| "EXPOSING THOSE WHO CONTRADICT" [Titus 1:9 Concordant Literal New Testament] An open letter to T.B.N. critiquing James Kennedy, A.B., M.Div., M.Th., D.D., and Dr. John Hagee Also presented to:
By: L. Ray Smith Dear Dr. Kennedy: My name is Ray Smith and I love the Scriptures. But I marvel how God's Word is being misrepresented today in such an organized worldwide effort. I believe that Paul calls it "the systematizing of the deception" (Eph. 4:14). After much meditation, I have some observations on two sermons by you and John Hagee. There was a time when I too believed many of the unscriptural teachings of modern theology. I see now how the God of Christendom is presented to the world as a God of meager and scant success in the running of His creation resulting in a minuscule reward for His well-intentioned efforts. And what is totally beyond reason or sanity is the teaching that adds colossal insult to this devastating injury. Except for a few who receive God's blessings, billions and billions will receive God's unquenchable frustrated cursings for all eternity. Gentiles accepting this God of Christendom must also accept the teaching that salvation will ultimately come to only a few of their people, not all. This is hardly a fair exchange for the gods these people are supposed to forsake. First, let me state my position succinctly:
In your sermon you mentioned visiting a person who had no interest in God. He remarked that if he lived his life the way he considered "good," that was all he needed. He then questioned how God would deal with Africans who know nothing of God. What would be their fate? You suggested that he posed this question in such a way as to feel self-assured that he had boxed you in. As though, surely, you wouldn't be able to answer him. You then assured your congregation that he had not trapped you in this question, but that you have the true Biblical answer to this question which has also been asked by countless truth seekers through the centuries. You used an analogy and a few scriptures on conscience to show that God is not responsible for the eternal fate of billions of unsaved humanity. It is your "analogy" that is the reason for this letter. Your analogy personifies much of modern theological thinking. Analogies are fine for teaching if they really are analogous to the subject. They should simplify, not contradict the Scriptures on the topic at hand! You opened a "theological can of worms" with your analogy.
HELL You said something to the effect that "sin is what sends people to hell." "Hell" is an unfortunate translation of numerous Greek and Hebrew words.
Why would an intelligent translator translate three totally different Greek words into the same English word? Are the Valley of Hinnom in Jerusalem, where our thoughts perish, and Tartarus, a place of restraint for Angels, all synonymous? I don't think so. "Hell" never was and never will be a proper translation of the Greek word hades. However, back in the Middle Ages it did have a totally different connotation than today. There is old English literature that refers to people "putting their potatoes in hell" for the winter. And I guarantee you that when they retrieved their potatoes they were still raw and not baked or burned by some fabled fires of hell. Although not a proper translation of hades, this old English word did (I said "did"-not anymore) have similarities to the word hades. My old Webster's Twentieth Century Dictionary has this definition: "hell, n. [ME, helle; AS, hell, hell, from helan, to cover, conceal.]" To "cover" or "conceal." That definition has at least some similarity to the Greek elements of hades: UN-PERCEIVED [the UNSEEN or IMPERCEPTIBLE]. Before the King James Bible, the old Anglo-Saxon word simply meant a dark, hidden, concealed, or covered hole in the ground. Actually, hell would be a better translation for grave than hades. But now check a modern dictionary and look what we get: Webster's New World Dictionary: "hell (hel), n 1. the place where Christians believe that devils live and wicked people go to be punished after they die." What happened to the definition ... of the word ... "hell?" It doesn't even purport to define the word. It just tells us what Christians believe it is. I, frankly, don't care what Christians think it means. What a travesty of modern scholarship. So when unsaved people die, are they really punished eternally in this "Christian" hell? You know, it's the theologians who should be protecting the people against such modern heresy, but instead it is they who are causing and promoting the heresy. Let's see if God's Word really teaches eternal torture in a "Christian hell where devils live," immediately after death for unsaved sinners. Thank God one doesn't have to be a theologian to understand His Word. "Thou hidest these things from the wise and intelligent and Thou dost reveal them unto babes [Gk: minors]" (Matt. 11:25). The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior by John Broadus more properly translates Phil. 1:10 thus: " ... may distinguish the things that differ." Whenever and wherever God inspires different words in the Hebrew or Greek, translations should show those differences. We must be able to distinguish the differences in words as they are used Scripturally. In most cases this is not difficult if we consult all the ways the same words are used in Scripture. Let's look at body, spirit, and soul, and see if any dwell "with devils" at death.
