About six months ago Brother Whitmire informed me that a new book was in production. This book would be a comprehensive treatise on the doctrine of soteriology. This afternoon I am pleased to share the announcement of this book’s near completion. The title is Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology
What follows is the announcement at is appears at the Free Grace Seminary web site.
The Free Grace Seminary is in the process of publishing a historic book on Free Grace Theology. The work is the combined effort of more than ten scholars and represents leading edge scholarship on various issues related to salvation. For the first time ever in one volume all of the critical issues related to the doctrine of salvation will be examined and explained from a free grace perspective in one book. The book, Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology, is in the final editing stages and should be out within the next few months. Here is a sneak peak at some of the chapters in the book:
What Is Free Grace? by Dr. Mike Halsey
What Is the Gospel? by Dr. J. B. Hixson
Faith, Saving Faith and Non-Saving Faith by Dr. Fred Chay
Repentance by Dr. Richard Seymour
The Distinction Between Salvation and Discipleship by Dr. Fred Lybrand
Rewards and the Bema Judgment by Greg Sapaugh
Evangelism and Free Grace Theology by Dr. Larry Moyer
Sin and Free Grace Theology by Dr. Mike Stallard
What Is Lordship Salvation? by Dr. Charlie Bing
Assurance and Eternal Security by Dr. Dave Anderson
Please join with us in praying for the success and widespread distribution of this helpful work. Above all else, pray that it helps to advance the gospel of God’s grace to a lost and dying world.
Warmly,
Dr. J. B. Hixson
Executive Director
Free Grace Alliance
Following is one line from the announcement about the new book.
For the first time ever in one volume all of the critical issues related to the doctrine of salvation will be examined and explained from a free grace perspective in one book.I am noting, “all of the critical issues.” The concern I am going to share is not necessarily a personal one and I am hopeful it is a non-concern. If this book, that is advertised as examining and explaining “all of the critical issues related to the doctrine of salvation,” does not clearly explain and examine the Grace Evangelical Society’s “Crossless” gospel then, in my opinion, it does not fulfill its stated objective.
The subject of Lordship Salvation is clearly defined as a prime objective for treatment in the book. I am grateful for this and look forward to reading that chapter, as I am all of the chapters.
The GES gospel is, however, conspicuous by its absence from the table of contents. I trust and am hopeful that this does not indicate the GES “Crossless” interpretation of the Gospel has largely been given a pass in this new book.
LM
Greetings my friend, thanks for the notice.
ReplyDeleteI'm still reading JB's Getting the Gospel Wrong. It's a fine book, I just don't have the discipline to read for hours at a time and the Olympics have been distracting. At the rate I'm going I ought to be finished with GtGW just in time for this one; The chapter list alone makes it look like a must-read.
That'll be around Christmas, sounds like a good gift to put on my wish list.
Stephen
Thank you bro. Lou! I want them all, especially the one by Dr. Seymour!
ReplyDeleteHi Stephen:
ReplyDeleteYou must be a plodder like I am through books. My wife asks me how can I read books when there are no Laura Ingalls Wilder characters in them.
As for the new book, I have been given some advance idea on the scope of what will be addressed in certain chapters. The book will be comprehensive. It will not only define the Gospel from the Bible, but will also address some of the various departures from the one true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Obviously, Dr. Bing's chapter identifies Lordship Salvation as one of the false interpretations of the Gospel to be dealt with.
Feel free to share some thoughts about JB's Getting the Gospel Wrong in the previous discussion threads about it.
Take care,
Lou
PS to Rachel: Note Stephen’s Christmas request.
Hello David:
ReplyDeleteThere will be a chapter for every interest in the doctrine of soteriology.
I'll help announce this books ultimate release.
Lou
To All:
ReplyDeleteThere is another major work nearing the final phase for publication.
This new book will be specifically focused on the egregious errors of the Grace Evangelical Society’s “Crossless” Gospel.
IMO, that book will be the definitive document that once and for all closes the case on the radical departure from biblical orthodoxy Hodges, Wilkin and GES have taken in regard to the Gospel.
LM
Bro. Lou,
ReplyDeleteI have come to greatly appreciate both Dr. Seymour's scholarship & Christian character. May the Lord bless.
Dear Guests:
ReplyDeleteThis evening I was asked if my comment above “another major work nearing the final phase for publication” is a reference to the book, Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology.
