HE WILL SAVE HIS PEOPLE FROM THEIR SINS 

Matthew 1:18-25

Key Verse 21

She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,

because he will save his people from their sins."

We are those who "glory in Christ Jesus" (Php 3:3 NIV84 Gk. καυχώμενοι "boast" see LXX Jer 9:23-24). Doxa means "glory". And the Bible contains numerous "doxologies" where the inspired writer gives glory to God. My favorite is Ro 11:36, "For from him and through him and to him are all things. [αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν] To him be the glory forever! Amen." Here is a secret: Doxology in the heart is facilitated by correct theology in the mind! What do I mean by that? The medium or lens through which God reveals his doxa glory with blazing sharp clarity is the Bible. So we need to correctly learn it. Bible study is really "God study", θεολογία, theology. Hence, my prayer is that the Lord may teach us through today's passage correct theology and Christology. This passage reveals Christ's identity and mission. His identity and mission are so tightly coupled that his name is his mission. Jesus means, 'the LORD saves'. I wish to show today the glory and power of his mission, what he came to do for us, that we may stand in awe of it and give him doxa (glory).

<< <<>>>>

The account before us establishes how Christ came to be born -- Christ the Moshiach, our Anointed King. Verse 18 reads, "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit". This establishes Jesus' origin. He did not come from Joseph. Rather, he came from above by the Holy Spirit. Jesus, the transcendent eternal Word of Life, left his glory above to enter human history in the most humble manner, being conceived in the womb of his own creature, and thereby became like one of his own creatures (like us) in every way, except was without sin. The genealogy in the previous passage established the human lineage of Jesus, his bloodline. It established that his blood is royal from line of David and from that of Abraham. Now we learn that his blood is also divine. The blood of the Lamb, the blood of the eternal covenant αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου (Heb 13:20; Mat 26:28) is both human and divine.

Joseph was maybe 18 and Mary was probably 12 at that time. And they were pledged to be married, which is similar to engagement, except that they were considered legally as husband and wife but forbidden to live together and have sexual relations. So verse 19 tells us that young Joseph had in mind to "divorce" Mary quietly. He thought, most understandably, that her pregnancy was due to her unfaithfulness. So, in verses 20,21, an angel (probably Gabriel) (Luk 1:19, 26), appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him what the situation was. He said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit." And then the angel gave these important instructions in verse 21: "She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." This declares the name of Jesus and its meaning: the mission of Jesus. Each component of this sentence is tremendously important and deserves our full attention and careful examination. Let's go through it piece by piece.

The first part reads as follows: "καὶ and καλέσεις ^V-FAI-2S you-shall-call τὸ the ὄνομα name αὐτοῦ of-him Ἰησοῦν Jesus" ("and you are to give him [shall call him] the name Jesus"). "Jesus" in Greek is Ἰησοῦν (the accusative inflection of the lemma (stem) ιησους (nominative form)). This was the name he was to be given. The word ιησους is Joshua's name in the LXX (Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT). The first century Jewish person reading Matthew's Gospel in Greek would, upon reading the word ιησους, think, 'Oh that means Joshua'. In fact, ιησους "was a fairly common name among Jews in 1st century Palestine". Joshua is the Greek of the Hebrew word Yeshua “Yahweh saves”. "The LORD saves" -- that's the meaning of Jesus' name. He is the true Joshua. Joshua led his people out of the desert into the Promised Land. Moses, the Lawgiver, couldn't do that -- couldn't lead them out. The people themselves could not do it. But Joshua did. He led them out of the desert into the Promised Land. Similarly, Jesus leads his people out of their sins into his dominion; he saves his people, a thing that they themselves cannot do. That is his mission. He is the Good Shepherd who loses not a single sheep of all that the Father gives him, but gives them eternal life and brings them to glory, raising them up at the last day (Jn 10:28-29; 6:39-40, 44; 17:2). Again, he is Yeshua, “Yahweh saves”. He is the LORD. The I AM. He is the LORD who saves. That is his name. 

The next part reads, "αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει" ("because he will save..."). Again, it goes like this, "...and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save..." The word "He" (αὐτὸς) is emphatic. That's because the case is nominative. I am not pretending to be some kind of expert in Greek or Hebrew. I don't know Greek grammar that much honestly but my daughter does, my dear daughter, Ellie. She is now a 3rd year Greek student -- straight As in Greek, and is recognized by her professors for her proficiency. She is even a tutor for Greek students and even gets referrals from her professors. I recommend you, ask her if you have any questions about Greek. She can even arrange to give you tutoring. She's brilliant. Anyways, this is what she says, "The nominative forms of autos intensify the implied subject of the verb". I consulted some Greek Grammar books and they're exactly in agreement on this point. "αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει". The "He" is emphatic. *He* will save -- he himself and no other. The ASV reads, "for it is he that shall save". This matches with other verses in the Bible like Jonah 2:9 which reads, "Salvation comes from the LORD." Salvation comes, not from ourselves, but from the LORD Jesus because only he can save.

Again, verse 21 reads, "...he [αὐτὸς emphatic **he**] will save [σώσει] his people from their sins." The word here "save" is σώσει. It is a FAI-3S (Future tense, Active voice, Indicative mood, 3rd person, Singular) inflection of the lemma (stem, dictionary entry) σώζω, a verb which means "save" essentially. But most importantly this verb is in the future tense. σώσει means, "He shall save". But the future tense of the verb is not prediction. This is not God looking into the future and informing us of what will happen based on his divine foreknowledge. The angel was not predicting something when he literally told Joseph that he shall call [καλεσεις future tense form of the verb καλέω] the child Jesus. No. That was a gentle command from God not a prediction. In the same way, the word σώσει "He shall save" expresses that Jesus has been sent to carry out the divine command to save; his divine mission was to save; he had come to carry that out. This is critical for the correct understanding of Jesus' name, his identity. God is not predicting something here but is telling us that Jesus' mission is to accomplish salvation. 

The verb σώσει means "He shall save". σώσει is in the indicative mood, not the subjunctive mood. The subjunctive mood of a verb expresses action that is conditional or potential. Had the verb been in the subjunctive mood it would mean that Jesus saves conditionally, potentially, or hypothetically. It would mean that he came to conditionally accomplish salvation. But thank God. The word σώσει is in the indicative mood. This is the mood of CERTAINTY, simply stating a thing as being a FACT. And this indicates clearly that he was not sent to maybe save people, nor make people "savable", giving them the possibility of being saved. No. Rather, he was sent on a mission to actually accomplish salvation. He entered Mary's womb to accomplish it (Heb 10:5-7; Psa 40:6-8) and ascended to the cross to accomplish it. And then 2000 years ago he actually accomplished that mission on the cross as an irreversible fact of history. Isa 53:4 reads, "Surely [] he took up our infirmities []". Now let's think this through carefully. By confessing, "Surely he took up our infirmities," we are acknowledging that an irreversible event in history has already occurred: On the cross, Jesus actually took up our personal infirmities. Now, is it possible that he surely took up our personal infirmity but conditionally paid for it somehow? No. Either it happened or it did not. You cannot potentially take the place of the criminal who is about to get shot by a firing squad and potentially receive multiple bullets in your body and then potentially die. Once the event of substitutionary death happens on behalf of an individual you cannot go backward into history and undo that event. So, if Jesus was already punished as our substitute for our personal infirmity and paid the full penalty for our sins, then no sin of ours remains unpunished and no punishment awaits us at the last day. 

