Shake off the dust

Jesus instructed the 12 Apostles on how to respond to people when he sent them out:  

"Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. 12 And when you go into a household, greet it. 13 If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet." 

Matthew 10:11-14

I think the shaking of dust off the feet or garments by the messenger signified that they were now clean from those they had warned: they would no longer be held accountable for those individuals.  

Another figure of speech connected with this is "your blood is on your own heads."  We see this concerning the Jews who rejected the message of the Apostle Paul that Jesus was the Christ: "But when they opposed him and blasphemed, he shook his garments and said to them, 'Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.'" Acts 18:6   

He was in effect saying to them: "I told you and you did not believe me, so I'm no longer responsible for what happens to you; I am clean of you."   

A Prophet's Reward

[Jesus said]  41 "He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward. And he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." Matthew 10:41

There are reasons to believe that there are rewards in heaven that the believer in Christ will receive because of their faithfulness to Christ.  The words above could be a reference to such heavenly rewards, but I tend to think that rewards in this life are referenced above.

What exactly is a prophet's reward or a righteous man's reward?  We are not told.    I tend to think it could be what they have to offer as a prophet or a righteous man.  If one receives either, you receive what they have to offer:  you benefit from what is unique about their lives and ministry.

If you receive a missionary into your home, you get to have fellowship with them; you can hear their experiences.  It can be an enriching experience.  They can become lifelong friends, almost like family. There are different ways God may bless you in this life for receiving them.  

Jesus instructed the 12 Apostles on how to respond to people when he sent them out:  "Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. 12 And when you go into a household, greet it. 13 If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you." Matthew 10:11-13

To receive the truth about Jesus as the Christ will bring salvation, but as Jesus said to the Apostles, if the household is worthy and you stay with them, "let your peace come upon it."  That would be a present, temporal kind of benefit.

Jesus clearly spoke of temporal rewards or benefits for faithfulness and sacrifice in addition to persecution.  "So Jesus answered and said, 'Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's, 30 who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life. Mark 10:29-30   

Faithfulness doesn't mean one can only expect persecution in this life or rewards in the next.  I might add that if the receiving of a prophet and righteous man can bring with it reward in this life, it is a reason to serve the Lord, because the kind of reward they bring may have the impact on your life that you need.   Have you ever heard the stories that the Gideons tell about the salvation of those who found a Gideon Bible?  Have you ever heard the stories of Bible translators who work for Wycliffe translators?  Inviting these people into your homes, spending time with them--maybe getting involved with them--may benefit you, change your life. They may become a part of your life as well.  Receiving such people has its rewards.

The heresy of Grace Evangelical Society

Wilson identifies the “Universal Propitiation” view of Hodges, Wilken, and GES as heresy.  There are those who hold to this view that disagree with GES on the “Content of Saving Faith” (COSF) or know nothing about GES and their views.   I think Wilson doesn’t understand that that view he calls “universal propitiation” makes a distinction between forensic forgiveness (which must be inseparable from the propitiation accomplished at the cross) and fellowship forgiveness.  I think this is why Wilson is critical of Hodges, because Hodges believes in a forensic forgiveness of all sins for all people, and yet Hodges believed that one is not forgiven until they believe, but Hodges, and many others, believe this is fellowship forgiveness, not forensic forgiveness.   This belief in “universal propitiation” seems common among free grace people, and even among those who don’t hold to GES’s COSF or know anything about them.  If it is a heresy, it is very common among Free Grace people.  I, however, believe that forensic remission of sins is not received until one believes in Christ as Savior from sin, so I am in alignment with Wilson and at odds with GES and many Free Grace people on that particular issue, but I don't believe it is a heresy.

Wilson is critical about GES’s understanding of Eternal Life as Eternal Security.  Wilson is seeking to argue that if one has to understand eternal life as eternal security, then hardly anyone has been saved throughout time.  One can be opposed to Hodges’ COSF, and yet believe that if one does not believe in eternal security when they believe the gospel, then they haven’t believed in the gospel correctly.  I tend to agree with Wilson on this as well. 

I have understood “eternal life” as primarily qualitative--a quality of life.  Even though I probably have more books by Zane Hodges than any other author, and I used his commentaries when I taught through James, Hebrews, First John, and First Peter, I didn’t really discern that he was understanding the words “eternal life” as “eternal security.”  I started to sense that though as I would listen to his discussion on “assurance is OF the essence of saving faith.”  Though I do agree firmly that assurance is OF THE ESSENCE of saving faith, I may have not understood what he was saying, if he meant the assurance was in eternal security.  I understood the assurance in the message to be believed was the promise of salvation or eternal life; that is, I am believing a promise from God, and that is the assurance; if I don't have the assurance of eternal life, then what have I believed in? 

