Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain

In its "Introduction to the Gospels," with the intent to make an opening for a new doctrine, the Scofield Bible wrote:

"In approaching the study of the Gospels the mind should be freed, so far as possible from mere theological concepts and presuppositions. Especially is it necessary to exclude the notion — a legacy in Protestant thought from post-Apostolic [sic] and Roman Catholic theology — that the church is the true Israel, and that the Old Testament foreview of the kingdom is fulfilled in the church."

In other words, we should just ignore what Jesus said, and the apostles through the Holy Spirit, and blindly adopt this new presupposition that ignores context and forces Scripture to say things it does not say.

We should just ignore Jesus saying, "I am the true vine," a declaration of being the true Israel. We should just ignore all parallels between the life of Jesus and that of Israel, such as them wandering the desert for 40 years unable to learn a specific lesson while Jesus wandered the desert for 40 days and quoted that lesson to the devil, or Israel being called out of Egypt and this particular statement being prophetically applied to Jesus.

We should just ignore everything the New Testament teaches regarding the Old Testament and the Ekklesia. We should just ignore that Peter applies certain terminology applied to Israel in the Old Testament to the Ekklesia. We should just ignore everything Paul has to say, especially in Romans 9 and Ephesians 1 where he makes the case that while Jews were chosen, God chose to include the gentiles in His plan of salvation and expand true, spiritual Israel; the fact that Paul takes the two men (Israel and gentiles) and demonstratively shows that there is now one new man in Christ Jesus (consisting of Jews and gentiles) — the Christian.

This new doctrine that the Scofield Bible is trying to get people to imbibe asserts that after the apostles there was a change in theology and beliefs. This is a bald-faced lie! Anyone who bothers to read and pay careful attention to the letters of the apostles can easily see that the apostles themselves taught what the Scofield Bible's new doctrine wanted people to deny. The apostles taught the very same thing the Scofield Bible ignorantly refers to as "post-Apostlic [sic] and Roman Catholic theology." You would have to be willfully blind not to see it.

For more on this, see The NEW Israel—Christ Jesus and "All Israel Will Be Saved"?. 

All Eyes Off Catholicism

It is interesting to note that the Preterist view was developed by a Jesuit named Luis de Alcazar (published posthumously in the 1600s), and the Futurist (Dispensational) view was developed by a Jesuit named Francisco Ribera de Villacastín (published during the 1500s), in order to refute the Historicist view.

Catholicism has always been engaged in the practice of hiding the Scriptures from the public, or obscuring them by one means or another. Catholicism has never been interested in TRUTH, which is why they elevated tradition over God's Word. Even by distracting and misleading believers with different doctrines or systems of theology, it does not help Catholicm in one iota because, other than the essentials, it does not matter what one believes. You could have everything wrong, but as long as you trust Christ Jesus the Messiah as your Lord and Saviour, you have nothing to fear. The non-essentials, or secondary issues, do not affect your relationship with God, your interaction with others, or your salvation.

Some people might claim this as the Genetic Fallacy (for either position), but that simply is not the case and they are begging the question. Sometimes the genesis of something does, in fact, matter greatly and have great weight behind it. The proof is in the pudding.

What other way to distract from the fact that the Catholic Church is the woman riding the beast in Revelation and that the position or office of Pope is Anti-Christ than to develop arguments that the Anti-Christ either appeared much earlier during the first century, or will appear much later in the future? The fact is, every single detail in Daniel, Thessalonians, and Revelation is a perfect match to Catholicism. Observe:

Daniel 7

1. It is a little kingdom (v.8).
2. It comes up among them, among the ten nations of the divided Roman Empire (v.8).
3. It comes up after them (v.24).
4. It plucks up three kingdoms by their roots (v.8, 24), leaving no trace of their bloodlines behind.
5. It is different from the other kingdoms (v.24), being a religious and political kingdom. Do you know of any such kingdom?
6. It has a man at the head of it (v.8, 20, 24-26). What religious, political kingdom do you know that has a man at its head?
7. It speaks blasphemy (v.8, 20, 25). How do the Scriptures define blasphemy? Do any of these sound familiar?
1. Blasphemy is the claim to have power to forgive sins (Mark 2:7).
2. Blasphemy is a man making himself to be God (John 10:33).
3. Blasphemy is persecuting the church in the name of God (1 Tim. 1:12-13).
8. It is a persecuting power (v.21, 25). Who do you know that has persecuted the saints of the Most High?
9. It seeks to change times and laws (v.25).
10. It reigns sovereignly for 1260 prophetic days (v.25).

2 Thessalonians 2

1. The apostasy must come first (v.3). You cannot be an apostate unless you once held to a claim of the true faith and have abandoned it, or you hold to a perverted form of that faith—keeping parts, omitting parts, and changing parts.
2. The man of sin is revealed through apostasy (v.3). This man would come out of the midst of the apostasy, claiming either to have been a “Christian” or to be a “Christian.”
3. The man of sin exalts himself against every god (v.3).
4. The man of sin sits in the temple of God—the church (v.3). Who do you know of that sits in the church as its ruler?
5. The man of sin proclaims himself to be God (v.3).

Revelation 13

1. The beast is given great power and authority (v.2).
2. The beast received a mortal wound that would be healed (v.3).
3. Those who dwell upon the Earth worship the beast because of this healing of the wound (v.4).
4. The beast is given 42 prophetic months to exercise its authority (v.5).
5. The beast is allowed to persecute the saints (v.6). Who do you know that has severely persecuted the saints for many centuries?
6. The beast is given authority over multitudes (v.6). Who do you know that has great authority over multitudes of people?

Revelation 17

1. The kings of the Earth are involved with this illicit infidelity (v.2).
2. Those who dwell upon the Earth are greatly affected by it (v.2).
3. This city rests upon or is built upon the foundations of a previous kingdom or empire (v.3). What city do you know of that has this sort of foundation?
4. This city’s colours are purple and scarlet, and she is rich with gold and jewels that she displays without shame (v.4). Catholic clerics wear purple and scarlet.
5. Through a “cup,” this city fornicates with political powers (v.4). Whom do you know who dispenses salvation via the means of a cup?
6. This city represents ancient Babylon at heart (v.5).
7. This city is responsible for the deaths of the saints and martyrs (v.6). What city do you know of that has killed hundreds of thousands of Christians from the first century to present day?
8. Two things may be said: the very sight of this city results in great admiration, but moreover John marveled at her because she put to death the saints and martyrs of Jesus (v.6).
9. This city sits on seven hills (v.9). What city do you know of that is called “The City on Seven Hills”?
10. This city holds sway over the bodies and souls of many peoples, multitudes, nations, and languages (v.15). What city do you know of that has this kind of influence?
11. This city reigned over the kings of the Earth (v.18).

