Billy Graham, King of Lordship Salvation’s False Gospel!

From our friend, John

A friend of mine recently recommended an article from “Decision Magazine”, a periodical published by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Organization.  I went to the website for that magazine and perused the titles from several back issues, before coming across an article dated September 12, 2012, entitled “How to Be Sure You’re Saved.”

There were five steps offered by Graham, at least two of which constituted a false gospel of works.

They were as follows:

1.   You must recognize your need

2.   You must understand the cross

3.   You must count the cost

4.   You must take a definite step

5.   Allow God to change your life

Under number 3 (you must count the cost) is the following quote: 

“Many people come to Christ without first counting the cost. The cost includes repentance, the forsaking of sin, and a continual, daily, open acknowledgment of Christ in your life.”

My Comment: Graham is not clear whether he believes that “counting the cost” is a requirement for salvation or for discipleship.

Under number 4 (you must take a definite step), Graham is explicit in his view that something besides simple faith in Christ is required for salvation: 

“We ask people to make a public confession of Christ in our meetings because Christ demanded a definite commitment. Christ had reasons for demanding that people openly follow Him. He knew that an unwitnessed vow is no vow at all. Until you have surrendered to Christ by a definite act of your will, you are not a Christian.”

My comment:  there is no vow, commitment, or confession required to be a Christian.  Salvation is by Grace through faith in Christ alone.

Graham finishes with this invitation: 

“Would you not like to know that every sin is forgiven? Wouldn’t you like to know that you are ready to meet God? It could happen today, if you will only let Christ come into your heart. Invite Him in right now. The Bible says, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:13).”

My comment:  this invitation is not Biblical.  One is saved by Grace through faith.  Once that happens, Jesus comes into his heart.  It is not the means by which one is saved.  It is the result.

I saw Billy Graham live once when I was in junior high.  We watched his crusades on television when I was growing up.  Now, I pass by the Billy Graham Library each time I drive to the airport.  I am reminded every time I see a billboard advertising Graham’s self-promoting “library” of the extent to which he is considered the authority on matters of faith by the religious establishment, government and the mainstream news media.  But, now that I believe the Gospel, I don’t believe Billy Graham.

Billy Graham was the leading icon of evangelicalism in the twentieth century.   His theme song was “Just As I Am.”  The words to the first verse read as follows: 

“Just as I am, without one plea

But that Thy blood was shed for me,

and that Thou bidst me come to thee,

O Lamb of God, I come, I come.”

If Billy Graham ever believed those words, he denies them by his current teaching.

Eternal Life is Simple and Free << Click

162 responses to “Billy Graham, King of Lordship Salvation’s False Gospel!

  1. Thanks John,

    “We ask people to make a public confession of Christ in our meetings because Christ demanded a definite commitment. Christ had reasons for demanding that people openly follow Him. He knew that an unwitnessed vow is no vow at all. Until you have surrendered to Christ by a definite act of your will, you are not a Christian.”

    Graham’s article is full of errors – some more obvious than others. The quote above though should raise red flags for everyone. You are right that we don’t vow our way to salvation.

    I really don’t know how anyone could dance all the way around the true gospel and yet still miss like Graham does. The sad fact though is that learned and unlearned men alike are susceptible to Satan’s deception. Graham’s is just one of the more recognizable voices in the chorus of voices singing a false gospel message. If only they understood the line “and that Thou bidst me come to thee,” means that we are to come to Christ through simple faith alone. No confessions, prayers, public vows, cost counting or anything else is needed.

  2. Thank you for this article. Very necessary. I once read a Calvary Chapel book that had one of the guys in the book talk about how a person in the church warned the church about Billy Graham’s false gospel and ecumenicalism, and this Calvary Chapel person ridiculed the person warning about Billy Graham, saying to the effect, “I’d never heard someone speak again such a powerful man of God as Billy Graham, and I wouldn’t let him get away with it”.

    That’s the kind of man-worship that causes people to turn off Biblical discernment. Just look at all the steps in this presentation:

    “Count the cost”… How does Billy Graham or anyone that believes as he does, know if they themselves “counted the cost” and paid it or not? What cost did they pay for eternal life? Particularly when eternal life is a free gift.

    “You must take a definitive step”… That’s about as clear as mud. What is the step? Is it the same for everyone? Or different for different people? Why doesn’t the Bible tell me the nature of this step? How does Graham and those that believe like him, know if they took any such step?

    “Allow God to change your life”… If salvation happens in a split second, then how can the person know in one split second if their life was changed or not? Then salvation as they describe it, is a progression, a process. That’s roman catholicism. And then that doesn’t make any sense as to why Billy Graham would call anybody forward to come to Christ.

    Thank you for this article!

  3. Hello Everyone

    This is one of the sacred cow for those who believe in Lordship salvation… Mr Billy Graham. So many will defend Mr. Graham as “a man of god” without understanding what is the clear message of the gospel. Just ask them for chapter and verses for the gospel and watch for the deer in the headlights look. This is follow by 101 excuses for why Mr. Graham is “Christian”

    Yes Mr. Graham is the king of LS and his message lives on in the like of Paul Washer and others. Sad but true the world will know it’s own.

    Trust in Jesus
    Levi

  4. Thanks John, for the article. It is indeed roman catholicism. Jesus’ death and resurrection is never enough according to them; one’s commitment and surrender is what seals the deal. I just can’t believe how common this mentality is.

    But what really boggles my mind is how a great many of these people can be so tolerant of other religions. There’s a youtube video out there with an aged Billy Graham being interviewed by Robert Schuller, where both are rejoicing at how “broad” God’s love is, meaning that the devoted buddhist is in the fold without ever having to make that “commitment” to Jesus.

    I guess that’s what makes it all good; as long as they smell sweat, then it doesn’t matter where the person came from.

  5. John,

    Excellent article. It will be controversial in that there are many who adore the man but perhaps overlook the errors he has preached for years. I have been aware of Billy Graham’s (BG) errors since I graduated Bible College in 1971.

    I have relatives who say they trusted Christ at a BG Crusade — but after talking to them further it seems that the Grace Gospel counselor who spoke to them after the meeting was the one who actually led them to the Truth and salvation in Jesus alone — perhaps in spite of BG’s message.

    The BG crusades are well known to be dramatically ecumenical — they send invitations to every church in town (of every description) inviting them to come and participate as Counselors. Hundreds from many assorted churches send counselors — hence the hoards of folks “coming forward” at the invitation with their white “Billy Graham Crusade” badges plainly visible as they amble forward. Apostate churches love that because they are reaching vulnerable folks they would otherwise never meet. Yet at the same time I know several Grace Bible believers who would participate for the same reason — they would be able to witness the Truth to those vulnerable unsaved folks who have come forward. Incidentally, I refused the BG crusade’s offer for our church to join them in crusades when they visited South Florida.

    One thing that particularly disturbs me is that both nominees for the Presidency this year (one a Mormon, the other a former Muslim who is a self described “Christian” but denies the Savior) felt some obligation to have a public “audience” and pay obeisance to Billy Graham, in an almost popeish fashion. That is the ultimate insult to our Savior from all three men.

    In Jesus Christ, Jack

  6. Hi all!

    Jack you said,” Yet at the same time I know several Grace Bible believers who would participate for the same reason — they would be able to witness the Truth to those vulnerable unsaved folks who have come forward. Incidentally, I refused the BG crusade’s offer for our church to join them in crusades when they visited South Florida.”

    I know that would be a tough decision for me personally! all these people that go to these crusades and are searching for “something” and the main show plays on these peoples emotions rather than the purity of the Gospel message.

    If it was just me,myself and I ,i would go to a crusade as a counselor.

    If I had a church I think I would have passed also.

    Its tough when you know that these things draw huge numbers of lost souls and you know that what they are hearing is false.

    The Lord has all this under control though. Even at events like these , if there is a genuine soul there that wants the truth The Holy spirit will get the truth to them somehow.

  7. Matt for Grace and Truth

    The only form of “surrender” related eternal salvation that is Biblical is “giving up” that you can save yourself by contributing your own efforts, works, or rituals.

    Grace means God does it all. Our part is to receive the free gift of eternal life by believing only.

  8. Exactly, Matt. Yet that’s not how they mean it.

  9. Bruce’s article entitled “Grace Baiting: Twenty Ways Lordship Faith Advocates Mischaracterize Free Grace Theology” mentions the fact that Jon MacArthur’s 2008 updated version of “The Gospel According to Jesus” was released by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and that “Franklin Graham wrote the introductory tribute to the book and its author.”

    See Bruce’s article linked below:

    http://www.freegracealliance.com/pdf/baiting.pdf

  10. Pearl,

    I really like your observation of how inclusive of other works systems LS has become. I guess it makes sense, though, since LS is really just a works system itself. They’re being consistent with their works based message, and confirming for all to see that that’s what they’re about, right? Seems that way to me.

    I see the link to your blog here, also, Pearl. I’d love to partake! What is required to qualify, please?

    Thanks,
    Kim

  11. Hey there, Kim!

    I’m glad you brought up the blog because I’ve been meaning to remind Jack to remove the link: (Jack, please remove the link! ;-) )

    (Bear with me as I lay down here an abbreviated version of my journey; I promise it’ll fall short of “War and Peace”): When I began blogging back in the spring of 2010, I was entirely ignorant of the term Lordship Salvation and didn’t know all that much about Calvinism or Arminianism. I thought the two merely debated how a person gets to be saved. I was already long of the opinion that for God to choose who would go to hell and who wouldn’t portrayed a cruel God, so I concluded that I must be Arminian, but I didn’t delve any deeper than that. Rather, my focus was the sanctified life as taught by the likes of Major Thomas, Alan Redpath, Frances Havergal, Andrew Murray, D.L. Moody, Amy Carmichael, A.W. Tozer, Vance Havner etc, etc, I found that Arminians and Calvinists could indeed live peacably together as they gathered together under the umbrella of Keswick (mind you, I kept to the deceased “classic” teachers, knowing the tendency for things to go down hill the longer they’re in business).

    Long story short, I don’t remember exactly what it was that started to make me question the deeper life movement, but I do remember noticing a trend in people who began with these teachers to end up in contemplative circles, and therefore tolerate all kinds of junk. I remember receiving a book by Stephen Olfort called “Not I but Christ” and being disappointed that the forward was written by Billy Graham (of whom I had already discovered was ecumenical) and grew increasingly uneasy as I perused the bibliography to find several obviously dangerous names (i.e. Richard Foster and Eugene Peterson), mixed in with those I had long followed and trusted. What hindered my arriving at a solid conclusion over the specific teachers I followed was that they seemed “old school”, and trustworthy, teaching before the advent of contemplative mysticism (or so I thought). I reasoned that the tares and wheat grew together, side-by-side. Then, through a common blog where Jack would frequently comment, I followed his gravatar link and started reading about John MacArthur and this thing called “lordship salvation”. I wasn’t ever crazy about MacArthur, and I detested Washer, so I wasn’t personally affected, though I couldn’t help but wonder if any of my heros were guilty. The answer didn’t come overnight. But I will say that as I continued blogging, I found myself scouring my previous blog posts and deleting specific, obvious offenders. First to go was A.W. Tozer. Slowly but surely, more and more of them began to drop like flies from my blog and my personal bookshelf. Since my blog was first and foremost a collection of quotes and essays to encourage one in the Christian walk, I finally surrenderd to the hard truth that there is none who is completely trustworthy, except the bible itself, and a King James version at that. Not much reason to continue with the blog after that realization. I also no longer frequent discernment sites and other blogs, because I’ve been extremely hardpressed to find a single one which isn’t tainted with LS, not one!! (For me, that’s saying a lot.)

    Looking back on those two years of blogging, I see God’s guiding hand in each revelation leading me to where I am today, walking with a much lighter “burden” and seeing things much more clearly!

    And now you know!

  12. Jarrod, you said: “The Lord has all this under control though. Even at events like these , if there is a genuine soul there that wants the truth The Holy spirit will get the truth to them somehow.”

    I agree that the Holy Spirit can steer people around false doctrine. But, there are strong admonitions against preaching false gospels (Galatians 1:9), as well as exhortations to mark and avoid false teachers and to not yoke ourselves with unbelievers.

    Given all of that, I have to think that false teaching does inhibit fulfillment of the Great Commission and that we should vigorously expose false teaching as well as proclaiming the true Gospel.

    Tom Cucuzza gave a great sermon entitled “The Obvious That Isn’t so Obvious”. It focused on 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, which says: “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” Tom said that the way that the god of this world blinds people is largely through religion. Below is an excerpt:

    “…people automatically want to believe the authority and so what that does is it leads people astray, into something that’s false and they believe that.

    And then, when someone comes along with the true Gospel of Grace, that says your sins have been bought and paid for by the blood of Jesus Christ, once and for all, and that all you can do to be saved is to put your faith in Him, trust in Him as your Savior, they say this: ‘I can’t believe that. That’s too easy. That’s easy believism. That’s cheap grace.'”

    Clear Gospel Campaign says it like this:

    “We believe that the more ardently and regularly a pastor or teacher holds forth any of the above perversions of the gospel of grace as a necessity for salvation, the more firmly a pre-existing grid of salvation-by-works is fabricated in the hearts and minds of the congregants, progressively shackling the lost sinner more hopelessly behind a veil of deception, making it less and less likely that any forthcoming profession of faith has meaningfully grasped the message of salvation.”

  13. Hi Jarrod,

    Yours is an interesting comment. John has some wise words. It is essential to realize each Believer must assume their own responsibility before the Lord, whether to go into a meeting as a counselor knowing a false message will be preached — and try to “take advantage” of it.

    But we as believers must remember that the Lord’s control does not dictate our decisions nor overrule our disobedience or stupidity. We still have a free will.

    Yes, God is in control and His Holy Spirit convicts the lost — but He does not make the lost believe in Christ. Unbelievers must eventually make a decision to trust Christ and have eternal life or reject Jesus Christ and remain condemned. They have the choice by virtue of a God given free will and we as Grace Believers have the responsibility of steering the unbeliever to the Gospel.

    Yes God is in control but our obedience to God is not automatic. Believers must make the decision to study His Word and to serve Him, etc. The New Testament is chock full of pleadings that we, as believers in Christ, be obedient to the many instructions in His Word. We have that choice — God does not robotically control our behavior, therefore He does not make us automatically obey Him or His Word. As we believers are obedient to His leading by the Holy Spirit we shall receive His blessings.

    But thankfully, as believers, we are secure in Christ Jesus whether we are obedient to the Lord’s leading or not. We are assured His blessings if we are obedient, His discipline if we are not, but guaranteed always safe and secure in Jesus.

    In Christ eternally, Jack

  14. Matt for grace and truth… and Jack :) I took your comment on Biblical surrender and laid it to a picture along with some of the verses Jack supplies here for the gospel. See if you both think it’s o.k. You’ll have to enlarge, it’s a link to the picture. If you don’t want me using your quote Matt (changed a little), let me know.

    I thought it was exactly right.

  15. Sorry Matt and Jack, please try this link, and if it is o.k., I will finish it, or if you’d like to add or take away anything (I almost made a joke there) then just let me know.

  16. Holly,

    Not a problem for me about Matt’s words. He will read this and comment I’m sure.

    As usual my eye did not allow me to read the colors on the graphic.

    In Jesus eternally, Jack

  17. Maybe you can see on FB Jack, I sure hope so. Here is that link, but here is about how I laid it out.

    THE ONLY FORM OF BIBLICAL SURRENDER
    Is giving up the idea that you can contribute your own efforts, works or ritual for salvation.

    GRACE MEANS GOD DOES IT ALL…

    OUR PART IS TO RECEIVE
    THE FREE GIFT OF SALVATION BY BELIEVING.

    Romans 3:23; 6:23 ~ Rev 21:27 ~ Eph 2:8-9 ~ Titus 3:5 ~ 2 Cor 5:21
    Acts 16:31 ~ John 3:16-18 ~ John 5:24 ~ John 6:28-29, 47 ~ I John 5:9-13

    In His love to you and your family Jack, thank you for all you do.

