<BGSOUND SRC="letter/bcjesujy.mid" LOOP=1>

October, 2000

Oceanside, CA

Written in response to the book written by L.D.S. scholar, Bruce C. Hafen,entitled, "The Broken Heart," Salt Lake City: The Deseret Book Co., 1989

This book is certainly the finest I have read on the atonement by an L.D.S. author. What I appreciated most was the authors' recognition of how little any of us knows of the magnitude of the atonement and how it applies to our individual lives. Of special interest to me was the author's feeling that non-L.D.S. Christians seriously, even appallingly, misunderstand L.D.S. teaching regarding the atonement which he calls "our core doctrine" (pg. 2). This is of interest to me because I have the same impression in reverse, namely that L.D.S. believers seriously misperceive what non-L.D.S. people believe and teach. This is pinpointed in the author's quotation from Bruce R. McConkie that "modern Christianity espouses a second great heresy," namely "the doctrine that we are saved by grace alone, without works . . . that we may be born again simply by confessing the Lord Jesus with our lips while we continue to live in our sins" (page 4).

During all of my 70 years in non-L.D.S. churches I have never encountered any such teaching as stated by Elder McConkie. I have never met anyone who believed that the Bible contains any such teaching. I therefore feel that perhaps the answer to where this misperception comes from is in what Elder Hafen says on the same page 4, "perhaps some reasons exist for our reluctance to stress the doctrine of grace. The prophet Nephi wrote, 'For we know that it is by grace that we are saved after all we can do.'" He then goes on to say, "our natural inclination to think in categorical either/or terms makes us worry that a public emphasis on grace will lead some church members to ignore the crucial 'all we can do' in that two-part process." To which I would add, it is not only L.D.S. people who are reluctant to stress grace for the reason given, but almost everyone else I know including myself and the people I grew up with. But the abuse of a thing does not argue against its proper use. If we are ever going to be delivered from our fear of grace (because of how it can be abused) we are going to have to acquaint ourselves more fully with what the Bible teaches on the subject.

Elder Hafen makes a good start in this direction but, in my opinion, doesn't go nearly far enough. Where he does his best is on page 144 where he speaks of grace as the "enabling power" whereby God enacts many miraculous effects. He quotes John 15:5 as a basis for this statement. But nowhere in his book does he quote from the voluminous teaching on grace in the Apostle Paul's writings (with one or two minor exceptions). This neglect of Paul surprised me, because of all the men who have ever lived, Paul did the best job of articulating grace. For starters is his classic statement in Ephesians 2:8-10 where he says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of your own doing, it is the gift of God-not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them."

What Paul does in these three verses is to show that "good works" are the result of our acceptance of God's gift (which is grace). Or to synchronize this with John 15:5 (quoted by Elder Hafen), any good works done by us are the fruit of our faith relationship to Christ as branches attached to a vine. This idea is borne out in Philippians 2:12-13 where Paul says, "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling: for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure." Here Paul shows clearly that our works are, in a sense, God doing both the willing and the doing. How this is so Paul teaches us in Romans and Galatians.

His teaching begins in Romans 1:16-17 where he defines what he means by "Gospel." He says, "I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God's power for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith. As it is written, he who through faith is righteous shall live." As you know, the word gospel means "Good News." The reason that it is good news for Paul is that in it God reveals a way of salvation which is by grace through faith in sharp contrast to the "bad news" of salvation by obedience to law. During all of his life prior to becoming a Christian, Paul had believed that the only way he could be saved was by knowing and obeying all of God's law or commandments. And what is so astounding is that until the day that Jesus encountered him on the road to Damascus he had deceived himself into believing he had obeyed God fully. As he says of himself in Philippians 3:6, "as to the righteousness under the law, blameless." But when he met Christ on the road to Damascus all such self-righteous illusions were shattered. He discovers that he was "the chief of sinners" (1 Timothy 1:15).