Revelation 18

1. This city is a source of demonic presence and powers (v.2).
2. This city is responsible for the economic riches of certain individuals associated with her (v.3).
3. God calls His elect children out from under this city’s abominable influence (v. 4).
4. In contrast with God’s people, whose sins He has forgotten, God has remembered this city’s sins (v.5).
5. This city claims to be the seat of a “Queen” (v.7). What city do you know of that has a “queen” as part of its religion?
6. This city has always been a great foe against God’s people, from the day she became an empire until modern day (v. 20).
7. Splendid music and craftsmanship have been a spectacle from this city, but will eventually be no more (v.22).
8. This city is guilty of deceiving the nations (v.23).
9. This city was found guilty of the blood of God’s children (v. 24).

If you would like to learn more, check out my The Man of Sin entries: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.

 

Josephus on Jesus

There is a video making rounds on social media of an older gentleman pulling a large book off a shelf, claiming it is a "first printing" or "first edition" of Josephus. He begins to read a passage:

"At the same time there appeared in Judea an extraordinary person called Jesus, if it be lawful to call him a man. He was a famous worker of miracles, a teacher of those who were desirous of receiving the truth in simplicity and brought over to him many disciples both Jews and gentiles. This was the Christ. …"

This is NOT a "first printing" or "first edition." It is not even a facsimile of a "first printing" or "first edition." It is a modernized, somewhat paraphrased English version. The actual first printing in English was in 1602 by Thomas Lodge, and this is how it reads:

"At which time also was Iesus, a wise man, if so be it is lawful to call him a man: for he was the author of wonderful works, a teacher of men which receive the truth with pleasure. He drew unto him many of the Jews, and also many of the Grecians. He was Christ. And when Pilate at the accusation of the principal men of our nation, had condemned him to the cross, they which loved him at the first ceased not: for he appeared unto them the third day again alive, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things of him. And unto this day the tribe of Christians named after him is not extinct."

Josephus was a Jewish historian. He was not a Christian. The phrase "He was the Christ" (i.e., Messiah) would not have been stated by him. This was added by earlier copyists. The same goes for the talk about the resurrection. The majority of Christian, Jewish, and secular scholars all agree that this is not authentic to Josephus. Early Christian copyists may have been well-intentioned, but altering what someone wrote to provide greater strength to your argument is deceptive. Sadly, many professing Christians do the same thing today. In fact, either the publisher Banner of Truth or Monergism (I forget which) does the same thing when reprinting the works of the Reformers, attempting to make some of their writings better align with their particular theological beliefs. Manipulating things or lying in order to "strengthen" your position only ends up weakening it. When you are exposed, it makes all of us look bad. Christians do not need to lie or manipulate data in order to be convincing, prove their case, or win an argument. That is the methodology of weak cowards!

A more acceptable reconstruction of Josephus’ original wording would be something like:

“About this time there was Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Gentile origin. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the principal men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him in the beginning did not cease [to do so]. And the tribe of the Christians, named after him, has not died out to this day.”

Just because a video may sound convincing (like the video claiming that the Gospel is contained in the very first word of the book of Genesis in Hebrew, despite their failure to provide the Strong's code for two of the words, which also cannot be found in any Lexicon), does not mean that it is legit. Blind and ignorant Christians will often latch onto many things they know nothing about and attempt to run with it like it is some grand proof. We saw this with the video about Laminin, which they attempted to tie to Colossians 1:17, despite the limitation of where it is found. A better correlation with Colossians 1:17 would be the nucleus, which has the properties of expulsion (it pushes outward) yet everything in creation is held together.

Church Scandals

"Pastor So-and-so was removed as Senior Pastor and as an Elder of the church for engaging in conduct that the Elders believe is contrary and harmful to the best interests of the church... This decision was made with heavy hearts and much time spent in earnest prayer."
—The Elder of Such-and-such Church

If your biblically unsupported "Pastor" is engaged in questionable activity, the response to such should not be a "decision"—it is the right thing to do. To imply it is a "decision" is to say that you could have or would have gone in the opposite direction. Also, if you are the least bit biblically grounded, such a "decision" would not be made with "heavy hearts." This implies you had to wrestle with your response. "Our Pastor has been exposed as having had multiple affairs and engaging in paedophilia by sexually abusing children. Should we or shouldn't we? This is a tough decision." Seriously?!?!? Such egregious behaviour requires zero wrestling to do the right thing! You had to spend time in "earnest prayer" to figure out if you would do the right thing or not? Do these clownish people not hear themselves? Do they not hear the religion void of biblical Christianity dripping from their lips?

Positions of authority are not supposed to exist in the Lord's Ekklesia (Congregation)! Even Grok AI can easily assess this from the New Testament Scriptures. But given that religion has hi-jacked biblical Christianity and has implemented hierarchy, any time someone in authority (even non-religious institutions) is caught or exposed with verifiable evidence of having committed questionable activity, THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY!!! There should be no scale required to determine if you should or shouldn't! If it is illegal, such as sexually abusing children, THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE! No slaps on the wrist!

When congregations want to protect their biblically unsupported "leader" from any and all accusations, it is a clear and undeniable evidence that you are dealing with a Cult. Of course there are people who lie, or are put up to lying, and "proof" can be faked. But when it is investigated and evidence prove it to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt, your recourse should be simple and effected easily. When the person steps down or retires early, it is a flat-out admission of guilt. By the way, if other groups were the least bit biblically grounded, when such a person guilty of such questionable actions attempts to revive their station as a "Pastor" at another institution in another city or province or state, or to start a new church, that should be dead in its tracks. In other words, individuals like Mark Driscoll and Tullian Tchividian should not be in new pastoral positions today! Their conduct has disqualified them.

When hierarchy exists, scandal easily becomes big news. Remove hierarchy and have zero authority and the scandal practically vanishes. That does not mean that individual people will not still fall into such situations, but it becomes easier to deal with among the members and does not bring such national or international headlines. Moreover, if you stop telling people that they are dirty, rotten, filthy sinners with wicked, deceitful hearts who can do nothing but sin, and start telling them the truth that they are new creations (Eph. 4:22-24) with new hearts (Ezek. 36:26), new minds (1 Cor. 2:16), new spirits (Ezek. 36:26; Rom. 8:16), new passions and desires (Rom. 6:17), with God's Spirit living inside them (1 Cor. 3:16; Ezek. 36:26), and that they are slaves to righteousness (Rom. 6:18,-19, 22), placing their identity in Jesus rather than their sin, you will discover that such questionable activity lessens. People realize that they do not actually want to do these things and that such temptations are not coming from themselves and they start living better. Evolution tells people that they are nothing but animals, and then acts surprised when people act like animals. When you constantly tell people they are nothing but sinners, do not be surprised when that is exactly how they behave. Behaviour follows identity. Right behaviour follows right belief.

