself. That includes praying. To pray in the name of Jesus means to pray in the authority and character of Jesus. It means to pray for whatever Jesus would pray for. It means to pray as if you were Jesus himself.

Jesus said that he came in his Father’s name (John 5:43) and he did his works in his Father’s name (John 10:25), yet he did not go around muttering, “in the name of the Father.” Even so, Jesus could tell Philip that when he saw Jesus, he also saw the Father (John 14:9). So, too, what Jesus and Paul are telling us is that to do all, including praying, in the name of Jesus is not to mutter “in the name of Jesus” but to live in such a way that when people see us they see Jesus. Granted, muttering a phrase is much easier to do, but it is not Biblical, and certainly not what we have been called to do. Let’s go live as if we were Jesus himself.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Path to Further Deception

Posted on April 30, 2019 by chfordenterprises

Years ago the pastor of my current church taught on three popular trends in today’s churches: the seeker friendly movement; the so-called “revivals” in which people lose control, roll in the aisles, laugh uncontrollably and make animal noises; and the health and wealth teaching. I have researched these trends as well, but he said something that was brilliantly insightful and which, because of my research, I recognized as true as soon as he said it. He said, “The people who fall for these deceptions tend to get carried away into further and further deception.”

            How true. Some of the health and wealth teachers also teach that we become little “gods” when we are born again and/or that Jesus ceased to be God when the Father laid our sins on him at the cross. And Bill Johnson, the pastor of Bethel Church in Redding, California, started off as a health and wealth teacher but got sucked into the Toronto “Revival,” a full blown example of a revival in which the people lose control.

            For me, the best example of a person who fell for one of these deceptions and then was carried away into further deception was the head elder of the last church I attended. He was also the worship leader of the church. He taught that it is God’s will for all of us to be healed and if we had enough faith, we would be healed. He would often declare from the platform during worship time that there would be no more sickness in his home. He even encouraged the rest of us to make the same declaration. He would continue to make these declarations even though his wife was mentally ill and taking several prescriptions to combat it.

            This occurred while the so-called Lakeland “Revival” in Florida, led by Todd Bentley, in which hundreds of people were supposedly healed, was happening, and this elder just had to go see it. He came home sick. He went to work the day after he came back but was so sick his boss sent him home. So, yes, there was sickness in his home despite his declarations.

            After I left that church, this elder experienced chest pains and drove himself 25 miles to the nearest emergency room. The doctor there told him he had pneumonia, gave him some antibiotics, and sent him home. He died in his sleep that night from congestive heart failure. The evidence that God kept giving him never did convince him that his teaching on healing was a deception.

            But the deception did not stop there. While I was still at this church, this elder spent an entire sermon teaching us why we should pray to the Holy Spirit every day, asking him to teach us and guide us and give us strength to do God’s will. When I asked him, one on one, after the service, to show me the Scriptures that tell us that we should pray to the Holy Spirit, he said, “Brother, you need to read the Scriptures from the beginning and ask the Holy Spirit to show you where they are.” I did not say anything more to him because his answer told me that he was not ready to talk rationally about this subject, but my thought was, “Is not that the issue here? Why would I pray to the Holy Spirit if I do not know if I am supposed to pray to the Holy Spirit in the first place?”

            His answer sounded like something a cultist would tell me. “How do I know if the burning in the bosom is the way God confirms if something is true?”

           “Because the Book of Mormon says so.”

           “How do I know that the Book of Mormon is true?”

           “Ask God if it is true and he will tell you that it is by giving you a burning in your bosom.”

            The Scriptures do not forbid praying to the Holy Spirit, but they do not teach us to pray to the Holy Spirit. Whenever they do teach us to pray to someone, it is always to the Father. When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them how to pray, he said, “When you pray, say: Our Father…” (Luke 11:1-2). Jesus even told the disciples, “And in that day you will ask Me nothing. Most assuredly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you” (John 16:23). So Jesus told them that prayer was not directed even to him, but to the Father.

            The disciples understood this. The prayers that are recorded in Acts (1:24-25, 4:24-30) are directed to the Father, not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Paul’s prayers (Eph. 1:15-23, 3:14-19) are directed to the Father. After Jesus ascends to heaven, no one addresses him unless they see him in a vision. All the prayers are directed to the Father. No one prays to the Holy Spirit.