1Pe 2:24a reads, "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins..." The word "might" sounds like maybe or possibly. But that's not the actual meaning. In this verse, the word "might" is a translation of the Greek word ἵνα hina. Hina means, "in order that". It denotes purpose or result. So, 1Pe 2:24a is really saying this: He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, for this purpose, to accomplish this result: our death to sins. It is saying that his sufferings for us are effectual and efficacious, they achieve the intended result: our salvation. But if Christ died for all people, then his substitutionary sufferings are (somehow) potential and very much non-effectual. Consider all the people who die in their sins in unbelief and go straight to hell every single day. But thank God. Jesus' sufferings for us are indeed efficacious because they are particular and not universal. Notice in verse 21, Mat 1:21, Jesus came to save not all people but his people (τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ). He came to die for his people, REAL PERSONS. Now, is it possible that these persons, the ones for whom he died, are an indefinite and unnumbered group? Many people think so. But look again at the first part of 1Pe 2:24. It reads, "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree". This refers to an actual event that happened already. And these were actual, not hypothetical, persons whose sins he bore. These were his people. And their particular names are written in his book. The names of each of his blood-bought people are written in Jesus' book, the book of life..... the book of those for whom the Lamb was slain (Rev 13:8; 17:8; 20:15; 21:27). And hence, we are assured that his sufferings for his people (that means "us", the believers), are unlimitedly powerful and effectual. By these sufferings, we (his people) have received of unconquerable power of eternal life by which we will surely prevail over all counterforces in this world to the end and enter heaven. 

Summing all this up, we now grasp the meaning of the words in Mat 1:21, "Jesus... will save his people". He entered Mary on a mission to actually accomplish the salvation of his people, the believers. He ascended the cross to accomplish it. And he has already accomplished it for us, his ἀγαπητοί his beloved blood-bought people. The meaning of Jesus' name is he that came on a mission to accomplish the salvation of his people. That's the meaning of "He shall save". He entered Mary to definitely and without a doubt accomplish the salvation of his people. That is the correct meaning of Jesus' name. He is a successful savior. He is the glorious perfect Savior who never fails to save his people (Jn 6:39-40, 44; 10:28-29; Isa 53:4). He has a 100% success rate. (I cannot emphasize that enough.) When Jesus on the cross exclaimed tetelestai ("It is finished; paid in full") (Jn 19:30), he was declaring "mission-accomplished!". He was declaring the successful accomplishment of his mission to save us (his people). This has already happened as an irreversible fact of history.

Who are "his people", the "τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ", whom Jesus came to save? Some argue that "his people" refers to the Jews. After all, they are his blood-related kinsmen. And, insofar as Matthew's Gospel was written for the evangelization of Jews, perhaps it was intended that the Jews would read this, thinking, 'Ah. Jesus was sent to save me'. Jesus says in Mat 15:24, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." Furthermore, in Mat 10:5,6 Jesus instructed his disciples to do evangelism exclusively among the Jews, saying, "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel". Hence, it is true that Jesus was sent only to the Jews, to minister exclusively to them. From his baptism until the cross, they alone were the ones to whom he was sent to preach and teach and heal. What is untrue is the inference that these are the same ones whom he came to save. That idea is completely wrong and is easily refuted. This book reveals that God's plan was not to save the nation of Israel through Jesus' ministry but to judge them. In this book, Jesus predicted his sufferings at their hands again and again (Mat 16:21; 17:12, 22-23; 20:18-19; 21:33-42; 22:1-14). And each time, Jesus was announcing what God had foreordained should happen. God's plan was that the Jews would reject Jesus' teachings and reject him as their Messiah and King. He planned for that generation to crucify Jesus and thereby bring down on themselves what they deserved for their wickedness (Mat 23:35-39; 24:2; 27:25). The plan was for Jesus, the Davidic King of the Jews  (the Moshiach) to be rejected and crucified so the resurrected King and his saving dominion would be given over to the Gentiles (Mat 21:43; 8:11-12; 12:18, 21; 24:14). Finally, at the end of the book, the Risen King Jesus Christ, whom the Jews crucified and rejected, is presented as an international Savior, commanding his Apostles to go out (to leave Israel) and make disciples πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε of all (Gentile) nations πάντα τὰ ἔθνη (Mat 28:19).

So, back to the question: If the Jews are not "his people", the ones he came to save, who then are "his people"? The short and sweet answer is this: They are the believers in Jesus. Period. But, of course, there is such great beauty revealed in this term "τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ" ("his people"). This comes out as we examine it more closely. In the book of Matthew, Jesus frequently calls his people as his εκλεκτους, his elect. The word εκλεκτους (plural) or eklektos (singular) means "picked out, chosen". Jesus uses this word 4 times in Matthew to signify "his people" (Mat 22:14; 24:22, 24, 31). Some argue that election in the NT has nothing to do with salvation. This is not true. In the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT), the word eklektos appears 79 times. And, in many of those times, it simply means election to service. But the NT is an entirely different context. And words are to be understood according to their context and the way they are used. It's quite obvious that εκλεκτους has everything to do with salvation in the NT context and especially in the book of Matthew. Take Mat 24:31, for example. It says that when Jesus returns, "...he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect [εκλεκτους αὐτοῦ] from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other." The term εκλεκτους, therefore, signifies the persons chosen to be saved and be taken up to heaven at the last day. I myself, at one time, thought that elect persons can be lost much in the same way that the ten chosen tribes of Israel were lost so that, in the end, only two tribes remained. But Mat 24:24 reads, "For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect [εκλεκτους] -- if that were possible." So, the term, εκλεκτους designates saved persons who cannot be lost but will persevere to the end and be taken up to heaven. The meaning of the term εκλεκτους is beautifully captured in Mat 22:14, "For many are invited πολλοὶ γάρ εἰσιν κλητοὶ, but few are chosen ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί." On Wednesday night, Oct 29th Jason Koch remarked in his message on 2Pe 1, "We don't elect ourselves, election is something God does". That was a very good definition. But still, the mainstream evangelical concept is that the chosen people are the ones whom God chooses to save based on their foreseen choice. God looks down the corridors of time and chooses to save men based on their forseen response of faith to the gospel invitation. Sounds great. But it is not true.