I would identify the content of John 3:16’s “should not perish but have everlasting life” as assurance.  Now I have heard Dr. Wilkin say often that “everlasting life is everlasting,” and I took him to mean eternal security, but that’s where I didn’t quite agree with him, because I understood eternal life as primarily qualitative, though it is forever as well.  I believe in eternal security, but I don’t think the primary meaning of everlasting/eternal life is eternal security.  

Wilson said that everyone has everlasting life, because we live forever.  I'm not aware of any Scripture that says everyone has everlasting life, for that terminology is used with reference to what one can have or does have who believe in Jesus.  The contrast is made between perishing and eternal life.  The unsaved may live in some form forever, but it is perishing, not everlasting life.  I believe it's about a quality of life.  So here again, I appear to be more in line with Wilson that GES on the meaning of "eternal/ everlasting life."

Concerning the COSF, I believe there are 2 pieces of information that are usually divided up as what one is to believe and what happens when one believes it.  These two things are usually identified as the gospel and the response to the gospel, or maybe, intellectual assent and trust (the 2 of 3 aspects of faith such as Evangelist Larry Moyer promotes.  The first aspect is knowledge.).  I think Hodges was referring to these two things as the “two step.”  I think Hodges combined these two pieces into one statement to be believed, to avoid the two-step or intellectual assent and trust approach.  Of course, his COSF didn’t require certain content others believe should be necessary.  His COSF was “cross-less,” “minimalist,” and it was “faith in faith,” or more of the response to but not the gospel itself.  

Obviously, no one would just say to someone that Jesus died for your sins, was buried, and rose again, and then say nothing else about it, if they were seeking to evangelize.  Obviously, not everyone is automatically saved, if an universal propitiation or an universal forensic forgiveness of sins (which Wilson rejects)—for one has to believe to be saved.  

So does one have to believe they are saved by faith to be saved by faith?  It kind of seems to me they do—even if you say it’s the response to and not the gospel.  You can argue that it is not what saves you, but you do have to believe it.  Jesus did tell the woman that her faith saved her, Luke 7:50: "Your faith has saved you, go in peace."

I think Hodges' COSF seeks to avoid the two-step (as in the two of the three so-called aspects of faith, being intellectual assent and trust): Hodges combines it into one step.  

Wilson thinks one can be saved as long as they believe in Jesus as God and Savior, even though one also adds works for salvation. Interestingly, Wilson doesn't believe this is heresy, but just error.   Were the Jews saved who said one had to be circumcised to be saved?  They obviously didn’t believe in faith alone.  But did they add circumcision from the beginning or later?  If later, then they had “fallen from grace” (Gal 5.1-4).  But if from the beginning, then I would be concerned, though since they were already Jews and circumcised, it probably wasn’t on their minds when they first believed.   

I do think that one could not get to that COSF Hodges held to without some prior knowledge and belief.  It is a hypothetical situation to say that if one could believe Hodges’ COSF, they would be saved, even though they didn’t know and believe the things that one typical does before that belief that results in salvation.   

But there is going to still be debate on what content is pre-salvation-content and what is necessary salvation content.   If one believes that Jesus is God and Savior from sin, are they saved, as Wilson believes, even though they weren’t thinking in the terms of Jesus bearing their sins on the cross to God’s satisfaction?  Is the message of the cross prerequisite knowledge or final-content knowledge?   Is the message of the cross essential or helpful knowledge?  I think I need to read Wilson again to know exactly how the message of the cross fits in, because I mainly remember him saying one must believe in Jesus as God and Savior to be saved.  Hodges believed Jesus was the guarantor of eternal life to all those who believed in him for it.  Wilson pointed out that Hodges’ view didn’t require one to know that Jesus was God, but it did require the belief that eternal life is eternal security.