To clarify: the book I referred to is not one and the same as Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology. The other book I referenced is being prepared to deal with and specifically address the Grace Evangelical Society’s (GES) “Crossless” gospel.
It is obvious the works based Lordship interpretation of the Gospel is going to be addressed and put to the test of Scripture in Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology. The reductionist GES gospel is as heretical from its end of the theological pendulum swing as Lordship Salvation is from its end. Unsuspecting believers need and deserve to be warned about the GES Crossless gospel as forcefully as we warn them about the Lordship Salvation heresy. I am hopeful, therefore, that Free Grace Theology: A Primer on Traditional Dispensational Soteriology will likewise tackle the GES interpretation of the Gospel.
Let me remind everyone that the Hodges/Wilkin view is that a lost man can be born again apart from knowing, understanding or believing in who Jesus is and what He did to provide salvation. This is a radical departure from the biblical plan of salvation as one can encounter in any evangelical circles. There is no way to justify cooperation and fellowship with the GES faction of the Free Grace movement as long as they hold to and propagate a Crossless/Deityless interpretation of the Gospel.
I am aware there are long time friendships and fellowships that have been strained over the GES’s extremist theology. But you must ask yourself where does your first loyalty lie, to the Word of God or to your friends and fellowships.
The Bible mandates the course of action when the Christian is faced with teachers of a false gospel, even when these teachers are among the body of Christ, “admonish, mark, avoid and withdraw” (Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15).
I want to encourage readers to re-visit some the following articles so that you may be reminded of the danger of the GES interpretation of the Gospel, the “Crossless” gospel, and our biblical responsibility to separate from this known and vital error.
God bless you,
LM
Is “RE-DEFINED” Free Grace Theology- Free Grace Theology
Heresy of the “Crossless” Gospel: Verified & Affirmed!
Unity at the Price of Truth is Treason
Good morning Lou. In regard to your commentary about whether The Crossless Gospel will be addressed, I can see your concern. It's my hope/expectation however, given his own recent book, that the chapter "What Is the Gospel? by Dr. J. B. Hixson" will define "the Gospel" clearly enough to categorically mark Redefined Free Grace and other erroneous interpretations as critical deviations whether they are mentioned by name or not. In light of the hot debate, I agree that a specific decrying of Redefined FG is in order.
ReplyDeleteSo, you make a good observation and I pray the book indeed lives up to it's billing.
Stephen
It would surely be ridiculous if so much effort was spent arguing against the additionists and little or none was spent on the reductionists movement. It could be that since there is no common all-inclusive title that describes the GES position clearly that this false theology will be argued against in several chapters.
ReplyDeleteI would hope this is the case anyway.
Kev
Hi Lou,
ReplyDeleteI want to keep checking in here with you because without someone like me hanging out, you won't have such the opportunity to be stretched to stay in the Word (and the same goes for me too). :)
I can understand why leaving out the message of the cross in the gospel presentation makes you uncomfortable. Who wants to leave anything that is "important," out? It's painful, when it happens.
However, are you trying to tell me that there is no way, ever, under any kind of circumstance that God could grant eternal life apart from understanding that Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected?
I know what the scriptures say. I think it is unfair, as in too extreme, for JP to have said in the comments from the link you provided to the post titled, "Unity at the Price of Truth is Treason!" the following:
"The sad reality is that the evangelism of the GES and it's advocates is categorically inconsistent with and contrary to the evangelism of Jesus and His apostles."
How can this be true when, if one was to believe and use a reduced gospel presentation, they would be categorically, 100% consistent with the gospel that Paul used for a Roman Gentile?
This is the Word of God in Acts 16:
29 The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30He then brought them out and asked, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household." 32Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house.
I just want to ask if it is not a legitimate consideration for anyone who loves the LORD and desires to model the apostles and in doing so honor God, in ordering their message as Paul did here?
Lou, a person like you and me have so much ground between us. But both of us love God and respect the truths of His Word in equal portion. I am faithful to read the links you provide... but many of them only lead to more posts expounding men's words and not the actual words of God. I am sure you are like me and prefer one more than the other. I've seen your series on 1 cor 15. Got anything else I can take a look at?
Thanks,
Michele
I would like to read Dr. Chay's and Dr. Bing's chapters.