  18. Holly, Better thank you — except I could see no Bible references. Leave it up to Matt.

    Thanks for your graphics.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  19. Hi, Pearl! :)

    Thank you so much for sharing the history of your blog and the progression you experienced to where you are today! It is wonderful indeed to be able to look back and see how God was at work in bringing us through the various teachers and their teachings of varying degrees of truth and error, all to get us to correct understanding of His pure and simple truth, unadulterated by the often ego-driven extra-biblical systems of men (and women!). One thing about having been in or under an errant system of thought and teaching, the appreciation of the Truth is so very great for it, and the relief from being out from under it’s effects oh so sweet!

    Thanks, Pearl!

    Kim

  20. Matt for Grace and Truth

    Hello Holly,

    I am humbled that you desire to use my comment. And I have no objection to you using the language from my comment. However, the comment was related to “eternal salvation” only.

    For the saved believer, I believe it is Biblical to surrender ourselves wholly to the will of God which, although not salvific, is our reasonable response (Romans 12:1-2). Then, along with such surrender, we are to TRUST in God’s sufficient grace moment by moment to GIVE us the victory through Christ over the power of sin to the glory of God (1 Corinthians 15:57; 2 Corinthians 12:9).

    Thus, regarding sanctified victory, for example, regarding anger, instead of our trying by our own efforts to keep the lid on the boiling pot, as we trust Christ, He, by His grace, keeps the pot from boiling in the first place.

  21. Matt – I completely understood it was speaking only to the gift of salvation, eternal life. I am frustrated as I watch Macarthur preach and write in his “gospel according to Jesus” that the Gospel Message is James 4:6-10, completely ignoring this is spoken to those indwelt with the Spirit.

    We obviously know surrender is what we should do, but to add total surrender, turning from all sin, being sorry enough, submitting fully to His Lordship etc., is something that I felt your comment addressed, and so that’s why I put the verses about the free gift of salvation with it :) I really believe for me in surrendering once I was saved, it was obeying to spend time in His Word and prayer. Prov 3:5-6 and Luke 10:38-42 kind of spoke to me. I knew very well what I needed to do, but I wasn’t. Once I obeyed, how gracious He is…His Word came alive and I am so thankful!

  22. Has it been discussed here yet that Mormons were removed from a list of cults on Graham’s website after BG met with Romney? And here is part of a quote from Franklin Graham: “But I was shocked that we even had that on there,” Graham said, as he described the “cult” reference as name-calling.
    “If I want to win a person to Christ, how can I call that person a name? That’s what shocked me, that we were calling people names.” Source: christian post.

  23. Jon — Franklin Graham is the perfect example of “unity at any cost”. Mormonism is LS with the even more damaging denial of the deity of Jesus Christ. At least he doesn’t deny the deity of Jesus. But, he does support sending people to catholicism, as his father did, and his message is a duplicate of his father’s, for the most part. But this refusal to call mormonism what it is, that’s a new step, in the wrong direction of course.

    It would be as if, instead of Matthew 23, we would have Jesus promoting the positive aspects of the Pharisee religion, discussing how we don’t want to speak against their beliefs too much.

  24. “Count the cost”
    This is obviously the result of conflating salvation to discipleship, which is a common error due the teaching of replacement theology. Taking the legit instructions of Christ to count the cost, take up one’s cross, etc. and wrongly applying those to becoming saved to begin with. Years ago, I would have been shocked and would have never considered any criticism of Graham as legit. However, the LS doctrine is repeated so often, one begins to believe it. That is why it is so dangerious, IMO.

  25. I’ve been quite sad lately as I have a friend who’s clearly caught up in lordship salvation. She talks about how we must repent of our sins to be saved and it’s just the most confusing thing in the world to me. How much sin do we have to repent of? What about the people who attend church with her? You see I don’t believe anyone has given up all their sins. So I’m sitting here thinking, are the only reasons they fellowship with one another because their sins are not brought to light? If all their sins came out would they turn on each other? Or perhaps hopefully it would cause them to reexamine their beliefs. It’s just so confusing to me. How can I fellowship with them knowing how much of a sinner I am? I would have to keep quiet about my sins or else be judged. I’m just choosing Christ alone, but lately I’ve been questioning if lordship salvationists are even in the faith at all. I know that sounds harsh.

  26. Well said Abe, I agree.

  27. Matt for Grace and Truth

    Holly,
    Having re-read your effective, artistic evangelical message:

    http://s184.beta.photobucket.com/user/hollywd58/media/Bible%20Verses/cross2a-1.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0

    I believe that it accurately relates to surrender in the context of salvation only. Keep up the good work!

  28. Thank you Matt, always, always open to Biblical correction, do not want to get something wrong :)

    Chris – I understand what you mean, because as they tell you their “testimony” of turning from all their sins, and repenting of their sins and they despise someone who has received Jesus, or they classify childlike faith as “easy believism”, or they flood facebook with their videos on the “idolatry of decisionism”, or they mock altar calls and sinner’s prayers as “never saving anyone”, rather than pointing out that if you believed by hearing the complete, simple gospel, you are saved no matter how you voiced it. I think it’s fairly obvious that a prayer, or a walk to the front of the church doesn’t save. But to me it seems the agenda is to undermine assurance.

    It seems like if they had a theme song, it’d have multiple stanzas of,
    “You’re not really saved if….”
    “You were never saved if…”
    “If you don’t do ___________, you were never saved”…

    NEVER SAVED….

    Seems to me, I hear the same voice of the accuser of the brethren in the Lordship/Calvinist preachers…and the majority of their “sermons” have that underlying theme, you are probably not saved.

  29. Holly, you said: “.. .if you believed by hearing the complete, simple gospel, you are saved no matter how you voiced it.”

    I agree completely. And, I would add, whether or not you voiced it.

  30. Good insight John :)

    Hey, I have a question for any who would give input. We are all familiar with the term to ask Jesus into your heart, although when I was told that as a little girl, the gospel was explained and then I was told when I received Jesus (John 1:12), He would come to live in my heart (Eph 3:17)

    Recently, although I understood the premise for the speaker saying, “shame on those who tell little kids that all they have to do is ask Jesus into their heart”, he also added something to the effect of “why would he want to live in that cesspool” and referenced Jer 17 about wicked our hearts are.

    When I told my children about the Lord, they understood they were placing their faith in Him alone, and not in any special formula of prayer, but I did explain that He came to dwell in our hearts (after we believe/receive). Thoughts?

  31. Holly,

    Great question. I have a real thing about using any “heart” language or terminology when witnessing to anyone, including kids.

    Here are a few that are Wrong:
    Jesus is knocking — Open the door of your heart and let Jesus come in.
    Let Jesus come live in your heart.
    You may miss salvation by 12 inches, the distance between your head and your heart.

    And there are many more.

    And my “favorite” bad one is Give your heart to Jesus.
    In the late 60s Peter Dyneka, Founder of Slavic Gospel Mission, speaking at Florida Bible College Chapel, told the story on himself to illustrate a point. He was witnessing to his grandson (probably 6-7 years old). Peter kept insisting but the kid refused. Peter would say, “Give your heart to Jesus.” Finally the kid broke down sobbing and said, “But Grandpa, PLEASE, if I do I will die — I need my heart to live.” Peter realized he had been using terrible, un-Biblical terminology. He broke into tears himself, hugged his Grandson, apologized and shared with him the True Gospel of Salvation in Jesus. The Grandson trusted Jesus that day. And then Peter crusaded to make sure no one heard that phrase from his lips again. Peter’s Gospel message was very clear that day in Bible School Chapel.

    We can witness to anyone without using language that confuses.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  32. Holly, I think the speaker who said “why would He want to live in that cesspool” was being a little harsh. After all, the Holy Spirit does indwell every believer!

    I don’t think that God is looking to disqualify anyone on a technicality. So, like you said, “.. .if you believed by hearing the complete, simple gospel, you are saved no matter how you voiced it.”

    That said, I agree with Jack that “heart” aphorisms are confusing, and they are non-Bilblical. If being non-Biblical were not reason enough to not use gospel substitutes, there are serious dangers to using them.

    Below is a discussion from Clear Gospel Campaign on this matter:

    “POPULAR GOSPEL SUBSTITUTES

    There exists today a collection of pithy little aphorisms, which, though not always espousing salvation by works, are empty, meaningless, and incapable of imparting a saving knowledge of the person and work of Christ. By substituting these pithy little aphorisms for the authentic gospel, grave damage has been done to the cause of Christ.

    Because it is impossible to anticipate every corruption of the gospel that fallen man may concoct, we offer, not as exhaustive, but by way of example, the following as false gospel substitutes:

    ‘Invite Jesus into your heart,’
    ‘Make a personal commitment to Christ,’
    ‘Put Christ on the throne of your life,’
    ‘Give your life to Christ,’
    ‘Commit your life to Christ,’
    ‘Give your heart to God,’
    ‘Turn your life over to Jesus,’

    We believe that there are at least six grave dangers set before the church in the use of these, and similar contemporary gospel substitutes and popular aphorisms:

    1. Even when presented fully and accurately, the gospel is camouflaged by such nonsense, thereby hindering the effectiveness of the gospel message from illuminating the way of salvation to those who know not Christ.

    2. Oftentimes, essential elements of the gospel message are excised entirely from the message of the evangelist in order to make room for the addition of more nonsensical aphorisms, thereby robbing such messages of any capacity for imparting a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.

    3. The gospel is often contradicted by works-oriented invitations such as requiring an unbeliever to “make a personal commitment to Jesus Christ,” which is, in its essence, a requirement of a promise of future works in exchange for salvation. The gospel is not how we must “commit our life to Christ.” The gospel is that Christ committed His life to us at Calvary. The requirement that the unbeliever “commit his life to Jesus” is NOT “basically the same thing in different words.” It is 180 degrees opposite of the message of salvation. It is heresy, it is a false gospel, and it is high time that the true church of Jesus Christ stopped tolerating such false gospels as “just a different expression of the gospel.”

    4. By such silly aphorisms, the unregenerate are given a false assurance of salvation through a meaningless profession of faith, thereby discouraging further inquiry into the most important question in the universe: “What must I do to be saved?”

    5. Those unregenerate who subsequently lapse from their confused “profession of faith” are more likely to become hardened to the gospel, having seen the emptiness and worthlessness of what they understood to be biblical true Christianity.

    6. The true believer who is not firmly grounded in the clarity of the gospel is likely to redefine his understanding of the gospel message according to how he hears it repeatedly presented. Though this will not impact the salvation of a true believer, it will cripple him in his ability to meaningfully share the gospel. Multiplication cannot take place when a believer is crippled in his understanding of the gospel, or his ability to communicate it to others.

    Because these pithy little aphorisms destroy the capacity for believers to meaningfully multiply themselves through evangelism, they are not just a minor difference between Christians. They are a hindrance to the great commission, and a cancer to the church. They are not ‘advancing the gospel in their own way.’ They are destroying the advance of the gospel.”

    http://www.cleargospel.org/topics.php?t_id=18

  33. Hello Holly
    Here is my understanding of the question you ask about the heart. The heart describes three different areas of a human being.
    Physical: Life
    Mental: Love, joy, and sorrow
    Spiritual: Morals….God’s laws are written on man’s heart.
    When I read Romans 10:10a: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness;… this show me where a man beliefs come from. But it is the object of our belief. Where do we place our trust?

    I agree with you and Jack (Sir). We must use a clear and simple message of the gospel…more so when we witness to children.

    Trust in Jesus
    Levi

  34. Holly,

    Here are a few passages that you can check out regarding God in us. John 14:11-21, Eph. 4:6, Rom 8:9. I think it is safe to say that God (Father, Son, and Spirit) is in us as believers. Many verses give this idea. I have mentioned just a few. There is also the idea that we are in Him. You could spend the rest of your life gaining a better understanding of all the ways in which this works. Thankfully as believers we get to do just that.

    You said,
    “…he also added something to the effect of “why would he want to live in that cesspool” and referenced Jer 17 about wicked our hearts are.”

    I have personally heard this kind of talk before from a man teaching a lordship style message at my old church. The desire for these type of teachers is to get the person to want to clean up their lives first before then going and making a public profession of faith. They come across as that both things are necessary for salvation. However it is a works message and a gospel counterfeit. For more on it you can check out the article I wrote about it for Lou Martuneac’s blog a while back.

    http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2011/04/spread-of-lordship-salvation.html#comment-form

    I am also glad to hear about the faith of your children. They are indeed blessed to have been given a clear gospel.

    In Christ,

    Jim F

  35. I appreciate all your comments, I know I fully believed when I was a child, but I understand now more than ever, how these things can be much more of a problem, then I ever understood years ago, and who knows what we pick up in baggage along the way, and we need to lovingly hold each other accountable, for it certainly a matter of life and death.

    The man was making a joke, and is free grace, and yet even in trying to clarify the mistake of not making that part of the gospel, I think he also added something that might confuse people about what happens later. Just was curious your thoughts, and appreciate them all. God bless you all, and I am blessed the Lord has given me children that love Him, and have believed on Him, and now He has guided them to Fred Chay as a teacher also. Really thankful for all His goodness.

    I will go check our your article too, thank you Jim!

  36. Expected Imminently

    Hello {addressed to Jack — Edited by Jack – to enable and welcome any of our commenters to answer Sue.}

    I am really appreciative of all the comments. It is particularly helpful when an error is dissected in context. Naming L.S. as a ‘works system’ is really helpful
    Would you please check my understanding and put me straight where I fail. I have limited Greek but understand that the English translation of kardia is heart or mind. Kardia being the seat of our will/soul not referring to the organ that pumps blood, or emotions/feelings. Other languages would need to find their own idiom to describe the will/soul such as stomach or kidneys. We course Brits even call it our ‘guts’. 
    Also that there is no distinction in the Greek between heart and mind. LS forces a difference by falsely claiming it a ‘heart faith’ and ‘mind faith’. I think it was John MacArthur that changed the definition in his commentary. Before it is possible to be saved, we need the knowledge of the Gospel to give us eternal life. Knowledge alone does not save, but the acceptance or assent is essential, acknowledging our trust in Christ to save from sin and give us eternal life. We cannot ask to be saved if we don’t KNOW the facts for the kardia, the mind/soul, to respond to through faith alone by God’s grace. I use K.A.A.T. as a pneumonic for pistis as the definition for faith which refers to faith/believe as a need for Knowledge Assent Assurance Trust. I understand JM is also responsible for changing the traditional definition of faith. Dr. Dean says that a man of JM’s calibre and standing should not make so many linguistic errors.
    If the above is correct, and more besides, then LS is a false gospel for much more than ‘making Jesus Lord’ and claiming metaneo (repentance) for Justification. It makes a mockery of God’s free grace. I do realise repentance is necessary for the believer via 1John1:9 in order to renew fellowship with the Lord; but it doesn’t mean a loss of relationship as some claim.

    Free grace is not licentiousness, God is not mocked. Without the cleansing of 1John1:9 as well as a failure to remain abiding as John 15, there are consequences to pay in this life as well as a loss of rewards at the Bema fire due to lack of spiritual growth through faith works. Some will lose all rewards for failure to repent of post-salvation sin 1Cor3:15. To do with our inheritance, I believe.

    What an eye-opener I found in this verse. 1John2:28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and NOT BE ASHAMED before him at his coming.

    I could go on about the failure of LS theology, but I will stop here for now. Many thanks for any guidance and instruction.
    Sue

  37. Sue,

    My last three direct emails to you have bounced as undeliverable.. If you have changed your email address — change it in the proper box when you comment — otherwise you will not get notices of comments from others. Be sure and do not publish it publicly. It is safe within our web site system but not so if you advertise it.

    In Jesus eternally, Jack

  38. Expected Imminently

    Hello Jack
    I am thoroughly nonplussed, generally flummoxed, bothered and bewildered, by that faux pas. That’s what comes of relying on my memory. Hopefully I have ammended correctly. As my three score year and ten are nearly up, I can say that old age doesn’t come alone. Thank you for warning me and my apologies for the inconvenience.