We in UBF have doctrine. Lots of doctrine. And we do care about it. We care about theology too. We use the word "Trinity" a lot. That term is not found in the Bible. It is a very sophisticated theological term. But oh we care a lot about what that term "Trinity" means. And we have doctrinal statements too. These are posted on our website. It is entitled "statement of faith" and is commonly termed "doctrinal statement". Article 3 of our doctrinal statement reads, "We believe that the Bible is inspired by God; that it is the truth; that it is the final authority in faith and practice." The final authority in faith and practice is not our beloved pastor, John Kwon. It's not our common sense. It is not the UBF HQ or the Christian community. No way. Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Jesus is Lord. And the final authority is his word. The University "Bible Fellowship" is a church fellowship based upon the authority of the Bible. That's Article 3. This Downey church, a local body of Jesus, is a church community that stands united in the Truth of Jesus our King. Truth -- the absolute truth of the Bible -- that is the foundation of our unity. 

So, for the issue at hand, we need go by what the Bible actually says and not what everybody else believes about what the Bible says. Verse 21 again says, "he will save his people [not all people] from their sins." This clashes with what many Christians believe. But, fortunately, it doesn't clash with what we in UBF believe as expressed in our doctrinal statements. This is quite comforting. Article 8 of our doctrinal statement reads, "We believe that we are made righteous by grace alone, through faith alone." That comes straight from Eph 2:8 and Eph 2:5. And Msn Sarah Barry, the cofounder of UBF, (who will visit us next month) told me on Tuesday directly by email that Article 8 expresses what we all understand from Eph 2:8 and 2:5. And then on Thursday this was confirmed and explained with great precision in an email I received from Dr. Augustine Suh, a member of the internal Education Committee at UBF HQ and who also serves as Professor in Systematic Theology. (I BCC'ed many of you on these emails.) Hence, there is no doubt that we in UBF affirm what Jesus has done for us based on Eph 2:8 and 2:5 and that we do so based on what these verses actually say rather than on what is so popularly understood about what they say. Eph 2:8 reads, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this not from yourselves [καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν], it is the gift of God". The word "this" (touto) in this sentence has critical meaning. It does not only refer to the noun which immediately preceded it, the word "Faith". No, the word touto is neuter and none of the words preceding it have that gender. Consequently, touto refers to the entirety of what preceded it: Faith and Salvation. Dr. Augustine Suh told me the same thing. Faith and salvation are by grace alone. That's Eph 2:8 and Article 8 of our creed. That also comports with many Bible verses. Acts 18:27b reads, "On arriving, he [Apollos] was a great help to those who by grace had believed [τοῖς πεπιστευκόσιν διὰ τῆς χάριτος]". Php 1:29 reads, "For it has been granted [aorist tense of charizomai, literally charis-ed or "graced"] to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him". Salvation and all that is required for salvation including faith, repentance and the willingness to repent and come to Jesus -- all these are by grace alone. This is what we in UBF affirm. All these are what Jesus obtained when he accomplished his mission on the cross "to save his people", Mat 1:21. Salvation comes from Jesus alone, not from ourselves. Now it is true that we participate hugely in the salvation process. The grace-giver initiates it and then we, the grace-receivers, respond and participate. Yet when we participate, it comes as a result of grace alone, according to Eph 2:8. This is a very critical point. I repented -- I did it and I chose to do it freely -- but actually God gave me the willingness and desire to do it. I believed and I came to Jesus freely but that was actually caused by God who drew me graciously to Jesus (Jn 6:44, 37). Hence, salvation is the gift from the grace-giver alone. Salvation can't be attributed even 0.00001% to ourselves. In short, we, the grace-receivers, made a free choice to be saved produced by Jesus' accomplishment on the cross. It was given as a gift to us by the Spirit with the result that we chose to receive and believe it. 

Now, this is unacceptable for many. Their understanding is that the heavenly grace-giver does not interfere with the grace-receiver's choice, even the choice to go to hell because he wants to populate heaven, not with "robots", but with people who love him out of their own free choice. What they believe about grace is this: God is love. He loves all and gives grace to all such that all can choose to be saved. This sounds good. Yet, if this be true, then the difference between that person who believes and is saved and those who go to hell, is that person's choice, a choice that came from himself, not grace alone. This contracts Eph 2:8 and Article 8 of our creed.

And that contradiction needs be shown for what it is in the light of truth as a huge barrier to seeing the beautiful doxa glory of Jesus in our salvation. And shown for what it is a huge barrier to beholding the intensive blazing love of our Lord Jesus who saved us and continues save us so that we make it to heaven. When a Christian who thinks himself saved, not by grace alone, but by his own free-will choice seriously and carefully considers the difference between himself and those in hell by their free choice, he will have to admit some things in his heart before God. He will have to say in his prayer something like the following.... (Piano music, please. Rock of Ages, Hymn #445 Augustus Toplady).

"Lord, you are holy, a God who punishes the guilty for their sins. And all those souls down there in hell are suffering under the intensity of your wrath for their sins and are getting exactly what their sins deserve. You are to be praised for the perfection of your justice. They are responsible for the choices they made while in the body to reject your mercy, to reject Jesus, your Son. You sent Jesus to save them on the cross, to pay the price for their sins. Mat 1:21 says, "He will save his people from their sins". Lord, I know it says "his people" right there, but surely it must mean "all people", every single person. Jn 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son...". You, my Lord, are the God of love (1Jn 4:16). Surely the intensity of your love and mercy and compassion reaches to everyone on earth equally. Surely everyone is given enough grace at one time or another by which to be saved. Lord, it seems so clear that the difference between me and those in hell is my choice. They are down there in hell by their free-will choice and I am here before you by my free-will choice as your beloved child. Your grace helped me out a lot to make my choice. But it seems that was all up to me to make that critical choice to be saved. It was so tough to make the difficult steps of faith to come out of my deep darkness and come into the light of Jesus and be saved. I could have made the foolish choice to reject your grace like all those people down there in hell. Even now, it seems that it all depends on me and the power of my free will choice to stay on the narrow road to heaven and stay out of hell."