 

As a result of this shattering experience Paul was forced to go back to the drawing board and thoroughly rethink the whole matter of salvation. In the process he made an epochal discovery: salvation had to be by faith in God's grace through faith alone, and not works (Rom. 11:6). IT COULDN'T BE BY FAITH AND WORKS. FOR ONLY IN THIS WAY WERE "GOOD WORKS" POSSIBLE. Most of the people I grew up with in the Church were and still are under the impression that we are saved by faith plus good works. They have failed to see the either/or in the Philippians' teaching. For Paul in reviewing the way Abraham was "made righteous" discovers that Abraham was justified by faith, AND NOT BY WORKS (Romans 4:1-6). Thus Paul is able to state the case in sharp either/or terms: EITHER by works OR by faith, BUT NOT BY BOTH. So let us see what he says in the rest of Romans 4:1-6, "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to brag about, but not before God. For what does the scripture say? 'Abraham believed and it was RECKONED to him as righteousness.' Now to the one who works, his wages are not reckoned as a gift but as his due. And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness. So also David pronounces a blessing upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness APART FROM WORKS." 

In this connection it is of interest to me that when Joseph Smith read the above quotation from Paul he found it to be unacceptable and proceeded to reverse its teaching by inserting into Romans 4:1-6 the word "not" in verse 5 as follows, "But to him that seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth NOT the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." This leaves the impression on me that Joseph Smith is very similar to most of us in the Church who find it impossible to accept Paul's teaching on grace as it stands. We do not rewrite the text of Paul, as Smith did, but we live our life as though we had.

It was not until I was 21 that my eyes were opened (by a wonderful Bible teacher) to the truth of Paul's GOSPEL (i.e. GOOD NEWS) wherein it really is true that the God Abraham and Paul believed was one who "JUSTIFIED THE UNGODLY." At first glance this seems to be too good to be true. It is however too good to ignore. When studied in the total context of Paul's writings (as well as the Bible as a whole) and in the light of our own experience, it turns out to be the only basis on which any of us can be justified. For as Paul so well reminds us, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NO NOT ONE . . .There is no distinction, since ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD; they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:10 & 22-24). This and similar texts in Paul's writings, together with our own experience teaches us that God's grace is the only basis on which we can depend for our salvation or justification. All credit belongs to God, even for the "all we can do" which so concerned the prophet Nephi.

Now let's proceed further with Paul. In Romans 5:6 he again refers to God in relation to the ungodly. "while we were yet helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly." Then two verses later he says, "God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us." This was the glorious message preached also by Peter on the day of Pentecost as recorded in the second chapter of Acts. The essence of what he said was this, "when you did your worst to God (in nailing Jesus to the cross) He did his best for you!" For in the precise moment in which you sinned most grievously against God, He forgave you and made possible your salvation. The proof of this is that the man you thought you had destroyed was raised from the dead on the third day and turned out to be the long awaited Messiah, even 'both Lord and Christ.'" Paul echoes this in Romans 5:10 when he says, "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." What we have here is the astounding revelation that God didn't wait to act "after we had done all we could do" but rather took the initiative in reconciling us to Himself at the precise moment in which we were doing our worst!

"That is why," Paul says in Romans 4:16, "it (our justification) depends on faith in order that the promise (which God made to Abraham) may rest on grace and be GUARANTEED to all his descendants." The kind of faith which this kind of GOOD NEWS inspires in our hearts ENERGIZES us to love God and to obey his commandments, including the command to repent. All of which issues in good works (the all that we can do). As John says in I John 4:19, "we love him because he first loved us" to which I add the comment, God loved us and blessed us while we were yet his enemies! That is why we respond to such love so thankfully and passionately! 