ReplyDeleteIt looks to me like Dr. Hixon might tackle the crossless gospel in his chapter, judging by the title.
JanH
Hi Stephen:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, “In regard to your commentary about whether The Crossless Gospel will be addressed, I can see your concern. It's my hope/expectation however, given his own recent book, that the chapter "What Is the Gospel? by Dr. J. B. Hixson" will define "the Gospel" clearly enough to categorically mark Redefined Free Grace and other erroneous interpretations as critical deviations whether they are mentioned by name or not. In light of the hot debate, I agree that a specific decrying of Redefined FG is in order.”
I appreciate your catching the significance of this.
I am hopeful that portions of this new book will clearly identify the GES “Crossless” as a departure from the biblical plan of salvation.
ReDefined FG theology is an extremist view that is shocking in its reductionist assault on the Gospel.
I truly hope FG leaders who know that the GES’s Crossless gospel is heretical will summon the strength and resolve to stake out the biblical high ground by dealing squarely with the doctrinal errors of Hodges and Wilkin.
It will never be right or biblical to seek or maintain unity with the teachers of known and vital, errors. Hodges, Wilkin and all who advocate the heresy of the Crossless gospel should be prayed for and admonished, but also marked and avoided for the sake of purity in the body of Christ and fidelity to God and His Word.
Lou
Michele:
ReplyDeleteWhile I appreciate your participation, when you make the following comment,
“I can understand why leaving out the message of the cross in the gospel presentation makes you uncomfortable. Who wants to leave anything that is ‘important,’ out? It’s painful, when it happens.”
…it tells me one of two things:
1) You still do not understand what the controversy is over.
2) You do understand and you are now using the same dishonest misdirects that the Crossless gospel advocates use to avoid the crux of the controversy.
Incidentally, it is come to my attention that you have publicly accepted and embraced the GES (Hodges/Wilkin) Crossless gospel.
I would like for you to clarify in unvarnished terms whether or not you believe a lost man can be born again apart from knowing, understanding and believing in who Jesus is and what He did to provide salvation?
Do you agree with the heretical view of Crossless extremists that the lost can be saved no matter what misconception he/she holds about Jesus?
Please advise.
Thanks,
LM
Kev:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, "It would surely be ridiculous if so much effort was spent arguing against the additionists and little or none was spent on the reductionists movement."
I could not agree more. Both LS and the CG are heretical. The former by addition, the alter by subtraction.
I trust the writers will not for the sake of past friendships and fellowship take a pass on the responsibility of dealing with the Crossless gospel.
Lou
I agree with our position Lou. What I am concerned about though more so is the crossless gospel camp. You see, the Lordships are attempting to put those qualifications on to try to get people to understand the gospel but they don't realize they are in the process nuetralizing it by adding. Yet I know many of them are solid on truth. For some reason the crossless camp always wants to disregard truth and it almost seems purposeful as if they have contempt for truth or something. It concerns me that some of them have not gotten to the cross if they think it to be of so little value in the gospel message.
ReplyDeleteGrace upon grace,
Brian
Hi Lou,
ReplyDeleteGod is great. He gave me a day to meditate and ingest. I just think that's great because He is faithful to tame the tongue and a quick reply is not always the best reply.
I think I can "hear where this is going."
I figured out what I'm doing wrong. You have been gracious to invite me in, here in your mission, and that certainly could come from nowhere but the LORD. I want to put to work all that grace not in time spent stating in freedom my convictions but better yet in gaining more understanding of the truth. I even said somewhere recently at my blog that whenever someone asserts their rights and opinions, somewhere someone else is being oppressed. Judged by my own "wisdom." it is also unkind and gangly of me to talk so boastfully here about such things that the LORD has imbued richly upon my life, particularly because you have already made it very clear a number of times in my hearing that these things are the gravest of violations! What's the point of entering in if I'm not listening? I am corrected in all these ways.
I am confident in the truth of the scriptures. But I should want your fulfillment more than mine. Therefore I take some care to weigh out what is truly beneficial.