BODY When a man dies his body (if not disintegrated) goes into a grave or tomb (Jn. 11:38) where within a few days it begins to smell and decompose (Jn. 11:39), and it returns [Heb. shub] to the dust of the ground from which it was taken (Gen. 3:17-19, Job 10:9, Psa. 9:17, etc., etc). The "person" is said to be where the "body" is and the "person" is resurrected from the place where the body is (Mat. 28:6). Only in a figurative or symbolic sense does a "body" ever go to sheol (Jonah 2:2). Jonah was not "literally" in hell [sheol], but in the fish, and besides he didn't even die. I'm sure Jonah's loss of perception inside the fish resembled his knowledge of the word "sheol."
SPIRIT When a man dies his spirit returns to God Who gave it (Lk. 23:46, Psa. 104:24-30). The "spirit" is never said to go to hades or sheol, and the "soul" is never said to go to Heaven at death. Men and beasts have the same spirit [ruach] and they go to the same place (Ecc. 3:18-21). There is no getting around this: when God takes away a living soul's spirit, it always dies. The spirit "gives life." No one can live without "spirit," no matter how young and healthy he may be. There are no exceptions. If there are, where is the Scripture? A dead person cannot experience anything-not pleasure in Heaven or pain in a fabled hell. This is a serious thing. Rom. 14:23 says: "Now everything which is not out of faith is sin." If one doesn't have Scriptures that show people go to eternal hell fire after death, then it is a sin to teach it.
SOUL When a man dies his soul goes to the unseen or imperceptible [Gk: hades, Heb: sheol]. We also know that when man is in this condition (dead) it is likened to "sleep" (Psa. 13:3, Dan. 12:1-2, Jn. 11:11-14). God Himself likens death to sleep,
This is substantiated by the fact that:
Again:
Do we think all of these Scriptures lie? According to what we just read in Ecc. 9:5,6,10, do dead people know anything? And these verses are correctly translated. The words "soul" and "spirit" have become corrupted through theology so that they are now used interchangeably, as if they were synonymous. They are not synonymous. There may be certain similarities between soul and spirit, but similarities do not make them one and the same. The "soul" is the seat of sensation, consciousness, and feelings, not the body or the spirit. It is the spirit that imparts life to the body and the body then becomes a living soul (Gen. 2:7). A thorough study of the word "soul" in the Scriptures proves that it is used of consciousness, feelings, and emotions. Hence, "sensation" is a good word to define its usage.