            It is true that in the Old Testament, God was rarely addressed as “Father,” but David knew that he was not praying to the Holy Spirit because he once prayed, “Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps. 51:11). So even in the Old Testament, prayer was not directed to the Holy Spirit.

            During the first three centuries of Church history, very few prayers were directed to the Holy Spirit (one study found only four clear examples) and only Origen encouraged anyone to pray to the Holy Spirit. The vast majority of Christians in the first three centuries understood the teaching of Jesus: prayer should be directed to the Father.

            Some people try to justify praying to the Holy Spirit by saying, “We pray to the Father, who is God, so why cannot we pray to the Holy Spirit, who is also God?” That is human reasoning, which ignores what the Scriptures actually teach. Human reasoning ignores the fact that each person in the Trinity is a distinct person. Human reasoning says that because the Father is God and the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, then blaspheming the Father and blaspheming the Son and blaspheming the Holy Spirit should be equally unforgivable. But that is not what the Scriptures teach. Only the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is unforgivable (Matt. 12:31-32). Human reasoning ignores the fact that each person in the Trinity has a distinct level of authority. Human reasoning says that because the Father is God and the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, they should all have the same authority. But that is not what the Scriptures teach. The Son is subject to the Father (1 Cor. 11:3, 15:28) and the Holy Spirit is subject to both (John 15:26). Human reasoning ignores the fact that each person in the Trinity has a distinct role. The Father is God and the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God but only the Son actually hung on the cross and died for our sins. Yes, the Father is God, and yes, the Holy Spirit is God, but we pray only to the Father.

            But even if we do not offer petitionary prayer to the Holy Spirit, is it wrong to thank him? We can thank the Father for sending the Holy Spirit and for what the Holy Spirit has done, but praying to the Holy Spirit at all starts us down the path of deception.

            In my research, the people who advocate praying to the Holy Spirit are inevitably caught up in some other deception. The elder is only one example. The Catholics have developed several prayers to the Holy Spirit and, of course, Catholicism is just another deception. It seems to me that the three trends above are not the only paths to further deception. It seems that once you fall for any deception, you tend to get carried away into further deception. This is why we must always subject our human reasoning to the Scriptures and not the Scriptures to our human reasoning.

You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen (2 Peter 3:17-18).

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Should the Head of a Christian Woman be Covered?

Posted on April 6, 2019 by chfordenterprises

The question of whether a Christian woman should wear a head covering in obedience to 1 Cor. 11:2-16 is a highly controversial subject. Some say that she does not need to wear a head covering because her long hair is her covering (v. 15). Others say that she does not need to wear a head covering because the head of the woman is the man (v. 3), therefore the man is her covering. Still others say that this passage only applied to the culture of the first century and does not apply to us today. But there are those who say that this passage does apply to us today and therefore a Christian woman should wear a head covering.

With so much disagreement over this issue, would it not be helpful if we could hear Paul himself tell us what he meant? Of course, we cannot do that but we can do the next best thing. We can know how the Corinthians themselves understood this passage. A leader in the early Church named Tertullian wrote a tractate entitled, “On the Veiling of Virgins,” around 200 AD (that is, about 150 years after Paul wrote First Corinthians), and he says that the women of the Corinthian church wore veils in response to Paul’s injunction, and were still doing so even in his day. He also says that the women in the churches founded by the apostles were still wearing veils. Tertullian’s testimony alone should settle the matter. (You can read Tertullian’s tractate at http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0403.htm).

However, he also admits that the women in many of the churches in his day had stopped wearing a head covering. Why? Because the women in their culture no longer wore them. Does that argument sound familiar? These women did not want to stand out from the crowd.

“We are scandalized,” they say, “because others walk otherwise (than we do);” and they prefer being scandalized to being provoked (to modesty).

His response to this is “Good things scandalize none but an evil mind.” Being scandalized is not a good enough reason to disobey God. He asks, what if the evil ones are scandalized by virginity?

Are therefore chaste virgins to be, for the sake of these marketable creatures, dragged into the church, blushing at being recognised in public, quaking at being unveiled, as if they had been invited as it were to rape?

Of course not. The fear that a Christian woman would be “scandalized” or embarrassed if she wore a head covering in a culture in which the other women did not wear a head covering is not a good enough reason to disobey the Word of God.