    I have joy unspeakable and full of glory since landing on your blessed plot by stalking Jarrod from DTW. I need not have bothered as a certain gent is so incensed by three of us becoming your ‘disciples’, he has conveniently linked you for all the web to see. Sadly, like others, he says he is against LS, and yet his teachings reek of it, but he fails to see. I pray that The Lord will open up the eyes of his understanding and all those who genuinely desire to follow Jesus’ doctrine for Eternal Security.
    The Lords ways are past finding out; He is incredible by the way He finds a way where there is no way for those who desire Biblical fact i.e. Eternal Security by God’s FREE grace with no adds or minus’. I have only one complaint – why didn’t I find you earlier, it would have saved me, and others, no end of heart ache.

    Surely there are some Free Grace churches in the U.K., as well as those who oppose LS, but I am yet to find them. Pearl is quite right to say that all the Discernment sites are LS either overtly or covertly! Still, The Lord leads and I do learn best from my mistakes.

    Praise The Lord and pass the ammunition. Publish and be blessed!
    God bless you.
    Sue

  39. Sue, you said: “We cannot ask to be saved if we don’t KNOW the facts for the kardia, the mind/soul, to respond to through faith alone by God’s grace. I use K.A.A.T. as a pneumonic for pistis as the definition for faith which refers to faith/believe as a need for Knowledge Assent Assurance Trust.”

    One does not need to ask to be saved. I think one needs knowledge of the Gospel and then either believes it or not. I think acronyms like K.A.A.T. overly complicate the message.

    According to Clear Gospel Campaign, the object of saving faith is Jesus Christ. The content of saving faith includes:

    1. An understanding and belief that one has sinned and fallen short of the standard required by God, and therefore, in need of a Savior (Matthew 9:12; 1st Corinthians 15:1-4).

    2. An understanding and belief that Jesus Christ is the Eternal God who became a man; (Matthew 16:16-18; John 8:23-24 & 58; 11:25-27; 20:31; Acts 9:20; 16:30-31; 1st John 5:13).

    3. An understanding and belief that the violent and bloody death suffered by Jesus Christ was sufficient to cover, pay for, or take away the sins of the one who believes in Him (1st Corinthians 15:1-4, John 19:39).

    4. An understanding and belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ; (1st Corinthians 15:1-4); and

    5. An understanding and belief that Salvation is the gift of God, bestowed only on those who honor the Son by believing in Him alone for their salvation, and renouncing all confidence in the works of the law to contribute to their salvation (John 4:10; Romans 4:4; 11:6; Galatians 2:21; 3:10-14; 5:1-4; Ephesians 2:8-9).

  40. Sue, I want to encourage you to make a clean break from any websites, books, sermons, fellowships, etc which fail to make the clear distinction between salvation and discipleship. Don’t look back! It really doesn’t matter what others are saying about this website and its contributors. What does matter is how many people God continues to bring here who’ve come to discern the subtleties of LS,and rejected it once and for all.

    There is no shortage of naysayers. They are, in fact, the majority.

  41. Expected Imminently

    Hello John
    Asolutely one does not need to ‘ask’ to be saved. That was really sloppy of me. I hope I meant to say, ‘no-one can be expected to be saved if one has no knowledge of the Gospel’ (or the reason for it). As the heart/mind/soul is exceedingly wicked, relying on our own feelings to judge ourselves, we wouldn’t recognise, or accept, the judgment that we are all hopeless sinners and in need of a saviour.

    In the short span I have been coming here, I have realized how much the idioms of the false gospel stick. I have had a few ‘double-takes’ to alert me. They are mindless repetition, just like an advertising ditty to buy what we don’t need i.e. to ‘ask Jesus into your heart’. Children see through this as their simplicity of thought thinks of a 6’ man, opening up their little chest with a knife, to live inside all the flesh and blood of a pulsating organ – its complicated, utter nonsense.

    KAAT is only a tool for my personal studies helping me to remember what the traditional definition of faith really consists of, and how wide a meaning it has. It isn’t needed for the easy, uncomplicated clear cut, non-intellectual message of by Faith alone. Thank you for checking my understanding; I have some more queries for a separate post, so I do hope you will bear with me.

    Yes Pearl; I agree with you. Thank you for responding and keeping an eye on me. :-)

    God bless all
    Sue

  42. Sue, I agree with Pearl. I have looked at the DTW site and would run – not walk – away from it and never look back.

    Soon after I trusted in Christ alone (a couple of years ago), I started looking for churches, websites and ministries that teach salvation by Grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. It is like finding a needle in a haystack.

    You will find a host of sites that claim they believe that salvation is by Grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, but betray that belief by some of their other content. Here are red flags that I look for to avoid such sites or ministries:

    1. Dishonest treatment of iconic figures in church history who perverted the Gospel in major ways. For example, some sites will say “Spurgeon did not teach Lordship Salvation.” Anyone who would make such a statement is either ignorant of Spurgeon’s teaching, ignorant of the Gospel, or is lying.

    2. Back door Lordship salvation. These guys will tell you that salvation is by Grace alone through faith alone, but then they will say if your life isn’t changing sufficiently, you were probably never saved.

    3. Vague or undefined use of words such as “repentance.”

    4. Use of the phrase “accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.” Another manifestation of this one is “the Holy Spirit indwells anyone who has accepted Jesus as both Lord and Savior.”

    5. Associations with groups that pervert the Gospel. This would include organizations such as the Southern Baptist Convention, the Billy Graham Evangelical Association, etc.

    6. Comfort with ecumenism. This might include cooperation with charities sponsored by organizations that promote false doctrine (Operation Christmas Child, the Salvation Army), inter-faith prayer breakfasts, large conventions with questionable speakers, etc.

    7. Links to resources that pervert the Gospel. One so-called Free Grace church in my city promoted “The Spurgeon Archives.”

    8. Cross-less gospel advocates. This is primarily the later teachings of Zane Hodges and Robert Wilkins of the “Grace Evangelical Society.” More subtle forms include teaching that Christ’s bloodshed and physical death were not necessary components of the atonement for our sins.

    9. Brotherly love or social gospel focus. These tend to promote love and works to the exclusion or near-exclusion of sound doctrine. These sites often do not have a statement of faith, of if they do, it is so vague you can’t tell what they believe.

    10. Sites that use Romans 10:9-10 as their primary scriptures in explaining how to become saved. This passage tends to confuse people into thinking that salvation is conditioned on asking or praying for it, or even on publicly confessing Christ. This one tends to be a favorite of LS groups.

    If you have concluded that I am narrow minded, you have concluded correctly. After having been deceived by false teaching for almost fifty years, I am very wary of it.

    In Matthew 7:14, Jesus said: “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.”

    Most people who claim to believe the Bible do not appear to believe the above verse and accept at face value anything that calls itself “Christian” or “church.” Not me.

    I am completely comfortable here at Expreacherman, Clear Gospel Campaign and Northland Bible Baptist Church, but do not always agree with everything I hear or read from any source.

    You will find links to both Clear Gospel Campaign and Northland Bible Baptist Church under the “Blogroll” section to the bottom right of this website.

  43. Excellent, clear and succinct comments, John. I appreciate the mind which is able to break down, isolate, and numerate the many fallacies which I detect in my spirit, yet lack the skill to adequately verbalize.

  44. John,

    I agree with Pearl — that is a wonderfully comprehensive list of how one may recognize apostate teachers. That would make a great “stand-alone” article.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  45. Expected Imminently

    Hello John, your comment to me is received with gratitude. There was nothing I disagreed with and can confirm I have been aware of all the deceptions in these men for quite a few years. Truthfully, I was against LS before I even realized what it was called. Even got myself banned from Rapture Ready by warning they were hosting another gospel. I had been harassed, bullied and slandered by a mod who was obviously (to me) LS. About two years later, I noticed they had altered their Statement of Faith about repentance, and were finally standing against LS, praise The Lord. At that time Afruchts teaching on ‘Condition For Salvation’ was my solitary prop.

    I first discovered DTW about a week ago at the start of 2013; I was interested in their judgment of a man I have met personally, Jacob Prasch. He isn’t an easy soul to love, and I don’t agree with certain of his views, but he has done a great deal to challenge error here in the UK, and abroad. But oh my, how they were savaging each other was cannibalistic, with the attitude of an eye for an eye and not an ounce of grace between them, genuinely disturbing.

    On their thread of OSAS, I saw they were LS in spite of their objections to it. Thinking I may be of help, I posted about the stance of Calvinism and Arminianism vs Chafer Free Grace on Jesus’ lesson in John 15. They actually agreed but once they ‘twigged’ I was saying ‘no repentance for Justification’, I was immediately told I was a false teacher as their ‘door’ was slammed in my face. That was the best decision I had made for me; in their company for all of 48 hours (thereabouts) that was me done and dusted with no desire to ever go back again. So fret not on that account. :)

    In fact, I suspect that another group had wrongly deduced that I was associated with DTW because we have obviously used the same sources for info, but aren’t linked with them in any way. These souls said one of my comments, which consisted of purely the Scripture of John 15 – was ‘straight from the pit of hell’ and cursed me and did their ‘binding and loosing’ of my evil spirits – such larks! So my brief encounter with DTW has solved an annoying little mystery that I have been praying about. It’s a question of ‘been there, done that, but didn’t wear the ‘T’ shirt’.

    I concur with you that searching for sites teaching Grace alone, by faith alone, as well as UK churches has indeed been the proverbial needle in a haystack. Although it’s been a difficult time, I have been pleased to know some lovely peeps in spite of our different theology. Some were unpleasant, but likewise some were very kind and supportive in spite of our differences.

    I’m taking up too much time, but want to add that I have also learned the hard way about Covenant Theology (Chafer warned against) and its insidious inroads into all persuasions especially the ‘church growth movement’ with Rick Warren’s Purple Drivel ‘church’ that has messed up my family who are blind to it.

    What a tremendous blessing ‘Israelology’ and ‘Footsteps of the Messiah’ by A.Frucht have been to me over these awkward and sad years (long story) and what a fantastic feast I was led to at the ‘table’ of Robert Dean – oh yum! Thank you Lord, such scrumptious treats this side of glory!

    Every blessing
    Sue

  46. Sue wrote: “I was interested in their judgment of a man I have met personally, Jacob Prasch. He isn’t an easy soul to love, and I don’t agree with certain of his views, but he has done a great deal to challenge error here in the UK, and abroad.”

    Hi Sue! If I may say this in the kindest of words, I want to say that Jacob Prasch might have exposed errors found in word/faith and that sort of thing, but he also introduced tons of his own error, from the error of teaching you can lose salvation, to the errors of “midrash” that really twist things around. He also refuses to admit that Calvinist teachings are error. He is quite ecumenical and he is a supporter of Billy Graham as well (speaking of this thread).

    And you are right, the DTW site is very LS, they pretend not to be, but when you give them the Biblical grace message, they will reject it.

  47. Sue, thanks for sharing some of your “war stories” with us. It is sad about your mistreatment at the hands of the DTW crowd. I have to always remind myself that I should feel sorrow for such folks, rather than anger. They are either lost or have fallen from Grace. Either way, they do not currently believe the Gospel.

    I liked your statement: “It’s a question of ‘been there, done that, but didn’t wear the ‘T’ shirt’.”!

  48. Expected Imminently

    Hello Abe
    I don’t disagree too much over JP; my objection is the unfortunate attitude of the DTW kettle calling the pot ‘black’. I don’t need to agree with JP to pray for him. DTW have him marked as having lost his salvation, either that or LS style he was never saved in the first place. ~~Shudder~~ and that’s the end of him. ‘Orf wiv is ‘ead!

    Harsh, so harsh, but that’s to be expected of those who are unable to grasp God’s amazing Free Grace and demand to be ‘fruit inspectors’ of another works to prove they are even saved. I do think this is judging before the time and I think it is enough to expose an error publically without feeling the need to gore and trample their victim who is no doubt clothed in the Righteousness of Christ. I agree JP gave as good as he got, that doesn’t mean, do the same.. Anyway, Jesus wears JP’s unrighteousness upon His own body, so every blow against JP is landing on Jesus, who loves JP enough to die for him.

    Grace is love in action, is it not? It’s so easy to say ‘I love the brethren’ but then use vindictive, graceless comments to condemn an erring brother and imo, they deny genuinely loving God as they claim. I speak to myself as well.

    Quoting John’s comment concerning DTW “I should feel sorrow for such folks, rather than anger. They are either lost or have fallen from Grace” This is also true of JP. We who are totally assured of Eternal Security, regardless of bad works in others, live with the hope that their sins were paid for at Calvary. JP no longer lives, but Jesus lives in Him.

    Please don’t think I am ‘okaying’ JP’s behavior, I do not advocate Grace as a license to sin as there are always consequences to our actions, but God is a good and righteous judge, there will be no miscarriages of justice for JP or any of us. I suppose I am saying ‘put away the pointing of the finger’ – ‘ what is that to you/me/us, follow God’ and leave JP to his Master.

    Night night God bless and Maranatha!
    Szzzue ;)

  49. John,

    These two points stood out to me.

    “2. Back door Lordship salvation. These guys will tell you that salvation is by Grace alone through faith alone, but then they will say if your life isn’t changing sufficiently, you were probably never saved.”

    “4. Use of the phrase “accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.” Another manifestation of this one is “the Holy Spirit indwells anyone who has accepted Jesus as both Lord and Savior.””

    Many at my previous church including the Pastor used the phrase “accept Jesus as Lord and Savior” almost every week. Also, the backdoor Lordship view is prominent in many fundamental baptist churches. In my experience as other have mentioned, these folks will usually deny that they are Lordship but will still insist on repentance meaning a turning from, deep sorrow, and trusting “Christ as Lord and Savior.” They are usually also big Spurgeon fans so you are right to warn about anyone who promotes him. I’ve heard of some trying to say that Spurgeon had changed some of his views later in life, but even if he did, which I doubt, I wouldn’t ever look to him for learning. Nor would I ever recommend him.

    One thing I have seen is that there are sites and ministries out there that might have a grace sounding doctrinal statement on salvation but later on define faith as repenting of sins. You pretty much have to take a long hard discerning look at things. There are also other things to avoid. For me, I look to make sure that the person is dispensational. If they are not then there could be big problems in their theology. Covenant, new covenant, progressive dispensational, hyper-dispensational (Mid-Acts), new perspectives on Paul etc are all to be avoided no matter if the person or group has a grace statement of salvation. I am also wary of extreme King James Onlyism. There is a King James Only church nearby that I looked at but they ended up being Mid-Acts (Right Dividers) and I believe they even defined repentance as turn from sin. I would say that they are an example of a very deceptive church. One could be there for a while not understanding that Mid-Acts is a bad thing. I would run from that type of place as fast as from a Lordship oriented church.

    The thing is that we are not safe from Satan’s deception once we become believers. Yes he may have lost the battle in that we are saved but He still looks to sow deception and see us be less effective in our Christian lives.

    Jack, all

    I’ve have also been thinking about starting my own simple blog in order to be another voice proclaiming a true gospel. The other thing on my heart is whether or not to seek a church to attend that is a long drive away or to start a home Bible study that might be able to lead into something. So far I prefer the Bible Study idea. I can’t get away from the idea of how great it would be to have a truly free grace church one day in this area. Any prayers would be appreciated.

  50. Jim F,

    We will pray for you in your future plans that the Lord will bless your efforts for Him–

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  51. Jim, I have prayed for you as well.

    Thanks. John

  52. I greatly appreciate the prayers. Thanks. One thing I have noticed is that the Word does not return void. May we be faithful to teach it accurately and the Lord will indeed bless us for it.

  53. JimF,

    Many times over your comments have taught me much about LS, and I have often thought a lot of those comments could stand alone as an article. Should you accept that incredible responsibility of owning a blog, I will certainly be a regular reader.

    The same goes for your idea of starting a home fellowship, only, regretfully, I wouldn’t be able to enjoy that (unless, of course, you take advantage of technology and incorporate podcasts!).

    I am also praying for you.

  54. Jim, you mentioned the importance of making sure someone is dispensational. I have to admit I don’t fully understand the term, care to define it?

  55. Jon,

    Just a note on your question about Dispensational teaching.

    There are many opinions but generally “Dispensations” means seven separate time periods since creation through Eternity with the Lord in Heaven.

    The understanding of “Dispensations” mean that, within each time period in History, God has dealt with man differently according to His determination. It is important to remember that God’s salvation has never changed but has always been by Grace through Faith in God’s revealed Truth at the time.