"But, Lord, I have a big problem: What I see is myself and the power of my free will rather than your glory. How my soul thirsts to see of you, your full-on glory, your beauty in my salvation. But I don't see it. Lord, I would love to agree with what you seem to say Mat 1:21, that you sent your son Jesus to save his people, not all people, from their sins. For that would entail that Jesus came down from heaven to save me from my sins with a love that was so blazingly intense and effectual that it actually caused my salvation. What a beautiful thing that would be. But, Lord, what about those people who are already down there in hell? Am I to think that you so loved me and gave me grace that effectually saved me but withheld it from them? Doesn't Jn 3:16 say that you "so love the world", every single person? Surely, it can't be true that you tremendously love just a few "elect" children and then insufficiently love all the rest of the world so that they end up in hell. What love is that? What kind of God is that? That's a monster! Surely, you would blame me if my neighbor went to hell as the result of me not doing what was within my capacity to do, namely to proclaim Jn 3:16, the gospel of Jesus. Didn't, Jesus, your Son, command all Christians without exception in Mat 28:19 to go and love their neighbors in foreign countries, and make them disciples? So this idea about you loving tremendously just a few "elect" children can't be true. If that were so, you would surely command me to love them more than anybody just like you do....  But oh, wait a minute. I remember.

That is exactly what you command me to do in 1Jn 3:16. 1Jn 3:16 says,

"This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers." Oh. Now I get it. The "us" whom Jesus laid down his life for are the same ones I ought to lay down my life for. The "us" in that verse has got to be referring to me and all my "brothers" who believe in Jesus. They are the "us" whom you sent your Son to die for. Ah, this totally fits with what that guy told me during a conference group Bible study. Trying to remember the name... James Hope-something. Anyway, he told me the real meaning of Jn 3:16 based on the actual wording of the Greek text. He told me that you sent your Son to die, not for "whoever believes" but for the πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων (all the believing ones). (Note: For Jn 3:16, the ISV, NRS, NET, HCSB translate "πας ο πιστευων" as "everyone who believes". Concerning ο πιστευων in John 3:16 Dan Wallace says, "The idea seems to be both gnomic and continual: "everyone who continually believes".... since the aorist participle [πιστεύσας] was a live option to describe a "believer," it is unlikely that when the present was used, it was aspectually flat. The present was the tense of choice most likely because the NT writers by and large saw continual belief as a necessary condition of salvation." (Dan Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 2000, Pg 620, footnote 22). For verse 15, the NIV (1984, 2011) AMP, ISV, NET, HCSB (5 versions) translate "πας ο πιστευων" as "everyone who believes". "singular articular substantival participles (even without πᾶς) already have the tendency to be generic. Thus πᾶς seems only to intensify or emphasize the individuals of the class denoted by the participle" (J. William Johnston, 2004, The Use of PAS in the New Testament, Pg 91)) Now it all makes sense. The ὁ πιστεύων (the believing ones) in Jn 3:16 are the same ones in 1Jn 3:16, my brothers who believe in Jesus. Wow. It all makes sense now!!!!!!!!!! αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν ["To him be the glory forever! Amen.] To you, Lord, be the glory for sending Jesus on a mission to actually accomplish my personal salvation on the cross. Lord, I still want to save the world and I think... that you do sincerely love everyone and want no person to perish. I remember the passion of Jesus for the people of Jerusalem before their slaughter in Mat 23:37, "ποσακις ηθελησα επισυναγαγειν τα τεκνα σου" ["...how often I have longed to gather your children together...!"]. But now, I don't think you're a monster anymore for having so loved sacrificially and intensively your special children, even me, and sending your Son to die for them alone. In fact, when I think about it, I would be a monster if I did not love my own children sacrificially more than anybody else. You would look at me as monster and perhaps my own children would do the same."

Verse 21 again says, "...he will save his people from their sins [ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν]." Jesus took our place and was punished for our sins. We have so little insight into how terrible our sins are that required Jesus, the Lamb, to come down and be slain in our place. But a time is coming when we will see before our eyes the heavy cost he paid for sins. And we will feel the intensity of it. For eternity, we will forever enjoy the presence of God and of the Lamb. But outside the holy city we will see the smoke rising from the torment of the people in the lake of fire (Rev 22:15; 14:11). Not only so, but Isa 66:24 says, "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die,

nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind." (c.f. Gen 19:28; Psa 58:10-11) Why would God permit us to do that even in heaven? Why would we ever want in that glorified state to go outside and look at that scene and the actual "loathsome" bodies of men and women in conscious torment -- people who were thrown there because their names were not in the Lamb's book of life (Rev 20:15)? God is love but our God is also HOLY, the thrice holy God, a consuming fire (Heb 12:29; Deu 4:24). He must punish anything or anyone who is contrary to his character (Ex 34:6-7). Eternal punishment (Mat 25:46; Dan 12:2) of his enemies in the lake of fire (Rev 20:15) under the fury of his wrath and of the wrath of the Lamb (Rev 19:15; 2Th 1:7-9; Rev 14:10-11) will be for the awesome display of his glory to us (Ro 9:23). It will be for the display of his perfect attributes, his power and justice and holiness (Ro 9:22). And it will especially be for the display of his great mercy on us (Ro 9:23). Beholding that scene of torment, the bodies of men in torment, we will know then in that glorified state just how wicked we were and still are in the full-on brightness of illumination. And we will know that there is but one difference between us and them: Grace. The grace of Jesus. And we will stand in awe of him who chose us and made the choice to be slain for our sins as an irreversible historical event. We will praise the mercy of the Lamb who was slain in our place, for each name of his people written in his book. 

Verse 21 again reads, "...he will save his people from their sins." Eph 2:4-5 reads, "But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy,  5  made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions -- it is by grace you have been saved." Sin is so powerful. And we were dead in it spiritually before being born again, before we made our choice to believe. We were entombed in our sin. We were dead to God, children of the devil. 1Jn 3:10 reads, "This is how we know who the children of God are [τὰ τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ] and who the children of the devil are [καὶ τὰ τέκνα τοῦ διαβόλου] Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother". Jn 8:44 reads, "You belong to your father, the devil [ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστὲ]". We were enemies of God deserving of eternal punishment. It's true that God does not populate heaven with robots. Rather, it is the earth that has been populated with robots, robots of the devil (2Ti 2:26; 1Jn 4:6). Before we were born again that's exactly what we were (that's what the Bible says). We were robots of the devil programmed to walk straight toward eternal destruction with no free will choice but to obey our master: Sin, the world, the devil (Jn 8:34; Eph 2:2). Like robots, we had no mind and heart that understands. Deu 29:4 reads, "But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear." We had no true intellectual capacity to understand who Jesus is. Jesus is the treasure of treasures. But we could not understand it. Rather we loved our sin and hated Jesus. According to Eph 2:3, we were τέκνα φύσει ὀργῆς, children by nature φύσει of wrath. Our phusis, our nature, was the problem. We were constrained by our phusis (our nature) to do what that rebel, devilish nature desired, "gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts" (Eph 2:2). That is why we did not want to repent and always refused to repent and could not repent (Acts 7:51). It was impossible (Mat 19:26) for us to do anything except choose to resist God and refuse to believe in Jesus as Savior and submit to his lordship as King. What had to happen was a miracle from above, the new birth. That miracle happened at the moment our Lord Jesus called us to himself by name (Jn 10:3). The great Shepherd of the sheep (Heb 13:20), populates his sheep pen, not with robots but with blood-bought sheep. We're born again "sheeple" as Ryan is fond of saying. We are "sheeple" -- it's a compound word, "sheep" plus "people". We are "sheeple" of Jesus, the Good Shepherd. When he called us, it was like dead Lazarus coming to life from his tomb (Jn 11:43-44). As Eph 2:5 says, we were spiritually resurrected from dead robots of the devil to the spiritually alive sheeple of Jesus. This happened as the result of him, our Good Shepherd, calling us to himself through his word, giving us the gift of life he died to give. Jn 6:63 says, "The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life". Then we were drawn by the gift of grace to listen to his voice, and make the right choice to believe and enter his sheep pen and receive eternal life. As it is written, Acts 13:48, "and all who were appointed for eternal life believed" (καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον). 