Paul further comments on the faith of Abraham (by which righteousness was RECKONED to him) in Romans 4:19-25. Paul characterizes Abraham's faith as one in which "no distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised." Then Paul goes on to say, "That is why his faith was reckoned to him as righteousness." So we are compelled to ask concerning God's promise to Abraham: what kind of promise was it? In the verses just quoted we can begin to see the answer. It was a promise in which everything depended on God and nothing depended on Abraham. He believed that God was able to do all that God had promised to do. And what had God promised to do? The answer is in Genesis 12:1-3 where we are told that God promised to do three things: (1) Guide Abraham into a land he had never seen before, (2) Give Abraham that land and (3) give to Abraham descendants too numerous to count and through one of those descendants all the families (nations) of the earth would be blessed. This promise staggered Abraham's and Sarah's minds, for they were painfully aware that since they were many years past the ages at which people normally give birth to children, there was no way for them "to do what they could do." It all had to be God's doing. But like most of the rest of us they couldn't feel comfortable in letting God do it all. So for awhile they decided "to do their part." They decided that Abraham should take Sarah's handmaid, Hagar, to wife and give birth to a son, and in that way fulfill God's promise of a son. But when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, God told Abraham that this was not the promised son.

Thus Abraham was forced to depend wholly on God for fulfilling the promise. Abraham's momentary lapse of faith ironically resulted in Ishmael (God hear us) and his Ishmaelite descendants. These descendants are still living in the Middle East and known to us in modern times as "ARABS." These Arabs, interestingly enough, cling to the "Old Testament" (and Moslem faith) that is steeped in "the Law and works." In Galatians 3, Paul enlarges on this theme of the PROMISE which God made to Abraham (in sharp contrast to the law which God gave Israel through Moses). By articulating this contrast, Paul is able to show that it applies far more broadly than just to "promise" vs. "law of Moses," but to the distinction between the "gospel" he had been given and ALL LAW, ANY LAW! His crucial statement appears in 3:21 where he says, "for if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law." But he goes on to say, "the scripture consigned all things to sin that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe." What he means by the phrase "the scripture consigned all things to sin" is made clear in his comments on the law in several passages in Romans 3 and 7 and Galatians 3:23-24.

In Romans 3:19-20 Paul says, "now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those under the law so that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For no human being will be justified in his sight by works of the law, SINCE THROUGH THE LAW COMES KNOWLEDGE OF SIN." On the basis of this fact Paul then quickly goes on to say, "but now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law . . . the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ, for all who believe." When Paul says "apart from law" he deliberately omits the article "the" (the Greek text omits the article) to show that he is not talking about "the law of Moses" only, but about ALL LAW. As we noticed above in Galatians 3:21, LAW of any kind does not have the power to produce LIFE. I believe Joseph Smith had this in mind when he rewrote Galatians 3:20 thusly, "now Christ is the mediator of life. For this is the promise which God made unto Abraham." 

In Romans 7 Paul discusses at length the IMPOTENCE of law as a means of justification. Wherein lies its impotence? If the law is (as Paul says in Romans 7:12) holy and the commandment is holy and just and good, why can't we be saved by it? As Paul goes on to reason in verse 13, "Did that which is good then bring death to me?" He answers, "By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. We know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, SOLD UNDER SIN." Then beginning in verse 15, and going through verse 24, Paul goes into a detailed description of how incapable he was of obeying God's commandments. He writes, "I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want but I do the very thing I hate . . . ."; and verse 19, "For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do." Then back in verse 18 he concludes, "I can will what is right, but I cannot do it." 

Joseph Smith's translation of Romans 7:15-24 is radically rewritten and has the effect of reversing what Paul says. For example he changes verse 15 to read, "But now I am spiritual; for that which I am commanded to do, I do; and that which I am commanded not to allow, I allow not." THAT IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT PAUL ACTUALLY WROTE. AND IT HAS THE EFFECT OF DEPRIVING PAUL OF HIS GOSPEL (GOOD NEWS).

Now let's look at Galatians 3:23-24, to see another function of the law as well as all law. "Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until FAITH should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by FAITH." When we put Romans 7:13 with Galatians 3:23 & 24, we learn that for Paul the law (all law) has the function of doing two opposite things: (1) Increasing sin and (2) restraining us from sinning! But in either case it is powerless to enable us to do God's will and is thus powerless to save us. That is why Paul cries out in Romans 7:24, "Oh wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" He quickly answers his question in the following verse 25, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" He makes a similar statement in I Corinthians 15:57 after asking the question, "O death, where is thy victory, O death, where is thy sting?" and observing that "the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law." To which he responds with, "But thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." 