    The Seven Dispensations:

    1) Innocence, Adam and Eve in paradise.
    2) Conscience, after the Fall.
    3) The law in the Old Testament.
    4) Grace in the church age.
    5) The Antichrist, the time between the Rapture and the Return of Christ.
    6) The millennial kingdom.
    7) Perfection in eternity.

    You may find some variation in name descriptions of the seven different time periods (Dispensations). We should interpret Scripture with Scripture and in the context of the time period (Dispensation) in which and for whom it was written as well as within the time it references.

    Of course this is a very short description. People have written volumes about Dispensational Truth (Charles Ryrie for example).

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  56. Jon,

    One further note about Dispensations, the link below is an interview given by Dr. Charles Ryrie, who for the most part is accurate on Bible Doctrine. Listen with discernment. I was unable to listen all the way through (28 Min) but it should be somewhat helpful.

    {Sorry, Link removed by Admin due to false doctrine of David Regan}

    I don’t want us to have a deep discussion on Dispensations here at ExP. Maybe later on another article. Thanks.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  57. Thanks for your description Jack, it is helpful. I will watch the video as well when I get the chance.

  58. Expected Imminently

    Hello Jon
    With Jack’s approval, this is my brief understanding of a Dispensation from following the teaching of Dr Arnold Fruchtenbaum. (Free Grace)

    {Link removed by Administrator}

    Dispensation ‘ oikonomia’ means to manage the ages, or the economy of the ages and is also fondly known as ‘God’s Housekeeping’ for His family on earth and concerns the way God keeps his house in order.

    E.g. Before marriage, the way a man would manage his home (oikonomia) would be to meet the needs of a single man.
    When he marries, his ‘housekeeping’ (oikonomia) will alter to fit around the life of two people.

    When children come along, his oikonomia (economy) changes to meet the needs of a growing family; and so on through his life span. God never changes, but his plans for mankind alter to fit the circumstances.

    Dispensation teaching stands in opposition to Covenant Theology and their use of allegory to interpret God’s Word that replace Israel with the Church in God’s plans. Dispensations teach a literal or normal interpretation of Scripture and defends the Jews rights to the land of Israel. :)

    PS. Dr. Reagan (nice man) is Arminian and believes salvation can be lost and never regained. :(

    Sue

  59. Jon and all,

    I made a mess of the link to the video. It is an interview with Charles Ryrie, not Bing — through David Regan’s video.

    Thanks Sue for pointing out that Regan is not clear on the Gospel of Grace. You said, “Dr. Reagan (nice man) is Arminian and believes salvation can be lost and never regained. :( Truthfully I was not aware of Regan’s theology (However, Pearl says I warned her about him some time back). I don’t remember and must go back and check my notes.

    BEWARE OF REGAN.. Please listen to Ryrie with caution and discernment!!

    I apologize for the confusion and appreciate those who called me out on it. Thanks.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  60. Sue,

    Thanks for the “head’s up” on Regan. Sad.

    But about Arnold Fructenbaun, I was unable to read his PDF on Dispensations due to my vision problem. However and sadly, he is an admitted 4+ point Calvinist as reflected on this question and answer session about Calvinism on his web site, Ariel:
    ( http://tinyurl.com/bjmpx5p ).

    So, you can see from the above that Ariel and Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum are, at minimum, 4 point Calvinists with perhaps a quarter to a half point extra regarding atonement. There is no question in my mind that these points best reflect the biblical data as revealed in the New Testament.

    And then part of Fructenbaum’s Statement of Faith at Areil:

    “..that those who are saved have been unconditionally elected to salvation in eternity past and have been effectively and irresistibly called by the Holy Spirit.”

    So few teachers are dependable.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  61. Sue and Pearl,

    Thanks to both of you for reminding me about the dangerous David Regan.

    Yes, Pearl, I did report on David Regan in November 2011 (misspelled his name) — He is Charismatic, a Lordship “salvationist” and among many other bad doctrinal errors, “Latter Rain Movement,” etc. I do not understand why Charles Ryrie would appear on a program with Regan. Why I did not remember Regan from my previous expose?? I do not know. Thanks for checking that out and letting me know, Pearl!!

    David Regan’s quotes from my earlier expose':

    But I do believe in Holy Spirit baptism, just as I also believe in the gift of tongues. And I think the time is long overdue for us to do some serious teaching and preaching about both of these topics within Evangelical Christianity.
    [...]
    Many Christians have quenched and grieved the Spirit within them because they have treated Him as an unwanted guest. This is due to the fact that many Christians have accepted Jesus as Savior but not as Lord.
    [...]
    The Church began with a great outpouring of God’s Spirit (Acts 2). The Bible says that the Church Age will conclude with another great outpouring of the Spirit (Joel 2:28-29). I believe we are in the midst of that “latter rain” right now.

    http://http://expreacherman.com/2011/10/28/why-i-use-the-king-james-version/#comment-10217

    I have removed the link to the Regan/Ryrie video..

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  62. Abe, I am so glad you said that about Jacob Prasch. Yes, he has introduced “tons of his own error” including insisting midrash is necessary in order to understand the “deeper things of Scripture”, and we can only understand issues relating to salvation otherwise.

    I have seen him viciously attack people who disagree with his teaching..I have lost quite a number of friends for standing against his insistence of Midrash, and have quite a load of material collected on him including screen shots. On a Berean group on FB that I admin, I was called a liar by Jacob, through Jackie Alnor relaying his message. He called for Christ’s swift judgment to fall on whoever was the liar, (he just said I was a liar my words proved me to be, so I am assuming he meant me). His fruit is one of a railer (a word he used to describe himself), and whether a brother or not, I prefer not to keep company with him, and for certain his teaching on midrash being “taught in the Bible” not just mentioned, is untrue.

    As for David Reagan, I used to admin for Christ in Prophecy, but he is definitely taking some wrong paths, Arminian, hanging out on TBN, and some other things, I could not recommend him.

    Fructenbaum…sad to hear… thanks for letting us know Jack.

  63. hollysgarcia, Prasch also says that you can lose salvation, so that makes him wrong about the Gospel, as well. Alnor is attempting to do some good things but she lacks any real discernment as it seems she got her ideas mainly from Prasch, ideas like being a fan of MacArthur and Wesley at the same time (the contradictions don’t seem to be an issue for them).

  64. Pearl,

    Thanks for the kind words and support. My home study may be in the wishful thinking stage yet, but the blog is now up and running. All prayers are always appreciated.

    Jon,

    Looks like others have answered your question. Sue brought out a couple key points:

    “Dispensation teaching stands in opposition to Covenant Theology and their use of allegory to interpret God’s Word that replaces Israel with the Church in God’s plans. Dispensations teach a literal or normal interpretation of Scripture and defends the Jews’ rights to the land of Israel.”

    If a preacher says that the church started any time other than in Acts 2 or if he hints at replacement theology then look for the error coming around the corner (many times Lordship style.) The covenant theologian’s tendency to allegorize is also problematic. The reason that dispensationalism is even taught is because it is a logical conclusion of proper Bible study using a plain, consistent, and literal principle of interpretation that compares scripture with scripture.

    Dispensationalism is a large overarching topic and cannot be covered in a few comments. Perhaps there will be more on it in a different post.

  65. Expected Imminently

    Hello Jack
    I was so shocked and disappointed when I realised Dr. Reagan was ‘Latter Rain’. I then remembered he had posted at least two charismatic ‘prophecies’ so that cap fitted. Nathan, the web minister of L&L, had been extremely supportive and so kind to me through a nasty split in my beloved family; I felt like a traitor when I had to ‘have it out with him’ over this ‘Latter Rain’ business. Plus he told three of us who have been long term ‘churchless’, to get to any church, that was better than none! He called watchmen warnings, spiritual cannibalism; it was then I recognised what used to be called ‘Shepherding’, now it is Dominionism I believe? My chin sank lower onto my chest. I told him that it was RW who had moved the goalposts, not us, so why were we in the wrong for remaining in the Word!

    L&L then announced they had no problem with Rick Warren’s teaching other than his refusal to teach prophecy. L&L didn’t feel the same about RW as other ministries did (such as Berean Call) Several blogged to say how ‘biblical’ was RW’s book ‘The Purpose Driven Church’ and L&L agreed with them.

    I had first gone to L&L because they were Pre-Trib; I reluctantly ‘winked’ at their Arminianism as I was hungry for fellowship and it wasn’t pushed at that time. DaveR. is a member of the ‘Pretrib Research Centre’. I had thought him relatively safe because of who he worked with, such as Thomas Ice. While insisting the Rapture was ‘imminent’ and ‘signless’; he also wrote that the Parable of the Fig Tree was evidence we were in the season of the Rapture.

    The left side of his mouth said ‘imminincy’ and the right side of his mouth claimed the Fig Tree as the sign we have been waiting for. Ah, but it was still imminent because of the Holocaust and the return of Jews to Israel. Obviously it wasn’t imminent for the Church living up to the 2nd World War.

    To second that thought, DR also claimed that the Rapture came after the ‘latter rain’ for the church which he places BEFORE the 7 years whereas THE latter and former rain is for Israel to begin the Millennium horticulture. Yet another denial of what he said about signless imminency. It was all nuts. It was said that DR likes to run with the hair and with the hounds because he most certainly is NOT Pretrib, his version is a twisted deception imo If you have managed to follow that twisty tale, you deserve a medal. :-\

    Re A.F. I had forgotten, but yes I did know about your report. I have been at peace over it because it isn’t something that affects what AF is teaching. Personally I am fully aware that it was The Holy Spirit that chose to teach me about Israel through AF. It was AF that first alerted me about LS teaching and the false gospel of putting repentance before faith. He tackled the problem by explaining the truth of the Gospel called ‘Condition for Salvation’. I found him to be a quiet, gentle man and non confrontational (met him twice in England). He does the same job of alerting to false teachers by their actions not their names.

    I am not competent to explain about AF’s view, but very roughly, it concerns the TEACHING of Calvin himself which is so different to what it became through Beza’s influence into what we know as Calvinism and LS. I THINK it is similar to what Eric Douma of Twin City Fellowship believes. Also pastor Bob DeWaay of Critical Issues Commentary?

    However, dear Jack, this is YOUR blog, so if I have caused trouble by naming my ‘sources’, I regret that and will try to be more sensitive in future. I completely forgot about your sight limitation. When I get chance I will attempt a copy and paste of ‘Condition for Salvation’ and send it to your personal email.

    Many blessings in Jesus for your sterling work here. Praise The Lord and pass the ammunition. :-D

    Sue

  66. Jim, you said: “If a preacher says that the church started any time other than in Acts 2 or if he hints at replacement theology then look for the error coming around the corner (many times Lordship style.)”

    Do you think the reason behind this error is that people that teach replacement theology believe that God does not keep unilateral promises? If so, this would explain why people that teach replacement theology drift into teaching LS – which is a bi-lateral contract arrangement.

  67. Hello Sue,

    I am happy you understand our concern about mentioning teachers who may be OK in some respects– but teach just a tad of leaven. We all know that leaven spoils the whole lump, and is dangerous for undiscerning baby Christians (as well as mature ones). There are many teachers around who may sound great but as we have seen, they preach a “little” LS here and a “little” Calvinism there.

    My own terrible mistake of linking to a video by Regan could very well lead others astray.

    Incidentally, both Bob Dewaay and Eric Douma are Calvinists. In their newly organized church statement “What We Believe” we see nothing but the “Five Solas,” the use of the elitist Latin language which indicates the rallying call for true blue Calvinists.

    We note their “sola” proclaiming faith:

    “Sola Fide (Faith Alone) – Pronounced “Fee-Day”, that salvation comes through faith alone, and not by works. Faith itself is not a work, but is itself a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9).”

    Calling faith a “gift of God” is a Calvinist trick and is contrary to proper exegesis of Ephesians 2:8-9 in particular and God’s Word in general. Most Bible scholars (except Calvinists) know and understand that.

    Despite some who deny it, John Calvin, from the beginning, taught error and everyone who follows his teaching simply perpetuates that error.

    We like to urge each other here at ExP to support and favorably mention only those teachers who subscribe to a true free Grace position. We may occasionally make errors but we should be quick to correct them.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  68. Expected Imminently

    Crumbs Jack, I was trying not to throw the baby out with the bath water, I hadn’t realised they were so far into the puddle. You will be glad to hear that I visited infrequently and I didn’t hear or read anything overtly Calvinist at that time. My interest lay with their objections to all things Emergent.

    Regularly visiting Wales, there was a dour, little old man standing solemnly outside the market offering Bible tracts to passers by. We didn’t take one to read as it would be wasted on believers. It was good to see such loyalty come fair winds or foul, each time we saw him we smiled and said ‘keep up the good work’ before walking on by.

    One day I was waiting for my husband by this mans street ‘pulpit’; I thought to give him a word of encouragement – for some unknown reason, I can’t think why, I said ‘how cruel Calvin was for murdering Jacob Arminius’.

    Oh my word, this frail old soul turned into a screeching maniac before my eyes as he began defending Calvin at the top of his voice. He railed on and on – It was a busy street and everyone stopped and stared. I was as red as a beetroot and I could only grin and giggle looking around at everyone’s horrified amazement.

    There was literal hatred in that mans eyes and he looked as if he wanted to kill me there and then – thankfully I was rescued by my husband who was holding me up as he pulled me away. I was shaking in my shoes and the embarrassment was excruciating. If that’s what loving Calvin does to a person, they all need locking up imo. We avoided that ‘sacred’ spot from then on. :-|

    Generally the Welsh are very friendly peeps! :)

    Sue

  69. Sue,

    Interesting story about your little Calvinist Welch-man “friend.”

    Calm, sweet Calvinists can be the most viscous, illogical folks when challenged on Bible doctrine. We see that regularly here at ExP. Thankfully, not all viciousness gets through to our general readership.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  70. Abe, yes, don’t all Arminians say you can lose salvation? I agree sadly on Jackie lacking discernment, and a lot of the “discernment” people are Calvinist and/or Arminians. Interestingly, they seem to be bridging the gap with each other. They compromise their beliefs in order to band together against “other” false teachings, even doing conferences and commending each other. Where are their convictions?
    ——————————————-
    John and Jim… speaking about those who veer from the church beginning with Pentecost. Interesting that my Tues. night study had just put in place last Tues, a new teacher, an older gentleman, who when he mentioned Les Feldick, I cringed, thinking, “here we go”… He handed out charts on the dispensations of time, of course Feldick is hyper dispensational and believes the church began with Paul. This man began to teach that the church was Jewish and under the law, and I really honestly couldn’t understand, even jumped over to the gap theory in Creation and likened Jer 4:23 to creation. He says Gen 1:2 shows the earth was not perfect because there was darkness, therefore this couldn’t have been creation. I said Is 45:7 shows that God created darkness, how could this be so? I left the class thinking of how convoluted the teaching had been in order to prove certain points from his hyper-dispensational view. Sad…
    ——————————-
    Sue, I had similar encounter as you with your little man, yet not in person, but I asked this man three times as he viciously attacked me when I spoke against Calvin. When I asked him if he too would kill someone who stood against the “Institutes of Christianity”, he ignored the question. I asked him three times, the last time, I basically said something to the effect, that his lack of denial spoke volumes. It was actually not the first time, as one man when I said, Calvinism was NOT the gospel, inboxed me and insisted I remove my comments NOW, or else… By the way, it was not his page. This has been a couple of MANY of these accounts sadly.

    Another friend had an encounter with a man in Costco a couple of days ago, and since he was handing out tracts, she too thought she was meeting another believer. But when she dared bring up Calvin, he turned on her, she was quite amazed, and sad as she said the man was 93, but turned quite angry when she dared say anything about Calvin.

    So, not saying all are this way, some may know Him and have been misled, but I am afraid that we are going to see more and more of this type of behavior if we dare question their idols.

  71. Expected Imminently

    Hello Bruce
    I know you appreciate Acts 16:31! There is a comment on another site railing against God’s Free Grace, that I would like your reaction to if that is ok? I need to add that the author denies being LS, so it’s the comment itself that seems to be LS teaching?