Verse 23 reads, "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" -- which means, [Μεθ' ἡμῶν ὁ θεός] "God with us."" Jesus is the Immanuel God who is with us "his people", his blood-bought people. As he himself said in Mat 28:20, "[και ιδου εγω μεθ υμων ειμι] And surely I am with you ". He is the Christ, the Risen King who is with us, ruling within us and among us by his Spirit (Ro 8:9). We are all a part of his body, the church. And he is among us using us on earth as his physical feet, hands and mouth to carry on his saving mission. The Risen King commands his church "go and make disciples of all nations" [πορευθεντες ουν μαθητευσατε παντα ALL τα εθνη Nations]. He has empowered us to carry out his command. His blood is that power. His blood is the power by which we reach those purchased by that blood in the furthest corners of the world with the gospel (Isa 52:15; 53:12). Rev 5:9b, "ὅτι ἐσφάγης καὶ ἠγόρασας τῷ Θεῷ ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου...because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς καὶ γλώσσης καὶ λαοῦ καὶ ἔθνους from every tribe and language and people and nation." The end of the age will happen and the end will come when the last person named in the Lamb's book is reached and saved through the gospel. Jesus, the slain Lamb, is the true vine. Flowing from those wounds, from his veins on the day he was slain, is life-blood with unlimited power. The life-blood of the Lamb is the source of unconquerable life-power, through which we overcome the world, and without which, we can do nothing χωρὶς ἐμοῦ οὐ δύνασθε ποιεῖν οὐδέν (Jn 15:5). There is no way for anybody to enter the gates of heaven except through that blood, the glorious, gracious life-blood of the Lamb (Rev 21:27). Conscious, deliberate dependency on that blood, looking with faith to its efficacy -- that is what each of us are taught by the Lord to do (Jn 1:29; 3:14-15; Nu 21:9; Jn 6:40). The blood is the power of this Downey church. The blood is the only means by which we carry on his mission to reach those purchased by that blood. The blood is the center-point of human history: The starting line, the finish line, the dividing line.

Review question: Downey church, where is your power? Where is it to be found? Calvary, is it not? The cross! Because there, the powerful blood of your King was spilled. Therefore, proclaim the Good News concerning his accomplishment for you on the cross. Teach the blood! Proclaim it among yourselves and to yourselves and to your family members. Dear fellow messengers, preach the blood, its efficacy. Dear inreach ministers and servants, teach the blood. Dear, precious campus evangelists among us (including my dear Lydia), proclaim the blood in campus 1:1 bible studies! The gates of hades can NEVER prevail to stop a blood-bought, blood-empowered church (Mat 16:18)! Therefore, I say, be empowered Downey church by the means provided by your King: His own blood. Be empowered to carry on his mission to reach the precious souls bought by that blood on the campus through 1:1 Bible study! 

One word: The efficacious blood that saves his people: Teach it! Preach it!

<< <<>>>>

NOTICE:

Below are the emails from Msn Sarah and Dr Augustine Suh regarding Article 8 as mentioned in my message at this link location:   HYPERLINK  \l "EMAILS_ON_ARTICLE_8" CLICK THIS LINK.

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Augustine B. Suh <augustinsuh@gmail.com>
To: James Hopeman <hjames_1@yahoo.com> 
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: Two questions about Article 8

Dear Shep James,

Thank you for your through response. It looks like we are both on the same page. I'm very encouraged to see your love for God's word and truth.

God bless you and your message!

In Christ,

Augustine

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:48 AM, James Hopeman < HYPERLINK "mailto:hjames_1@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" hjames_1@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thank you, Dr. Augustine, for your precise explanation of the terms used in Article 8 of the UBF doctrinal statement. From what is posted on the UBF HQ site (I have never met with you personally), I can see that you are just right person to receive an answer from. This is wonderful. Concerning the critical meaning of Article 8 of our creed, you are just the right person to provide both me and everyone in UBF an accurate, edifying interpretation. You, Dr. Augustine, from what I understand, are an active member of the UBF organization (how long?), a member of the internal Education Committee, and presently serve (correct?) as a Professor in Systematic Theology. All of us in UBF, I believe, do care somewhat from time to time about the meaning of our own creed. And, as I expressed to Msn Sarah Barry yesterday (in the emails below), I now have a legitimate, heightened concern about the general meaning of Article 8 of our creed and particularly the meaning of the term "by grace alone" found there because of my Christmas-related message this Sunday at the L.A. UBF worship service. I aim to bring out, with blazing sharp clarity for everyone's edification, the actual and full meaning of the key verse in the message I will serve, a meaning that pertains directly to the phrase "by grace alone" in Article 8. Therefore, I particularly value and appreciate the answers you provided in your email for the two questions I raised about Article 8. You stated that (in UBF?), "we all agree that salvation is “by grace alone,”" and you carefully explained what the meaning of that is as expressed in Article 8 based on Eph 2:8. You stated, "“by grace” we are saved “through faith” (Eph2:8). Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves. And all of this is not our own doing but is the gift of God". When you distinctly said "all of this", it is reasonable to assume that you were explaining the unique role of the word "this" (touto) in Eph 2:8. Since the gender of that Greek word does not match with its antecedents, it is assumed to be a reference to the entirety of what preceded it: Faith and Salvation. Both of these come from the gift of God. That is what you're plainly expressing: "Our being saved by grace through faith... all of this is not our own doing but is the gift of God". This is monumentally important, critical for the proper understanding of Article 8. The ramifications of this are abundantly clear: Salvation and our saving faith are God's gift. They do not come from ourselves but are from God's gift alone. They are "by grace alone". This term "by grace alone" in Article 8 means that salvation is "not our own doing", as you explained. It means that, according to your articulation of Eph 2:8, "Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves". It is not through our own supposed free-will choice. It does, indeed, come through faith but not through ourselves. This follows directly from your statement, "Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves". Our being saved most certainly is not through the libertarian concept of unfettered "free-will" choice. (Note: Salvation, of course, does not come from "free-will" choice as indicated by the word "dead" in Eph 2:5. Prior to regeneration, the human will is in total bondage to sin, the world, and Satan as is unmistakably stated in Eph 2:1-3. Therefore, salvation comes, not from ourselves, but exclusively from the spiritual resurrection power of grace as expressly stated in Eph 2:5. The grace in Eph 2:5 is the same grace referenced in Eph 2:8.) As you stated, "Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves". This clarifies Article 8 and removes any shadow of doubt concerning its meaning. Particularly, it removes from consideration the idea of our own supposed free-will choice as the deciding factor in how we were saved. That is the clear and compelling implications of what you stated. Again, as you stated, "Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves". Therefore, as you stated, "we all agree that salvation is “by grace alone,”". Thank you for making this point so clear. I am, in my estimate, making clear the ramifications of what you said but did not expressly say. If I am drawing an inference that is unwarranted from what you said or beyond what you intended your words to mean, feel free to tell me. Especially, if you feel that I am, so to speak, putting words in your mouth and saying something that you would prefer never to say in this context, feel free to tell me that also. I do believe that you are perfectly in agreement with me in all that I have stated. That's what I expect because of the words, "the Art.8 is carefully formulated, following biblical witnesses and Reformation theology".