:) Michele
Hi Lou,
ReplyDeleteSomeone once said lately that my comments are too long. Here's an attempt to topicalize them (I know you like my fake word "topicalize," just evidence that I randomly make up stuff as I go :D )
I'm sorry, I guess my style is to be human first and theological second. Hopefully it isn't annoying. :)
You said:
"I would like for you to clarify in unvarnished terms whether or not you believe a lost man can be born again apart from knowing, understanding and believing in who Jesus is and what He did to provide salvation?"
To answer your question, because I have no intention to avoid it, yes. :) I have been clear and consistent in my expression on some issues regarding soteriology, not only from the very first comment I have made at your blog and at mine but also at another's as well. I should also have you note that a mere six days following the first time I met you I wrote a letter to Dr. Radmacher revealing to him my opinions on some matters of soteriology, and another four days later I published that letter on my blog. I mention the timeline so that you know my persuasions have been building for some years before I met you. What's more, I have yet to read either of Hodges or Wilkins, or at GES, a single article on soteriology. I have read a handful of "the unmentionable other crossless' blogger's" articles from his blog, to this point. This is so you may know where I am. I... don't think you mean for me to hide it, and I wouldn't want to either.
Specifically I believe that God can save not only with less information than the cross of Christ but that He can also grant eternal life to those who hear no gospel at all, for what and who He is He has made plain in creation though the world pushes that knowledge away from themselves, and though they have a law of their own they violate it and even now stand condemned. There is a fair trial for "the Pygmies in Africa," so to speak. Though... if you ask me what I use to preach to the lost I use more than just "Christ crucified," I include all the things known as "the wordless book" used by CEF. That's what I use. Why... well... because I love scripture and I can't help it. (I'm such a hypocrite! ;) )
If you can accept who and what I am to this point, then, well that's awesome.
How would you like me to engage if not out of what I know? I have never heard a person talk about Jesus Christ and not from a persuasion of what He means to him.
To ask me to separate my convictions of truth while having a conversation... I suppose is possible, but, I think it would be hard to suppress or change something so fundamentally human as how we do interact with others from the reference of our beliefs. You aren't going to ask me to stop blogging my opinions at my own blog as prerequisite to talk to you, I wonder?
I would like to make a request that you be clear with your expectations of me.
I flourish under a harsh hand. That's just my style. I'm not really interested so much in listening to my opinion as I am being revolutionized in the Word by someone else's, I do hang here for that reason. I want to believe the Word of God like you do especially because of your strong sense of urgency to escape error, and I believe you speak from what God has honestly shown you. Pray for my humility and a sober spirit.
May I suggest that I will submit my thinking to you (and others here) as authoritative, the same as I would to the pastors at my church. For me that means an emptiness of righteousness. There is one thing I will need in return, and that is to be able to talk to you about all of the Word of God. Maybe you can just point me to more links. I'd like some interaction on it though.
I wasn't here, for the cycles I am sure you have been through of figuring out not only the gospel but how to handle those who disagree, through the last several years. I'm sorry that it might be frustrating to think about going over some of that again. But, there's not much I can do about that....
Blessings, Michele
Hi Lou, you asked:
ReplyDelete"Do you agree with the heretical view of Crossless extremists that the lost can be saved no matter what misconception he/she holds about Jesus?"
Hmm, no. In order for misconceptions to be overlooked, there ought to be an easily recognizable fear of and honor for Jesus manifesting itself, as a good reason to think God also overlooks the same while He discerns and responds to the true ways of the heart.
I'm working on this one. I don't know how to answer. So far I don't feel comfortable just letting that be out there as is. Obviously my opinion is irrelevant. But you wanted to know where I am.
Michele
Michele:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, “Specifically I believe that God can save not only with less information than the cross of Christ but that He can also grant eternal life to those who hear no gospel at all…”
To my guests, I sadly have to say that this is another genuine tragedy of the Crossless gospel. The reductionist heresy of Zane Hodges, by this latest definition, is another clear indication that these folks are inching ever close to full-blown Universalism.
The Bible says, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!” (Rom. 10:13-15)
LM
Lou,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that I'm right. I'm just trying to figure it all out. What do you think happens to the man who is seeking YHWH but never has contact with a missionary? Do you think it impossible or possible for such a person, to seek?
BTW, my definition has nothing to do with Zane... I don't think....
Even if I was on to something with that point it's kind of irrelevant, because as a believer it is evil for me to withhold my service to God to make disciples of all men, teaching them everything He commanded.