I already said that I believe eternal life is qualitative.  I understand that to mean life with God: to have eternal life is to have a quality of life, which will be life with God.  Since God is in view for all of this, since it is with reference to him, I either have eternal life or I don’t-- it seems that I must understand something as to why I don’t already have eternal life, naturally.  Obviously, sin is the reason we don’t naturally have eternal life.  I would understand that Jesus being savior from sin and being given eternal life as the same thing, ultimately.   Sin brought death, the “wages of sin,” but through the forensic forgiveness of sins, I am given eternal life:  I am made alive, born again, and I will be raised up.   But if I believe in Jesus as Savior from sin or for eternal life, for me, it means the same thing.  And though it would require prerequisite knowledge, to believe in who this Jesus is, who can make such a thing possible, I do have to believe in Jesus’ divine authority, whether he is God or the son of God.   I think that believing Jesus is the Christ is to believe he is the son of God—Peter, Nathanial, Samaritans, and the High Priest understood this.  Jesus had the authority to forgive sins, which the Pharisees said only God could do.  I think that one would have to have some prerequisite knowledge and belief about who Christ was to believe his COSF.   If one could hypothetically get to Hodges' COSF without that knowledge, I would wonder why or how one would believe it.   It seems the authority would not be there, and the Divine connection and promise missing.

If one believed in Jesus as the son of God who saves from sin through his death and gives eternal life to those who believe in him for it, you have Wilson’s 2 primary beliefs about Jesus, as the Son of God and Savior from sin.  You have a content that is somewhat similar to Hodges' but more fully acknowledges Jesus as the Son of God and combines the provision and the promise: Jesus is Savior from sin for those who believe in him for it.  

Last days and Scoffers

Peter writes of scoffers who are to be expected in the "Last Days."  That period can have a broad time reference (see Hebrews 1.2), but Peter may have in view a time beyond his own life-time.

Knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation. 2 Peter 3.3-4

Their identity is uncertain. Scoffing at the expectation of the coming of Christ by the unsaved would be nothing unusual, so I think this must be a reference to those who have some association with Christianity, and we do see that they make reference to the "fathers" having fallen asleep. But who are the fathers, and why make reference to them and then refer to the beginning of creation as a reference point? I would tend to think the fathers are the early church fathers--as they are referred to by some, and the scoffers are first referencing them, and then they go all the way back to the beginning of creation. There point is that nothing of note has happened that hasn't been happening throughout time that would indicate the coming of Christ is near. There's nothing to "hang your hat on."

I suspect these are liberal Christians who typically question the authority of Scripture and are skeptical of eschatological expectations.

Their scoffing suggests an expectation of an event or events that would signify or precede the Coming of Christ. This seems to be a typical expectation.

The disciples of Christ asked Jesus what signs would precede the Second Coming and the end of the age. In Matthew 24.3-8, Jesus answers the question. He speaks of those things one might normally associate with the expectation that Christ's coming and the end is near. But Jesus said these things must come to pass, and the end is not yet.

The things Jesus references are things one might expect to signify the Coming of Christ (COC) or the end of the age is near. It's typical to think this way. Major wars have led to such speculation. Some people count earthquakes. Is Covid 19, that has gone global and is still with us a year later a "pestilence?"

But Jesus said that "the end is not yet." What is Jesus telling us?  I believe He is saying don't "jump the gun." We don't want to be scoffers, but we need to be discerning.

Some believe Jesus spoke more specifically of the "70th Week" events, being represented in the "seals" of Revelation, but others say it speaks of the period between His First and Second Comings. If those things are the same as the seals of Revelation, during the 70th Week, then when they begin, we should know the time is short, with less than 7 years to go. But if they are concerning events between his comings, which I tend to think they are, one should realize these things will happen, and they are not specific enough to know how close to the Second Coming we are. But the temptation has always been to see major world events as an indication that the end is near.

In 2 Peter 3.5-7, Peter points out that the Flood was an event the scoffers choose to forget, but it was a Divine event that reveals they are wrong. There has been an event in history clearly unusual, beyond that which is merely natural.

The Flood was divine judgment on the world, and it is set forth as how it will be at the COC, though it will have some "hang your hat on" indictors of its approaching occurrence.

I believe Peter clearly connects the COC with the Day of the Lord (DOL). They can be used interchangeably as a Day of judgment on the world and coming like a "Thief." 2 Peter 3.8-10 says the DOL will come as a "Thief." All the "thief" references speak of how it comes on people who are unprepared: it comes as destruction: see John 10.10; Matthew 24.36-44; 1 Thes 5.1-3; Rev 16.15 (in connection with Bowl 6 and approaching Armageddon).

There are no specific fulfillments as of yet, nothing to "hang your hat on," but there are some curious events that may be getting us closer. We don't want to be a scoffer or jump the gun.

The Covid virus and the vaccine are not the "Mark of the Beast." The timing is not right, nor can it be just a vaccine. The Mark must involve a state of mind that confirms one's conscience in a state of unbelief about salvation through Christ. However, how this virus has affected the world, and the way it has been handled, along with a vaccine that the world needs, and how it may be part of a required verification system to move about freely could be how the Mark comes about and works: you need the Mark to buy and sell. I still do not understand the Mark's nature as being eternally condemning.