 

Yes, as you stated, there is a peculiar ambiguity in Article 8. This comes from the expression “made righteous”. That expression is a bit confusing because righteousness is imputed to us. The word "made" conveys a possible meaning that does not comport with imputation. Some other word would seem more appropriate because it could be misunderstood as implying the infusion of righteousness. As you stated, "The Reformers would argue that sinners are not "made" righteous, but "declared" righteous." However, I have reason to suspect that this expression “made righteous” was not a mistake of some sort. It seems to me intended to convey a particular meaning. Let me explain.

 

This current Statement of Faith was tweaked sometime back in Dec 2004, shortly after Samuel C. Lee's departure. The prior UBF statement of faith can be found at this address:  HYPERLINK "http://web.archive.org/web/20041204050121/http:/chicago.ubf.org/statement.html" \t "_blank" http://web.archive.org/web/20041204050121/http://chicago.ubf.org/statement.html)

The pertinent part of that page reads as follows:

 

"We believe that salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ alone, through grace alone, and that regeneration by the Holy Spirit is necessary to enter the kingdom of God."

 

Article 8 now reads, "We believe that we are made righteous by grace alone, through faith alone."

 

The significant changes that were made to the prior articulation of how we are saved are these: The word "salvation" was replaced by "made righteous" and the terms "faith and "grace" were swapped. Because the terms "faith and "grace" were swapped, the words "made righteous" and the words "by grace alone" are now placed beside each other. This results in the expression, "made righteous by grace alone".

 

H in what follows, is what I suspect: It seems reasonable to assume that the person(s) who made this change were aware of the possibility of a misunderstanding by selecting the word "made" and the word "justified" and putting them next to each other. (Both words weren't in the prior formulation). I suspect that the person(s) who made this change were willing to sacrifice possible misunderstanding in order to achieve a particular effect. I suspect that the effect they wanted was this: To have the articulation suggest the power of grace and approximate the words in Eph 2:5, "made us alive...by grace". This is all my guessing, of course. If these person(s) had changed the wording to maybe "made saved by grace alone" (or something similar) this would have been wonderfully clear. But perhaps that would have been unacceptably clear. That accounts for the switch from the word "salvation" to the word "righteous". The word "righteous" is, of course, closely linked to salvation. Yet, when people read Article 8, they must mentally convert the expression "made righteous" into "saved". This reduces the efficacious-kind of force of the word "made" in the words "made to be saved by grace alone". The overall effect is that the concept of "made to be saved by grace alone" is half veiled and half disclosed. And all this is possibly related to the context. This was a change made some time back in Dec 2004, shortly after Samuel C. Lee's departure. Again, this is all my suspicion, just an interesting speculation into the author(s) intent.

 

It is my hope, indeed, that you and the Education Committee would at some future time revise Article 8 to both retain the current distinctive effectual force of the "made...by grace alone" concatenation and yet be "more accurate, simple, and comprehensive". My hope is that the next Article 8 may, indeed, capture the true and full meaning of the term "by grace alone". Thank you, again, for your answers to my two questions about Article 8.

 

Immanuel,

James

 

From: Augustine B. Suh < HYPERLINK "mailto:augustinsuh@gmail.com" \t "_blank" augustinsuh@gmail.com>
To: James Hopeman < HYPERLINK "mailto:hjames_1@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" hjames_1@yahoo.com> 
Cc: Sarah Barry < HYPERLINK "mailto:sarahbarryubf@gmail.com" \t "_blank" sarahbarryubf@gmail.com>; Kevin Albright < HYPERLINK "mailto:kevinubf@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" kevinubf@yahoo.com>; Choosun Yang < HYPERLINK "mailto:markyangubf@gmail.com" \t "_blank" markyangubf@gmail.com>; Ron Ward < HYPERLINK "mailto:pastorronw@gmail.com" \t "_blank" pastorronw@gmail.com>; John Kwon < HYPERLINK "mailto:johnkwonubf@gmail.com" \t "_blank" johnkwonubf@gmail.com> 
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:52 PM

Subject: Re: Two questions about Article 8

Dear Shep James,

Thank you for your thoughtful questions and discussion. I also appreciate Mother Barry's comments. 

I think that the Education Committee needs to review our Statement of Faith to be more accurate, simple, and comprehensive. 

The expression “made righteous” in Art.8 refers to salvation. In Reformation theology, the term "righteous" is mainly related to justification which is an essential aspect of salvation. However, the expression “made righteous” is a bit confusing. The Reformers would argue that sinners are not "made" righteous, but "declared" righteous. In terms of justification, sinners are declared righteous before God because of the righteousness of Christ. So the righteousness of Christ is imputed, not infused. Since what Christ has brought for us is more than justification (an essential aspect of salvation), it is better to use the term salvation which is a more inclusive concept. The phrase salvation "by grace alone" (sola gratia) is fine because it emphasizes salvation as the gift excluding our work-righteousness (Eph2:8-9).

The phrase "through faith" in the Art.8 is carefully formulated, following biblical witnesses and Reformation theology. The phrase “through faith” expresses the aspect of our human response to God's grace. The word “through” emphasizes that faith is instrumental in the process of salvation. That is, our faith is not in any way meritorious. I believe that Mother Sarah Barry means the same thing.