These verses show the wide range of emotions and sensations that "souls" experience, but dead souls experience nothing in the unseen or imperceptible (hades). We need to pay close attention to the meaning of words. Hades comes from the Greek a(i)des. The a is a prefix which is equivalent to our un- and the stem -id means perceive. Thus we have UN-PERCEIVE, or imperceptible: the unseen. Etymologically, your doctrine of torment in hell falls flat on its face. From the words that God chose to call this condition of the soul after death, one thing is crystal clear: There is absolutely no perception there. And the soul has everything to do with perception and sensation as clearly seen from the verses above. So why do you teach that there is perception in death? The very meaning of the word itself (hades) is unseen or imperceptible, so how can a dead soul have perception in a condition of imperception? God Himself chose this word which teaches us that hades is UN-perceptible or IM-perceptible (NO perception). Your teaching is blatantly false and deceptive! Because of the shameful way these words are translated and interchanged in the Authorized Version, it is nearly impossible to understand their true meanings without an exhaustive concordance. FROM KING JAMES TRANSLATION:
This kind of translating is not responsible scholarship-it's confusing and contradictory. The Apostle Paul admonished Timothy to "have a pattern of sound words" (II Tim. 1:13) The Scriptures quoted above clearly show the translator's disregard for this instruction. I am amazed that people put up with such irresponsible teaching. You teach that man has immortality in his soul. The Scripture says man is "mortal," and "Our Lord, Jesus Christ ... Who ONLY has immortality." Which do you think is true - your teaching or the Scriptures? What part of the word "ONLY" don't you understand, Dr. Kennedy? Man is mortal (Job 4:17). Not one Scripture says that man is "immortal" or has an "immortal" soul. Not one. "Our Lord, Jesus Christ: the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only has immortality" (I Tim. 6:14-16). It is by means of the "resurrection" that God causes dead people to live again. The Apostle Paul said: "Concerning the expectation and resurrection of the dead am I being judged" (Acts 23:6). The truth regarding the "resurrection of the dead" is not even taught in Christendom today. They teach that there are no dead people (only dead bodies). They teach that people are either alive on earth, alive in Heaven, or alive in Hell. What need have we for a "resurrection of the dead" if there are no dead people to resurrect? This, my friend, is heresy! Paul also stated: "Now if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ been roused. Now if Christ has not been roused, for naught, consequently, is our heralding, and for naught is your faith" (I Cor. 15:14-15). The very salvation of mankind rests on the resurrection. This is most important to understand: "For, if the dead are not being roused [resurrected], neither has Christ been roused. Now, if Christ has not been roused, vain is your faith-you are STILL IN YOUR SINS." (Acts 15:16-18). That is just how important the resurrection is, and according to you and most Christian theologians, it isn't necessary at all, because you teach that man has an immortal soul that goes directly to Heaven or Hell without resurrection and thus make a mockery of the very Word of God. And where, Dr. Kennedy, is all the "hell fire and brimstone" in all these verses on body, spirit, and soul? Where? If you don't understand the Scriptures concerning God's punishment and chastisement on mankind, fine, but don't force them into these versus regarding "the dead." And don't turn "ages" into "eternities" either. I'll comment on punishment, gehennah, the lake of fire, etc. later. YOUR ANALOGY To show that God cannot be held responsible for the orthodox hell-bound fate of the peoples of Africa, you used an analogy of a man snake-bit in the Everglades. You said that a snake-bit man in the Everglades could not hold a nearby medical center responsible for his death even if they did have at their disposal the antiserum that would have saved him. How is your analogy of a snake-bit man in the Everglades analogous to all the people of Africa (or China and the rest of the heathen world) who do not know God? If your analogy stands, then he doesn't even know who or what his savior is. And even if he does, he is hardly in any condition to get there by himself. Is it the responsibility of a dying man to accomplish the impossible, namely, to reach an unreachable Savior? Is it the Africans' responsibility to find a Savior they don't know or never even heard of? What logic is this? Or is this a case of "God helps those who help themselves?" No. Many Scriptures show that God helps those who can't possibly help themselves. Instead of inventing an analogy, why didn't you just use an analogy that is already in the Scriptures? You put this snake-bit man in the same predicament as