I’ve been editing the long-overdue Spring 2009 Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society. It is a special edition in which all of the articles are articles by Zane Hodges which we previously published. One of them I’m editing now, Legalism:The Real Thing, pointed me to the antinomian controversy in the 1630s in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. That led me to search the web and I found an excellent article on it you might want to read:

http://www.answers.com/topic/antinomian-controversy

In a nutshell the article says that Anne Hutchinson argued that works have no role whatsoever in the believer’s assurance of eternal life. We simply believe in Jesus for that life and we know we have it because we know Him to be trustworthy. While Anne did not deny the importance of good works in the life of the believer to please God, she denied their role in assurance. Indeed, she viewed this as a very bad thing.

The link cited above goes on to say the the minister’s of the MBC (minus her pastor, John Cotton, who agreed with her on this point, though he did later banish her over her claim to receive special revelation from God, a point Zane discusses in a different article in this issue of the journal) feared that if believers did not look to their works for assurance, then they would wander in lives of sin. Sound familiar! This is exactly what the modern Puritans have been contending for years. Interesting I also edited three articles by Zane for this issue of the journal in which he discusses books by D. A. Carson and Michael Horton. He suggests that these men represent the new Puritans.

Anyhow, if you have time, check out that link. I think it will find it very helpful.

A GES reader asked me:

Wondering about John 5:14.  After Jesus healed the evidently partially
paralyzed man, He  finds him and the temple and tells him to "go and sin no more, so that
nothing worse may befall you."  If we take this "worse thing" as
spending eternity in hell, then it seems that salvation is dependent
upon living a sinless life.  It seems more likely that "go and sin no
more" is to be descriptive of the Christian life after faith (though
it never says the man believed).  If so, what would a believer
experience that is "worse" than the 38 years of misery, impotency,
poverty, without hope, in this sin-cursed body, separated from God?
Sobering to contemplate.

John 5:14

It is my view that the issue here is temporal judgment. The man experienced his illness due to sin. Jesus has just healed him. If he goes back into that sin, or another sin in which he is clearly rebelling against God (going to the far country, Luke 15), then something worse than his original illness would occur. That could be more pain and suffering. Or it could be a painful death. In any case, it can’t refer to eternal condemnation, unless the Lord is showing the impossibility of justification by works as in Rom 2:13, which doesn’t appear in the context. See John 8:11 for a similar statement by the Lord in the Fourth Gospel, again dealing with temporal, not eternal, punishment. The woman caught in adultery should have been put to death that day. Jesus forgave her and waived the death penalty. However, if she continued in an immoral life, she would reap the deadly consequences, possibly including premature death.

John doesn’t indicate whether the man Jesus heals in John 5 is regenerate or not. The point is the same either way. Whoever walks in willful sin reaps the consequences.
By the way, both of the above should be contrasted with John 9:1ff. The man born blind was not born blind because of sins of his parents or because of sins that God foresaw he would commit. He was blind for the glory of God. Thus John’s Gospel shows both that sin can result in physical affliction and a person might experience physical affliction simply because God chose to allow that in their lives for His ultimate glory.

I hope that helps.

I received the DTS Alumni e-news today. The lead article was about a young man who received his Ph.D. from DTS last year and is now teaching in Russia. I found it interesting that he appears to be very happy with the theology of John Piper, Jonathan Edwards, The Shepherd’s Conference, and evidently John MacArthur, the head of The Shepherd’s Conference. Note this brief write up in the e-news:

Alumni Spotlight on Jonathan Moorhead (PhD 08)

Following graduation in 2008, my wife Sharon and I, with our five children, moved to Samara, Russia, where we help train the next generation of Russian expository preachers. The students go through a rigorous program much like the ThM program at DTS. I teach church history, apologetics, and edit our theological journal that was released in October. Also in October, John Piper joined us for our annual Shepherd’s Conference where over 600 attendees from Russia and surrounding countries were present!

I have so many fond memories of DTS: ministering with a true scholar/pastor in Eugene Merrill, working with the greatest and most feared police department in the world (DTSPD), life at Swiss Tower, the birth of three of our five children, and falling in love with the God-glorifying nature of church history. One of the greatest contributions the Seminary made to my life was being introduced to Jonathan Edwards by John Hannah. Church history truly glorifies God by reforming and reviving the present!

That DTS is comfortable promoting its school by favorably mentioning 5-point Calvinists and 5-point Calvinism is a bit amazing since the doctrinal statement rejects limited atonement/particular redemption, as well as Lordship Salvation.

I greatly appreciate the education I received at DTS. I fear, however, that what students are receiving now at DTS is significantly more Reformed and less Free Grace than it was 25 to 30 years ago.

Bob:

My pastor asked me about the following and I was wondering if you are aware of anything written specifically on this issue aside from Zane and Dillow?

