YOU CAN PROVE ANYTHING BY THE BIBLE

 

Have you ever heard someone say, "You can prove anything by the Bible?" That is true if you have no respect for the integrity of the text or for the rules of interpretation. For example, if you take a passage out of its context or if you define a word like you want it to mean, you can make the Bible teach whatever you want it to teach. I remember a silly illustration N. B. Hardeman, president of Freed-Hardeman University, used when I was a student there. A certain preacher objected to the way women sometimes arranged their hair in a knot on the top of their heads. He discovered this expression that restricted such hair arrangements. "Top not come down." That is obviously a dishonest use of the Bible. The passage comes from our Lord's Sermon on the Mount of Olives. Jesus warned his disciples: "Then let him who is in Judea flee into the mountains: let him who is on the house top not come down to take anything out of the house" (Mt. 24:16-17).

 

The Apostle Peter was concerned about certain teachers in his day who had the attitude I am discussing with you, that is, they tried to use the Bible to prove their own ideas. They were reading into the scriptures their own thoughts and preferences. In his second letter, Peter has an extended discussion of the Lord’s second coming. He encouraged his readers: "Wherefore, beloved, seeing that you look for such things, be diligent that you may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him has written unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they who are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction" (2 Pet. 3: 14-16).

 

Peter does not identify the unlearned and unstable men who were wresting the scriptures, but all of us should be aware of the enormous damage such teachers do to the cause of Christ. The word "wrest" is a translation of the Greek strebloo which means to twist or to torture or to pervert. In fact, most modern versions render the word "twist." Paul uses a different word in his letter to the churches of Galatia, but with the same basic meaning. "I marvel," he said, "that you are so soon removed from him who called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there are some who trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ" (Gal. 1:6­7). The word "pervert" (metastrepho) means to turn about, to change from one thing to another, to change to its opposite (Rogers & Rogers, p. 421).

 

We know such teachers existed in the first century, but surely there are no such teachers in our generation. Would to God that were true! Tragically, there are many teachers who pervert the word of God to further their own personal or denominational agendas. Do I believe that all of the men who twist the scriptures are dishonest? I have no authority to judge other men's motives. I do not know if they are honest. But honesty is not a test of truth. Our only standard of sound doctrine is the word of almighty God. We must examine every teaching by that divine standard. I shall furnish you with some examples of men who have twisted the scriptures.

 

Dr. John MacArthur, Jr. is one of my favorite authors. Some of his books are among the most useful I have in my study. But Dr. MacArthur is a Calvinist and has twisted some scriptures to maintain his Calvinism. In his book, Forgiveness: The Freedom and Power of Forgiveness (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1998), Dr. MacArthur quotes the question the Jews asked Peter on the day of Pentecost, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" He says Peter commanded the believing Jews: "Repent and trust Christ." That is not what the Apostle Peter urged the Jews to do. He said: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). Dr. MacArthur does mention the dramatic results of Peter's sermon. "Then they who gladly received the word were baptized, and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls" (p. 50).

 

Did you know that Martin Luther added the word "alone" in Paul's letter to the Romans? Paul wrote: "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Rom. 3:28). Luther added the German word allein ("alone") to the word "faith." In his commentary on The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1934), Dr. R. C. H. Lenski, a prominent Lutheran scholar, has written: "As to Luther's little word 'alone' it may interest you to know that it antedates Luther and is in this sense Roman" (p. 272). Is Dr. Lenski arguing that we have right to add to the word of God because some of the ancient theologians did?

 

There are some serious problems with Luther's adding the word "alone," regardless of which ancient theologians added the word to the sacred text. The Bible specifically condemns those who add to the word (Rev. 22:18). If Luther were right in adding the word "alone" to the word "faith," we would have a flat contradiction between Paul's letter to the Romans and the epistle of James. Let me challenge you to harmonize Luther's view with that of James. "Even so faith, if it has not works, is dead, being alone" (Jas. 2: 17). The verbs in this verse are all present tense. When we take into consideration the tenses of the verbs, the verse reads as follows: "Even so faith, if it keeps on not having works, keeps on being dead, because it is continually alone." Charles Williams renders the verse: "So faith by itself, if it has no works to back it up, is dead." James adds: "You see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith alone ... For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also" (Jas. 2:24, 26). Incidentally, Luther had some real problems with the book of James. He called it a "right strawy epistle."