Read the Epistles. Were believers absolutely perfect? Of course not. There will always be struggles. Take a good look at the Corinthian Ekklesia. They misunderstood Paul's message so egregiously, the same message he delivered to the Galatians, that they basically lived the concern Paul anticipated (and people raise today) with his words in Romans 5:20-6:2, 14-16. He had to correct them. But the member having sexual relations with his father's girlfriend did not become a national or international scandal. It was addressed and dealt with by the Ekklesia. When all members are equal and there is no authority structure, it is easier to deal with such issues. When hierarchy is instituted, such issues are inevitably invited because people almost always (if not always) gravitate to abuse of their power and/or position. This is why Jesus said "it shall not be so among you." People like to lord their power and position over others, and it can lead to mental, physical, emotional, sexual, or even spiritual abuse. It is difficult to reign in that kind of temptation, which is why Jesus condemned it in the first place. This was always a concern I had when I was studying to be a "Pastor." Thankfully, God has taught me enough that I quit that pursuit. I did not feel His calling to return for more schooling (where they brainwash, condition, program, and train you with what you should believe), but continued reading and studying Scripture regularly, and as a result have now come to realize that such positions did not exist in the early Ekklesia and were to never exist in the first place. Such is a return to the Old Covenant system as well as to the structures and patterns of the world.

ADDENDUM:
All these "Pastors" caught in questionable activity, past or present, like to say, "I've repented." Have you? That is just a bunch of religious mumbo-jumbo. Do you even have a clue what "repentance" is? Repentance has nothing to do with your sin. Biblical repentance means to have a change of mind. What have you had a change of mind about? When you committed your egregious sin(s), did you think it was good and right to do so? Then you have not "repented" because you clearly do not know or understand what biblical repentance actually is. Repentance does not mean a turning from sin. Turning from sin is a fruit of repentance. Period.

Denominational Shortcomings

The Grace Message stresses the finished work of Christ Jesus, unconditional forgiveness, eternal security, and freedom from law-based performance or any mixture of works with grace. Any holdover from Reformation-era legalism that does not fully embrace New Covenant freedom is a mixed-grace gospel, which is no gospel at all. Any doctrines of men that add conditions to salvation, sanctification, or Yahweh God's favour are law mixtures, religious additives that dilute pure grace and obscure the basic Gospel.

Denomination	Key Shortcomings According to The Grace Message
Catholics	Emphasizes sacraments (e.g., Eucharist, confession to priests) as necessary for grace, implying works or rituals earn forgiveness rather than Christ's finished work. Purgatory suggests incomplete atonement. Veneration of Mary and saints dilutes sole reliance on Jesus. Catholicism is problematic, promoting a hierarchical priesthood contradicting the believer's direct access to God as a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9). Overall, viewed as a system of religious performance over pure grace.
Lutherans	Retain elements of law-grace mixture through consubstantiation in communion (implying ongoing need for rituals) and infant baptism, which grace teachers see as non-scriptural and not reflective of believer's choice. Confession for absolution often implies forgiveness is conditional, not once-for-all (Hebrews 10:10). Critiqued for Reformation-era legalism remnants that limit full New Covenant freedom.
Calvinists	TULIP doctrines (e.g., limited atonement) contradict unlimited grace for all; perseverance of the saints often implies works or endurance prove salvation, fostering performance anxiety. Calvinistic predestination limits God's universal offer of grace, undermining assurance by tying security to behavior rather than Christ's work. Overly deterministic, missing the relational aspect of grace.
Anglicans	Liturgical and sacramental focus (similar to Catholics) adds rituals to grace, such as confirmation or ordained clergy mediating forgiveness. Infant baptism and hierarchical structure seen as Old Covenant remnants.
Anabaptists	While believer's baptism aligns better with grace, emphasis on pacifism, community rules, and separation from world can become legalistic "works" for holiness. Avoid any rule-based living that replaces resting in Christ's righteousness.
Presbyterians	Strongly Calvinist, so same issues as above: limited atonement and predestination viewed as restricting grace's scope. Covenant theology sometimes mixes Old and New Covenants, which is law contamination. Infant baptism adds non-voluntary ritual.
Baptists	Varies by subgroup; some (Arminian-leaning) teach loss of salvation, contradicting eternal security in grace (Hebrews 13:5). Others (Calvinist-leaning) share TULIP flaws. Emphasis on "lordship salvation" (requiring submission as proof) is backdoor legalism, not pure faith.
Episcopalians	Similar to Anglicans: sacramental system, ordination, and liturgy imply grace is dispensed through church rituals, not directly through Christ. This is contrary to the believer-priesthood model.
Mennonites	Like Anabaptists, plain living and non-resistance can turn into performance-based rules for acceptance. Grace message sees this as self-effort over relying on Christ's imputed righteousness (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Methodists	Arminian theology allows for losing salvation through sin or apostasy, which is fear-based, not grace-assured. Wesleyan perfectionism (entire sanctification via works) is striving for holiness instead of receiving it by faith.
Pentecostals	Focus on second blessing (baptism in the Spirit), speaking in tongues as evidence, and ongoing experiences often imply grace is incomplete without additional works or signs. This as divides believers into "haves" and "have-nots," contradicting one-time righteousness in Christ.
Seventh-Day Adventists	Mandatory Sabbath-keeping mixes Old Covenant with New, which is legalism (e.g., in teachings on Galatians). Investigative judgment doctrine suggests ongoing evaluation of works, undermining finished atonement. Ellen White's prophetic status adds extra-biblical authority.

Since there are over 40,000 different Christian denominations, groups, and sects around the world, obviously the shortcomings of them all cannot be addressed. The larger denominations, however, can be. Usually, whatever shortcomings you find in the larger denominations you will find in the smaller denominations. You will even find mixtures of shortcomings. If it does not adhere to the New Covenant, the Gospel, and grace, then it is another gospel entirely, a mixed-grace gospel attempting to mix oil and water. The New Covenant does not mix with the Old Covenant. Any denomination that attempts to mix any part of the Old system with the New is either blind, ignorant, or delusional. They clearly do not understand the Scriptures, and cling desperately to the errors perpetuated by their particular flavour of bankrupt theology and man-made doctrines.

