In2Freedom: A Journal Journey with Brad Jersak’s “Different” Jesus

Examining "A More Christlike Word" by Brad Jersak

Day 78

“For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.” (Paul’s concern from 2 Corinthians 11:4)

The False Filter	The Biblical Filter
The word OR the Word	The Word THROUGH the word

Concerning the Cross (p. 208)

After a couple of refreshing days of Journal Journeys in God’s words, my return to BJ’s book with a reinvention of the cross is a good time to post this reminder:

The purpose of the BJs’ writings is to demoralize people’s faith in the authority of Scripture as the breathed-out words of God. They continue the serpent’s question in the garden, “Did God actually say…?” to replace what God said with what the “evil people and imposters” are peddling for unjust gain.

And with that, let’s weed through the verbiage and take on the next claim:

BJ’s Claim

Monte’s Response

“In other words, God was never our enemy” (p. 208).

Before I even explore how BJ justifies that claim, let’s consider what the apostle Paul wrote:

“For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life” (Romans 5:10).

So, the apostle Paul wrote that we were enemies of God, and Brad Jersak says we never were. What does that tell you?

Now, because we want to do a thorough exploration of this verse before hearing BJ’s explanation, I will step outside the box to give us a bit more room to work without hurtin’ anybody.

Let’s begin with the definition of “Enemy”. “Enemy (personal) n. — a personal enemy” (Bible Sense Lexicon). So, Paul says we “were” someone’s personal enemy. Whoever we were enemies of was in the past tense, and when we were enemies, it was personal.

Question: Who were we enemies of?

Does Paul clarify whose enemy we were (just in case BJ were ever to claim that Paul meant someone else other than God)?

Just for fun, let’s go through Romans 5 and see if we can find anything in the context that would answer who we “were enemies” of. Now, since I believe Paul is talking about Christians, true believers in Jesus Christ, I am going to refer to “us” true believers as “we”, not meaning everyone who might read this, but meaning “we” who are the people Paul is talking about.

1. “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (vs 1) Paul says we “have been justified” already, and this gives us “peace with God” now because we “have” it. This means that the “peace with God” we have now through being “justified by faith” is something new, meaning, we once were NOT at “peace with God”. Now, is it fair to say that people who are not at peace with one another could be called “enemies”?

2. “Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God” (vs 2). Paul rhymes “through him we have also obtained…” with “we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”. I take it from this that we can combine as facets of the same diamond anything Paul says we have “through” Jesus Christ in the multi-faceted ways he may say it. We can now add that the “access by faith into this grace” is something we have obtained along with having peace with God. We can also look at how we once were people who did not have access by faith into this grace of God until we were “justified by faith”. That almost sounds like we could have been enemies of God or something.

3. “Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us (vss 3-5). The “not only that” ties this in with the benefits we have now that we “have been justified by faith”, benefits we obviously did NOT have prior to being justified since we were the opposite of justified.

4. “For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly” (vs 6). Two things that described us prior to being “justified”. We were “weak”, and we were “ungodly”. “Weak” means “weak (morally) adjs. — wanting in moral strength, courage, or will” (BSL). So we were clearly not on God’s side as far as moral goodness. “Ungodly” means “irreverent person n. — a person lacking proper veneration and practice (toward those whom such is owed); usually toward God” (BSL). Which means we were clearly not relating to God as friends. And Paul’s point (rising towards its beautiful crescendo) is that this is “the right time” for Jesus to die for us, when we were against him in morals and worship. It is this enemy-stance against God that magnifies the glory of what he did for us.

5. “For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—” (vs 7). A “righteous person” is “a person characterized by righteous actions and morals” (BSL). Paul’s point is that someone dying in the place of such a good person would barely be a possibility. But we were NOT righteous persons. And, since God is a righteous person, it isn’t far fetched to put us in the categories of enemies.