Greg Sapaugh wrote his master’s thesis at DTS on the Matthew 22 outer darkness/weeping and gnashing of teeth passage. We published a journal article on the passage by Sapaugh. It is a condensation of his thesis. It is available free online at http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1992i/Sapaugh.html

1. The outer darkness only occurs 3 times in the NT and always in Matthew. It is not a common NT expression, to say the least. I conclude from this that we should look at all three passages carefully before we conclude what it means.
2. The expression in Greek actually means “the darkness outside.” In Matt 22 it is the darkness outside the wedding celebration.
3. One of the three outer darkness passages refers to the sons of the kingdom being cast there (Matt 8:12). It is telling that the only other reference in Matthew to “the sons of the kingdom” is in Matt 13:38, and there they are clearly not the tares who are called “the sons of the wicked one.” Clearly in Matt 13 the sons of the kingdom must be regenerate Jews.
4. The third use of the outer darkness is in Matt 25:14-30, the parable of the talents. The unprofitable servant is cast into the outer darkness (v 30). That he is called a servant is telling. Unbelievers are rarely called servants of Christ. This guy was earlier given one talent by his Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ (v 15) and later the Lord came to “settle accounts with them [the servants].” The account (logos) imagery is never used of the Great White Throne judgment, but is used of the Bema elsewhere in the NT (cf. Phil 4:17; Heb 13:17). When we compare this parable with Luke 19:11-27, we see a sister parable. It is different in that the servants there all are given the same amount and all are capable of the 10 minas. And it is different in that the first only hears well done, good servant. The second gets rulership over 5 cities, but is not called a good servant (Luke 17:19). But the third servant is called an evil or wicked servant and has his potential rulership of one city taken away and given to the first servant. A careful look at Luke 19:27 shows that only after the third servant is judged (at the Bema) are those citizens of Jesus who didn’t want Him to rule over them, that is, unbelieving Israel, are brought there (they are not at the judgment of believers) to be slain, an allusion to the GWT Judgment. Clearly the third servant in Luke 19 is not the same as the unbelievers who experience the second death (are slain). Since clearly the third servant in Luke 19 is parallel to the third servant in Matthew 25, the analogy of faith says that the third servant in Matthew 25, the one cast into the outer darkness, is also a believer.
5. The expression “weeping and gnashing of teeth” is associated with hell. However, it is never a technical expression. Hell is not the only place where weeping and gnashing of teeth occurs. Of course, Jesus wept at the death of Lazarus (John 11:35).
6. In Matt 22 the man cast into the outer darkness was not one of those who rejected the invitation to the wedding. He accepted the invitation and was in the hall. He is called “Friend” by the king (v 12). The issue is his improper dress, a metaphor for works, not his belief or lack thereof in Jesus.
7. The expression “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt 22:14) is related to ruling with Christ in the NT, not with election to eternal life. Compare 2 Pet 1:10-11. A careful study of 2 Pet 1:5-11 shows that one must ADD to his faith character qualities to receive the rich entrance to the kingdom. Faith alone will not give that result. Thus the calling and election in 2 Pet 1:10 is to rule with Christ and have the rich entrance, not to be born again.

I could go on. The point is that what seems right at first is not right on further reflection.

We had a joyous time visiting with most of Sharon’s aunts, uncles, and cousins. She has many on both sides of here family as there were 18 siblings on her Mom and Dad’s sides.

On Friday I had a small part in the funeral. I spoke for 5 minutes on John 11:25-27. The next day one of Sharon’s cousins said, “You know, what Bob said got me to thinking. I always thought we were saved by faith and by works. Is it really true that it just by faith in Christ?” I got a chance to answer her question and she was very responsive. Hopefully she and others at the funeral came to faith.

Thank you for your emails, cards, and prayers. Sharon has been taking it hard at times. But at other times she is rejoicing. She will say, “Mom isn’t suffering any more. She can walk again now. And she is with Daddy.”

Today, Monday, October 12th, we received word that Sharon’s Mom, Camille Riggs Dallas Rodgers, went to be with the Lord this morning. She has suffered from Alzheimer’s for the last decade, with declining health in the last few years. That she is now with the Lord is a blessing, though Sharon and I are hurting right now as we grieve, but not as those who have no hope. This is a reminder that Jesus is coming soon and then He will give us glorified bodies. That will be a great day.

Right now I’m in St. George, UT. Yesterday I spoke at Upland Bible Church in Las Vegas. What a super congregation. I really enjoyed my time there. Pastor Rich Olsen and his wife Debbie (Deb) are great hosts. I stayed Saturday night with Clay and Jamie Vertrees, and enjoyed visiting with them as well.

On Saturday I competed in the 3,000 meter racewalk at the Huntsman Senior World Games. I won a bronze medal. Of course, only three guys were in my age group (55-59). But, hey, I finished, and my time wasn’t bad (19:31, a 10 min 31 second per mile pace).

This morning, before I learned about Camille, I raced in the 1500 meter racewalk, again coming in third. This time there were 4 competitors, so I did beat someone. Actually I had to “racewalk” him down in the last 100 meters. I finished in 9:15, which is a 9:55 minutes per mile pace. Again, another bronze medal.

GES Partners, Dean and Pat Thompson, from Omaha are here too. Indeed, they talked me into coming. I saw Dean play a 4 on 4 basketball game and score 28 points! And he is 74 and getting over a rib he broke 3 weeks ago–playing basketball. It is super to be able to visit with them here too.