Mormons are not Christian by any stretch of the word or the imagination as they teach a different Jesus (created being, brother of Lucifer), works-based exaltation to godhood, and have additional scriptures (Book of Mormon). Mormonism is a false gospel (Galatians 1:8), with no true grace since salvation involves temple rituals and obedience to laws.

Jehovah's Witnesses are likewise not Christian by any stretch of the word of the imagination as they deny Jesus' deity and Trinity, teach works-based salvation (door-to-door witnessing, etc.), and a limited 144,000 in Heaven. This is heresy, with grace absent due to rejection of Christ's full atonement for all believers. Blood transfusion bans are extreme legalism.

It Is Finished!

When Jesus was on the cross, He uttered "Tetelestai" just before giving up His life. He was saying, "It is finished!" The word tetelestai comes from the verb teleō and is in the perfect tense, which indicates a past action with results continuing to the present. In other words, the results of what Jesus accomplished on the cross are still in effect today. What is finished? What does this word mean? What exactly does it entail? During the first century, tetelestai was used in several different contexts:

• Business Context: Tetelestai stamped on a receipt meant "paid in full" — debt completely settled.
• Judicial Context: Tetelestai marked on a prisoner's record meant "sentence fully served" — penalty fulfilled.
• Military Context: Tetelestai declared by a commander meant "mission accomplished" — victory won.

On the cross, Jesus was declaring, "Your debt of sin is fully paid, the judgment for your sin has been fully served, and the spiritual war against sin, death, and the Devil has been completely won!" But is there more to His use of tetelestai? Absolutely!

First, Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the Mosaic Law. Jesus had said that He came "to fulfill the Law" (Matt. 5:17). This was predicted in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44). The apostle Paul said that by Jesus' death on the cross, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us" (Gal. 3:13a). Nobody except Jesus could keep the Law perfectly; everyone else fails, which brings the Law's curse of condemnation.

Second, Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies concerning a final sacrifice for sin. Isaiah 53:5-6 prophesies of a suffering Servant Who would bear the penalty for all mankind's sins. Daniel prophesied of a Deliverer Who would "finish the transgression," "put an end to sin," and "atone for iniquity" (Dan. 9:24). Jesus was the sacrificial Lamb anticipated in Old Testament sacrifices: "The next day [John] saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29). The author of Hebrews affirms this accomplishment: "But as it is, He has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Heb. 9:26b) and "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ Jesus once for all" (Heb. 10:10). The word in Hebrews 9:26, "put away," is athétēsis, which means a cancellation. It comes from the verb athetéō, which means to do away with; reject what is already laid down; to set aside (disregard as spurious); nullify, make void; remove out of an appointed (proper) place, i.e. reject as invalid; to cancel, disannul, abrogate; to disregard, pass over (refuse to acknowledge).

Third, Jesus satisfied Yahweh God's wrath toward sinners. Jesus had said that He came "to give His life as a ransom for many" (Matt. 28:28; cf. 1 Pet. 1:18-19). Yahweh sent Jesus to be the propitiation (appeasement to God) for our sins (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2). He was the atoning sacrifice Who paid sin's penalty for all people, satisfying Yahweh's justice.

Fourth, Jesus sealed the Devil's fate. In Genesis 3:15, Yahweh told the Devil that someone was coming Who would destroy him: "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." This was a promise of the coming Messiah Who would secure the spiritual victory over the Devil and his final destruction. The author of Hebrews says of Jesus' victorious work that was accomplished, "Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the Devil." John adds, "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the Devil" (1 John 3:8b).

Lastly, Jesus initiated the New Covenant. In anticipation of His death, Jesus had said of the cup at the Last Supper, "For this is My blood of the Covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt. 26:28). The author of Hebrews explained the necessity of Jesus' death: "Therefore He is the Mediator of a new Covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first Covenant" (Heb. 9:15).

Jesus has accomplished the purpose for which Yahweh the Father had sent Him. His work on Earth was to do the Father's will. Jesus had said to His disciples, "My food is to do the will of Him Who sent Me and to accomplish His work" (John 4:34). Likewise, Jesus had prayed, "I glorified You on Earth, having accomplished the work that You gave Me to do" (John 17:4). Both of these passages use the verb teleō. The work Jesus finished was the redemption and reconciliation of all the world. Paul writes, "And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, He has now reconciled in His body of flesh by His death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before Him" (Col. 1:21-22).

You can accept the following, or you can reject it because of your religious theology, but pay attention to these passages:

"The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, Who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29)

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believers in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him." (John 3:16-17)

"...that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation." (2 Corinthians 5:19)

"For there is one God, and there is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, Who gave Himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time." (1 Timothy 2:5-6)

"For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, Who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe." (1 Timothy 4:10)

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people." (Titus 2:11)

"He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)

"And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world." (1 John 4:14)

Now, these passages are not teaching Universalism, the false idea that all people will eventually be saved. No, what these passages teach is that Jesus dealt with our sin problem once and for all. It would seem that Father Yahweh is no longer counting our sins against us. Whether you believe that Jesus' blood was universally provisional (available to all humanity) but conditionally received based on faith (applied only to believers), or that it is universally applicable (applied to all people) makes no real difference. We are forgiven by Jesus' death (the cross clears the debt) (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:13-14; 2:13-14; Heb. 9:22); we are saved by His resurrection life (Rom. 5:10). [The resurrection life is received by faith.] The only thing that Yahweh is concerned with today is whether you embrace His Son (Heb. 1:1-2; Matt. 17:1-6). The only thing that matters today is whether you accept what Jesus has done for you on your behalf in your place, and put your faith in Him and trust His finished work on the cross (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Rom. 10:9-13; 2 Cor. 6:2). That appears to be the deciding factor as to where you will spend eternity. If you want to put your faith in your religious terms like "positional" and what not, then go right ahead, but do not judge your brothers and sisters who see it differently than you do (and quite possibly more accurate). Maintain the wisdom of Romans 14.

Jesus finished the work of redemption for all people. There is nothing remaining for anyone to do. There will be no encore, no second act. There is nothing you can add to His finished work, and you dare not try to finish your own (as your righteous deeds are like a menstrual rag). The only thing that you need to do is to rest in His finished work. Religion says, "Do this!", and holds out a Balance to weigh your deeds. Jesus says, "I have already done it! Rest in Me! Trust Me!" We are saved only by Jesus' work and obedience, not ours. If we accept through faith the pardon for sins that He offers, we have no debt to pay. Yahweh gives us the free gift of eternal life. We do not need to try and earn that gift by our deeds, and we do not need to try and prove ourselves worthy of it as if on probation. The penalty for our sins was completely paid for by Jesus, as Paul writes: "And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This He set aside, nailing it to the cross" (Col. 2:13-14).