Michele,
ReplyDeleteI'm certainly not Lou, & I don't pretend to speak for him, he does very well atthat. But my attempt to answer your question about someone who's never seen a missionary seeking God I believe can be answered quite nicely from Scripture itself. In Acts 10 we see a man who likely knew very little about Christ & the Gospel, yet obviously he wanted to know God & was seeking the best way he knew how, & of course, this man was Cornelius. God was in the process of getting the Gospel to him through Peter, & when He got him ready, he sent him to Cornelius who was ready & the Gospel was preached to him, & he believed! The point I believe is universal: if someone wants to know God, even though they have no idea who Christ is, God will move heaven & earth, so to speak, to get the Gospel to them, so they can hear it, believe & be saved. But I also believe the Bible teaches just as plainly that there is no salvation outside of Christ. (Ac.4:12; Jn.14:6)
Just as God hardened the hearts of the Jews who didn't want Christ, so He can soften the hearts of those who want to know God, & then somehow, some way, get the Gospel to them so they can be saved. I appreciate your sincerity & desire to know the truth. May the Lord bless you all.
Thank you bro. Lou for this blog so we can discuss these matters.
David:
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the missionary emphasis that you drew from to answer Michele’s question.
In this dispensation God has raised up and sent out untold thousands to preach the Gospel to every creature. From the Apostles to the Moravians to the modern day missionary God is calling and sending forth choice servants to carry out the Great Commission to the uttermost parts of the earth.
Reflecting on the example of Cornelius, I am certain we have never heard about the thousands of like examples that have occurred over the centuries.
Our finite minds tend to think that the lost in darkest Africa are somehow outside or beyond the reach of the Gospel. David, you will appreciate this: The Gospel is beamed all over the world via am/fm and short wave radio. I can tell you that when I was in an African bush village I could often find Trans World Radio and listen to Dr. J. Vernon McGee’s Through the Bible Radio program.
David, you wrote, “Just as God hardened the hearts of the Jews who didn't want Christ, so He can soften the hearts of those who want to know God, & then somehow, some way, get the Gospel to them so they can be saved.”
I like this principal: “Light received; More light given. Light rejected; Less light given.” I share your opinion that the seeking soul shall hear the Gospel. He must hear and believe the Gospel to be born again (Rom. 10:13-ff.).
Lou
PS: I am pleased to know you appreciate the opportunity to discuss various matters here.
Michele:
ReplyDeleteI hope you find what David and I shared helpful.
Yours faithfully,
LM
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAll right. Let's try this again.
ReplyDeleteSorry. I deleted my last 2 posts because of typos. Here it is again, more readable.
I can add to David's comment also. First from Scripture. In addition to Cornelius there was the Ethiopian eunuch that Philip got called to specifically in Acts 8:26-40. I have also received unmistakable instruction to travel a distance to witness to someone specific who received Christ shortly before he died (alas, I was not miraculously whisked away after! Heh.)
Then there is my own testimony. Through out my childhood I had a desire for God. One day when I was 11 I prayed to Him and told Him I thought He was really neat and I wanted to be friends with Him. Not as a far away kind of friend, but the kind of friend you hang out with. I was too young to articulate it well at the time, but what I meant was that I wanted a personal relationship with God. Some short time later (I don't believe it was more than 3 days) a fellow I had never seen before and never saw again came around to our apartment complex putting gospel tracts in the mail boxes. He enlisted the aid of my friend's little brother, whom we were watching (sort of) for the day. Of course we had to investigate the situation to see if we approved of this (being the mature, wise, responsible 11 year olds we were. Ahem.) So when we inquired what he was all about, he asked us if we would like to know how we could have a personal relationship with God (well, yes, now that you mention it... :) How did you know???) He proceeded to share the 4 Spiritual Laws tract with us and I received Christ that day. My friend did too. The 4 Spiritual Laws ,for all its flaws, does contain the problem of sin, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ so I did hear the complete gospel and that is what I responded to.
So these things are really very common.
On an interesting side note, while we discussed the fact that our sin separates us from God and the wages of sin is death, we did not cover repenting from specific sins or making Jesus Lord of your life. I believe there is a comment of that sort in the suggested prayer ("make me the person You want me to be," or something similar), but that was so incidental as to be immaterial.