He also points out “our Lord Christ has surnamed Himself Truth, not Custom.” Therefore, if custom is contrary to truth, truth should prevail. This does not mean that custom cannot determine the style of the head covering. For example, the Scriptures admonish women to dress modestly (1 Tim. 2:9-10), but the Scriptures do not require them to wear first century Middle Eastern clothing. But it does mean that custom does not determine whether or not we obey the Scriptures. When Paul says, “But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God,” he is using a Greek idiom which would be better stated as, “If anyone seems contentious by offering a custom other than this, we will not accept it because this is the only custom practiced by all of the churches.” Notice how Paul says that the practice of wearing a head covering was observed not just in Corinth, but by “the churches of God.”

Many people mistakenly argue that Paul told the Corinthian women to wear a head covering because if they did not, they would be confused with the prostitutes who ran rampant through the city. The temple of Aphrodite in Corinth, for example, was known to have 1000 prostitutes. This may have been true of the Greek city of Corinth, but that city was destroyed in 146 BC by the Romans who rebuilt the city as a Roman colony in 44 BC. The architecture of the Roman buildings clearly show prominent women of the city without coverings. What Paul was commanding the Corinthian women to do, therefore, was actually contrary to the Corinthian culture. This is why he appeals to timeless Nature (vv. 13-15) to support his argument, not to ever changing culture, and certainly not to the Corinthian culture of his time.

My response to the position that this passage only applied to the first century church is, “Then why is it in God’s eternal Word, which is meant to instruct all Christians for all time?” Paul mentions in 1 Cor. 5:9 an earlier epistle he had sent to the Corinthians, an epistle which the church did not keep because it was not inspired Scripture. Why did God not have Paul address this issue in that letter? Why did God make sure Paul addressed this issue in the inspired Word of God if it no longer applies to us?

I have even heard someone say that Paul refers to the wearing of a head covering as a “tradition” (v. 2), and since we are not to be bound by tradition, we are not obligated to observe this. When I think of “tradition,” I think it means “a continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices.” Thus, it is a tradition to have turkey at Thanksgiving dinner because that is what our culture does. If Paul thought that this was a tradition in that sense, that it was something the churches did because it was the cultural thing to do, then perhaps we could say that we are not obligated to observe this since it is no longer a tradition in our culture. But then again, if so, why is it in the eternal Word of God?

“Tradition” also means “the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation, especially by word of mouth or by practice.” We eat turkey at Thanksgiving because that is the custom that has been handed down to us. The Greek word used here is paradosis, which means “a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc.” “Tradition,” therefore, can be another word for “teaching.” The Corinthians practiced the custom of wearing a head covering because that is what they were taught to do.

A tradition, like any teaching, can be a good thing or a bad thing. It is true that Jesus chastised the Pharisees for allowing “the traditions of men” to supersede the Word of God (Mark 7:8). But the problem is not that they practiced traditions; it is that they practiced the traditions of men. Traditions that are handed down to us by the Word of God itself should be observed by Christians. Thus, Paul tells the Thessalonians, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15). He also commands them “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6). The wearing of a head covering is a tradition that has been handed down to us by the Word of God and should therefore be observed by Christian women everywhere.

Does that mean a Christian woman needs to wear a hat or a scarf or a veil? Some say that she does not have to do so because the man (whether her husband or her father or her pastor) is her covering because the man is her head. However, that means the man has a covering also, which is Christ, because Christ is his head. But Paul says it is a dishonor for a man to prophesy or to pray with his head covered (v. 4). Does that mean he must disavow Christ as his Lord before he can prophesy or pray? Of course not. This argument, therefore, is senseless.

Is long hair a sufficient covering? If so, then verses 5and 6 do not make sense. If long hair covers a woman, then having short hair (cut hair) or no hair at all (shaved head) means she is uncovered. So verse 5 would then mean, “But every woman who prays or prophesies with a shaved head dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.” And verse 6 would then mean, “For if a woman has cut hair, let her also be shorn (let her hair be cut).” Obviously, those verses do not make sense if the woman’s covering is merely her long hair. What Paul does mean is,

But every woman with long hair who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman with long hair is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.