We, believers, are supposed to be ministers of reconciliation. We should be searching out and speaking to the lost and telling them the Good News of the Gospel. By the way, by very definition there can be no bad news in the Good News. When we preach the Good News to the lost, it should make them want to fall in love with the Saviour. "He did all of that for me?!? There's nothing I need to do to earn it? I don't have to pay Him back? What a truly loving God!" The Good News is that Jesus has done everything that we could not do for ourselves. The Good News is that Jesus has bore the punishment that we deserved for our sins. The Good News is that Yahweh has forgiven us because of the sacrifice of Jesus. Yahweh is offering us a free gift. If we reject Jesus in this life, there are no second chances in the life to come. "Today is the day of salvation!"

The Christian Faith

There are over 40,000 different Christian denominations, groups, and sects around the world. All of them have their own Seminaries where they indoctrinate (brainwash, condition, program) their students with their particular brand of theology. All of them have their own "Scholars" (so-called "Experts") in the Scriptures. All their adherents think that their particular brand of theology is the "right" one. They cannot all be right, but they can certainly all be wrong. There are 40,000 different Christian denominations, groups, and sects who teach "You must..." or "You need more...," but only one that says, "It is finished!"

If your beliefs, doctrines, practices, theology, and traditions contradict the very basics of Christianity 101 and the foundation of the New Covenant, the Gospel, and grace, then your system, no matter how committed you are to it, is flawed, erroneous, and bankrupt.

When Jesus uttered, "Tetelestai," He was saying, "It is finished!" What is finished? What does this word mean? During the first century, 'Tetelestai' was used in several different contexts.

• Business Context: Tetelestai stamped on a receipt meant "paid in full" — debt completely settled.
• Judicial Context: Tetelestai marked on a prisoner's record meant "sentence fully served" — penalty fulfilled.
• Military Context: Tetelestai declared by a commander meant "mission accomplished" — victory won.

On the cross, Jesus was declaring, "Your debt of sin is fully paid, the judgment for your sin has been fully served, and the spiritual war against sin, death, and the Devil has been completely won!" This is the first truth that needs to be the foundation of your faith.

Yahweh promised to make a new Covenant, but unlike the previous Covenant, this one would be made with the entire world — Jews and gentiles alike. Yahweh said of this Covenant, it will be "not like the Covenant that I made with their fathers" (Heb. 8:9a). Yahweh promised to put His laws into the minds of the faithful and write them on their hearts (Heb. 8:10b; 10:16b). This does not refer to the Ten Commandments, or the two greatest commandments (which sum up the Ten), because Paul said these were a "ministry of condemnation" and a "ministry of death" (2 Cor. 3) that merely cause us to sin (Rom. 7). It certainly is not the 613 commands of the Law, because the "former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect)" (Heb. 7:18-19a) and "if that first Covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second" (Heb. 8:7).

Yahweh promised, "I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more" (Heb. 8:12; 10:17). The author of Hebrews adds, "Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin" (10:18). At the Last Supper, Jesus said His blood was being "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt. 26:28). The New Covenant was activated with Jesus' death on the cross (see Heb. 9:16-17). With Jesus' blood, all our sins — past, present, and future — have been completely forgiven (Eph. 1:7), we have been released/freed from our sins (Rev. 1:5b), our sins have been removed from us as far as the East is from the West (Ps. 103:12), and God promised to remember our sins no more (Heb. 8:12; 10:17). If your theology teaches contrary to this, it is another gospel which is no gospel at all, and Paul said such people should be cursed. That is a great indictment! This is the second truth that needs to be the foundation of your faith.

With the New Covenant, Yahweh promised to fulfill everything by His own hand, swearing by Himself. He accomplished this through Christ Jesus. He fulfilled the Law because we could not. He took the punishment that was due us. If your theology and interpretation of certain Bible passages teaches that Yahweh will discipline, chastise, or punish the believer for any sins that he/she commits, then your theology is bankrupt and you have not understood the basics and foundation of Christianity and the Gospel. The full anger, wrath, and punishment of Yahweh was poured out on Christ Jesus at the cross. If Yahweh has to exact more from the believer because of his/her sin, then the sacrifice of Jesus was not sufficient enough to deal with our sin problem. That is heresy! 

(From Yahweh's perspective, "there is no longer any condemnation" for sin because Jesus took care of it once and for all on the cross. In this world, however, there are still consequences for sin. Lying, stealing, murdering, etc., all still have worldly consequences, but Yahweh will not judge you for them because He does not hold them against you. If your theology teaches otherwise, it is bankrupt theology that contradicts the New Covenant, the Gospel, and grace. Repent!) 

Jesus' work is finished! There will be no encore, no second act. You cannot finish your own work (your righteous deeds are like a menstrual rag), and you cannot add anything to His finished work. All you can do, and all you should do, is rest in His finished work, thanking Him for all He has accomplished for you on your behalf in your place. This is the third truth that needs to be the foundation of your faith.

Read the book of Hebrews some time. Slowly and carefully. It is the most Christ-centric of all the epistles. The entire letter demonstrates how Jesus is better than everything. He is the foundation of our salvation. He is greater than Moses. He is our Great High Priest. He is greater than Melchizedek. He is the Mediator of a Better Covenant. He is the better sacrifice. If you are flirting with Moses, then you are cheating on Jesus! You cannot attempt to date the Law. We broke up! (Rom. 7:4, 6)

Anything that you are taught in any Christian denomination, group, or sect, or in cults who profess to be Christian (Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, etc.), that contradicts or rejects these basic foundational beliefs of Christianity is another gospel that makes void the grace of Yahweh. It is bankrupt man-made theology that ignores the New Covenant and the Gospel. These foundational truths are the Gospel! The Good News! If you reject these, it is because you have a heart like the Pharisees and are self-righteous (seeking to earn something from Yahweh by your deeds), and you need to hear Jesus' hard statements in order to break you and bring you to despair so that you look to Him for something better: grace!

Is It God's Will For You To Be Healed?

In the book The Gospel in Twenty Questions, Paul Ellis says things like, "The word save first uttered by the angel is the Greek word sozo, which means to deliver or protect, heal or preserve. It means to make whole. Jesus, the Savior from heaven, came to make broken people whole. How could this not include healing and deliverance? Forgiveness from sin is wonderful, but it's only part of the package. ... If you don't know Jesus heals, you are missing out on some of his benefits. You're not getting the full bang for his buck" and "We have lived with sickness and death for so long that it has become normal, but Jesus did not accept sickness as normal" and "So why are we unsure about his will for the sick? His will is that we heal them."

