Faith and Opinion
Do you know the difference
between faith and opinion? From a
biblical point of view, faith must be based on a “thus says the Lord.” Paul explained that truth in these well known
words: “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom.
Preachers and theologians for generations have been using the meeting between Jesus Christ and Nicodemus to illustrate the difference between faith and opinion. The apostle John says that Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, “came to Jesus by night” (John 3:1-2). If you believe the Bible to be the word of God, then you believe that Nicodemus came to Jesus by night. But why did Nicodemus come to Jesus by night? Some have speculated that Nicodemus came by night for fear of what other Jewish leaders might think. Others insist that he came to Jesus by night so he would have more freedom to talk with the Lord without any interruption. But the simple truth is: Nobody knows why Nicodemus came to Jesus by night. We can go further than that: Nobody knows and nobody needs to know. If we had needed to know, the Lord would have told us. When a preacher or theologian expresses his view on that topic or any other that is not plainly revealed, he is merely giving his opinion which is worth nothing--absolutely nothing. How much better off all of us would be if preachers would cease giving their opinions and preach what they know about God and his word!
The word of God tells us of Paul’s thorn in the flesh. We know of Paul’s great concern for his affliction. He informs us that he prayed three times that the thorn might depart from him. The Lord responded to Paul’s prayer by assuring him: “My grace is sufficient for you: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:8-9). We can have solid faith that Paul had a thorn in his flesh. That is not even open to debate and most scholars do not debate the fact of Paul’s thorn in the flesh. We know it was a “messenger of Satan to buffet” him, to keep him from exalting himself, but nobody knows what the thorn was. Some commentators have expressed their opinion that Paul’s thorn in the flesh was his poor eyesight. There is some evidence that he may have had poor eyesight, but it cannot be established conclusively that his poor eyesight was his thorn in the flesh. Others have argued, on much less evidence, that Paul was hunchbacked and that was his thorn in the flesh. John Shelby Spong, former Episcopal bishop, expressed the opinion that Paul’s thorn in the flesh was his temptation to commit homosexual acts, although Spong seems not to offer that as an opinion. He is pretty confident he is right about the matter.
Nobody knows, and in the nature
of case cannot know, what Paul’s thorn in the flesh was. I am reminded of a question someone asked Guy
N. Woods when he was directing the Open Forum at
The Bible continually emphasizes the fact of our Lord’s second coming. Christ told his disciples: “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there you may be also” (John 14:2-3). Based on divine revelation, we believe Jesus Christ will come to take his faithful children to be with him forever. But who on this earth knows the time of the Lord’s coming? Nobody! But did not Edgar Whisenant’s book, 88 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Occur in ’88, give us the information we needed to have to know about the time of the Lord’s return? Do I have to tell you that Edgar Whisenant’s opinion was not worth the paper on which it is written? More than eighty-five years ago, Judge Rutherford wrote a book with the title, Millions Now Living Will Never Die. How many people today accept Judge Rutherford’s opinion? Anyone--whether Jack Van Impe, Hal Lindsey, William Miller or Judge Rutherford--who sets the date for the Lord’s second coming does the cause of Christ a great disservice. It actually leads some to believe the Bible is wrong about the date, but neither the Lord nor his apostles set a date. Please listen to the apostle Peter. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). Peter does not leave any room for speculation, and yet there is probably more speculation on this topic than on any other.
I want to illustrate just how foolish theologians and preachers are when they claim to believe ideas that have no scriptural authority. I could use almost any of John Hagee’s books to show how unscriptural it is to express personal opinions, but I shall examine just one of his books: The Revelation of Truth: A Mosaic of God’s Plan for Man (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2000). I use Hagee’s book with no ill will toward him or toward his television ministry, but we must know when preachers are preaching the Bible and when they are expressing their own opinions.