 

John Hagee seems to delight in taking verses out of their contexts or leaving off a word or incorrectly defining a word. In his book, Jerusalem Countdown: A Warning to the World (Lake Mary, FL: FrontLine, 2006), Hagee repeats over and over: "All Israel will be saved" (pp. 186-189). In fact, one chapter in his book has the heading, "All Israel will be saved. There is a problem with Hagee's use of that verse. He leaves out a word - a very small word - but an important one. Paul wrote: "And so all Israel shall be saved" (Rom. 11: 26). The word "so" is an adverb of manner. The English Standard Version renders the Greek: "And in this way will all Israel be saved." In other words, the Jews will be saved in the same way as the Gentiles. If you add a word or leave out a word you can use the Bible to prove anything you wish. But is that being honest with the text?

 

The great prophet Isaiah predicted: "And a Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them who turn from transgression in Jacob, says the Lord" (Isa. 59:20). Paul quotes this verse from Isaiah (Rom. 11:26). Hagee recognizes that the redeemer or deliverer is the Lord Jesus Christ. He comments: "I believe my generation will live to see Him sitting on the throne of David on the Temple Mount in the city of Jerusalem, bringing the Golden Age of Peace to the world. It's coming sooner than you think" (p. 192)! Hagee uses the word "believe," but he cannot scripturally believe that his generation will see Christ sitting on David's throne in the city of Jerusalem. According to Paul, "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10: 17). In order for Hagee to believe that, he would have to produce a "thus says the Lord." Neither he nor anyone else can do that. Besides, Jesus Christ is already sitting on the throne of David (Acts 2:29-36).

 

In his latest book, In Defense of Israel: The Bible's Mandate for Supporting the Jewish State (Lake Mary, FL: FrontLine, 2007), John Hagee relates what he told a Jewish audience: "The room was electrified as we pronounced the verdict of the one who promised never to slumber or sleep as he watches over Israel: the chosen people of God are alive and well" (p. 195). There is not even the slightest doubt the nation of Israel was "the chosen people of God" under the Mosaic covenant. Hagee uses the Old Testament to establish that fact. But the nation of Israel is not the chosen people of God today. The apostle Peter sets the record straight. He told the Christians to whom he addressed his first letter: "You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession; that you should show forth the praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: which in time past were not a people, but now are the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy" (1 Pet. 2:9-10). The word "chosen" in verse 9 is the Greek eklektos from which we derive our word "elect." The church of our Lord - not the nation of Israel - is God's chosen or elect people.

 

The prosperity gospel preachers are notorious for stretching biblical passages to justify their greed for wealth. I could give you dozens of examples, but I shall furnish you just one. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (Sunday, October 22, 2006) published an article with the title, "Was Jesus Rich?" The subtitle of the article was, "Swanky messiah not far-fetched in Prosperity Gospel." The article says Christians have sung for many years about Jesus as the poor baby "asleep in a manger with a crib for his bed." According to the article, Creflo Dollar, a popular television evangelist, denies that view of Jesus. He argues that Christ became wealthy because of the gifts from the kings who came to visit him when he was born. The kings of the east brought to him and to his family gold, frankincense and myrrh. In fact, according to Creflo Dollar, Jesus had so much money he had to have an accountant to keep track of his money. Dollar affirms that Jesus wore such expensive clothing that the Roman soldiers who participated in his crucifixion gambled for his robe. Dollar asserts: "He was rich, he was whole, and I use those words interchangeably" (p. MS-l).

 

There are numerous errors in Creflo Dollar's views, as any careful Bible student can easily discern. For example, how much gold, frankincense and myrrh did the wise men bring to Jesus? Was it an ounce or a pound or a wagon load? And it borders on insulting for Creflo Dollar to affirm that Jesus had so much money he had to have an accountant to keep track of his money. One verse from the book of Luke shows how Creflo Dollar perverts the scripture to justify his plea for wealth. Luke, a Greek physician, recorded these words from the Lord himself: "Foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head" (Lk. 9:58). Did Paul know about Christ's great riches? If he did, why did he tell the Corinthians: "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that you through his poverty might be rich" (2 Cor. 8:9)?