Ellis admits, "Hand on heart, I have to admit we don't see such miraculous healings [sic] every time we pray." Is that not a contradiction? "God wants you to be healed; He wants to make you whole. But we only experience His healing every once in a while." If that is the case, then how can you say it is wrong to pray and say, "If it's your will..."? If you only periodically witness such miraculous healing, does that not indicate that it does indeed depend on whether God is willing or not? Otherwise, would you not see more healing miracles?

Not only that, but this kind of teaching borders on legalism and is void of grace. Read Andrew Farley's books some time, or any of the other grace preachers. If sozo and the Gospel message does entail physical healing, then telling people in order to receive such they need to ask with complete faith without doubting even the slightest, you have entered the realm of legalism. Now, even though I know that God can do such things and I believe He can do such things, that doubt I can sense in the back of my mind in my subconscience is forever keeping me from experiencing such miracles. Am I supposed to somehow control this doubt that is in my subconscience? If so, how in the world do I accomplish this? Based on the typical grace teachings, if it is not about me being perfect or doing perfect things or any of that, how is it that my faith has to be absolutely perfect in order to witness such miracles? How is this any different than telling people "you must be holy!"?

On top of that, telling people that God wants you healthy and that you should always ask with faith and without doubting, this is part and parcel with the Health-Wealth-and-Prosperity nonsense. What happens when you have people who believe what you are telling them, exercise precisely this kind of faith, and yet nothing ever happens?!? You have sold them a bill of goods that your words cannot deliver on. They will either believe themselves to be faithless, thinking they do not have enough faith, or they will malign God somehow because of your promises and end up walking away from the faith. They conflate your bill of goods you sold them with God Himself and think God has somehow failed them. Not to mention the fact that our faith should never be contingent upon whether such miracles ever happen or not; that is not why we have faith!

Finally, did Paul lose faith later in life? Was he not unable to heal himself from an affliction he had later in life? Did the first, second, and third century Christians lose faith or not have enough faith, because it appears that they were unable to do the things that we read of in the book of Acts (which is a transitional book, by the way, and not one where we should derive any theological beliefs from)?

If it is God's will for us to be healed, if Jesus' sacrifice includes getting the "full bang for His buck," then we should expect to be healed or see healing every. single. time. If we are not experiencing this, then I would think they have skewed and misunderstood the message. If you are saying that God wants us healed and we are seeing very little of it happening, and since it is all based on what Jesus did on the cross and not on anything in and of ourselves, then you are in error somewhere.

"All Israel Will Be Saved"?

"God has not rejected His people … they stumble[d] … they were broken off because of their unbelief." Romans. 11:2, 11, 20

What does Paul mean when he says, "And in this way all Israel will be saved"? There are those (Jews, Zionists, Dispensationalists) who think "all Israel" means physical, ethnic, national Israel—the biological descendants of Abraham. But is this true? Here is a question that you need to wrestle with if you are a Jew, Zionist, or Dispensationalist who believes this: If all Israel is ultimately saved, then why would Paul want to trade places with them?

"For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites..." Romans 9:3-4a

Why would Paul give up his salvation for those who are going to be saved anyway? That kind of logic simply does not make sense. Something does not add up.

"But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree." Romans 11:17-24

Please take careful note of what Paul is saying here. He takes physical, ethnic, national Israel and divides them into two groups: (A) believing Jews and (B) unbelieving Jews. According to Romans 2:28-29, Group B, the unbelieving Jews, are not true Jews: "For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God." According to Romans 9:6-8, Group B, the unbelieving Jews, do not belong to Isreal: "But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring." This means that Group A, believing Jews, are true Jews and do belong to Israel.

Paul then takes the whole of gentiles and divides them into two groups. The believing gentiles are grafted in with believing Israel. All through the Old Testament, God prophesied about the gentile inclusion (Is. 11:10; 42:6; 49:6; 60:3; 66:18-19; et al.). What Paul is describing here and in Ephesians 2:11-3:13 is an expansion. So, if believing gentiles are grafted in with believing Jews, what does that make them? Well, according to Romans 2:28-29, they are true Jews, and, according to Romans 9:6-8, they belong to Israel. So when Paul says, "And in this way," he is talking about the gentile inclusion, the expansion of Israel. When he says "all Israel will be saved," he is speaking about spiritual Israel, the one Body made up of believing Jews and believing gentiles.

"God has not rejected His people … they stumble[d] … they were broken off because of their unbelief." Romans. 11:2, 11, 20

This in not some divine judgment. The Jews cut themselves off. Gentiles as a group benefit, but if they likewise reject Jesus, they will be cut off, too. Verses 20-21 are not a warning or threat to believers about some possibility of losing their salvation. That is quite impossible. This passage is not dealing with individuals but with groups. Clearly all the natural branches were not cut off. The only ones who were are Group B, the unbelieving Jews. Therefore, this is a warning to unbelieving gentiles. If gentiles continue in unbelief, as the unbelieving Jews did, then God will likewise not spare them. This passage could not be more clear, but you need a Seminary degree in order to confuse the issue so badly.

"Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits." Matthew 21:43

Jesus said that the kingdom of God would be taken from the Jews and given to a people producing its fruits. Which people is that? Let us take a look at what Peter said: "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy" (1 Peter 2:9-10). Who are the people producing the fruits of the kingdom of God? Christians! The Ekklesia, made up of believing Jews and believing gentiles.

There are those (Jews, Zionists, Dispensationalists) who claim that "God still stands with national Israel today." But, again, is this true? The answer is both "Yes" and "No." Let us see how.

A new Jacob is introduced when Jesus chooses the 12 disciples (Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16; Matt. 10:1-4). Jesus says something to Nathaniel in John 1:51 that echos Jacob’s experience in Genesis 28 (because Jesus was that ladder). Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness, citing to the Devil what the Israelites could not learn in 40 years wandering the desert (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). The new Jacob (Jesus) finds His Rachel at a well—at noon.

• Isaac’s wife was found at a well (Gen. 24).
• Jacob comes to a well and Rachel appears at noon.
• Moses came to a well and found a bride, Zipporah (Ex. 2).

The Bridegroom, Christ, figuratively speaking, finds His bride at a well. Jesus is weary from His journey and asks for her water; she is weary from life’s journey and asks for His water. The Samaritan woman is a perfect picture of Christ’s bride—she is one woman, but she is part Jew and part gentile.