We would appreciate your prayers for Sharon and her Brother, Danny Dallas. The funeral is scheduled for Friday.

I received a question on the status of the commentary from one of the authors who said he knows a number of people who are looking forward to buy it as soon as it comes out.

Kyle is finishing the typesetting now. He hopes to be done by Friday, but at least by next Tuesday. The typesetting looks great. Not only is the content of this commentary excellent (in my biased view), but so is the typesetting and cover. We’ve also picked excellent paper and binding and printing.

After it is typeset, all authors will get one last look at what they wrote to check for errors. They will have two weeks, which includes mailing time, to find any errors and get it back to us.

We plan to have it to the printer by October 31. If so, it could be in print by the end of November, but certainly by mid December. I think a mail date of somewhere between Thanksgiving and Christmas is a very safe bet.

We are setting the price at $29.95, but we will offer it for just $19.95 at least until the end of the year.

Thank you to all who have been praying for and giving to this project, which actually began in 1990, 19 years ago! I must have been a child prodigy then. How time flies. We would appreciate your continued prayers for the last 100 yards of this marathon. We want to finish in a manner that glorifies the Lord.

I received the following email from a friend of GES:

I am writing regarding a question about the Greek present tense and am
wondering if you could please explain what it means.  Our Pastor claims that
John 3:16 uses the Greek present tense which he says means continual
non-stop action.  So he claims an individual must continue to believe in
order to have eternal life.  I recall having read somewhere where Zane
Hodges did not believe that the Greek present tense means continual action.
Why do some people believe that it means continual action and some do not?
How can we know for sure what it means?  I do not agree with our Pastor and
I would like to talk to him about it but I do not know how to articulate a
defense of what I believe.  Can you, or do you know of any recourse I could
go to that would clear this up?  Thank you for your help.

Here is my response:

In the first place, John 3:16 has an articular participle, not a verb. An articular participle is a verbal noun, not a verb.

I received several emails from a reader wanting to understand how should in Eph 2:10 is not guaranteed, but it is in John 3:16.

Both passages use a conjunction, hina (that, in order that), plus a verb in the subjunctive mood.

Hina plus the subjunctive expresses purpose or result. The purpose or result is that which is intended. It may or may not be guaranteed. But it is the intended purpose or result.

The fact that hina occurs with a subjunctive doesn’t tell us whether the intended purpose or result is guaranteed or not. That is discovered by studying the context.

In John 3:16 we know the intended result is guaranteed by the context. Two verses later we learn that the one who believes in Him is not condemned. Condemnation is parallel to perishing as a comparision of John 3:16 and 3:17 shows. Thus “should not perish” in 3:16 is guaranteed, not merely possible. Once a person believes, his eternal destiny is secure. This is also evident in the larger context of John 3:16, that is, the whole book. Compare John 1:12-13; 4:10-14; 5:24; 6:35, 37, 39, 45; 11:25-27; 20:31.

In Eph 2:10 the matter is less certain. First, we must note the change from the second person plural, you, in Eph 2:8-9, to the first person plural, we, in Eph 2:10. This is striking. “We” in Ephesians refers to Jews and Gentiles together in one body, the Church. Thus Paul is speaking collectively in Eph 2:10, unlike in John 3:16 where he is speaking individually (”whoever”).

The Church collectively is intended to produce good works that God prepared beforehand. Does she? That is a matter of conjecture. I don’t think Ephesians definitively answers that question, nor the entire NT. Clearly as a group good works always emanate from the Body of Christ on earth. That is to say there are always some good works coming out of some of the local churches on earth each and every generation and indeed each and every day. However, is that what Paul means in Eph 2:10? Since he is writing to the Church of Ephesus, it is likely that he expects them to read this as the intended result for them particularly, as well as for the entire Church collectively. There surely was no guarantee that the Church in Ephesus would remain faithful to Christ. Compare Rev 2:1-7, which had some good deeds coming from it (Rev 2:2-3, 6), but also that church had lost its first love (Rev 2:4-5).

In any case, it is wrong to read Eph 2:10 and think that Paul is guaranteeing that individual believers will produce lives chararacterized by good works, or even with enough good works to show anyone who is looking that these people are clearly different than the unbelievers around them. Compare 1 Cor 3:3 where Paul says that the five-years-in-the-faith believers in Corinth will still walking “like mere men,” that is, like unbelievers.

And it would also be completely wrong to see that hina plus the subjunctive occurs in John 3:16 (and John 3:15) and conclude that the granting of eternal life to the believer is intended, but not guaranteed. The context shows it is guaranteed.

Note too that the two constructions are different. In John 3:16 the hina clause has a condition within it: “that (hina) whoever believes in HIm (condition) should not perish (subjunctive mood) but should have eternal life” (subjunctive mood). In Eph 2:10 there is no condition in the hina clause: “that (hina) we should walk in them” (subjunctive mood). In John 3:16, whoever believes in Him will never perish but has everlasting life. In Eph 2:10 the Church has been created for good works in order that she should walk in them, though individual believers and individual local churches may or may not do so faithfully.