There's also the Abrahamic Accords that has stated agreements between Israel and some Arab countries. Some may anticipate something similar to this that starts the 70th Week of Daniel, the last 7 years before the COC, as revealed in Daniel 9.27.

It's also interesting that the Saudis recently stated that the Temple Mount holds no interest for Islam. Israel gave custodianship of the Temple Mount to Jordan. So what could happen if this changes? It is believed, prophetically--and this is "hang your hat on"--stuff, a temple or tabernacle has to exist for what Daniel 9.27 and what Jesus and Paul spoke concerning, being the "abomination of desolation": Matthew 24.15; 2 Thes 2.3-4. These things must precede the COC and DOL.

How should we answer the claim that "we are in the last days, and Christians are not prepared for it?"

I don't think we are there yet, but even if we were, what should we do? Being a "prepper" is a lot of work and expense. I think we should live wisely, prepare as we can, and do what is always required as a believer, abiding in God's word.

“What must I do to be saved?

Click on image for full screen.

Jonathan: An example of a man who knew his God.

He was the eldest and noble son of King Saul and heir to the throne of Israel.

He was the brave friend of David.  

DTS professor and prolific writer M.F. Unger wrote: “one of the most beautiful characters of the Bible” (Unger’s OT commentary).

We don’t read concerning him as with David as being “a man after God’s own heart,” but there are significant spiritual qualities revealed about him and a clear contrast between him and his father Saul.

Bravery was clearly characteristic of Jonathan:  1 Samuel 13.1-6; 14.1-6

He commanded1000 men against the Philistines.  We read that he and his armor bearer, by themselves, engaged a military post of the Philistines.

Jon’s bravery was centered in a belief in God as one who can save by “many or by few."

Surely, Jon had a similar understanding and faith as that of David when it came to the relationship of God to Israel and the promises of God of deliverance from their enemies through faith and obedience. 

Deuteronomy 7.23: “the Lord your God will deliver them over to you…”

Daniel 11.32:  During the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (Seleucid Ruler who persecuted the Jews and foreshadow of Antichrist) and the Maccabean revolt: “The people who know their God shall be strong and carry out great exploits.”

1 Samuel 14.7-17: The Philistine soldiers fell down before Jon as he climbed up to them on his hands and knees; Jon’s armor bearer killed them with the sword.  God brought about victory for Israel following this act of courage.

 

Friendship with David was surely due to a common faith in and submission to God.

1 Samuel 18.1-4:  Jon loved David as himself, but Saul would grow to despise David, jealous of his popularity and fear for his throne.  

Close friendships are very valuable.

Proverbs 18.24: “A person who has friends may be harmed by them, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother.”  NET Bible

David had 7 bothers, but his close friend was Jonathan.

The believer's closest friends should be those with whom they share a common faith. 

If you're married, it should be your spouse—no competition should exist with your spouse.  Friendship is significant for encouragement or for admonition if necessary. 

1 Samuel 19.1-7:  Jon intercedes for David, temporarily diverting Saul’s murderous intentions, but it wouldn’t stay this way.

1 Samuel 20.12-15: The plan…David doesn’t show up for dinner with the king, so Jon could discover Saul’s intentions toward David.

1 Samuel 20.27-34:  Jon angrily reacts to Saul’s murderous jealousy against David.  Jon then goes to inform David of the danger, that he should flee. 

Jonathan shows humble acceptance in the will of God.

David is constantly on the run, hiding from King Saul’s attempt to find and kill him.

1 Samuel 23.14-18:  Jon finds David in hiding, and he “strengthens David’s hand in God.”

That was a figure of speech.  Here is a quote from another source: “Jonathan comforted and supported him against all fears, by considerations of the divine goodness and power, and by reminding him of God’s faithful promises to him, and his providence which had been and would still be with him.”

Jon encourages David, acknowledging that he shall be king of Israel.

It wasn’t an attitude of not wanting the kingdom for himself, but an accepting acknowledgment that it was the will of God.

Jon knew that God chose David to be king.  He accepted this.  Unlike Saul, he was accepting of the will of God.  He accepted that what was rightfully his, was given to another as a consequence of his father’s disobedience to God. 

Though Jon thought he might reign by David’s side, he chose to unite with his father in battle against the Philistines, a battle determined to take the lives of Saul and 3 sons, including Jon.  Jon may not have known the words of the witch. Jon chose to be loyal to the authority of his father in battle, and surely fought by his side with the decision that ‘God’s will be done.’