He means that the woman should have a covering in addition to her long hair. His argument is that Nature, by providing the woman with long hair as a covering (literally, a mantle or a veil), teaches us that she needs to have an additional covering on her head.

Where Tertullian got it wrong is that he, like so many others after him, makes it an issue concerning modesty. Paul’s mention of angels leads many to link this passage with Gen. 6:1-4, where the sons of God (presumably angels) were attracted by the beauty of the daughters of men. If the beauty of women could tempt angels, so the argument goes, then they should completely cover their heads so that they do not tempt men. But it is not certain that Paul had this story in mind. We can only speculate as to what he meant by “because of the angels.” It is also shameful for women to have shorn or shaved heads, says the argument, because the prostitutes in Corinth had shorn and shaved heads. But that is not the argument that Paul uses at all. He says that it is shameful for women to have shorn or shaved heads because it is their glory to have long hair. How long is long enough is a question he does not address, which probably means that each woman will have to ask God how long is long enough for her. Those who think this is about modesty naturally think that the woman should wear the covering all of the time, but Paul specifically says that she should wear it on only two occasions: while praying or prophesying.

The issue is not about modesty; it is about submitting to authority. This is the real reason why the women of our culture refuse to wear a covering. Paul starts the passage by reviewing the chain of command from God the Father down to the woman, who is last on the chain. He also says that the covering is a symbol of authority (v. 10). The purpose of the covering is to remind her that she is to submit herself to the authority above her, which is God the Father, Christ, and the man that God has placed over her.

Some have dismissed this issue as “a little thing,” as unimportant, that obeying it or disobeying it does not significantly change things, so why bother? Yet Jesus said, “He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much” (Luke 16:10). This is one reason why the Western Church is so ineffective. We are not faithful in the “little things.” Jesus is really not our Lord anymore. We choose what we will obey or disobey and then justify it. I have spoken to some of the women in my church about this issue, and yet they still do not wear a covering. I have also spoken to some of the husbands in my church about this, and yet their wives still do not wear a covering. I do not know if they spoke to their wives about this at all. That men are unwilling to make their wives wear a covering and are afraid to even broach the subject with them is a sign of just how weak Christian men have become.

If wearing a covering is about submitting to authority, then why does the woman not wear it all of the time? Is she not supposed to be submitted to her authority all of the time? Why does Paul say that she should wear it while praying or prophesying? I can only speculate, but perhaps she is to wear a covering at those times because spiritual forces are especially at work during those times and she is more prone to deception during those times. That is why, I think, Paul says, “because of the angels.” The covering reminds the spiritual forces that she is protected by God the Father, Christ, and the man who is her head.

Since prophesying can only be done in public, I assume that Paul also meant public praying. I could be wrong on that. I do not expect my wife to wear a covering during her personal prayer time, but she does wear one when we go to a place (such as worship service) where public praying is likely to happen.

Tertullian’s tractate is hard to read but worth it. He makes some interesting observations, such as:

Whatever savours of opposition to truth, this will be heresy, even (if it be an) ancient custom.

Herein consists the defense of our opinion, in accordance with Scripture, in accordance with Nature, in accordance with Discipline. Scripture founds the law; Nature joins to attest it; Discipline exacts it. Which of these (three) does a custom founded on (mere) opinion appear in behalf of? Or what is the color of the opposite view? God’s is Scripture; God’s is Nature; God’s is Discipline. Whatever is contrary to these is not God’s.

Another helpful website, though you might not agree with everything that is said there, is https://www.headcoveringmovement.com.

The Corinthian women wore head coverings in addition to their hair. That fact alone should settle the issue. The Scriptures do not specify the style of the covering or even how much of the head should be covered. The woman has some liberty in those areas. But she is required to wear a covering of some sort while praying or prophesying. The woman who refuses to do so can argue about tradition, custom, and culture all that she wants. Her real problem is that she is not submitting to authority, including the authority of the Word of God.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Life’s Filters

Posted on September 8, 2018 by chfordenterprises

Many years ago someone made a statement that shocked me into transforming my prayer life. He said, “Even the wicked can pray when it’s easy.”

Until I heard that, I had been complaining about how hard prayer sometimes was. “If you really want us to spend time with you,” I said to God, “shouldn’t prayer time be the one time that is easy and free from Satan’s attack?” But this man’s statement made me realize that if prayer were easy, then anyone could do it.