A new Israel is declared (John 15:1a; Matt. 2:15; et al.). In the Old Testament, Israel was frequently depicted as a vine (Is. 5:1-7; Ps. 80:8-15; Hos. 10:1; Ez. 19:10-14; Jer. 2:21; 12:20; Ez. 17). So when Jesus says, “I am the true vine” (John 15:1a), understand this . . . clearly, unequivocally, and irrefutably: Jesus was claiming to be the true Israel! I have said it before, and I will say it again: not only is Jesus the second Adam, as Paul refers to Him, but He is also the second Israel. Jesus succeeded on all points where Israel failed. His life parallels the life of Israel.

1. The King of kings was born in Bethlehem, the very place where David was crowned king of Israel. The magi following the star were looking for the baby who was born King of kings.
2. After Jesus was born, He went to Egypt, just as Israel fled to Egypt to avoid death during a famine.
3. Both national Israel and the NEW Israel (Christ Jesus) were "called out of Egypt."
4. Jesus was baptized at the very location national Israel crossed the Jordan to enter Canaan.
5. Before Jesus entered into His public ministry, He spent forty days in the wilderness, and before national Israel entered Canaan, they spent forty years in the wilderness.
6. God gave the Old Covenant Law on a mountain (Sinai) through Moses, and He gave the new Law on a mountain through His Son (i.e.: "the Sermon on the Mount").
7. National Israel has a history of disobedience to Yahweh and failure to meet the conditions of the Old Covenant Law, while the NEW Israel (Jesus) fulfilled every "jot and tittle" of the Law.
8. The Law promised "blessings" from Yahweh for full obedience and punishment for disobedience to the Law. National Israel experienced constant punishments from Yahweh throughout the duration of the Old Covenant (ending in AD 70), but Jesus experienced and felt the full pleasure of His Father because of His perfect obedience.
9. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law's festivals: born on the Feast of Tabernacles ("He tabernacled among us"), died on Passover, in the tomb during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, raised on the Feast of First Fruits, and sending the Comforter on Pentecost.

God's New Covenant with Israel/Judah (Jer. 31:34; Heb. 8:12, 10:17) was initiated at the Last Supper (Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; John 13:1-30) and activated at the cross (Heb. 9:15-23), but God's controversial plan was always to include the gentiles (Is. 11:10; 42:6; 49:6; 60:3; 66:18-19; et al.). God's only focus now is whether you embrace His Son (Matt. 17:1–8; Heb. 1:1-2).

Does God still stand with physical, ethnic, national Israel? No! Does God still stand with true Israel, Christ Jesus? Yes! (Matt. 17:1–8; Heb. 1:1-2)

The physical, ethnic nation of Israel ceased being the people of Yahweh God with their final rejection of Jesus the Messiah when they murdered Stephen. The Ekklesia, one new man made up of both believing Jews and believing gentiles (Eph. 2:11-3:13; Rom. 11:17-24; et al.), is now His people (1 Pet. 2:9–10), the "Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16). This should not be controversial, except among those who do not actually know a thing about the Scriptures (let alone the New Covenant and the Gospel) and instead have been seduced by Jewish myths and fables. The ignorant and ill-informed will argue that "God still stands with national Israel today," but that simply is not true.

By the way, when Jesus says "...and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9b) and "Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie..." (Rev. 3:9a), he is referring to religious Jews. Who else would claim to be a Jew but a Jew? According to Paul, a true Jew is anyone who has received circumcision of the heart made by God (Rom. 2:28-29), and has the same faith as Abraham (Rom. 4:11; Gal. 3:7, 16, 29; see also Rom. 9:6-8). Those religious Jews who persecuted Jesus and the apostles were not true Jews. By rejecting the faith of their father Abraham, and the testimony of the Law and the prophets, they proved themselves false. John the Baptizer said to them, "And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham" (Matt. 3:9). Jesus also said to them, "You are of your father the devil" (John 8:44). Jesus continues by saying, "[the devil] was a murderer from the beginning." When He refers to them as "a synagogue of Satan," he is referring to the fact that these Jews had embraced a satanic agenda of violence and murder. They had persecuted Jesus in Judea, and they continued to persecute His followers all across the Roman Empire. What else would be a synagogue but a synagogue?

It is not "hateful" or "anti-semitic" to state unequivocal and irrefutable biblical facts that God is done with the physical, ethnic nation of Israel and is now only concerned with His Son, Christ Jesus, and His people, the Ekklesia, which is made up of believing Jews and believing gentiles. If you oppose these truths, it is because you are opposed to Christ Jesus Himself.

What is 'Grace'?

"For from His fullness we have all received, grace upon grace." John 1:16

Grace is typically defined as Yahweh God’s divine unmerited favour and loving-kindness toward you. Some say it is God's riches at Jesus' expense. It is receiving something that you do not deserve. Grace means there is nothing you can do to make Yahweh God love you more, and nothing you can do to make Yahweh God love you less. So why are there those who are opposed to the message of Yahweh God’s grace? "Hyper-grace"? "Cheap grace"? "Greasy grace"? Do the ill-informed critics of the grace message even have a clue what in the world they are talking about? Do they even hear themselves when they speak? Do they even have a clue what grace is?

"Cheap grace" was defined by Dietrich Bonhoeffer in 1937. I am not sure Bonhoeffer had a clue what grace is, but it is anything but "cheap." Grace cost Jesus everything! Yahweh God is not "cheap" when it comes to lavishing His grace upon us. He gives abundantly out of His fullness; not in proportion to our needs, but in accordance with His riches (Eph. 1:7). Grace is anything but "cheap." Those who use this term, as well as the next term, should really think before they speak and embarrass themselves.

"Greasy grace" is a relatively modern pejorative phrase, an American colloquialism, that first appeared in the early 2000s and became fairly common by the 2010s. It implies a grace so "slick" that sin "slides off" without consequences. Clearly these people do not understand grace or consequences, for if they did they would not make such blunders in understanding. When you place your trust and faith in Christ Jesus as your Lord and Saviour, all your sins—past, present, and future—are totally forgiven, removed as far as the East is from the West, and remembered no more. Let's clarify: When Jesus hung on the cross, how many of your sins were future? All of them! In other words, as far as Yahweh God is concerned, there are no more consequences for sin (Rom. 8:1) because Jesus took the punishment on Himself. This is Christianity 101. This is basic understanding of the New Covenant and the Gospel. However, in this world there are still consequences for sin. If you lie to your boss, you will likely get fired. If you steal from a store, you will likely be charged. If you murder someone, you will likely face life in prison. It would appear that the users of this term have confused much: consequences, repentance, confession, etc. Their grasp on theology, and especially the New Covenant and the Gospel, is extremely tenuous.