the "lost sheep." Let me tell you why. Because the analogy of the "lost sheep" utterly destroys the fallacious point you are trying to make. Of course a snake-bit man couldn't hold a hospital (who had no knowledge of his tragedy) responsible for his own death. This analogy is a "straw man." There are no similarities between this analogy and God's responsibility toward His creatures for their eternal salvation. Is the snake-bit man "responsible" on his own to swim three miles and then crawl five miles on his belly to his savior (the hospital)? How, pray tell, can this man come to his savior by himself, by his own ability? He's dying. Look at your analogy: No one at the hospital had any knowledge of a man dying of a snake-bite or they would have come to his rescue. Do you doubt this for one second? Surely they would have used trucks, air boats, helicopters, or whatever it took to save him. Is God less responsible? Now, had they received word that this snake-bit man needed immediate medical assistance but refused to go to his aid, they would be considered criminally negligent. Is God just as negligent as they would have been? God is fully aware that His sheep are now lost:
"How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains [or the Everglades], and seeketh that which is gone astray? ... even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish." (Matt. 18: 12 & 14) When God almighty says something is His will or is not His will then that's the way it will be done (Mat. 6:10). In God's time and in God's way, ultimately, there will be NO lost sheep anywhere. It is the "will of your Father" that this is the way it will be done! Almighty God will not fail in His desire to accomplish all His Will. Notice Isa. 46:10-11:
But the shepherds (Pastors and Clergymen) of the world teach that God will never fulfill His own will and desires. They teach that most of the sheep will be lost. And worst than lost; they will supposedly be tortured in the fires of Hell for all eternity. You CONTRADICT God and His Word when you teach these things. Read Jer. 50:6 again, it is the "shepherds" that have led the sheep astray:
Maybe it's God's time to let the world know who these fraudulent shepherds are and how they are leading millions astray from God's truths. But God will bring them back safely (in case you doubted, God is a better shepherd than we). God will save ALL Israel (Rom. 11:26), and it is His delight to give Israel the Kingdom (Lk. 12:32), and God will perform ALL of His desires (Isa. 46:10-11). How can you doubt God's ability to perform His Own WILL? You attempt to diminish God's very Will into little more than a weak wish. If one cannot even believe the Scriptures, how can one teach them? Your theology is up-side-down, Dr. Kennedy. The shepherd (the Savior) goes after the lost sheep (the Africans or whoever). Since when is it up to the "lost sheep" to find the Shepherd? And what about "the ninety and nine?" Remember: "All we like sheep have gone astray" (Isa. 53:6). Were the "ninety and nine" shrewd enough, and strong enough, and clever enough by their own instincts to avoid all the jagged rocks, and holes, and cliffs, and ditches, and wolves, and foxes, till one by one they all saved themselves until they found the shepherd? If sheep could do all of those things by themselves, they wouldn't need a shepherd. Dr. Kennedy, learn something about analogies. Why does God Himself use the analogy of "sheep" to represent lost mankind? Because we have the same number of feet? God uses the analogy of "sheep" because sheep are totally unable to save themselves. They need a shepherd. Pastor Hagee says: "When one realizes just how helpless and dumb sheep really are, it's offensive that God calls us sheep." If that's how he feels, I don't know what he thinks of God's ultimate analogy of what man is (Isa. 64:8). This "straw man" analogy of yours is foolish, and any analogy that attempts to relieve God of His responsibility for the salvation of His creatures would be equally foolish. There is no analogy that can be used to demonstrate something that is false. You don't seem to understand that God is not trying to save all of His sheep in this lifetime. There are Scriptural reasons why God allows people to die without ever having known Him. They are not eternally lost, they are only "dead." And let's be completely honest here. When a person is "dead," how does God view that condition? As sleep (John 11:11). Are you suggesting that every night when your children go to bed that their eternal fate is sealed? I didn't say death is like sleep, but God Almighty has, many times. Do you believe God when He says death is "sleep?" Do you really believe that tired and overworked saints in Heaven go to sleep? Do you really believe that after a hard day at the furnace, people in Hell go to sleep? Why is it such a hard thing for you to just believe the Scriptures when God says death is like sleep? God awakens dead people out of sleep in resurrection. This is sensible and understandable: Your