6. “but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (vs 8). A “sinner” is “a person who has disobeyed any divine command or neglected any duty (whether intentionally or unintentionally)” (BSL). Paul has already made his case that this applies to everyone, that we are all sinners outside of Christ. A sinner disobeys God. Sounds enemyish.

7. “Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God” (vs 9). “Justified” means “to be justified v. — to be or become judicially vindicated as having complied with the requirements of the law (of God)” (BSL). There is no doubt we were weak, ungodly sinners prior to being justified, and once justified by his blood we are received as though we had “complied with the requirements of the law of God” our whole lives. This being “justified” is quite opposite to being weak, ungodly sinners (enemies). Paul then adds a progression of thought by taking what we already have and know about ourselves “in Christ” and applying it to something future “the wrath of God”. “Saved” means “to be saved (state) v. — to be or become delivered or rescued from sin (and consequential judgment)” (BSL). Because Paul speaks of this as future (shall we be saved), he is using what we already have as an assurance of the greater thing to come, the complete saving, delivering of believers from “the wrath of God”. “Wrath” means “wrath (punishment) n. — the punitive outworking of God’s righteous indignation at sin; perhaps describing an anger long-building” (BSL). This means that before we were justified we were on our way to being the recipients of the wrath of God, but the justification we have experienced by grace through faith has secured our deliverance from the wrath that is yet to come.

8. “For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life” (vs 10). We already saw that “enemies” means “a personal enemy”. Paul says that’s what we were. BJ teaches the opposite, that we are not enemies of God. Paul said Scripture was God-breathed making it God’s word; BJ rebukes Paul and says that Scripture is not inspired already making it a God/man hybrid that must be interpreted by the BJs. So Paul, writing down the words God breathed out says “we were enemies”, and BJ tells us to not believe what is written, but to take HIS word for it that “enemies” does not mean “enemies”. However, Paul again uses a “how much more” statement that Hendriksen explains as, “Each of the two statements is in the form of an a fortiori argument: if God did the greater, will he not even more readily do the lesser?”[1] In other words, if it was while “we were enemies” that we were reconciled, how much more now that we are reconciled we can certainly know we will be “saved by his life” which rhymes with “saved by him from the wrath of God”. It is so clear that Paul is glorifying God for doing the most remarkable thing for weak, sinful, ungodly enemies, while the BJs are echoing Satan’s words, “Did God actually say… that he did this?”

9. “More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation” (vs 11). Guess what. If we “have NOW received reconciliation”, what we had THEN was “enemies”.

So, the Bible DOES say we were enemies; BJ claims “God was never our enemy!” Isn’t that enough proof we are dealing with the kind of deceiver Jesus warned about?

Well, let’s continue and see how he mixes his brew to prove his Bible-dissing view.

BJ’s Claim

Monte’s Response

“Once again, the cross does not reveal the violence of God against sin, but rather reveals both the violence of the human condition and the love of God toward sinners” (p. 209).

I’m trying to figure out why BJ prefers the word “violence” to the words used in Scripture. I do not believe we need to prove God was or was not “violent” because that is a misleading word that hides the real words and meanings.

BJ’s statement has three parts. The first is a claim about God “against” sin, the second is a claim about how to describe “the human condition”, and the third is about “God toward sinners”.

I would answer the first part that, concerning God’s actions or attitudes against sin, some of the words used in the Bible are “judgment”, “condemnation”, “destruction”, and “wrath”. Perhaps BJ did not want to use these words because it is so easy to refute his claims.[2]

I would answer the second part that the biblical words for the “human condition” are things like “dead”, “lost”, “sinful”, “rebellious”, “corrupt”, “enslaved”, “hostile to God”, all kinds of words indicating how sinful we are, not how “violent” we are, although violence is definitely an expression of sin.[3]

And I would answer the third part that the “love of God” is not “for sinners” without distinction. God loved “the world” in contrast to just Israel, and eternity will be populated by redeemed people “from every tribe and nation”. However, God’s relational/covenantal love for his sheep who hear his voice is “the conditional, covenant love He grants to those who receive Jesus Christ as Savior”.[4]