In the introduction to his book,
Hagee expresses the opinion that Jesus is coming soon in the clouds. He will rapture his church to heaven. A little later--seven years to be exact--“he
will come to the
God’s own possession; that you should show forth the praises of him who has
called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: who in time past were not
a people, but now are the people of God: who had not obtained mercy, but now
have obtained mercy” (1 Pet., 2:9-10).
The church--not the fleshly nation of the Jews--is the Israel of God
(Gal.
I am deeply troubled that John Hagee supports the so-called “gap theory” of the earth’s creation. If he had done his homework on that topic, he surely would have known better than to endorse that groundless theory. Weston Field’s book, Unformed and Unfilled (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1976), completely refutes the gap theory. Tragically, Hagee’s research on the topic has been woefully inadequate. He asserts that “the earth was created and flooded before the six days of creation in which mankind appeared” (p. 11). That is Hagee’s opinion, but he cannot believe it because there is no evidence to support it. In fact, the biblical evidence explodes John’s Hagee’s speculations. Are there reputable scientists who agree with Hagee? Of course there are, but that proves nothing, except that some scientists agree with Hagee. Philip Johnson’s books and Henry Morris’s books would help those who embrace any of the tenets of evolutions. One would think that John Hagee and his researchers would be familiar with these and dozens of other books on creationism.
One of the strangest features of John Hagee’s book is his endorsement of what is called “gematria.” Hagee believes that gematria helps us to understand the biblical text and reveals “information about people, places and dates by the author’s choice of words” (p. 25). In case you are not familiar with gematria--sometimes called “numerology,” I shall give you a definition and an illustration of what is involved. Gematria is a false system of interpretation that attempts to find mystical meaning in the biblical text through the numerical values of the letters of the alphabet. For example, Genesis1:1 has seven Hebrew words that have twenty-eight letters. Hagee says that seven is the number of perfection and four is the number of creation. So that four times seven equals twenty-eight. Does that not prove that God’s creation was perfect (p. 25)? None of this makes any sense. Genesis 1:2 cannot be arranged in the numerical order that Hagee and others have used on Genesis 1:1. Does that mean that Genesis 1:2 is not perfect?
Of course, the most common use of numerology is attempting to discover the meaning of the number 666 in the book of Revelation. Please listen: “Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred threescore and six” (Rev. 13:18). My dear departed friend, Dr. W. B. West, Jr., wrote a little commentary on the last book of the Bible which he called Revelation Through First Century Glasses (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1997). He assigned each of the letters in the name Nero Caesar a numerical value and arrived at the conclusion that Nero--that utterly abominable Roman ruler--was the person John has in mind when he used the number 666 (p. 97). As much as I loved W. B. West, Jr., I have serious doubts about the numerical value of names, or places or events--either from the Old Testament or from the New. To show just how ridiculous such interpretation of the Bible is, did you know that Ronald Reagan was nominated for the honor of being the man whose number is 666? This is the way some people arrived at that conclusion. The former president has three names Ronald Wilson Reagan. Each of his names has six letters. The makes 666.
If the Bible can be known only in the way the numerologists suggest or if numerology sheds any light on the scriptures, then God has deliberately hidden his word from the common man. Am I arguing that numbers have no place in our interpretation of the Bible? Absolutely not! It is almost universally agreed that the number “seven” has great significance in our understanding of the Bible, especially the book of Revelation. Is it accidental that the book of Revelation mentions seven churches, seven spirits, seven golden candlesticks, seven stars, seven seals, seven eyes, seven angels, seven thunders, seven heads, seven last plagues and seven kings? Seven is the number of perfection, but attempting to assign numerical value to every word and to every sentence makes the Bible a complete puzzle with whatever meaning each person decides to give it. The Bible is not a book of riddles, but the inspired revelation of God, designed to bring people to God and to make them strong in his service. God has made his word simple enough for the common man to understand enough of it to know what to do to be saved. But the Bible is profound enough that the most capable scholars have not fathomed its complete depth. I must add before passing to another topic: Nobody, including John Hagee, believes in gematria or numerology for the simple reason that nobody can find a biblical basis for it. If it cannot be sustained from the scriptures, it is a matter of opinion--not a matter of faith.