teaching is strange and ridiculous. You make it clear from your sermon that when a person dies you think his fate is eternally sealed. This, however, is also unscriptural. Death is an enemy, but not too formidable an enemy for God. Death cannot separate anyone from the love of God, be he sinner or saint (Rom. 8:36). More proof on this later. Besides, even death itself will be abolished (I Cor. 15:26). God abolishes death by vivifying everyone who is dead. The only way to abolish the darkness in a room is to turn on the light. The only way to abolish death is to make everyone alive. Look at the giant difference between God and a hospital. The hospital was ignorant of a man needing immediate help. But, not only did God know full well that this man was snake-bit and dying, it was God Himself who created the poisonous snake, and created the Everglades, and created the man. I think if you reconsider your premise, we will probably be agreed that had the hospital been called to help this man they would have responded quickly. But now look at the implications of your analogy. Sinful medics at a hospital, in the final analysis, are much, much more loving, concerned, caring, and responsible toward a perfect stranger than your God is toward one of His own sons! The use of an analogy presupposes that the one using the analogy already knows the truth of the subject being analogized, else how could he devise the right analogy to substantiate his premise? Why not just skip the analogy and tell us plainly that you believe billions and billions of Africans, Chinese, and most of the population of the entire world are doomed to eternal hell without ever being given an opportunity to know Jesus Christ as their personal savior? Why not just admit that you don't think God is the least bit "responsible" for this, the most tragic disaster in the history of the universe? If that's the way you feel, why not come out and admit it instead of hiding behind a man-made analogy. Let's look deeper into why your analogy doesn't work. I'll use the exact same "premise," but let's change the characters and their location. Let's change the snake-bit man into a five-year old girl, the snake into an alligator, and the medical center into the little girl's father. Next, let's move this alligator-attack on this little girl from the Everglades to the little girl's back yard. Let's place her father twelve feet away from her on the back porch. Now. Do you really think this analogy is going to work, Dr. Kennedy? You don't like my changes? Okay, let's use your analogy again. As I recall, the snake-bit man was apparently some miles from the Medical Center, correct? Would it still work if he were only one mile from the Center? What about a hundred yards? Let's try this. Let's say this man is thirty feet in front of the hospital moat with the Medics witnessing his snakebite through a window. Does your analogy still, work, Dr. Kennedy? It's the "distance" that makes the difference, isn't it? Did I put the "Savior" too close for comfort? If the father were just across the street, maybe he could be justified in not saving his daughter. What do you think? Or must we put him out of screaming distance, say two or three blocks away? That suits your analogy better doesn't it? If one doesn't know what's going on, he can't be held "responsible." Isn't that what your analogy really portends? If the "shepherd" is out of sight, out of town, or on vacation-nowhere to be found-then he is no longer responsible for saving the lost sheep. Is that correct, Dr. Kennedy? Or if the shepherd is sleeping on the job, I guess he wouldn't be responsible for saving the lost sheep, either. Do you think all those billions of unbelievers are being lost because God is out of town on an extended vacation? Or is He "sleeping on the job?" My question to you is: How far, Dr. Kennedy - how FAR must you "distance" God from Africa until "His hand is too short to redeem or save" (Isa. 50:2 & 59:1), and He can no longer see or hear or feel or be "responsible" for all these poor helpless people who you think are on a daily death march into the eternal doom of a Christian Hell? According to your absurd analogy, it takes only a few miles to disable God's ability to save. This characterization of God Almighty comes a whole lot closer to blasphemy than I think you want to be standing, Dr. Kennedy! All who are dead asleep in their graves will be resurrected from death to life (Ezek. 37:13-14). Christ will draw all men (including Africans) to Himself (Jn. 12:32). It is God's WILL that they come to a knowledge of the truth and be saved (Tim. 2:4). Every tongue in heaven and earth will, " ... ACCLAIM that Jesus Christ is Lord, for the Glory of God, the Father" (Phil. 2:11). God will not lose one single sheep (Matt. 18:14). God will save all Jews and all Gentiles (Rom. 11:32). So that God may " ... be ALL in ALL" (I Cor. 15:28). Distance is immaterial to God. Can "distance" separate God from His love for His African people? Rom. 8:35-39 plainly says "no!"