While we all agree that salvation is “by grace alone,” we need to understand the meaning of the technical expression “through faith.” First of all, we cannot overemphasize the importance of faith in the process of salvation. The term related to faith appear about 240 times in NT. Faith is an essential aspect of conversion along with repentance. Repentance and faith are necessary for salvation. It is our responsibility to believe the gospel (Mk1:15; Rom10:9). Faith is the means by which we are saved. At the same time, the saving faith is never meritorious. It is not our work, or work-righteousness we could boast about. It is always instrumental. To be more accurate concerning salvation, it is not even faith in Christ that saves. But Christ saves through faith. The saving power is not in the act of faith, but in the object of faith. The object of faith is Jesus Christ and the promise of salvation in Him.

I believe that this emphasis is communicated in the phrase “through faith.” So, “by grace” we are saved “through faith” (Eph2:8). Our being saved by grace through faith is not through ourselves. And all of this is not our own doing but is the gift of God, so that no one can boast. 

In Christ, 

Augustine 

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:32 AM, James Hopeman < HYPERLINK "mailto:hjames_1@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" hjames_1@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thank you, Msn Sarah, for your speedy response and thank you also for your efforts to address the questions I raised. I am quite privileged to receive an answer directly from you, the cofounder of the UBF. Much of what you briefly said in the document attached to the email you sent to me is very helpful in answering the questions I raised. Article 8 of the UBF creed uses the term "grace alone" and I stated that "The plain meaning of the term "grace alone" is that the grace-giver alone is in control and not the grace-receiver." And I asked why "grace alone" appears in Article 8 rather than simply the word "grace". You began your response by presenting the text of Ephesians 2:4-10. You carefully placed in bold the particular parts of Ephesians 2:4-10 that are pertinent. (The parts in bold are Eph 2:5b and Eph 2:8.) Then you began explaining the terms "grace alone" and "faith alone". It seems plain, then, that, in your estimate, these two parts in bold (Eph 2:5b and Eph 2:8) are closely tied to the meaning of "grace alone" in Article 8. It seems plain also that your explanation of what the term "grace alone" means is based on those two parts in bold. In your explanation, the first two sentences that appear are these: "“Grace alone” and “faith alone” do not exclude the fact that we must believe and receive God’s gift of righteousness and his saving grace. A free gift cannot be given if it is not received." In my study of these two sentences, I observe four important points. They are the following:

 

Point 1.

You used the term "saving grace" in your statement. This would indicate that, according to your understanding, Article 8 expresses how salvation is attained. It’s not meant to say only how man is made righteous. That quickly answered the first question I had.

 

Point 2.

You used the phrase, "God’s gift of righteousness and his saving grace". This would indicate that you understand God's free gift as having two distinct parts, "righteousness" and "saving grace". I would like to add that Eph 2:8 clearly says that "faith" is also a part of God's gift. It reads, "...through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God". Faith does not come from ourselves but from the gift we are given. The faith to be saved goes to us from the gift of the gift-giver.

 

Point 3.

You stated, "“Grace alone” and “faith alone” do not exclude the fact that we must believe and receive God’s gift...". In essence, you stated that we must "believe and receive" and, unless we ourselves "believe and receive", we cannot receive the gift. This is true in a way. Eph 2:8 does say that "you have been saved, through faith". So, surely we are saved through faith. But where does this faith and the willingness to believe come from? Eph 2:8 says that this comes to us from the gift we're given. This is shown by the fact that the words "you have been saved, through faith" are immediately followed by, "and this is not from yourselves".

 

Point 4.

You clarified point 3 above and emphasized it by stating that this free gift "cannot be given" unless the gift-receiver himself receives that gift. You said, "A free gift cannot be given if it is not received." This is true insofar as gift-receivers have the role of actually receiving the free gift by faith as you explained in point 3 above. A nice illustration of this is the Christmas gift-giver who gives his free gift to the gift-receiver by wrapping it and placing it under the Christmas tree. The benefits of the gift cannot be received until the gift-receiver, by free choice, takes it from under the tree and unwraps it. The gift-receiver in this scenario is in full control of receiving the gift, not the gift-giver. If the person hates chocolates and finds out that the gift contains chocolates, he is going to be unwilling to receive the gift contents. That's where Eph 2:5 comes into play. Eph 2:5 reads, "made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions -- it is by grace you have been saved." Spiritually dead sinners don't like the goodness of what God offers in his gift and don't want to take it. Before spiritual birth from above, dead sinners are robots of the devil with no choice but to obey sin, the world, and the devil their ruler. They want only the evils that their nature craves as described in detail in Eph 2:1-3. They're like the person who hates chocolates (which is somewhat rare in America). They're "dead" to the love of chocolate. Eph 2:5 tells us that the chocolate-hater is given a new nature from above such that he is now a chocolate-lover. The gift he was unwilling to receive is now the very gift that he desires for. Eph 2:5 says that this is the amazing power of this gift of grace.

 

The precise definition of "grace alone"

I am quite thankful that you connect the term "grace alone" in Article 8 with Eph 2:5b and Eph 2:8. These two verses provide a complete understanding of the term "grace alone". This grace is effectual. It always gives salvation. Eph 2:5 (the whole verse) teaches that "grace alone" always removes the opposition to receiving the gift of life. Eph 2:5 again says, "made us alive with Christ...it is by grace you have been saved." Not only does "grace alone" remove man's opposition, it actually "makes" or produces the totality of salvation and spiritual life in man. The dead sin-craver is given a new nature that desires life, he is given faith, he is given repentance, he is given righteousness, and he is given the indwelling of the Spirit through which he is joined with Christ in spiritual life. And Eph 2:8 says expressly concerning "grace alone" that it gives saving faith ("and this is not from yourselves"). It reminds us that the faith by which we have been saved comes from "grace alone" and not from ourselves (in case we did not figure that one out in Eph 2:5). It comes to us from the saving gift we're given. "grace alone" gives salvation always. The result of this grace being given to us is that we inevitably receive salvation. The grace-giver alone is in the driver's seat, not the grace-receiver. That's because "grace alone" provides everything necessary to accomplish salvation. Now it is true that we participate hugely in the salvation process. Yet when we participate, it comes as a result of grace alone, according to Eph 2:5 and 8. This is a very critical point. In summary, the term "grace alone" means that salvation is by "grace alone". The free-will choice of man is not the final determiner of salvation, rather it is the grace-giver alone from beginning to end, at each and every decisive point.