    Quote “Please do not ignore the MANY VERSES throughout the GOSPELS and ACTS which show Godly Sorrow in action by those CONVICTED OF SIN, BEFORE they received Jesus and believed on Him. Don’t just focus on one FAVOURITE verse Acts 16:31 (not surprised that it is your favourite because you ignore all the others which contradict your position).”endquote

    1)Many verses? The only verses I can think of are linked with the gospel of the kingdom and the Jewish House of Israel.

    2)Received and believed? Received, or accepted that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah after which they believed in Him for Eternal Life.

    3)This concerns the gospel of the kingdom, and it is not THE Gospel of Jesus Christ! 1Cor15:3,4. Nothing at all to do with Salvation and the Church which was not instituted until Acts 2.

    4)Acts16:31 Instead of a having the ‘conviction of sin’ LS demands; in vs 29 he was trembling from FEAR from the quake and expecting to die. Instead, vs34 said he REJOICED “…having believed in God with all his household.”

    5)The Four Gospel’s concern the gospel of the kingdom. The 1k Messianic rule on earth. Does not involve Salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Church was not instituted until Acts 2

    It seems that not only does LS confuse Justification (no repentance from sin) with Sanctification (repentance for growth); they also confuse the earthly Jewish Messianic Gospel of the Kingdom, God’s wife; with the Heavenly Gospel of Jesus Christ (1Cor.15:3,4. which is Jew/Gentile and the Bride/Body.???????

    My brain aches!
    Maranatha! :)

    Sue

  72. Sue, I think it is remarkable that this LS quote looks for Godly sorrow from people who are not yet saved.

    The Bible says that God justifies the UNGodly.

    Romans 4:5 “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

    Romans 5:6 “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”

    Let’s look at a could of the accounts of people who believed on Jesus in the Gospels:

    1. John 4:25-29:

    “The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

    2. John 11:25-27:

    “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”

    I don’t see any mention of “Godly Sorrow in action by people CONVICTED OF SIN, BEFORE they received Jesus and believed on Him” in these passages.

    LS is a man-made religion. It is not that the people who push LS confuse justification with sanctification. It is that they don’t believe the Gospel.

  73. John,

    Excellent points — right on target which shows the fallacy of LS.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  74. Thank you John for your excellent thorough response to Sue’s question and quotation.

    Sue:

    If I may add briefly to John’s fine response, the verse that the objector cites, Acts 16:31, is a great verse declaring that salvation comes through believing in Christ alone by grace alone through faith alone for salvation; however, it is by no means the ONLY verse that declares the Free Grace Gospel message. Here are some more good verses that declare the gospel of grace: Ephesians 2:8-9; John 3:16-18; John 6:29, 40; John 10:27-30; John 11:25-26; John 12:46; John 14:6; John 17:3; Acts 4:12; Titus 3:5; Romans 4:5; 1 Cor. 15:1-8; 1 John 5:10-12.

    For a look at how Lordship “Salvation” advocates distort the gospel of grace, see, for example the article “Grace Baiting”:

    http://www.freegracealliance.com/pdf/baiting.pdf

  75. Hi Friends,
    A quick question I have regarding John 15. This chapter, many Arminians, Calvinists and LS will use to promote a false Gospel. In many of these questions I ask on your blog here, I ask for the clarification of how to respond to others. Now, regarding John 15, two things are clear to me:
    1. The purpose of the parable is about PRODUCING FRUIT not salvation from hell.
    2. I have been taught that the purpose of parables are not to be used as doctrine.

    But LS people will say ‘But why does Jesus use such strong language when He says in vs. 6 – “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.” – Surely He is referring to Hell when he refers to being cast into the fire?’

    I can easily give them points 1 and 2 but still wonder, why have trouble giving them a strong Biblical response regarding why Jesus uses such strong language and refer to those not abiding will be cast into the fire?

    Also, knowing that the purpose of parables are not to be used as doctrine could someone simply and clearly explain to me just what the purpose of parables were? (apart from hiding the truth from those that were self righteous).
    Blessings
    Daniel

  76. Daniel, regarding John 15:

    On John 15, see, http://www.gracelife.org/resources/gracenotes.asp?id=54

    I also recommend Dr. Bing’s GraceNotes # 28:
    Can Good Works Prove Salvation? no. 28 – Dr. Charlie Bing
    Dr. Charlie Bing:
    There is every reason to think that those who have believed in Jesus Christ as Savior and are consequently born into God’s family will experience a changed life to some degree. Some would say that this changed life is evidenced by good works which proves they are saved. If that is true, then the converse is true: if there are no good works, then there is no salvation. In this view, good works (sometimes called “fruit” or evidence of a changed life) prove or disprove one’s eternal salvation.

    Some passages are used to contend that works can prove or disprove one’s eternal salvation. Probably the most common are James 2:14-26, John 15:6, and Matthew 7:15-20. But James is writing to Christians about the usefulness of their faith, not its genuineness. Likewise, in John 15:6 Jesus is talking about fruitless believers and compares them to branches that are burned, in other words, not of much use. Matthew 7:15-20 warns against false prophets (not believers in general) who can be evaluated on the basis of their evil deeds or heretical teaching (not an absence of works in general).

    There is no passage of Scripture that claims works can prove salvation. In fact, there are many problems with trying to use works to prove salvation, or the lack of works to disprove salvation.

    Good works can characterize non-Christians. Works in and of themselves can not prove that anyone is eternally saved because those who have not believed in Christ will often do good things. In fact, good deeds are essential to many non-Christian religions. Sometimes the outward morality of non-Christians exceeds that of established Christians. In Matthew 7:21-23 we see the possibility of those who do not know Christ doing great works, but their works are useless in demonstrating their salvation; they are not saved.
    [to read the full article, go to GraceNotes 28 at the GraceLife web site]

  77. Expected Imminently

    Thank you lads for unravelling that error for me. I tend to go a bit too deep, but your replies reveal there’s no need. Hoping and praying this will be used by those concerned to un-muddy what should be crystal clear, not ‘deep’ at all. Praise The Lord!

    Sue

  78. Thanks John : )

  79. Question regarding the atonement of Christ.
    I was taught and have always believed that when Christ said on the cross in Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”. It was because that the Father could not look upon Jesus (have fellowship with Him) because ‘He became sin’ as it says in the following verse: II Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
    I have been taught that Jesus actually became sin for us and while He was on the cross, that He actually absorbed the sins of the world in His body as it says in I Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree…

    Recently I came across some teaching that said that to say that the holy Son of God actually BECAME sin is blasphemy and that to say that the Father and Holy Spirit removed themselves from Jesus and thus disolving the infinite oneness in the Trinity is paramount to blasphemy. They said that when it says in II Corinthians 5:21 that “he hath made him to be sin for us” that it means only that Jesus was made a SIN OFFERING for us and not actual sin as it says in Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul AN OFFERING FOR SIN…

    Little confused, feedback please….

  80. Daniel,

    I do not believe that Christ actually physically took on all sins in his body. What he did was bear the penalty for all sin in his body. He was totally without sin himself – who knew no sin – but the was made to be sin – that is a sin offering- so that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. Similarly I do not believe that Christ died spiritually as some may try to advocate. God basically placed the guilt of all sin upon Christ. The key is that Christ shed His blood in death as remission of our sin. That was the price that had to be paid.

  81. Thanks jimfloyd12, so you are basically agreeing with the second paragraph I wrote and that the idea that the Father literally turned away from Christ and that Jesus absorbed sin in His body is a wrong teaching, correct? Be good to hear from Bruce, Jack others etc.

  82. Hi Daniel,

    Jim’s response was thorough and well stated. Thanks Jim.

    As kind of a related issue, once in my teaching of the Bible a man from the audience spoke out and said, “But didn’t Jesus die merely as a man on the cross?” I responded, “No, he died as the God-man for our sins on the cross; otherwise, his death would not have been efficacious for the removing of our sins.”

  83. Thanks Bruce on behalf of the expreacherman ministry that you agree with what jimfloyd12 has stated. From what I understand you and Jack are the moderators of this site and I know there are many individuals that would say different thing so i do want to know if what someone says is supported or not, especially if i am only hearing from just one voice.

    Regarding the second half of my question, I felt it was unanswered. I understand what you believe, well stated, but what is your stance regarding what I was told:

    “To say that the holy Son of God actually BECAME sin is blasphemy and that to say that the Father and Holy Spirit removed themselves from Jesus and thus disolving the infinite oneness in the Trinity is paramount to blasphemy”.

    Do you agree that it is blasphemy? That really threw me and unsettled me when I heard it stated like that. Would you say it is that serious? I have a friend that is a free gracer (the only free gracer i actually know) and he says that Jesus did not become actual sin but absorbed them in His body. Would you call that blasphemy?

  84. Hi again Daniel,

    To reiterate, I think that what Jim Floyd stated, emphasizing that Christ was an offering or sacrifice for sin, expresses things very properly, clearly and well. What he says agrees with the OT sacrificial system pointing to the one great sacrifice of Christ for all time on the cross for the sins of the world: Rev. 5:12 “Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.”

    Now, getting to your second point, I must tell you that I am always careful about using the word “blasphemy.” I rarely if ever have used it (maybe never), unless possibly refering to a teaching of a cult. In my teaching of the Bible, sometimes people make some pretty off-the-wall comments, but it’s usually due to a lack of knowledge or understanding. That being said, let’s look at the verse a bit more closely. The verse says literally, “he has made him sin, or a sin-offering.” The words, “to be,” are not in the original. The King James notates this by placing the words in itallics [1972 Thos. Nelson Ed]. Christ was not literally made sin in the abstract, nor was he himself a sinner, for, as the text declares, he “knew no sin.”

    Jim’s interpretation of God making Christ a sin-offering is held by probably the majority of commentators. A few commentators say that God treated Christ as if he were a sinner. This idea may be implied, but I think that the first approach is the more powerful interpretation and fits better with the totality of Scripture.

  85. Daniel,

    Bruce and JimF gave great answers.

    Let us remember:
    2 Cor. 11:3

    “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

    Lest we wander too deeply into the weeds let us remember, 1 Cor. 15:3-4

    “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:.”

    That is what we believe to have eternal life.

    We can leave the mechanics and logistics of how God did it all and“He [God] hath made Him [Jesus] to be sin for us” up to the Lord and then, as we grow in Grace, we understand more of God’s Word.

    We must maintain that “simplicity that is in Christ”

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  86. Thanks Bruce for explaining what you think about what I was told about the other teaching being ‘blasphemy’. I won’t worry about it even though the person I heard it from was really giving a brow beating.

    I can clearly see what you are saying Jim and Bruce and see that Jesus became a ‘sin offering’ and not actual sin. Makes perfect sense and very interesting that the words ‘to be’ were not in the original language.

    Regarding, whether Jesus absorbed sin in His body or simply took the punishment in His body while on the cross, I am not entirely sure but I’m going with what Jim said, that Jesus bore the “penalty for all sin in his body”. Having said that, as you said Jack, I guess it does not matter if we don’t understand everything about how everything worked and the mechanics of everything while Jesus was on the cross, as long as we accept the basic truth of the Gospel.

    Saying all that, my free grace friend (who is the only person I know that will actually say people who don’t believe in eternal security are not saved; the pastor of the new church I am going to understands LS and believes in ES but not sure if he would take the stand my friend and I do, that said maybe I in contact with 2 free gracers, depends on how you define a free gracer?) anyway, back to my point my free grace friend actually also believes that when the Bible says that Jesus went to Hell, that it was on the burning side, not paradise. I have told him several times now that I disagree and that it’s dangerous doctrine because what Jesus did on the cross was sufficient, He did not need to suffer in Hell. Some would say that what my friend is affirming is ‘another Gospel’. I have not said that to my friend and prefer to think that he has gotten a little off track; I believe he is a genuinely saved believer. Regarding this teaching my friend affirms, that Jesus went to the burning side of Hell for 3 days before He resurrected, would you call that ‘another Gospel’? It’s definitely a wrong teaching but you would not say my friend is believing a false Gospel would you?

  87. Daniel, I have a couple of thoughts on your above comment.

    First, if someone does not believe in eternal security, I believe it is extremely unlikely that he understands what salvation is. If someone believes he can lose his salvation, then what gift of God does he believe has he received through Jesus Christ?

    Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

    Second, the teaching that Jesus went to “the burning side of Hell” for three days before He resurrected is false. However, I personally don’t believe it constitutes a false gospel.

  88. Hi again Daniel. You inquired:

    “Regarding this teaching my friend affirms, that Jesus went to the burning side of Hell for 3 days before He resurrected, would you call that ‘another Gospel’? It’s definitely a wrong teaching but you would not say my friend is believing a false Gospel would you?”

    First off, I don’t know your friend, so I won’t attempt to assess whether he is a believer or not. I think that many people (Christians included) have bought into the teaching of which you speak because it has been promoted on TBN and in the Christian bookstores. I submit that if they really knew the origin of that teaching, they would likely flee from it.

    Origin of teaching:

    The teaching of which you speak about Jesus in the burning side of hades likely originated with E. W. Kenyon, founder of the “Word of Faith” movement. Kenyon combined metaphysical teachings with Pentecostalism. Kenneth Hagin popularized Kenyon’s teachings which have been picked up and promoted by high-profile pastors like Benny Hinn, Paul and Jan Crouch, Frederick K.C. Price and Kenneth Copeland. At the heart of Word of Faith or Word-Faith teaching is the belief in “faith force,” in which a person’s words can be used to summon whatever one wants, like health and wealth (faith becomes one’s “god”). One of Kenyon’s many heretical teachings was that Jesus had to give up his divinity, go to hell/hades to personally atone for his own sins and that he himself had to be born again. Much more could be said but I will leave it to the folks to research the movement on their own.

  89. Hi guys
    Quick question. As I am preparing to get out there and share the Gospel with people I am wanting to be simple yet thorough when sharing the Gospel. Based on what Jesus said in John 8:24-25 it is clear that someone MUST believe Jesus is God to be saved.

    John 8:24-25
    I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.

    Most times, even those sound in the faith leave this out of their Gospel presentation. I want to keep things simple but I also know from previous experience in talking with the general public out there, most people think that Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God but are confused when you tell them that Jesus is God; God the Son. This causes me to think that a few verses to show them that Jesus is God is necessary when presenting the Gospel. What’s your opinion on that?

  90. Sorry, here are the verses from John 8 (with verse 23) which give a little more context:

    John 8:23-25
    23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
    24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
    25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.

  91. Hi Daniel,

    When Jesus used the words “I am,” he was claiming deity and equality with the Father. This goes back all the way to Exodus 3 (Moses and the burning bush incident) in which He, I believe He was the preincarnate Christ, spoke from the burning bush declaring himself to the the Great I Am, fully God, completely self-existent. John 8:18 and 58 also declare this. Jesus’ call in John 8, that you cite, was definitely to believe in him in the sense of his complete deity as God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity.

    Hope this is helpful. If I may add one thing, when LSers speak of making Jesus the “Lord of your life,” they are not referring to his deity; they are just speaking of rulership over one’s life.

    We cannot make Jesus Lord; HE IS LORD! He’s Lord of Creation, Lord of the Universe, Lord of Redemption, Lord of All, in spite of any puny declaration that an invidual might chose to make.

  92. Lots of catching up to do here, thoroughly enjoyed it.

    I have a question also regarding “godly sorrow”.

    Many also use Acts 2:38, “pricked in their heart” (or some versions “cut to the heart”, to state godly sorrow preceded repentance. Isn’t this just the emotion of sorrow that comes from knowledge of their actions and unbelief as the Holy Spirit convicts them by the Word?

    It is similarly used in Acts 5 and 7, different root words/phrases (katanyssomai and diapriō kardia) are used, but in Acts 7, it is rendered “cut to the heart”. As it sometimes is in all three chapters; 2, 5, 7. The group in Acts 2 was sorry/pricked in their conscience and wanted to know what to do, the other group was vexed, cut to the heart, yet knew what they wanted to do… (kill Stephen).

    Here’s my question, all three times, even in Acts 5, they heard the Word via the apostles. Didn’t the Word pierce/penetrate/cut their heart as in Heb 4:12, yet their responses to it were different? In Acts 2 they wanted to know what to do, in Acts 7 they stopped their ears.