Since then, I have come to believe that God uses hard times as a filter. Filters, of course, are used to remove impurities from the air and liquids. A good filtering system uses several filters that remove impurities in stages, starting with very coarse impurities and removing finer and finer impurities. God uses hard times to filter out those who do not really love him.

Anyone can pray when it is easy to do so. But who can pray when it is hard to do so? Those who really love God can, and they pass through the filter. Anyone can love those who love them back. But who can love their enemies? Those who really love God can, and they pass through the filter. Anyone can love God when times are good. But who can love God when times are bad? Those who really love God can, and they pass through the filter. Anyone can bless those who bless them. But who can bless those who curse them and spitefully use them? Those who really love God can, and they pass through the filter. Anyone can love those who praise them. But who can love those who nail them to a cross even though they did not deserve it? Those who really love God can, and they pass through the filter.

Those who successfully pass through all of the filters are, of course, the pure ones and they will stand before their Lord Jesus Christ and hear him say, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”

I hope to be one of those people.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Resurrection of the Dead and Eternal Judgment

Posted on September 7, 2018 by chfordenterprises

Lesson 12

10. The Resurrection of the Dead

We have seen that the central doctrine of Christianity is the resurrection of Christ.

Paul says in 1 Corinthians, “And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!” (1 Cor. 15:17). If Christ did not in fact rise from the dead, there is no Christianity. But Paul also says, “For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen” (1 Cor. 15:16). So, to believe in the resurrection of Christ, one must also believe in the resurrection of the dead.

The resurrection of the dead includes both the believers and the unbelievers (John 5:24-29).

We are not resurrected as spirit only, but as spirit, soul, and body. However, the body that we will receive at our resurrection is different from the one we have now (1 Cor. 15:35-58).

All of the examples Paul cites have a physical body. So, too, our resurrected bodies will be physical. However, they are called spiritual bodies because they will be free from sin. Our spirits will finally control our bodies instead of the other way around.

In short, our resurrected bodies will be just like the resurrected body of Christ (Phil. 3:17-21).

Paul says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:50). Jesus said that his resurrected body consisted of flesh and bones (Luke 24:36-39). His resurrected body did not have blood because he had shed it for us. So, too, our resurrected bodies will not have blood. In this sinful body, the life resides in the blood (Lev. 17:11). But now Christ is our life (Col. 3:1-4), so we will no longer need blood to sustain us. That is how we can be resurrected with physical bodies and still inherit the kingdom of God.

The unbeliever, however, will not be resurrected with an incorruptible, spiritual body. He or she will be given back his or her sinful, natural body, which is why he or she cannot inherit the kingdom of God and why he or she will suffer forever in the lake of fire.

11. Eternal Judgment

In Matt. 25:31-46, Jesus makes two things perfectly clear:

  1. Only two fates await everybody.
  2. Jesus will decide what everyone’s fate will be.

Jesus makes the same two points in John 5:21-30, but adds one more point: those who believe are not under judgment.

Only the unbelievers will actually stand before God and Jesus on Judgment Day. This Day is depicted in Rev. 20:1-15. It is known as the Great White Throne Judgment because God sits on a great white throne when he judges the people. Eternity for unbelievers is determined by their works, and all of their works are found wanting. So all of them are cast into the lake of fire, where they will be punished for eternity.

Eternity for believers, however, is not determined by their works. Believers are saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8). But the works of the believers do determine their rewards.

Paul tells us in 1 Cor. 3:6-17 that our works will be subjected to fire. He pictures our works as components to a building. What is that building? The Church. What will be tested, therefore, is how well we contributed to building up the Church. If we did well, we will receive a reward. If not, we will suffer loss.

That is why Paul says that each of us must stand before the judgment seat of Christ, “that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:9-10). In the Greek, this judgment seat is called the bema, which is why this judgment is called the bema seat judgment. The Roman proconsuls would sit on the bema when they acted as judges. Jesus will sit on the bema in heaven when he judges our works. It is a judgment only for Christians and it does not determine our eternity, only our rewards.