There is no partiality with God. You need to read these Scriptures and ponder them deeply. Your reasoning that lost sheep must find their own shepherd and unbelievers must find their own Savior or else be doomed reminds me of Lazarus' sister Mary who came to our Lord and said:
Amazing what we humans think are insurmountable problems for God. But you see, Christ was not there and Lazarus did die. But then Christ did come and He did resurrect Lazarus from the dead. Did Christ resurrect Lazarus out of Hell fire? If He did, then Lazarus went to Hell by mistake. Did Christ resurrect Lazarus out of Heaven? If He did, then Christ lied eight chapters earlier when He said, "NO one has ascended into heaven ... " (Jn 3:13). Christ resurrected Lazarus out of the TOMB (Jn. 11:38-39). Because that's where Lazarus WAS-in the TOMB-dead ASLEEP. This historical example of Christ's resurrection powers was a foretaste of what Christ will do in the future resurrections. This is how it is done. Dead people (not just dead bodies) will be resurrected from the dead, not from life at some other geographical location (not heaven and not hell), but FROM THEIR GRAVES, wherever they may be. If it is essential that a man be saved before he dies, then God, indeed, would be derelict in His responsibility toward His creatures. But where does it say that a man's eternal fate is sealed at his death? Where? Nowhere! Please read the explanation of the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in my rebuttal to Pastor Hagee. Absolutely nothing can separate man from the "Love of God in Christ Jesus, our Lord!" (Rom. 8:31-38). And certainly not "death" (Ver. 38). TV ANALOGY Here is an analogy that is applicable and easy to understand: God's spirit gives life to the body. Only in life does a man have consciousness or sensation. When God takes back His spirit, the body and soul are dead. Picture a TV console as representing the human BODY with all its intricate circuitry and components. Now picture ELECTRICITY as the invisible, powerful force representing God's life-giving SPIRIT. Picture the blank PICTURE TUBE as representing the SOUL. Without the electricity (God's spirit), the TV and picture tube (body and soul) are dead. All the time I hear preachers talking about our souls and our spirits as if they were one and the same. Soul and spirit are not one and the same. Next plug in the electricity (God's spirit). The TV comes to life, and we see the picture tube (soul) animated. We see color, sound, dancing, singing, talking, intelligent conversations, all live via satellite. The dead TV becomes a living, visible, animated, intelligent entity-"Soul." But notice very carefully, the Soul (the animated picture in the TV tube) is not one of the original components. It is not a component in and by itself, but is rather the result of two other vital components, Body and Spirit (the TV console and electricity). At bedtime I sometimes tell my daughter to give the TV a rest. When one turns off the "on/off" switch the TV goes to "sleep." The power light is still on, but the TV is blank and silent. But now, pull the plug and take away the electricity (spirit) and what happens to the TV console (body)? It dies. It's just a box of circuits. Not even the power light is on anymore. If left unplugged it will, in time, decay and return to the dust of the ground. And what happens to the colorful animated picture on the screen (soul) when we take away the electricity (spirit)? Want the real answer? Ask a child. Let several children watch TV together, then pull the plug and ask them where the picture went? A child will shrug his shoulders or say "I don't know" or say "It disappeared." Guess what? He is Scripturally correct on all three counts. Without spirit there is no life and no consciousness. Without power a TV has no life and no animated picture. It's dead. If you were to ask an ancient Hebrew person what happens to the soul (the thinking, feeling, animated, sentient personality of a man) at death, he would shrug his shoulders or say "who knows" or just say "it disappears." That's what "Sheol" meant to the Hebrews. It was a question mark. And the Greeks had their word for the same idea (Hades-the UNSEEN, the IMPERCEPTIBLE), and hades and sheol are synonymous in Scripture (Acts 2:27). There is one more profound Scriptural truth that is also perfectly analogous to the operation of a TV, and that is this. Picture God's Throne as the Broadcast Headquarters. The TV picture Tube, by itself, is not the source or originator of the picture it portrays on the screen. It is a channel for the signal transmitted from the TV Station and Tower. It can only manifest and portray on its screen that which is sent from the source [God]. And often the source [God] uses intermediaries like satellites [Angels] to relay the signals. In Scripture, death is called a "return" [Heb. shub]. Before we were born we had no body, no soul, and no perception of any kind. At birth God gave us a body, implanted to us His spirit, which gives the body perception (through the brain and the five senses). At death, we [shub] RETURN. The reversal of what happened at birth. The spirit returns to God (Ecc. 12:7), the body returns to the dust (all the elements of man's body are found in the ground or earth) (Job 10:9, Ecc. 3:18-21), and the soul returns to no perception again (the imperceptible or unseen-hades) (Acts 2:27 and Psalm 49:15). This is what the Scriptures very plainly teach: where all that man "is" came from, that's where all that man "is" returns to.
|