 

The health and wealth preachers remind me of the false teachers the Apostle Peter discussed. "Through covetousness shall they with feigned (or well-turned) words, make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingers not, and their damnation slumbers not.... (They) have forsaken the right way, and have gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness" (2 Pet. 2:3, 15). Creflo Dollar and other prosperity preachers are good examples of those who try to "prove anything by the Bible."

 

While I am speaking with you about money, there is another aspect of wealth I need to discuss briefly. Some liberal theologians and some radical academics promote what they call "distributive justice." They argue that Christians are not following the instructions of Jesus who commands all of us to give our possessions to the poor. Some even go so far as to argue that the government should evenly distribute the wealth of the nation. But if the government takes money it has no legitimate reason to have, is that not stealing? John Bartlett's book, Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown Company, 1955), quotes President Grover Cleveland as saying: "When more of the people's sustenance is exacted through the form of taxation than is necessary to meet the just obligations of Government and expenses of its economical administration, such exaction becomes ruthless extortion and a violation of the fundamental principles of a free Government" (p. 689).

 

What did Jesus say about selling all we have and giving it to the poor? Matthew tells of a man who came to Jesus with a question: "Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may inherit eternal life?" Jesus urged him to keep the commandments. He told Jesus he had been keeping the commandments from his childhood. He then asked: "What lack I yet?" Jesus instructed the young man: "If you will be perfect (or full grown), go and sell that you have, and give it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven." Matthew says the young man went away sorrowfully "for he had great possessions" (Mt. 19:16-22). It is not being honest with the text to apply what Jesus told the rich young man to every human being on earth. Is it not obvious that the young man was trusting in his riches rather than in the living God? When a man worships his earthly possessions, he would do well to get rid of them. Besides, if all Christians sold their possessions, who would support them?

 

Dave Hunt and James White conducted a written debate on Calvinism. The debate was published in a book with the title, Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2004). James White, a radical Calvinist, believes in unconditional election. He quotes these words from Paul's sermon to the citizens in Antioch of Pisidia: "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48). Wayne Jackson's outstanding commentary on The Acts of the Apostles: From Jerusalem to Rome (Stockton, CA: Christian Courier Publications, 2005) says concerning the expression, "as many as were ordained to eternal life believed": "Those who believed were those who determined for themselves that they had been offered and would accept, God's gift of eternal life. The verb 'believed' does not mean merely that they mentally assented; rather, it asserts that they obeyed the truth" (p. 162). Clarke's Commentary (Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, n. d.), by the Methodist scholar, Adam Clarke, affirms: "This text has been pitifully misunderstood Many suppose that it means that those in that assembly who were fore-ordained, or predestinated by God's decree, to eternal life, believed under the influence of that decree." The language does not allow for foreordination or predestination of any kind (volume 5, p. 790).

 

If the Calvinists' interpretation of this verse were correct, it would create some insurmountable difficulties for the biblical text. For example, if men and women are foreordained or predestined to eternal life, why would they need to hear the gospel? If they are predestined to eternal life, it would make no difference if they never heard the gospel. If they are not predestined to eternal life, all the preaching in the world could not save them. And yet Christ commanded his apostles: "Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you all the way, even to the end of the age" (Mt. 28:19-20). If people are already predestined to eternal life, why would they have to observe all the things the Lord had commanded?

 

If men are unconditionally elected, does it make sense for the Lord to say: "Come unto me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Mt. 11:28)? In the very last chapter of the last book of the New Testament, Jesus challenged all people. "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come... And let him who is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17). One word in this verse completely refutes the Calvinist doctrine of predestination. That one word is "whosoever." You may remember an old hymn that said: "'Whosoever' surely meaneth me." That unquestionably is the teaching of God's word.

 

I urge every person in my audience today to approach the study of scripture with an open mind and with godly reverence. Should we not make an effort to learn exactly what the Bible teaches rather than imposing on the scriptures what we believe they ought to teach? Perverting the word of God will bring the curses of God on our heads.

 

Winford Claiborne

The International Gospel Hour

P.O. Box 118

Fayetteville, TN 37334