    Or am I completely off here? I have one who insists this is godly sorrow preceding repentance. (Again I thought they were ungodly until justified :) )

  93. And another brief question regarding Romans 10 that the Lordship proponents use to make their point of us making Him the Ruler of our lives, or putting Him on the throne, or submitting to His Lordship etc.

    John Macarthur one time I heard/read, (it’s been awhile), but something to this effect regarding kyrios. That He is master, and we must submit as slave. And of course he goes into more Scriptures to try to build his case for salvation being based on submitting fully (never mind that believers are exhorted more than once to do this).

    Re: vs. 9 about confessing with your mouth (and believing in your heart) the Lord Jesus…. Isn’t this believing that we understand who He is? Lord meaning God, the Messiah and Jesus, Jehovah is salvation. This establishes who Jesus is doesn’t it?

    Funny, they usually use their key argument, “you can’t accept Him as Savior while denying Him as Lord”…. so deceitful, or foolish, not sure which, but I deny neither.

    Just curious if my understanding here is correct, it only came from just looking into the root word etymology for that Scripture awhile back, and this has always been my understanding before I ever knew even what the root words were. It seemed simple to me.

    So many voices out there now…

  94. Holly, Good questions.

    We have published an article/book review by Bruce about JMac and his fallacious insistence that one must be a “slave” to be saved. Typical LS falsehood:

    http://www.expreacherman.com/2011/01/09/john-macarthurs-new-apostate-book/

    And about your question on Godly sorrow; Godly sorrow does not work “repentance” in unbelievers. The verse in 2 Corinthians is speaking to believers about their behavior. Important: We must always insist that the detractors of God’s Grace understand that “repentance” is a change of mind, NOT that which they so often demand, a change of behavior or direction of life to secure salvation before or after belief in Christ.

    Happiness at hearing the Gospel of God’s Grace can bring about a change of mind unto salvation, as well as joy, disappointment, grief, understanding God’s love, Godly friends, etc.

    Don’t let the Graceless detractors get to you. Maybe some others here can add to this or answer your other questions further.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  95. Matt for Grace and Truth

    Hello Daniel,

    In response to your latest inquiry, I recommend that you listen to Dr. Cucuzza’s clear, simple and accurate “free grace” gospel presentation:

  96. I agree completely with you Jack on the change of mind, in those who use Acts 2:36-38, as remorse about sin being a necessary ingredient (how much?) many are insistent that the sorrow and change of mind prove they go together, hence repentance = being sorry for your sin and being sorry for your sin = turning from it.

    I understand that is not what it says, or at least that is how I see what metanoeo means in that passage, as well as others. Peter just lays out for Israel, (as you know), that they not only had seen the miraculous wonderful works of God spoken in their language, but that it was prophecy fulfilled regarding the last days.

    How that Jesus showed wonders and signs among them all, they knew it, and yet they took him by “wicked hands” and crucified Him.

    He preached the gospel, how God raised Him up since Jesus could not be bound by death. And how the prophecy of David spoke about Jesus the Messiah who was to be raised up to sit on David’s throne (Ps 132:11), and how it also spoke of His resurrection from the dead.

    That it was Jesus who sits by the Father’s right hand, not David. He preached that God MADE Jesus (who they crucified) both LORD and CHRIST (God the Messiah, the anointed, the Son of God).

    THEN it says when they heard these things, then they were pricked in their hearts.

    I surely don’t know what they were thinking, were they sorry for the past sins? I see no evidence by what was preached that this was what it was about. Were they convicted of being guilty of putting Him to death? Did they get convicted of their unbelief? Did they change their minds about who Jesus was? Did they realize that this was indeed the Messiah that was prophesied about in their Scriptures? The one that was promised unilaterally in the beginning when Abraham offered up Isaac? (Gen 22:18)

    I have to assume from the Scriptures these are the things preached on, that pricked their hearts and they believed. Faith comes by hearing the Word, and hearing by the Word of God.

    I hope this is o.k. to lay this is out here, not really sure it applies to the particular post, but it is a passage I see frequently for those who are either somehow confused by not carefully examining context, or by Lordship teachings.

  97. Hey, by the way Jack and/or Bruce, I didn’t see a link (to your link) regarding the review on Bruce’s book. Bruce, do you have it on kindle?

  98. Thanks Bruce, glad you confirmed what I already thought. I have often heard Gospel presentations that were good meaning there was nothing wrong with them but they left out what I thought be essentials including Jesus’ deity and eternal security.

    Also, what do you say about people that do believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit but deny the doctrine of the Trinity? (meaning they say that the Son and Spirit are modes of God, also known as modalism) Saved or not? My understanding is that it’s heresy but would not say they are not saved. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone aim to explain the teaching of the Trinity in a Gospel presentation as we want to make things clear and simple and not unnecessarily complicated. Your opinion based on scripture?

  99. Holly,

    No problem bringing this up within the false teaching of Billy Graham thread. OK.

    Not sure all of your questions are answered in the context of scripture.

    In Acts 2:36

    “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

    These men had just realized they had crucified the Lord Jesus Christ, their Messiah. They must have been horrified (I would be).

    Then in Acts 2:37-38

    “Now when they heard this, they were pricked [worn down] in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent,[change your mind about Jesus] and be baptized [cleansed] every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

    The only eternal cleansing and remission of sins available is believing in the Name of Jesus Christ: Jesus = “Jehovah [God] Savior” and Christ = “Messiah.”

    These men were told to change their mind and believe in Jesus. Just that simple.

    Your antagonists and those who wish to add man’s works will rarely understand or believe that simple answer.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  100. Daniel, I think you answered your own question. You said:

    “Also, what do you say about people that do believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit but deny the doctrine of the Trinity? (meaning they say that the Son and Spirit are modes of God, also known as modalism) Saved or not? My understanding is that its heresy but would not say they are not saved. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone aim to explain the teaching of the Trinity in a Gospel presentation as we want to make things clear and simple and not unnecessarily complicated. Your opinion based on scripture?”

    My comment: if trying to explain the Trinity would make a Gospel presentation unnecessarily complicated, how would someone need a perfect understanding of the Trinity in order to be saved?

  101. Hi Holly,

    Sorry but I have no book on the market at present. I have written some articles and book reviews for Free Grace Alliance that are published on its web site:

    http://www.freegracealliance.com/articles.htm

    I also have a couple more projects in the hopper which will probably have to wait until I have time off from my job to complete them.

    Thanks for asking.

  102. Hi John,
    I think you missed the point of my question. Maybe i did not explain my question clearly. I never said that when giving a Gospel presentation that a person needs a PERFECT understanding of the Trinity. I don’t think anyone has a perfect understanding of it, its probably the hardest thing to understand in Christianity. My question related to the need to explain the Trinity in a Gospel presentation with people who have a HERETICAL view of the Trinity and if such a heresy is a damnable heresy, of which I currently think it is not but I am not entirely sure which is why I ask for clarification from you who may be more sound in the faith than I.

    Please also realize that while I state in my questions that I am fairly sure of certain things, I still dont have complete understanding on alot of things which is why I ask for clarification from others that have a sound faith, of which I personally know of less then a few people that would agree that eternal security is part of the Gospel and essential to believe for salvation, out of those people I have really only one person I can easily speak with and he is like myself having come out of LS for short while but longer than me. Having been involved and affected by Lordship salvation and other heresy for 10 years and only coming out of it about a year ago and extremely limited access to people to clarify things with other people that have a clear understanding of salvation, asking questions here on this blog and over the net with sound believers is really helpful to me. In the last year I have cleared out alot of junk and am getting clearer all the time, some things I am FAIRLY SURE of but still need clarification. Hope you have the patience for my questions here on this blog.

    Rephrasing my question, basically my question is, if a person has a HERETICAL understanding of the Trinity such as modalism or if a person has any other form of heresy around understanding or denying the Trinity, should the Trinity be explained in the Gospel presentation? Would such a heretical view mean that the person is not saved? I have heard from some that it would mean that they are not saved because in accepting a HERETICAL view of the Godhead or simply denying the Trinity, such a person is believing in ANOTHER JESUS which is also talked about in the Bible. Your clarifications would be helpful.
    cheers
    Daniel

  103. “I have heard from some that it would mean that they are not saved because in accepting a HERETICAL view of the Godhead or simply denying the Trinity”

    This might not be fully relevant to the discussion, but I did want to mention that I have never found a person that denies the Trinity, that also believed in free grace. Just for an example, oneness pentecostal denies the Trinity, and they teach works and water baptism for salvation. Never is there a person (in my experiences) that denied the Trinity and yet believed in the free grace Gospel. I would say that a wrong understanding of the Godhead, automatically will lead to a false gospel as well. And of course, even a right understanding of the Godhead doesn’t mean that the person has the right Gospel (as we see in the examples of Chan/Platt/MacArthur etc., who have the Trinity right, but the Gospel wrong).

  104. Daniel,

    Let me jump in here. I don’t pretend to speak for John but let me try to shed some light.

    You say, “Would such a heretical view mean that the person is not saved?”

    It is wise to discern a person’s faith on whether they believe that their eternal salvation is based solely on; by Grace alone through Faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. Jesus Christ = Yeshua (God, Savior), Messiah.

    Modalism is just another “ism.” To argue the Trinity here or with your friends (or through blogs) is going into the weeds — and is something one can understand by studying Scripture. We need not go into the weeds here today.

    Remember, Belief in Jesus of the Biblical Gospel record is what saves.. with the faith of a child.
    1 Corinthians 15:1-5

    “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if [forasmuch as] ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ [Messiah, Savior] died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:” [and factually witnessed by many]

    Don’t be side-tracked by issues like the Trinity. Share with them the Gospel of God’s Grace through Jesus Christ.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  105. Daniel, I agree with Jack.

    However, belief in a false doctrine can be an impediment to a religious non-believer coming to faith in Christ alone.

    For example, the belief that the Great White Throne judgment pertains to Church-age believers may confuse rewards passages with eternal life passages and lend to someone trusting in Christ plus works for eternal life.

  106. John,

    Thankfully no believers will be judged at the Great White throne judgment.

    Daniel,

    As far as distractions concerning the gospel, there are many people that will throw up obstacles. Atheists have theirs, Muslims have theirs, Mormon’s etc. You have to, no matter what bring them back to Christ. Share with them the clear simple gospel that Jack mentions above. Most believers can barely begin to grasp the reality of the Trinity let alone unbelievers.

    In witnessing to a Muslim one time he kept bringing up the obstacle that we supposedly worship three God’s. He viewed Jesus as a good prophet and not the Son of God. I think a person does not have to understand the aspects of the Trinity but the better understand that Jesus is God, that He was the perfect sacrifice, and that our only hope of salvation lies in Him.

    The man I witnessed to would not believe that Jesus was God or that Jesus was His payment for his sin. His understanding of the Trinity was irrelevant at that point because He was clearly rejecting Christ.

  107. Thanks Jim, John, Abe and especially Jack for your clear responses to my question. I hear what you are saying. I agree. Going into trying to explain the Trinity in a Gospel presentation is making things unnecessarily complicated and like ‘going into the weeds’ as you put it Jack. As long as they believe in the Biblical Jesus (this includes understanding that He is God) and have all their trust in Him alone, that’s what’s important for salvation. Thanks guys for helping to declutter my at times over complicated mind.

  108. I have been trying to show my wife that believing eternal security is part of the package of believing the Gospel itself. To deny eternal security and to say one can lose salvation because of sin or not continuing in faith is to not put all one’s trust in Christ but is equivalent to putting one’s trust in Christ plus works/self which cannot save. This is so clear in scriptures such as 1 John 5:9-11.

    My wife currently believes that a believer in Christ cannot lose their salvation due to any sin or sinfulness as she understands Jesus paid for all sin over 2000 years ago and all sin is taken away through believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. However, she still believes that a believer can lose their salvation if they make a decision to reject Christ after they are born again and stop believing the Gospel. I have tried to show her how this view is mistaken and even used scriptures such as 2 Tim 2:11-13 especially vs. 13 which make it clear that even if we stop believing, God is faithful to us despite our unfaithfulness because He has made a covenant with us and He won’t break His promise. I have used explanations and analogies such as ‘what’s the word eternal mean?’ and ‘how many times does an everlasting gift need to be received?’ and etc. etc. but she does not get it. One area where she is getting confused is understanding WHEN eternal life starts. She is confused if it starts when believing or when one actually arrives in Heaven. Have used some scriptures to show her it begins as soon as you believe on Christ but again she is resistant. One of the things she has told me is that if someone later rejects the Gospel then it proves that they were never saved. She then used the scripture in I John 2:19 to confirm this which I have to say is pretty convincing when it stands alone but in the context of God’s promises about eternal life.

    Any advice about anything I could say to my wife or a scriptural response to her interpretation of I John 2:19 ?

  109. sorry little typo… was saying that I John 2:19 to seems pretty convincing when it stands alone but not when weighed up against the many promises of God regarding ETERNAL life…

  110. Hi Daniel,

    John 10:27-30 is a rock solid text on eternal security. So is Romans 8:38-39.

  111. Daniel,

    A thought.. as you probably have tried to get her to understand — if ETERNAL life could be forfeited or EVER end — it was never eternal.. But the very definition of eternal is, without end, everlasting etc.

    You might have her read Ephesians 1:13
    “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest (down payment) of our inheritance (Eternal Life) until the redemption of the purchased possession (each believer), unto the praise of his glory.

    When a believer is sealed by God’s infallible Holy Seal, the indwelling of His Holy Spirit… God’s Seal can NEVER be broken. If one who has believed in Jesus Christ alone for his Salvation were to go to hell, God’s Holy Spirit must also go to Hell — and that is impossible.

    One of the beautiful promises from Jesus Himself in in John 10:28, read and study it carefully:

    “And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall NEVER perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (not even the person herself/himself!!!)

    That word NEVER is a composite Greek word, comprised of 4 other Greek word phrases, Ou me, Eis Ho and Aeon:

    (1. Ou me = a double negative strengthening the denial; not at all, any more, at all, by any (no) means, neither, never, no (at all), in no case (wise), nor ever, not (at all, in any wise).

    (2.Eis - no place, time, or purpose (result, etc.); continual, + far more exceeding, for any [intent, purpose], of one mind, + never perish, throughout, till the end, (here-) until (-to), …ward, [where-] fore, with.

    (3. Ho = and the neuter, male, female in all their inflections; the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.

    (4. Aion = extension in perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specially (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future) :- age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the world (began, without end).

    Daniel, that, in context, is very impressive and definitive in one word. I pray your wife will read and believe that emphatic and precious promise from Jesus Himself made to to her..

    You shall NEVER perish!!!!

    In Jesus Christ ETERNALLY, Jack — That IS God’s Grace

  112. Thanks Bruce and Jack on those verses on eternal security and also that one in Ephesians 1:13 is great to show that the gift of salvation/justification/new birth/adoption or whatever you want to call it occurs immediately after believing. I have also tried to show my wife John 5:24 as well as I John 5:13 to show her that eternal life is a present tense possession. She is slowly coming round. A big part of my job is actually just lovingly and gently showing her as when I have been pushing her to listen she resists which i guess is just human nature.

    I shall also endeavor to show her that NO WHERE in the bible does it say that if we CONTINUE to believe that we shall have eternal life but on the contrary, many many promises for salvation are given by a simple one time act of faith on Christ. I read about this tonight and this is just another illustration I can use as with the examples of what a gift really is and the meaning of the word ‘eternal’ and ‘everlasting life’. It’s interesting because we are told to “Pray without ceasing” in I Thessalonians 5:17 but nowhere in the Bible are we told on this up-most important matter of salvation that we need to continually believe to be saved.

  113. Daniel,

    Glad to hear there is some progress..

    To paraphrase an old colloquial saying:
    “You can convince a wife more with honey than with vinegar.”

    We will be praying for y’all.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  114. Oh, any chance you can give a scriptural based rebutal to the idea that I John 2:19 means that a true believer will continue in the faith and not appostasize?

  115. Daniel, I think re-reading John and Romans 1-8 really made quite a difference for me, and remembering if the gift of God is eternal life, then how is it a gift, and how is it eternal, if I can taken it back or lose it, etc.?