David laments Jon’s death:  2 Samuel 1.17; 25-27.

Jonathan is an example of bravery, friendship, and humility centered in a belief in and submission to God.

Captain Jesus

 Therefore, we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, (Hebrews 12:1)

After providing several examples of those who did things in their lives consistent with a faith in a future life and reward--those being the "great" "cloud of witnesses," the author of Hebrews exhorts his readers to endure by setting aside every hindrance, particularly sin, and using the imagery of a long-distance runner.  He is speaking of priorities and proper focus.  Obviously, a call to sinlessness is not in view, but one needs to make changes concerning those things that would hold them down or back from the spiritual progress needed to endure to the end.

To further inspire in this race is the example of Jesus.

looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls. Hebrews 12:2-3

The New king James reading is the usual understanding of Hebrews 12:2a: “looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of [our] faith.” 

But I think that translation misses the meaning of the verse in light of the context.  The context is about what living by faith looks like.

Verse 2 and 3 are telling us how Jesus behaved himself and that is what we are to look to.  To translate verse 2 to say how Jesus authored (created) our faith and finishes (we will persevere to the end?) our faith doesn’t really fit the point that he is our example that we to follow. 

The book of Hebrews is concerned about continuing in the faith.  This requires effort: it’s not guaranteed.

Not all translations are the same on this…

ESV  “looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith,” Hebrews 12:2

NAS  “fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith,” Hebrews 12:2

NET  “keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith.” Hebrews 12:2

ISV  “fixing our attention on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of the faith” Hebrews 12:2

NIV  “fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith" Hebrews 12:2

We are to look to Jesus as an example of faith—of what living by faith looks like.

I believe the NIV is the best translation in light of the context.

The word translated “author” could be translated “captain” or “pioneer.” A captain often “leads from the front.”    A pioneer is a person who begins or helps develop something new or prepares the way for others to follow.  He “blazes” a trail for others to follow.

 The Greek word is translated “captain” in the NKJV in Hebrews 2:10:  "For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings."

 Why translate it “captain” in 2:10 and not in 12:2?  Jesus is the captain, the leader.  The Greek word is translated “prince” twice concerning Jesus in the Book of Acts.   In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the same Greek word translates words that mean “head,” leader,” and “captain.”

A different Greek word is translated “author” in Hebrews 5:9 in the NKJV: “And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.”  Here, “author” probably speaks of Jesus as the source or cause of “eternal salvation."  But that eternal salvation is probably more than justification, since "salvation" in Hebrews 2:3 must be looking to the “world to come” ("of which we speak" Hebrews 2:5) and the potential reward or glory in that future world for those who obey God, having been made possible because Jesus obeyed God. 

So, there is a salvation all believers will share equally, but there is reward or glory that depends on obedience now, which is also part of and included in the idea of salvation--and it is in the world to come.   There is a common salvation all believers share, but there is a salvation that depends on obedience, which is the future glory we will experience in the world to come.  That world to come, and its glory, is because Jesus was obedient unto death (and so he is the "author" of it, Hebrews 5:9), and because of him, there is a glory that we can share in, but it won't be equal, just as Jesus had more glory than Moses, Hebrews 3:3.  Yet, Jesus, as our "captain," is seeking to bring "many sons to glory":  he is seeking to lead us to obtain that glory in the world to come, just as he through obedience obtained it.

Though the Greek word in Hebrews 5:9 can be translated "author"--with reference to Jesus being the cause of the "eternal salvation" (as the "world to come") and the glory available for the obedient believer, I believe the different Greek word in Hebrews 12:2 speaks of him as the captain or leader of faith.  If you want to know what it means to live by faith, look to Jesus.  This fits the context.

Jesus is the “finisher” in that he “perfects” or fulfills what faith calls for.  This particular faith is one that fully trusts God and looks to the promises of God to be received beyond this life.  The Greek does not have “our faith” but “the faith.” Jesus perfected what faith looks like.  Again, I think the NIV is the best translation: “fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith."

Therefore, as the author of Hebrews stated earlier in the letter:

Hebrews 10:36-38: “For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise:    "For yet a little while,  [And] He who is coming will come and will not tarry.    Now the just shall live by faith;  But if [anyone] draws back,  My soul has no pleasure in him."

Jesus was and is the captain and perfecter of faith. We are to look to Him to obediently persevere in the faith, looking to the promises (reward and glory).   May God help us to persevere, even in great difficulty, so we might be like those who..."were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection." Hebrews 11:35