My conclusion on the above point is that BJ is avoiding what the Bible DOES say by distracting people with argumentative words he did not say. When we look at how the Bible describes God as “against” sin, we discover that it rebukes BJ for teaching otherwise. When we look at what the Bible says about “the human condition”, we discover that it rebukes and corrects BJ for teaching otherwise. And when we explore God’s word to find out God’s attitude “towards sinners”, we again find that BJ’s teachings are “wanting” at best, and false and poisonous testimony at worst.

BJ’s Claim

Monte’s Response

“In fact, the cross of Christ does not change anything about God or God’s orientation toward the world; it reveals the gracious heart of the Father who has always been, is now, and will always be perfectly revealed in Jesus” (p. 209).

Let’s break this down into what BJ claims, and what he leaves out.

First, does the cross “change anything about God”? If we mean God’s nature, then no, God did not change who he is through the cross. But there is a way it changed something about Jesus that didn’t change his nature, and it didn’t change his “orientation” which is the next question. But it did change what Jesus was, and I mean that in an I’m-being-very-careful-to-not-misrepresent-God kind of way. I am simply referring to the way that Jesus “being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him” (Hebrews 5:9). In a sense, prior to the cross, Jesus could not save anyone. Until he propitiated God’s judgment and condemnation against our sin by bearing it upon himself, there was no just way for God to forgive us. But when Jesus made that sacrifice, atoning for our sins, he “became” the source of salvation to all who believe in his name. This did not change HIM, but it changed everything so he could “save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him” (Hebrews 7:25).

Now, did anything change about “God’s orientation toward the world”? I would have to say “no” since God is still oriented “toward the world” in judgment and condemnation. The “world” will never be saved. It is an enemy of God along with the “flesh” and “the devil”. As the apostle John wrote, “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever” (I John 2:15-17).

However, if we ask, did God’s orientation change towards people in the world, then yes, anyone who receives Jesus Christ in repentance and faith can now know God as the Father who is “just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus” (Romans 3:26).

Does the cross “reveal the gracious heart of the Father”? Of course it does. But along with it revealing God’s judgment against sin, his defeat of Satan, and his exclusive salvation that is only applied to those who believe in Jesus Christ in repentance and faith.

Has the Father “always been, is now, and will always be perfectly revealed in Jesus”? Yes, if you mean the true Lord Jesus Christ; No, if you mean the “another Jesus”, “different spirit”, and “different gospel” of the BJs.

BJ’s Claim

Monte’s Response

“And that, my friends, is our Story” (p. 209).

What BJ presents as “our Story” is not the biblical story. So, what does the Bible say about people who twist and distort God’s word for profit? Are we “my friends”? Or does the Bible describe such people in more enemyish ways?

In the Old Testament, false prophets were “put to death” (Deuteronomy 18:20). Jesus said they were like “ferocious wolves” in sheep’s clothing and warned us to watch out for them (Matthew 7:15-18). So, no, we are not “my friends” with false teachers. And their story is not “our story”.

BJ has focused on removing the Bible’s revelation of our sinful state, God’s judgment against us, our hopelessness apart from justification by grace through faith, and even the glory of God changing believers from enemies to sons of God.

My focus is on putting the spotlight on Scripture, the “living and active” word of God, so that everyone’s faith is founded on what is written, not what is promoted by the peddlers of God’s word.

I will conclude with some articles for further exploration:

What are false apostles?[5]

What is false doctrine?[6]

What does the Bible say about false prophets?[7]

Email: in2freedom@gmail.com

Unless otherwise noted, Scriptures are from the English Standard Version (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Text Edition: 2016. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.)

Jersak, Bradley. A More Christlike Word: Reading Scripture the Emmaus Way. Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.

Definitions from the Bible Sense Lexicon (BSL) in Logos Bible Systems