    I just had to keep going back to the free gift being eternal, meaning forever, it’s just hard for us to comprehend. And that great of a love is so hard to understand. From the beginning He didn’t expect much of us and we couldn’t even do that…

    And remembering we are but dust, He gives us this wonderful gift if we will but believe on Him.

    I hope it’s o.k. to mention here, but I was greatly helped by “Full Assurance” and “The Eternal Security of the Believer” by H.A. Ironside, both really deal with plenty of Scriptures and go right to the heart (especially the latter) of what makes it so hard for us to believe that we have eternal life. And he deals with the problematic passages in context. The pdf books are online for free downloads. Unless Jack or Bruce would have any objection.

  116. Daniel,

    The explanation I gave on John 10:28 earlier with the detailed explanation of the word “NEVER perish” should sufficiently answer any questionable verse – especially one like the Calvinist’s favorite, 1 John 2:19.

    Study John 10:28, those who believe in Jesus are sealed eternally and will NEVER perish!

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  117. Daniel,

    I apologize if it seems I may have answered you in haste. Another thought about your question on 1 John 2:19. It is not referring to true believers in Jesus their Messiah.

    We should always remember to study verses in context. 1 John 2:18 explains the context of John’s statement in verse 19. Like any assembly of believers, there is always a likelihood it can be infiltrated by unbelievers who oppose the Gospel and the Savior. Those folks who “went out” [departed] the group of believers were “antichrists,” [Greek: antichristos; opponents of the Messiah] in other words, those who opposed Jesus the Messiah were obviously, by John’s statement, antichrists and unbelievers to begin with.

    1 John 2:18-19

    Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
    (v 19) They [the antichrists] went out [departed] from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest [made known] that they were not all of us.

    Verse 19 is often used (out of context) by Calvinists who insist that one must “persevere to the end” or they will be lost. (The “P” in the Calvinist TULIP)

    I pray this helps.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  118. Jack, what you did with verse 18 in relation to 1 John 2:19, was beautiful, and yet so simple. I forget so easily, that context means so very much. That is, “they” (the antichrists from verse 18), went out. I’ve read those verses hundreds of times, but the connection never went through until just now. :)

  119. Abe,

    Thanks — I recall during Bible college (as an old man) the idea drummed into my head that context is crucial to KJV Biblical interpretation.

    LSers and Calvinists favorite trick is to yank verses out of context (or make their own context), build a false doctrine and then run with it.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  120. Daniel, the section on eternal security in “The Gospel” booklet by Ron Shea may be helpful to you in your discussion with your wife. Following is the link:

    http://www.cleargospel.org/booklet.php?b_id=3&i_id=41&s=2

  121. I’ve thought about the subject of eternal security quite a bit over the last couple of days, in particular some peoples’ resistance to it.

    Following are some of my rambling thoughts.

    I listened to Tom Cucuzza’s sermon of March 10, 2013 entitled “The Amazing Word of God.” A couple of quotes stood out:

    “I did not understand the Gospel, or trust Christ as my Savior, ‘til I was nineteen years old. But, the religion I was raised in to that point did teach me that the Bible was the word of God.”

    And

    “If you can lose it, you lose it by misbehaving. So then what you’re telling me is you are keeping it by behaving. You’re trusting in, then, your merit – your good works, then, are your savior – not Jesus.”

    My comment: There are many institutions that claim the name of Christ, but are really leading people away from the truth. Any so-called church that denies the doctrine of eternal security is leading people away from Christ. These institutions are serving the role of the “fowls of the air (aka the devil)” referred to in Luke 8:5: “A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it.”

    The word of God is clear on eternal security. If you do not believe this, you have never understood the Gospel.

    Some people believe that one cannot lose salvation by sinning, but that one can lose salvation by discontinuing belief. While it is true that one cannot lose salvation by sinning, it is not true that one can lose salvation by discontinuing to believe. Others will say that if someone discontinues believing, he was never saved. This is also not Biblical.

    Luke 8:13: “They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.”

    My comment: This verse seems to teach that a believer may stop believing. The Bible never mentions false believers. Therefore, when we modify “believers” with the word “true”, we are helping to feed the misconception that there are other kinds of believers. The reality is, that most “false believers” have believed a false gospel. Believers have believed the singular, true gospel. Whether or not that faith endures, anyone who has ever trusted in Christ alone for eternal salvation is eternally secure.

    1 Timothy 1:19: “Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck.”

    My comment: How could someone’s faith become shipwreck if he never had it? This verse clearly teaches that a believer can lose his faith. Note that the Bible never says that one’s eternal salvation may become shipwreck.

  122. Expected Imminently

    Hello Daniel R

    A big ‘amen’ to Jack’s comment; he is absolutely spot on to insist that to read in context is vital. Historically ‘they’ are the Gnostics (anti-christs and liars) who do not accept that Christ is the God-man come in human flesh. It is these who left the personal fellowship of the APOSTOLIC BODY; not meaning the Church in general.

    To ‘continue in the faith’ means to stay in obedient fellowship with God The Father via His Word (if you love me, you will obey me) i.e. putting THE Faith into practise by application of The written Word.
    I agree with John that we believers are more than capable of making our Faith a ‘ship-wreck’ by failure to walk in the Holy Spirit remaining ‘stunted’ and immature.

    Any sin can wreck our FELLOWSHIP with God, but all sin has been paid for and cannot end our RELATIONSHIP with God. 1John1:9 remedy.
    All will be taken into careful consideration at the Judgment Seat of Christ for rewards or loss.

    Sue

  123. John,

    Welcome back..

    You said:

    ” Any so-called church that denies the doctrine of eternal security is leading people away from Christ.”

    Excellent and true observation. It is incomprehensible that “so called churches” and preachers don’t understand the meaning of the word “ETERNAL.” However, seminaries, schools and too many idolized “old time” preacher’s (such as Spurgeon, et al) have for years (intentionally I believe) distorted the precious Gospel of our Savior Jesus Christ and the meaning of “ETERNAL,” just to keep the “folks” in line.

    You further said in discussing 1 Timothy 1:19:

    ” Note that the Bible never says that one’s eternal salvation may become shipwreck.”

    Excellent point. One’s faith may wane, fade and even become “shipwreck” for many reasons; neglect and lack of studying God’s Word, embracing the world and its foibles, fellowship with unbelievers, studying false teacher’s books and their preaching, etc. But a Believer’s salvation remains 100% intact and just as eternal as the moment he or she made the decision to trust their salvation solely and simply by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone.

    In other words, God’s SALVATION IS Eternal, meaning — “without end, forever, endless, ageless, always, ceaseless, constant, continuous, dateless, deathless, enduring, everlasting, illimitable, imperishable, incessant, indestructible, infinite, interminable, lasting, never-ending, permanent, perpetual, timeless, unbroken, unceasing, undying, unending, unfading, uninterrupted, without end” !!

    Assuming that for some the Biblical definition of ETERNAL is not enough, please forgive the dictionarial redundancy above — but it certainly makes the point.

    Thanks, John, for that great analysis.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  124. Thankyou hollysgarcia, Abe, John, Sue and Jack for your excellent responses. Thankyou especially Jack for your follow up response. I did not think you answered in haste but your follow up response was very helpful. Yes, I John 2:19, as you so clearly pointed out, does not prove the calvinist false doctrine of ‘perseverence’ that you need to persevere to the end to be saved. No, I John 2:19 shows that those who left were never saved to begin with, they were ‘antichrists’ as seen in vs 18 and further explained in vs 22. Great observation. Often false doctrine is built out of not only wrong interpretation but taking lone verses out of their context. This happens alot with people propping up the ‘repent of your sins to be saved’ doctrine when they take a lone verse using the word ‘repent’ out of its context of the rest of the passage.

    Some would still argue however, that I John 2:19 is teaching that true believers cannot depart from the faith but as you pointed out John, there are other verses in the Bible to show otherwise. (such as Luke 8:13 and 1 Timothy 1:19. Besides, in the OT isn’t there ppl who were definitely saved but turned to pagan Gods? Did Solomon do this?

    Note, also:
    2 Tim 2:13
    If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

    Minor point, not tying to be devils advocate or anything but just wanted to make clear one thing you said John. I know you said John that the Bible never mentions false believers but in Galatians 2:4 it talks about “false brethren” (as it also does in 2 Corinthians 11:26) but this is talking about those who came to the Galatians preaching their false works gospel message of saying that they needed to be circumcised to be saved. Note, nowhere does it say in the book of Galatians that those people in the Church of Galatia were false brethren, they are actually called “brethren” in chapter 1 vs 11 even though some of them had turned aside by coming under a works gospel message. This is actually more proof that even if a believer turns aside to a false gospel message (which really is no gospel at all!) after having believed the gospel, they are still brethren since they at one time believed and were saved. More proof for OSAS!

    Having said that, your initial response Jack also bears alot of truth. The simple promises of God in scripture should be enough for us! However, people can get confused and hung up on particular verses even after showing them the great eternal security promises. Sometimes if people have hung out in Church for years and been brainwashed by being told from the pulpit that if you don’t live a holy life you can lose your salvation, if you dont continue in the faith you can lose it (or you never had it), if you do this you go to hell, if you do that you will go to hell, if they’ve been brainwashed like that and had alot of ‘proof’ scriptures to support this doctrinal error of ‘conditional security’, then having some good rebuttals to their false interpretations can be very useful to help them see the light. I myself have needed this at times (as you all know by now) and it has been very helpful to see how a ‘proof’ scripture can be deconstructed to show the error of these interpretations.

    My wife is beginning to come around but she is not quite there yet but since my last talk with her she is starting to begin think that even if someone departs from the faith then they are still saved but she is still unsure…

  125. Daniel,

    Thanks — Glad to see you return. We are praying for you and your wife as you grow in Grace.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  126. Expected Imminently

    Hello Jack and all

    I have flouted Pearl’s wisdom and taken a recent look at Lamb and Lion. Sorry Pearl, you are right, I should stay away, but I fret for a dear lady that often blogs there. I am hoping that Susie and Billy will realise how bent Reagan is and get away from his strange aberrations.

    I don’t believe I am changing the subject, because it concerns ‘how long is eternity’ meaning the Lake of Fire’s human residents get out sooner or later according to the length of their punishment for sin; meaning eternal – isn’t.

    Reagan calls it Conditionalism; a new one on me that may as well be Annihilationism. Still, he is being given some stick by ‘charis’ which is obviously not appreciated ;)

    My goodness, I am shocked that I was ever involved in what I thought was genuine Christian fellowship. The list of his errors is growing by the mile. The man is a menace.

    I really meant to ask about the Ephesians who didn’t ‘make Jesus Lord’ as they were still into their idols as believers. Unless someone ‘gets this’ I shall have to ask again as I feel quite troubled by the antics of David Reagan and those who take notice of him.

    I’m sorry about the ‘rhubarb’, I think I needed to get it off my chest so I can settle for the night. God bless and thank you for putting up with me crashing about.
    Sue

  127. Daniel, you said: “I know you said John that the Bible never mentions false believers but in Galatians 2:4 it talks about “false brethren” (as it also does in 2 Corinthians 11:26) but this is talking about those who came to the Galatians preaching their false works gospel message of saying that they needed to be circumcised to be saved. Note, nowhere does it say in the book of Galatians that those people in the Church of Galatia were false brethren, they are actually called “brethren” in chapter 1 vs 11 even though some of them had turned aside by coming under a works gospel message. This is actually more proof that even if a believer turns aside to a false gospel message (which really is no gospel at all!) after having believed the gospel, they are still brethren since they at one time believed and were saved. More proof for OSAS!”

    You are right on all counts! Here is what Clear Gospel Campaign has to say about this:

    “We acknowledge that believers may fall into error or confusion regarding salvation and works after their conversion, as happened to the church of Galatia (Galatians 1:6-7. 3:1). We further acknowledge that the believers of Galatia were regarded as “brethren,” (Galatians 1:3), having fallen into this grievous error subsequent to their coming to an authentic faith in Christ (Galatians 3:1-3). We note, however, that the authors of this grievous error, who had never believed on Christ alone, having simply added Jesus Christ to a pre-existing confession of salvation by works (Acts 15:1) were regarded as “false brethren.” (Galatians 2:4). To this end, we affirm that a lost sinner must, at some time in his life, believe on Christ alone, apart from the works of the law, for his salvation, and that apart from such an authentic moment of saving faith, there is no hope of salvation.”

  128. Hi, Sue~

    Not too long ago, I encountered the same claim from a former commenter here , an anti-LS champion who, from my limited observation, seems to have come full circle in that he has since allied himself with a few fringe emergent personalities who are all about love and total acceptance (yet really aren’t because they all point back to Rome by way of the authors which make them feel so good). Anyway, at his blog, he wrote a series of articles touting this strange view of hell and redefining eternity, going so far to say that a “god” who would condemn anyone according to the traditional view is a tyrant. Wow.

    I think it’s safe to say that every fable and philosophy designed to mislead the saints and conceal the true gospel begins with the ancient question “Yea, hath God said…?“.

  129. Expected Imminently

    Dear Pearl
    It’s so good to hear your own experience on this; you know what I am trying to say. ‘Hath God said’ indeed! That’s exactly what the issue is all about, the serpent is still calling God’s straight forward declarations into question – for the same reason as you say , fake ‘love’ by not obeying ‘IF you love me, you will obey me’. Now THAT is Conditionalism for sure.

    I am grieved that they suppose God’s character would do anything that wasn’t absolutely Just and ‘fair’ with none of the ambiguity they claim by wrenching more out of Matt.10:28 than Christ ever intended.

    You are so right to mention that word ‘emergent’; I could see it emerging from the words Reagan writes. He says the Lake of Fire is Eternal, but not the length of time people have to stay in it! Well where do they go then, there is no indication of an alternative place for them in eternity? Certainly not with the Saints in Eternal Jerusalem, nor with the righteous nations outside the city gates.

    They are there, eternally separated from God, because of their failure to put their trust in Christ to save, what he is suggests is they will be paying for their own sins! Not likely, it was Jesus who did that for ALL mankind. I don’t care if L&L want to confuse themselves and call doubt to God’s Word, what bothers me is them selling their ideas to the young in the Faith. Teaching them this, is causing them to doubt what is written plainly.

    “If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense”! Believe it or not, L&L actually claim to go by that, AND follow a literal interpretation. Its one thing to say it, but quite another to actually practise it. It’s the iniquitous trait of ‘speaking from both corners of their mouths’. It’s downright two-faced and deceitful, and I don’t like it one bit. B-a-d…David Reagan!

    Sue
    x

  130. Thank you everyone for your comments, reference to Scripture & so forth. Well let me say first of all thank You Jesus for leading me to this site & to Holly! Next after reading and meditating on everything that was posted through questions, comments, links, & answers, I thought the Holy Spirit delivered me from the lordship teaching as well as some other false teachings that were mentioned, but what about my Sons? At my church years ago when they were little boys my oldest son said what some call the sinner’s prayer and got saved. That’s the way it was done back then, you repeat after the Pastor and is told by doing this your were saved. Quote “ask Jesus to come into your heart & save you. I found out later that this was not Salvation by Grace but works. So since I happen to have my oldest son with me while I was reading this, I started to ask him questions like: “do u remember when you got saved?” He said why Mom I have to go. I told him to sit down & listen. I then asked him what was the Gospel. He could not tell me! I was shocked! Then I said your 4 yr old cousin went to church for the second time & came home excited about the Gospel! He said what? Tell me what is it I forgot! Then I asked him about John 3:16. He immediately quoted it. :) Next I said what is Grace? He said come on Mom why are we talking about this now? I said because you are here with me at this moment & it’s what the Holy Spirit is telling me to ask you! Then I said have a seat & let me give you an example of Grace as pertaining to the finished work of Christ on the Cross. I gave the example he said oh now I remember! I went on to quote Ephesians 2:8-9. I explained it & allowed him to ask questions. He kept on saying ok ok I understand. At one point I was about to say just accept Jesus, but the Holy Spirit kept on reminding me of His Grace & Grace alone was the reason I was Saved. By giving him examples that he could identify with it made it so clear to him. He now is 34 yrs old & he said that sinner’s prayer when he was round 8 yrs old. He left saying thank you Mom I have a lot to think about. I said today is the day to make that change to accept Salvation through the Jesus alone & not by works. Back then you said a prayer where u asked Jesus to come into your heart & be your Lord & Savior. I’m saying now accept the finished work of Christ on the Cross, His death, Burial, & Resurrection & by His Grace you will be saved. Jesus being your Lord & Savior is who he is not what happens once you accept him like you where told to. Friends I hope & Pray he got it because I sure had a hard time at first not saying accept Christ into your heart it was what I was taught! I’ve been passing out tracts but failing to witness to others the truth about Grace. Now to give example as will as my testimony I will do, but straight out challenging someone, well…. So please keep my son in Prayer. His name is Dominic. Next pray for me to be used by God for boldness to tell others the truth as the Holy Spirit lends me!
    Oh & my youngest said is got saved when he was 3. All I know is when he was in head start( school for 3&4 year olds ) one of his teachers told me he told them he had some good news for them & told them how Jesus died on the Cross for their Sins & rose the third day according to scripture! Wow I was soo proud of him! His 32 years old & I’m still as the Holy Spirit lends ask him the same questions I asked his brother.