Posted in The Basic Doctrines of the Christian Faith | Leave a comment

Salvation by Grace through Faith

Posted on September 6, 2018 by chfordenterprises

Lesson 11

9. Salvation by Grace through Faith

This doctrine is unique to Christianity. All other religions teach that you get to heaven (if there is a heaven) and have a relationship with God (if there is a relationship) by doing enough good works. Christianity alone teaches that you can never be good enough to get into heaven or have a relationship with God, that the only way to get into heaven and have a relationship with God is by putting your faith in Jesus Christ, the only person who has lived a life that is good enough.

The Scripture that teaches this most clearly is Eph. 2:8-10. It says that we are saved by grace through faith. It also says that we are not saved by works.

Why are we not saved by works? Verse 9 tells us why: if we were saved by works, we would boast about our accomplishment. Rom. 4:1-4 says that if Abraham had been justified by works, he would have something to boast about. It also says that if salvation came by works, then God would be in debt to us instead of us in debt to God.

In other words, salvation by works would put us above God and all other men. It would make us proud. And is that not why we sin in the first place?

Rom. 3:20-28 – Salvation must come by grace through faith because we cannot do enough good works in the first place and it excludes boasting.

Does this mean that we are no longer required to do the good works? Of course not (Eph. 2:10).

James 2:14-26 says that we show our faith by our works. Just as a lamp produces both heat and light, true faith produces both salvation and good works.

Posted in The Basic Doctrines of the Christian Faith | Leave a comment

The Resurrection of Christ

Posted on September 5, 2018 by chfordenterprises

Lesson 10

8. The Resurrection of Christ

The doctrine of the resurrection of Christ is absolutely paramount to the Christian faith. In fact, Paul says that if the resurrection did not happen, then our faith is futile (1 Cor. 15:17). In other words, if there is no resurrection, there is no Christianity.

We know that the resurrection happened because his disciples testified to seeing him after his crucifixion. All four Gospels record the resurrection. Luke gives the most details (Luke 24:1-12, 36-48).

Christ did not rise from the dead as just a spirit (like the Jehovah’s Witnesses contend) but as a full person: spirit, soul, and body.

In fact, Jesus said that he would raise his own body (John 2:18-21). Christ’s resurrection was a physical resurrection.

In 1 Cor. 15:1-8, Paul says that the Gospel consists of three events.

First, Christ died. John’s account of Jesus’ death includes the detail that blood and water came out of Jesus’ body after a soldier pierced his side with a spear (John 19:34). This proves that Jesus died when his heart ruptured. This also proves that Jesus really died (not just passed out), for no one survives a ruptured heart.

Second, Christ was buried. Following the customs of the time, he was placed in a cave, the opening of which was then covered by a large stone. Given the necessary size of the opening and the kind of material in that area, the stone probably weighed 1.5 to 2 tons. This means that if Jesus had been buried alive (and if he were a mere man), he would not have been able to move the stone by himself.

Third, Christ rose again on the third day.

Paul then cites the testimony of witnesses to prove that the resurrection did occur. How reliable were these witnesses?

First, in their written testimony, they pointed out their failures, including their unbelief. If they had made up the story of the resurrection, they would have made themselves look good.

Second, most of them died for their testimony. They were told they could live if they simply stopped proclaiming the resurrection of Christ. But they chose to die anyway because they knew they were telling the truth. People do not willingly die for a story which they made up.

Third, their testimony was confirmed by other witnesses, both friendly and hostile. Paul says that 500 people saw the risen Christ at the same time. This proves that the disciples were not hallucinating, for no two people have the same hallucination, let alone 500. The hostile witnesses include the priests, who bribed the guards into saying that the disciples had stolen the body. In other words, even the hostile witnesses admitted that the grave was now empty!

Fourth, and perhaps the best reason for believing the reliability of the disciples’ testimony, is that they first preached the resurrection in Jerusalem. They made their first public announcement of the resurrection within walking distance of the tomb itself. Anybody in the audience could have gone to the tomb to check it out for themselves. If the disciples had started preaching in Athens or Rome, no one could have verified it. But they began in Jerusalem because they knew that no one could prove them wrong.

All the enemies of Christianity had to do to stop it in its tracks when the disciples began to preach the resurrection was to produce the body. The fact that they never did is proof that the body was no longer in the grave.

The resurrection of Christ is the central belief of Christianity. We know that Christianity is correct because we know that Christ rose from the grave.

Posted in The Basic Doctrines of the Christian Faith | Leave a comment