JanH
Jan:
ReplyDeleteThanks fro the reminder of God’s special work in reaching the Ethiopian Eunuch.
While I was a missionary in South Africa I had several, but one very special occasion to relate the episode to a group of black Africans. These men were convinced and boldly telling me that Jesus Christ is the “white man’s God.”
What followed was from the Lord because I never thought it before and I am not smart enough to think it up on spur of the moment.
God put the encounter between Phil and the Ethiopian Eunuch on my mind. I told the story and then I shared this thought.
The God of all creation, whose Son is Jesus Christ, loved that black man so much that he called a white man away from a great city, to a desert place so that a black man could hear the Gospel, believe in Jesus Christ and be born again.
Then I told the men, “God loves the African so much that His first missionary to Africa was the black Ethiopian Eunuch.”
……………………………. Silence all-around.
LM
Yeah Lou and David,
ReplyDeleteRadio is indeed a very powerful medium. I delivered to a very kind black man today and then gave him an invitation to listen card. (There is a reason I mention race). He looked at the card and said, "Oh this is the station I listen to J Vernon McGee on. I understand he died a few years ago but I have been listening to him on 92.5 for a while now and teach Sunday School with his book of thru the Bible."
It was a blessing, because you hear a lot of people today say that we have to be relevant culturally and that black people have their own stations and don't want to listen to boring BBN, but this man was listening and J Vernon McGees preaching was preaching into this mans Sunday School class as well.
As in Cornelius case, God will take the message there. Also you both know I have a Calvanistic perspective so you know I have to throw in the part that God hears prayers of the saints and is moving and using many things to draw people like Cornelius to Himself.
But we must always preach the message that faith cometh by hearing and we are to tell people to look to the cross and live in the same way Cornelius was told. He still had to be told about who Jesus was and what he had done. Even though he was seeking, he was not saved until he believed in what he was told.
Lou and David. I am so greatful to both of you for sticking with the stuff. Free grace but no compromise with the gospel message.
I certainly meant no ill toward Michele when first commenting, but I am deeply burdened that Satan is deceiving teachers today and drawing people away from the cross. May God burden all of our hearts about this.
Grace upon grace,
Brian
Brian
ReplyDeleteThanks for the input on this important theme.
I am hopeful Michele will read and reflect on these Bible based follow-ups to her comment. I think they are a blessing to reflect on in regard to the providence of God among other things.
Let's do all we can through the means God has given us to carrying out the Great Commission to the uttermost parts of the earth.
LM
Lou, David and Brian,
ReplyDeleteI am quite happy having chose to listen foremost. In fact it is clear that God was trying to say something important to me, if you read my latest post you'll see why I believe so. So, thank you.
I still have questions. :)
I'm thinking of Acts 4:12. I don't mean to be a know-it-all but in studies dealing with the JW false teaching of promoting the name "jehovah" I noticed something amazing.... Which I will summarize by Jesus' self-assertion:
"You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me...." john 5:39
All that Old Testament? Was actually a testament of Jesus Christ. He is the theophany, the mediator, the image of and the spoken Word of the invisible and unspoken Godhead.
Jesus in His teachings was constantly giving one of three testimonies:
1) testifying of himself (which consisted of applying all important aspects of the OT YHWH to His self)
2) testifying of a "Father" God, and Jesus exalted the position of the Father by being emptied all of His own aims to fulfill the Father's instead
3) testifying of the Holy Spirit....
Jesus is such the (sanctioned) idol of the OT God YHWH that in order for the Father God to receive any worship Jesus must have submitted everything in order to establish Him.
You're going to get a kick out of this, though I am sure you've studied the deity of JC.
Nearly every testimony of YHWH in the OT made an exclusionary statement along the way. For instance:
“But I am YHWH your God, who brought you out of Egypt. You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior except me.” Hosea 13:4
“And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.” 1 John 4:14
“And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but me.” Is 44:21
“And everyone who calls on the name of YHWH will be saved;” Joel 2:32
“That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ ... you will be saved.” rom 10:9
“’What I have vowed I will make good. Salvation comes from YHWH.’” Jonah 2:9
What you have seen here in these scriptures I could show you the same thing with a healthy and sometimes lengthy list of each of the following attributes...