    Thank you love you. <3

  131. Terry,

    Thanks for that wonderful testimony — of a mother’s love for her son and for her love of the simple Gospel of God’s Grace.

    We will be praying for your older son as he thinks about what you told him.. and for your younger son as you get a chance to witness the Gospel to him.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  132. Terry, I have prayed for both of your sons. You were very bold in witnessing to your older son and I pray that you will have boldness in talking to your younger son as well.

    Back when I was still mired in LS unbelief, my seven year old daughter asked me if a homosexual could go to heaven. My response was “yes, if they are willing to give up their sin.” My daughter responded with “If they believe in Jesus, why wouldn’t they go to heaven anyway”?

    Four years later, when I finally understood the Gospel, one of the first things I did was relive that conversation with my daughter. I told her that I had given her the wrong answer.

    Since then, she has become a believer.

  133. Terry, what a blessing to hear your story. So glad that you were able to share the good news with your son. I wish others would consider His Word before men’s teachings, but the enemy twists God’s Word every chance he gets. I pray that Dominic and all the others will “get it” and want to spend time in His Word and prayer with Him each day. Knowing His Word gives us assurance of the truth. I am so thrilled to hear your story. And it’s such a blessing I know to me and others here….

  134. Fine write up. lordship salvation is spreading its false teaching, seems like every where. and i am amazed at how many people have no clue of its false teaching, just goes to show what can happen when people do not study scripture in its context and take verses and use them out of context to fit their ideas of what he Bible should say.

  135. D Taylor,

    Welcome, we appreciate your discernment and understanding of the lie of Lordship “salvation.”

    You will find that many of our readers and commenters agree — so we welcome your comments.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  136. I wonder if those who teach the “accept Jesus into your heart”, are so used to blending discipleship/walk teachings with the gospel, they have also blended believing, with the reality of what happens when we believe.

    For example, when we believe/receive Him, we become sons of God. (John 1:12) That I remember being equated with “accepting Him”. Or the Word effectually working in us, (I Thess 2:13) or the “implanted Word” (James 1:21).

    Then when we do believe, we know He comes to dwell in our hearts by faith. (Eph 3:17). So often I remember Revelation 3:20’s “open the door” being used for the example of inviting Jesus into your heart, or opening the door of your heart.

    We get so used to hearing men’s paraphrase of what the gospel says, that we do not relate the Word unfettered to others. I have been guilty of that, I hope I do not put any spin on Scripture that is not there….

    Some of these teachers have no excuse. They need to back up what they say with the Word vs. adding their own interpretation to words like “repent” or even the altar calls they added for effect to show the apparent success of their “revivals”. Still going on today…

  137. Another upcoming huge error by the ecumenical, mystical, Loadship, Billy Graham Ministry.

    Renovare, which is Richard Foster (wrote Celebrations of Discipline), big time promoter of Roman Catholic Mysticism, is hosting a retreat at the Billy Graham Training Center at the Cove in Asheville, North Carolina. It will be led by Richard Foster’s son Nathan…

    Renovare (Richard Foster) is known for their quotes and love and promotion of mystics and Roman Catholics (calls them ‘devoted masters of the Christian faith’) such as:

    ► Mother Teresa
    ► Thomas Merton (all paths are to God-you could be a good Buddhist Christian, or a good Catholic Christian)…
    ► Brennan Manning
    ► Ignatius of Loyola
    ► St. Francis of Assisi
    ► Teresa of Avila
    ► Brother Lawrence – “practicing the Presence”
    ► Catherine of Siena
    ► The Cloud of Unknowing
    ► Madame Guyon
    ► St. Thomas Aquinas

    Sadly, plus a multitude of others…

    Just more evidence of bad fruits….

  138. Holly, interesting that you should mention St. Thomas Aquinas and Billy Graham in the same comment. According to Clear Gospel Ministries, St. Thomas Aquinas is one of the torchbearers for Lordship “salvation” and Calvinism. See quote, below:

    “Bilateral contract salvation” and the “Perseverance of the Saints” are two separate but interrelated doctrines within a complex theological system of salvation by works, which relies, at its core, on redefining the word “grace” as some sort of mystical empowering substance. This theological system is set forth in Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica, Part 1 of the Second Part, Questions 109-114, “Treatise of Grace,” a 12th century manifesto of Roman Catholic Theology. In Protestantism, it is known as “Reformed Theology” or “Calvinism”.

  139. That is where they find their common ecumenical ground then, isn’t it?

    Very interesting Johninnc….thank you for letting me know…

    And the plot to corrupt minds from the simplicity that is in Christ grows thicker…

  140. Just in case there was ever ANY DOUBT that Billy Graham teaches a false gospel of works, please consider the following quotes from his latest book entitled “The Reason for My Hope”:

    “I am afraid that many Christians, in their zeal to share their faith in Christ, have made the Gospel message of making disciples for Him too simple. Just to say ‘believe in Christ’ can produce a false assurance of the hope of Heaven. Jesus spoke often about the gift of eternal life. To make it clear, He said, ‘Count the cost.’”

    “Giving up something to follow Christ is not earning salvation; it is giving up what keeps you from salvation. When we hold on to something that is dearer to us than receiving the greater gift of salvation in Christ, we lose.”

    Just as I am, without one plea…If only Billy Graham believed that!

  141. John,

    Thanks for that terrible quote from Billy Graham. If he means that (and is not just going along propping up his crowd), he has NO Biblical hope. If he believes what he wrote, he must say to himself, “I hope. I hope, I hope that by the time I die, I have given up enough to qualify for salvation.”

    That is A TOTAL LIE!

    But we see that philosophy ever growing in the “Christian evangelical” movements today. Too sad!!

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  142. Jack, if Billy Graham believes that, he is not trusting in Christ. And, if he doesn’t believe it, shame on him!

    Either way, the message is accursed.

  143. Jack, notice how Graham changes the Biblical concept of salvation as “a gift” to salvation as a “greater gift”?

    This is very subtle. What that does is suggest that what man “brings to the table” in exchange for salvation is but a pittance, compared to the greater gift that he gets from God in exchange. Talk about cheapening grace to a barter system.

    This reminds me of the serpent in the Garden of Eden: “Hath God not said that salvation is a GREATER gift?”

    No. God says that salvation is a FREE gift!

  144. You know, their circular reasoning always goes to if we believe that you can only believe and be saved, then ‘what if’ a person doesn’t show signs of being saved, or ‘what if’ they ‘stop believing’ etc., then it’s a whole heyday of the ‘what if’ questions rather than going back, Do YOU believe that you received ETERNAL LIFE as a FREE GIFT the MOMENT you believed

    I had one tell me today that 1 John 1 gives one the ‘parameters’ for salvation and if they did not fit those parameters we must question their salvation on that basis.

  145. Billy Graham has a nationwide outreach, with 21,000 participating churches, to reach the nation for Christ. I downloaded one of the resource documents being made available for this outreach program. It is a tract called “My Decision”. Following are some of the highlights:

    “HOW TO RECEIVE CHRIST
    1. Admit your need (I am a sinner).
    2. Be willing to turn from your sins, and ask God to forgive you (repent).
    3. Believe that Jesus Christ died for you on the cross and rose from the grave.
    4.Through prayer, invite Jesus Christ to come in and control your life through the Holy Spirit (receive Him as Lord and Savior)

    PRAYER OF COMMITMENT
    Dear Lord Jesus, I know I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness.
    I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from
    running my own life, and now I ask You to run it. I invite You to come
    into my heart and life. I trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior. In
    Jesus’ Name, amen.”

    My comment: Billy Graham missed the whole theme of Grace. He has turned receiving Christ into a trade. If one has to be willing to turn from his sins to be saved, he is “bringing something to the table”. That is, trying to buy salvation. It won’t work.

  146. John,

    One wonders how many of the notorious, well known “turn from sin/commitment for salvation” preachers and teachers today are the direct or even indirect result of Billy’s long-time false message?

    Let’s do some math– conservatively assuming 1,000 members per church (in the SBC alone) multiplied times 21,000 churches for over 50 plus years of Billy’s deceptive teaching — results in more than 1,000,000,000 (one billion) folks and their families, friends, future preachers and their flocks he has deceived. Of course this is not counting the millions who buy his books, worship him on TV and participate in his “crusades.”

    Simply Horrifying!!!

    Our tiny snippet of a list of false teachers who may have been influenced to preach falsely is at our Wiki-Index above: http://tinyurl.com/l8suyyf

    Folks MUST realize that the Lord says in His Word that Billy Graham is accursed — to be shunned, not followed:

    Galatians 1:8
    “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

    Sadly, Satan has done and is doing his job terribly well and so many millions of “christians” are helping him along.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  147. Jack, that mathematical progression is horrific!

    And just think, 21,000 churches are joining Graham for his November National Outreach Campaign – a national false gospel blitz.

  148. John,

    Yep, and when folks talk about America being a “Christian” nation, the current millions of “converted Graham-ites” are counted.

    Within your last few comments, I see the makings and content of a new article entitled something like:

    The Gospel of God’s Grace is The Polar Opposite and FAR REMOVED From Billy Graham’s Quid Pro Quo Message of Lordship “Salvation”

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  149. Billy Graham once had his organization admit that, for all those “coming forward”, practically all of them already considered themselves Christians at some point in their lives, and less than 2% of them can be found in any church attendance, just one year later. That’s on top of the accursed false gospel that he is preaching. So it’s a false gospel, and a huge exercise in futility.

    Will any of those 21,000 churches show how Graham called a former pope, “one of the world’s great evangelists”? Will any of those 21,000 churches examine Graham’s universalist statement that there are ways to be saved without the name of Jesus? I would say the answer is of course, no.

  150. I wonder if any of them will examine his agreement with the Pope to turn all Roman Catholics back over to the Catholic church? Obviously he is not a servant of the Lord if he is willing to turn over supposedly new converts to a false doctrine.

  151. i guess guys what i do want to check some say billy graham preached the gospel in the early days and he has now fallen into lordship salvation and because he is getting old his memory is going. i’m not so sure because he did turn converts to rome. do we know he always preached a false gospel more so in the early days. as some say lots of people got saved by his early preaching.

  152. Mary, please see comment from Jack, linked below. This takes it back to 1964 – so, for almost 50 years at least he has been off-track.

    Let’s hope Billy Graham understood and believed the gospel at some point in his life. Let’s pray that if he hasn’t, he will. And, if he has, that he will turn back to the true faith.

    http://expreacherman.com/2013/10/09/lordship-salvations-billy-graham-sets-trap/#comment-21006

  153. thanks for clarifying that as it always gets me into hot water when u even bring up billy graham as especially the baptists u can’t even go there with most of them they seem to discount all the things he has done like hook up with robert schuller from the crystal cathedral and larry king live they are willing to overlook that and say yes but he is still a great man of god. we have all heard it before it gets so frustrating they are not even willing to look at footage or facts they always say to me but u don’t know who could be messing around with the technology. yes and look how many people got saved thru his ministry. i don’t think the ecumenical jesus is the same as the god of the bible. all roads lead to rome is certainly happening with great acceleration. david cloud wrote a booklet about billy and mother teresa which was good but i have since found out that he is a lordship salvationist its really disappointing.

  154. Mary,

    It is sad but you are right about David Cloud — mixed up doctrine. Just today I was looking at his explanation of repentance — terribly confusing and wrong.

    With Billy, folks who worship their “hero” find it virtually impossible to break away. They are blinded by Satan. Pray for them that they will see and believe the Truth.

    Sorry but “The woods are full of ‘em.” Use care and discernment.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  155. Many older people do not know much of Billy’s error, they have seen him around forever and feel that it’s a ‘hands off’ subject. They just don’t want to hear. The ones that do are very disheartened. One said something to the effect about how it would affect the world to know that if Billy Graham can’t be trusted, what Christian can?…

    I wouldn’t want his gospel preached to anyone I loved, so why would I stay silent so the world might think well of us? At the expense of people’s souls?

  156. Holly, very well put.

    And, since we are to love our neighbor as ourselves (Mark 12:31), we shouldn’t want Billy Graham’s gospel to be preached to anyone.

  157. John, It’s odd, I remembered the perspective she was coming from, and she is a very nice person. I really remember thinking somewhat like that, although not if I knew there was directly false gospel, but just thinking it had to do with maybe being too nitpicky if people didn’t get everything perfect.

    And how I didn’t understand and ‘see’ the vast importance of defending the gospel, the only way by which people by believing it, can be reconciled to God and not suffer eternal torment. Change the clear simple instructions by one addition or subtraction, and you didn’t get it right… People, many people will die because of this.

    I explain to people all the time when they tell me “stop nitpicking”, or why are you so judgmental or critical, or “you are such a know-it-all, or why do I ‘always go after’ people like this, or, “you are always digging up dirt on people”, etc.

    It’s all about love for the lost. When someone states they are proclaiming the gospel, and it’s another gospel…well, I have to follow God’s Word, and the patterns and examples in His Word. I name names, I mark and avoid, I don’t share in their evil deeds, I expose their deeds to the light of His Word. We need to guard the truth.

    Woe to the one who compromises the truth, for it’s God’s Word, and it’s not theirs to pick and choose what to compromise on for the sake of getting along (false unity).

  158. yes holly i can relate to it all sometimes i get so discouraged in putting it out there i have people i know that are caught up in prosperity gospels and positive faith confession and when u try and point out things that r in error such as billy graham or joyce meyer or anything false they say oh why do u have to be so negative. positive christianity is an enemy of true christianity. DISCERNMENT TODAY IS SEEN AS NITPICKING OH YR SO JUDGMENTAL. also when exposing false gospels they think God will just overlook it because of yr sincerity it sounds like roman catholicism. i don’t think God saves people on sincerity otherwise why would we b wasting our time with doctrine and Christ then would have died in vain. even evangelicals can’t c thru c.s. lewis. we have a huge mega church in australia who is having a huge production on the lion the witch by lewis and celebrataing his life. they don’t care for doctrine.

    they just swallow it all up and just accepting everything they spoon out lewis believed in purgatory and on and on. david cloud has put out an excellent book on it. it certainly is the death of discernment satan is certainly having a field day out there.

  159. also with billy graham before 1964 do we know if he ever preached the correct gospel then fell into error, some say in australia that followed him and worked in his crusades that he was paid to be the pied piper and mix evangelicals and catholics together. they have also told me some horrible things he was mixed up in. we know that satan has jesuits and infiltrators in the church how can they b so sure he is not just a change agent. how do they really know he is a great man of God they may be shocked one day. i hope for his sake he is saved or will b saved before he dies i don’t wish hell for my worst enemy.

  160. Mary, very good discernment on your part.

  161. Holly, I agree – it is God’s gospel that we are defending. And if the Gospel is not worth defending, what is?

  162. I appreciate your contribution to this discussion, Mary. Very thoughtful insights, many of which I’d never heard before re Billy Graham.

We appreciate you. Please leave a reply & subscribe to our Web site and comments using check boxes below,

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s