 

Assessment of your response

My assessment of your response to Eph 2:5b and Eph 2:8 is the following. On the one hand, I am quite thankful that you connect "grace alone" with Eph 2:5b and Eph 2:8. It helps me greatly. But, on the other hand, I am not too comfortable about the ramifications of your assertion in point 4. Again, I do recognize that you only intended to provide a rough exposition (as you stated at the end of your document). Yet, when your assertion is placed next to my assertion, there is (on the surface) a distinct lack of agreement. I asserted in question 2, "The plain meaning of the term "grace alone" is that the grace-giver alone is in control and not the grace-receiver." And you asserted, "A free gift cannot be given if it is not received." This would seem to also have been an open, flat denial of my comment, “…when that term is combined with the word "made", it has a distinct deterministic ring to it…” What I asserted there in question 2 is the very centerpiece of what I intend to proclaim this Sunday. You may already be aware that I am the person designated by Pastor John Kwon to deliver the upcoming Sunday message at L.A. UBF. My Christmas-related passage has, as its centerpiece, an obvious presentation of "grace alone" (Mat 1:21). What I will proclaim this Sunday about "grace alone" will be in line with the precise definition I provided above. (And you are welcome, of course, to provide some comments or corrections). On the surface, it would appear from your assertion in point 4, that what I intend to proclaim on Sunday is not in line with what the UBF organization actually professes in Article 8. If my message is not well received by one or two persons, their complaint would have merit, not on the grounds of Article 3, but on the grounds Article 8 and the meaning of the term "grace alone" as you described it in point 4. What I mean is, their claim would have merit on the grounds that I am causing a disturbance (somehow) by saying something about "grace alone" that is significantly out of alignment with what our community actually professes. And Pastor John Kwon, who gave me the green light and full support to talk about "grace alone", would also be the legitimate target of complaint. Therefore, I am compelled to find out specifically what you meant in point 4 by the assertion, "A free gift cannot be given if it is not received." I would prefer to think that it was not your intention to deny salvation by "grace alone" as I’ve defined it, but rather that it was your intention to affirm more clearly what you said in point 3. I totally understand that what you wrote was a quick, rough exposition and was not intended to be subjected to close scrutiny. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to ask this very pointed question: Do you affirm or deny that "grace alone" is intrinsically that which savingly acts upon man, unconditionally causing the totality of salvation, including man's receiving by faith of the saving gift of righteousness? I would be quite comforted at this point before my message to receive a yes or no answer openly to this question of mine. But, it would be okay, too, if you prefer not to answer.

 

Thank you for kindly agreeing to come and speak at the L.A. chapter next month. It would be so wonderful if you were to present before all of us a thorough, precise exposition about "grace alone" from Scripture, like the one I will present this Sunday with clarity and grace. I am sure that Pastor John Kwon would have no objections if you were to do so. If you were to do that, it would be so beneficial for us all and go a long way toward straightening out exactly what "grace alone" means.

 

Immanuel,

James Hopeman

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"We believe that we are made righteous by grace alone, through faith alone." I have two questions about it:

 

Question one:

Article 8 uses the term "righteous", a term linked with salvation. Therefore, Article 8 seems to express how salvation is attained. But, is it actually meant to express only how man is made righteous rather than how he is saved?

 

Question two:

The plain meaning of the term "grace alone" is that the grace-giver alone is in control and not the grace-receiver. In fact, when that term is combined with the word "made", it has a distinct deterministic ring to it: "made righteous by grace alone". Why, then, does the term "grace alone" appear in Article 8 rather than simply the word "grace"? Is the term "grace alone" intended to express only how man is made righteous rather than how he is saved?

 

Thank you very much for your help,

James Hopeman.

 

Thank you for your thoughtful questions, James. I don’t have all the answers, but I’ll share with   you my thoughts

Ephesians 2:4-10-- But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, ⁵ made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. ⁶ And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, ⁷ in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. ⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”

“Grace alone” and “faith alone” do not exclude the fact that we must believe and receive God’s gift of righteousness and his saving grace. A free gift cannot be given if it is not received. The term is used to refute the ideology that says that we are saved by works—by something we do to make us worthy of salvation. (or by faith plus works—an unbiblical)  The passage from Ephesians makes it clear that our salvation is God’s gift. We are not righteous. So, we will die in our sins unless God saves us.

Romans 3:10-18--  ¹⁰ As it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one;
¹¹     there is no one who understands;
    there is no one who seeks God.
¹² All have turned away,
    they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
    not even one.”
¹³ “Their throats are open graves;
    their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
¹⁴     “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
¹⁵ “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
¹⁶     ruin and misery mark their ways,
¹⁷ and the way of peace they do not know.”
¹⁸     “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Romans 3:12-26--Righteousness Through Faith

²¹ But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. ²² This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, ²⁴ and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. ²⁵ God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— ²⁶ he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus

To be justified means to be forgiven, clothed with Christ’s righteousness, saved from hell.

 

 

 Romans 5:1-9-Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, ² through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. ³ Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; ⁴ perseverance, character; and character, hope. ⁵ And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

⁶ You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. ⁷ Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. ⁸ But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

⁹ Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath

 

This is not a very thorough exposition. I’m hoping to visit you in California in January. I hope I can meet you and talk more about these things. May God continue to be with you all.

In Christ,

Sarah Barry

 -

 

From: Sarah Barry < HYPERLINK "mailto:sarahbarryubf@gmail.com" \t "_blank" sarahbarryubf@gmail.com>
To: James Hopeman < HYPERLINK "mailto:hjames_1@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" hjames_1@yahoo.com>; Kevin Albright < HYPERLINK "mailto:kevinubf@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" kevinubf@yahoo.com> 
Cc: Augustine B. Suh < HYPERLINK "mailto:augustinsuh@gmail.com" \t "_blank" augustinsuh@gmail.com>; Choosun Yang < HYPERLINK "mailto:markyangubf@gmail.com" \t "_blank" markyangubf@gmail.com>; Ron Ward < HYPERLINK "mailto:pastorronw@gmail.com" \t "_blank" pastorronw@gmail.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 3:52 PM

Subject: Re: Two questions about Article 8

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:50 PM, James Hopeman < HYPERLINK "mailto:hjames_1@yahoo.com" \t "_blank" hjames_1@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hello, this is James Hopeman, a member of the L.A. UBF. Article 8 of the UBF creed ( HYPERLINK "http://www.ubf.org/about/statement-faith" \t "_blank" http://www.ubf.org/about/statement-faith) says, "We believe that we are made righteous by grace alone, through faith alone." I have two questions about it:

 

Question one:

Article 8 uses the term "righteous", a term linked with salvation. Therefore, Article 8 seems to express how salvation is attained. But, is it actually meant to express only how man is made righteous rather than how he is saved?

 

Question two:

The plain meaning of the term "grace alone" is that the grace-giver alone is in control and not the grace-receiver. In fact, when that term is combined with the word "made", it has a distinct deterministic ring to it: "made righteous by grace alone". Why, then, does the term "grace alone" appear in Article 8 rather than simply the word "grace"? Is the term "grace alone" intended to express only how man is made righteous rather than how he is saved?

 

Thank you very much for your help,

James Hopeman.

 

 PAGE 1

---