(And pay attention when either of the words "only" or "one" is used below, that means either the NT makes Jesus exclusive or else the OT makes YHWH exclusive, yet they are shared between themselves)
--the one who is and who was
--the first and the last
--the one shepherd
--the one father
--the one God
--YHWH
--the Lord God Almighty
--sanctifyer
--myself the redeemer
--the only savior
--lord
--I am
--worker of salvation
--beginning and the end
--alpha and omega
--only holy one
--the only ruler
--king of kings and lord of lords
--lone creator
--mighty one
--mighty God
--I am he
--am peace
--the only rock
--stone of stumbling
--the only name
--the lord of glory
--giver of rest
--our very life
--he who searches the heart
--words of eternity
--fountain of living waters
--object of all trust
--voice, hair & clothing described
--one source of righteousness
--one source of strength
--theos in nature
--receives proskyneo without sinning
How is it that my mission as a Christian must be to differentiate YHWH from Jesus Christ?
Is it a sin to substitute YHWH for Jesus Christ when dictating the terms of salvation?
Thanks, Michele
Hey Michele,
ReplyDeleteYHWH is indeed the most blessed name of Self-existant and eternal. He is Jesus.
It is also important as is the sign posted above Christ upon the Christ to identify who He is as our salvation as is where he worked out our salvation. Jesus told the Jews and Pharisees who were well aquainted with that name that if you do not believe that I AM (the Greek word is translated from the Hebrew name of YHWH) then you will perish in your sins.
Jesus' hour did not come when he turned the water into wine as it was at the cross that the hour had come and blood and water flowed from God and new wine of the New Covenant was made. It is only by passing through the portal of the cross that we can be born again. There is no other place. this identified the true YHWH.
You see when Eve gave birth to cain she thought that this may have been who was promised and so she refered to him in that sense of YHWH. In fact Luther translated her calling him the Lord, yet Abel was called but a breath or vanity as his name meant.
Only Abel in faith understood though that a blood sacrifice must be made for His sin.
The blood placed on the doorposts delivered the Israelites from having their firstborns killed by the angel of death.
Since the very first day Adam and Eve sinned and tried to cover themselves with figs, God made known to humanity that this was unacceptable and that only a blood sacrifice will do that he must provide. And so He clothed Adam and Eve with the skins of the animal that He sacrificed.
Jesus is our blood sacrifice and mediator of a new covenant. No other will do, so it is perilously important that we rest here at the finished work of Christ. Accepting that all of our sins, past, present and future are taken care of and we are clothed in the righteousness of Christ by His act at the cross. This is where we pass from death unto life. We pass through the cross to his resurrection life. This is the simplest and most basic truth of Christianity that Peter and the apostle Paul preached as the good news. And it is news most wonderful isn't it?
Hallelujah!
And as David Wyatt might add...
Tis done!
Grace upon grace,
Brian
Thank you Brian.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed being led though your perspective of the work of the cross beginning at creation. I hadn't heard it before, some of those points of view.
I was just thinking about how awkward blog commenting can be.
I noticed the free grace alliance forum recently has become unavailable. I remember at the free grace regional conference in June that someone said that it was an important goal for the alliance to increase discussion and communication. One of the leaders of the alliance said that plans were already underway to update the forum for that purpose. I hope that I have accurately conveyed what I heard. Maybe this is simply a sign of progress?
I understand that you have very specific goals in educating and warning the public of heresy. I can appreciate your aim. I think it is good to warn, but, I think it is also good for people to have a chance to ask their questions and come to these conclusions for themselves, with hard work and devotion. Some may not end up agreeing with you, but I think all should have the opportunity to be responsible in deciding for themselves.
I think it is enhancing to overall discussion to have features of color, quotation, expression smilies and even editing of posts. A thread also has pages so that we can remember where we left off in reading, if the conversation is very long.
I'm a good forum user. I'm a little frustrated with the blog commenting because it just feels like domination. At a forum I could pose my own questions and begin a new thread. I can't do that here.
Blogs are good for up-to-date announcements, for encouragement in short comments. But it's not a good place for throwing around a ton of scriptures.
Okay, I said enough ;)
Hopefully soon free grace will have a forum where I will not be so imposing.
Michele
Bro. Brian,
ReplyDeleteI could not (& have not!) have said it better myself, bro!
Michele,
You make some salient points about blogging! God Bless you both, my siblings in Christ!