"Hyper-grace" first gained widespread use around 2013-2014. Let us be clear, those who use the term "hyper-grace" seldom ever define it, unless they are deliberately misrepresenting Yahweh God's absolute grace using the same ridiculous nonsensical definition they give "cheap grace": "a no-strings-attached, open-ended package of amnesty, beneficence, indulgence, forbearance, charity, leniency, immunity, approval, tolerance, and self-awarded privilege divorced from any moral standards" (John MacArthur, 1993). Quite obviously those who use this term are extremely ignorant of Scripture. In Romans 5:20 to 6:2, Paul informs us that Yahweh God's grace is "huperperisseuó." Huperperisseuó is a Greek compound word made up of the words huper, where we derive the English prefix hyper, and perisseuó, which means to superabound (in quantity or quality), be in excess, be in abundance, be superfluous, overflow, excel. In other words, grace abounds exceedingly in great excess—that is, super-abounds or hyper-abounds. But wait! What Paul actually said was that grace hyper-superabounds.

It is clear from Romans 5:20 to 6:2 that Paul taught what ill-informed critics of the grace message call "hyper-grace." He also anticipated the ill-informed question that many professing Christians, especially their "leaders," raise today: "If we preach such a message of grace, won't it result in people committing Olympic world records in sin?" No! Why? Let's look at Paul's anticipation of this argument and his response to it: "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid! How can we who died to sin still live in it?" Seems pretty clear to me. Let's look further: "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under Law but under grace. What then? Are we to sin because we are not under Law but under grace? God forbid! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?" Again, seems pretty clear to me.

Those preachers who misrepresent biblical grace and badmouth it as "greasy grace," "cheap grace," or “hyper-grace” (in a negative way) have shown demonstratively that they have no idea what grace is. You cannot put a strong enough emphasis upon Yahweh God's grace. However, in their ill-informed ignorance, these preachers call such an emphasis "dangerous" and have watered down Yahweh God's grace in order to try and mix it with their obvious legalism. Such preachers claim that "The Law doesn't save us, but it sanctifies us." This is completely and utterly false. Trying to mix Law and grace is like trying to mix oil and water. You cannot put new wine into old wine skins. Once you understand the New Covenant, the Gospel, and grace correctly, it changes everything. Such sentiments expressed by such preachers expose the depths of their ignorance. Paul said that the Law was brought in to increase sin—not decrease it (Rom. 5:20). He said that the Ten Commandments were a ministry of condemnation and death (2 Cor. 3), and that they cause us to sin (Rom. 7). The author of Hebrews said that the Law was weak and useless and could perfect nobody. In other words, the Law cannot help you to live holy, righteous, godly lives. Do such preachers not understand what "you are not under Law but under grace" means? Seriously.

“The grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all men. It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness!” Titus 2:11-12a

In case you missed it, Jesus is the grace of God that offers salvation to all men! To say that grace promotes sin is like saying Jesus promotes sin. It is slanderous at best, and blasphemous at worst. Grace is not permission to sin; it is the power of God to "sin no more." (Enjoy Romans 5:20-6:2, 14-16.)

As far as we know, Jesus never defined grace. The Lord of grace Who came from the throne of grace full of His Father’s grace, and from Whom we receive grace upon grace, never used the word ‘grace.’ However, Jesus is the embodiment of grace, He personified grace. In other words, Jesus IS grace. "Grace and truth came through Christ Jesus" (John 1:17b). The order is important. What does the grace of Yahweh God look like? It looks like Jesus! What does the grace of Yahweh God sound like? It sounds like Jesus! It is grace that saves us and it is grace that keeps us. It is grace from start to finish. If you do not have a proper understanding of biblical grace, then chances are extremely high that you do not know Who Jesus is or what He has done.

“No doctrine is so calculated to preserve a man from sin as the doctrine of the grace of God. Those who have called it ‘a licentious doctrine’ did not know anything about it.” —Charles Haddon Spurgeon

“There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand it and misinterpret it to mean that it really amounts to this, that because you are saved by grace alone it does not matter at all what you do; you can go on sinning as much as you like because it will redound all the more to the glory of grace. That is a very good test of gospel preaching. If my preaching and presentation of the gospel of salvation does not expose it to that misunderstanding, then it is not the gospel.” —D. Martyn Llord-Jones

If you preach absolute grace, the scandalous grace of God, there are some (perhaps many) who will misinterpret your message as an endorsement of sin. It is absolutely inevitable. 

If the “grace” you are preaching says “Yes” to sin, it is not the grace of God! It is a man-made substitute. This is dangerous.

If the “grace” you are preaching is not absolute grace, it is not the grace of God. It is a watered-down cheap counterfeit. This is dangerous.

Let us identify three gospels, shall we:

1. Graceless Gospel: You are saved by works and sanctified by works.
2. Mixed-grace Gospel: You are saved by grace but sanctified by works.
3. Hyper-grace Gospel: You are saved by grace and sanctified by grace.

Since there is no such thing as a "graceless" Gospel, that leaves us two options. The second option, a "mixed-grace" Gospel, is thoroughly debunked and refuted by Paul in Galatians. Paul posed two multiple-choice questions to the Galatians:

1. How did you receive the Spirit?
1. by the works of the Law (human effort)
2. by grace through faith (dependency on Christ)
2. How do you plan to continue your spiritual journey?
1. by the works of the Law (human effort)
2. by grace through faith (dependency on Christ)

His questions are obviously rather rhetorical. Since you began by grace, you can only continue by grace. Therefore, such concepts as "Torah observance" are anti-Christ. If you are flirting with Moses, then you are cheating on Jesus! Pure and simple. That leaves only one option: the Hyper-Superabounding-grace Gospel!

Christianity today is really no different than what we read in Scripture about the first century. Our "leaders" (preachers, theologians, and "scholars") are exactly like the Pharisees. The Pharisees were against Jesus and the grace message. The Pharisees kept burdening the people with the Law. The Pharisees thought only they could interpret and understand the Scriptures because they knew Hebrew. The warnings Jesus issued to the Pharisees could easily be issued to the "leaders" of today. Beware the mixed-grace gospel, which is no gospel at all. It offers carrots (as rewards for obedience) and sticks (as punishment for disobedience). This is the Old Covenant system: If you do this, then I will do this. The New Covenant system says: I have already done it, now rest in Me.