John Hagee believes or says he believes in salvation by grace alone through faith alone, although that Calvinistic theory plainly contradicts words like “do,” “must,” “command” and “obedience.” If we must do anything, then salvation is not by grace alone through faith alone. The author of Hebrews lays to rest the Calvinistic theory of grace alone when he wrote: “Without faith it is impossible to please him: for he who comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them who diligently seek him” (Heb. 11:6). Must we believe and diligently seek him or are these mere suggestions? And what did Jesus mean when he said, “Not everyone who says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Mt. 7:21)? Did Jesus mean that only the ones who do the will of God will enter into the kingdom of heaven? Faith alone cannot be equated with doing the will of God.
John Hagee attempts to prove the
doctrine of grace alone through faith alone by citing the example of the
prodigal son. He says “the prodigal son
did nothing to be forgiven...he only came home” (p. 49). Have you read the story of the prodigal
son? Do you believe he did nothing to be
forgiven? The prodigal son had violated
the law of God by his immoral conduct and had dishonored his father by leaving
without any sign of respect or gratitude.
Will you please listen to the Lord’s account of this powerful story? “and
when he came to himself, he said, how many hired
In his chapter on “The Age of Promise,” Hagee makes an effort to establish that the land promise God made to the Jewish people still applies, although the Jewish nation as the people of God came to an absolute end almost 2,000 years ago. The Jews have no promise that does not equally apply to Gentiles. Hagee asserts that the land promise “would belong to the Jewish people forever.” He then makes this foolish statement: “Forever means forever” (p. 127). Does forever always mean forever? Could forever ever mean during that covenant or during that period? The priest under the Jewish covenant came from the tribe of Levi. Under the covenant, even the Son of God could not serve as a priest because he came from the tribe of Judah--not from Levi (Heb. 7:13-14). The book of Deuteronomy quotes the Lord’s words to Moses: “For the Lord your God has chosen him (that is, Levi) out of all your tribes, to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons forever” (Dt. 18:5). The Levites are not now serving as priests; so forever does not always mean forever. I could give you many other examples where the word “forever” does not mean forever, but I shall give you just one more. The book of Exodus describes the garments the Jewish priests were to wear when they were ministering at the altar. The inspired record says concerning these clothes: “They shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute forever unto him and his seed after him”(Ex. 28:43). If John Hagee had ever read these passages, how could he affirm that “forever means forever?”
John Hagee says he believes “that all the scars of Jesus healed except the scars in His hands” (p. 132). Please understand that I am not questioning John Hagee’s sincerity or his commitment to what he believes, but he does not believe that. Since there is no scriptural proof that all his scars healed except those in his hands, John Hagee cannot believe that. That is his opinion, but it is not his belief. “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). From a biblical viewpoint, nobody believes any idea he cannot find in scripture and opinions of the sort I have just mentioned undermine the authority of scripture and can drive people away from the truth.
Hagee foolishly says, “Do you need a miracle? Only believe” (p. 137). Hagee ought to know how unscriptural and unreasonable this approach is. Just this week, we learned that Geraldine Ferraro, a former vice-presidential candidate, has multiple myaloma. Webster’s Medical Desk Dictionary (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Inc., Publishers, 1986) defines Geraldine Ferraro’s cancer as follows: “A primary tumor of the bone marrow formed of any one of the bone-marrow cells and usually involving several different bones at the same time” (p. 459). “Multiple myaloma” simply means there are numerous myalomas in various parts of the body. Does Geraldine Ferraro want a miracle to cure her of her cancer? Does she not have to do more than just believe? Why are not all cancers cured among believers?
I have sought in this lesson to differentiate between faith and opinion. Faith is founded on fact; opinion is founded on little or nothing. We are not saved by our opinions, but by faith in Jesus Christ and by obedience to his word.
Winford Claiborne
The International Gospel Hour
Back to Home Page
Back to Transcripts Titles