In Galatians 3:10 through 3:20, Paul gives what is to me the clearest explanation of why the law (and by extension, any and all law) cannot save or justify us. In verse 10 he begins by saying that all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by ALL things written in the book of the law, and DO them." This is the nature of all law: it can save us only if we are obedient; otherwise, we must suffer penalties (which is death according to Paul in Romans 6:23 where he says that "the wages of sin is death, but the FREE GIFT of God is eternal life"). Paul continues in Galatians 3:11 by saying, "It is evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for He who through FAITH is righteous shall LIVE; but the law does not rest on faith, for 'He who DOES them shall live by them.'" 

So, Paul goes on to say, Christ's atoning death was required to redeem us from the curse of the law . . . that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might RECEIVE the promise of the Spirit through FAITH. Skipping to verse 17 Paul explains what he means, "the law which came 430 years after God gave his promise to Abraham does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance is by the law it is no longer by promise; but God GAVE it to Abraham by a PROMISE." At this point Paul raises a very natural question, "why then the law?" His answer, "It was added because of transgressions, till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made; and it (the law) was ordained by angels through an intermediary. Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one."

It is precisely in these two verses (i.e., Galatians 3:19-20) that the glory of the Gospel is most marvelously revealed. For here is where Paul draws out an amazing implication. He says that an intermediary "implies more than one." And that was indeed the situation when God issued His law to the children of Israel on Mt. Sinai. God on one side and Israel on the other side required Moses as an intermediary because a two-party agreement was to be put into effect. Such an agreement can come into existence only if each party to the agreement agrees to do his part. Thus, it is a conditional agreement. If either party fails to live up to the conditions, the agreement becomes null and void. And of course, it wasn't any time after the agreement at Sinai was ratified that the children of Israel failed to keep their side of the agreement. BUT, Paul says, in what went on between God and Abraham the situation is radically different. For in that instance, Paul says, "God is one" that is, God is acting alone WITHOUT A MEDIATOR. This implies that God made to Abraham a UNILATERAL PROMISE, not a two-party agreement. Thus God was not depending on Abraham or anyone else in the fulfilling of his promise. In other words it was an UNCONDITIONAL PROMISE. 

Most of us in our day to day lives are almost totally unacquainted with anything of an unconditional nature. That is why it is so hard for us to accept the idea of the unconditional grace of God which is showered on us so prodigiously in Christ. In this connection Jesus instructs us in Luke 6:35 to "love your enemies, and do good, and lend EXPECTING NOTHING IN RETURN; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the MOST HIGH; for he is kind to the UNGRATEFUL and the SELFISH. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." We are so unaccustomed to such unconditional giving that we resist believing it. 

Thus, Elder Hafen (on page 147) sees the atoning death of Christ as unconditional only in the sense that it provides us with physical resurrection from death; it does not provide any other unconditional benefits. So, he goes on to say, "the law of mercy applies to our personal sins only on condition of our repentance." It seems to me that Elder Hafen fails to see with Paul that our radical enslavement to sin can be broken by nothing less than the radical grace of God which communicates forgiveness to us before we repent or even ask for forgiveness. The point at which this is most clearly seen is Jesus' action on the cross when he asked his Father to forgive his assassins BEFORE they repented or asked for forgiveness. When those same assassins heard Peter on the day of Pentecost speak of God's redeeming work simultaneously with their murderous crime against Jesus, they were "pricked in their heart and cried out, 'Men & brethren, what shall we do?'" (Acts 2:37). To which Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized . . . ." So here we see that the order is not repentance OBTAINING forgiveness but rather forgiveness ELICITING repentance.

It is the gospel of the unconditional love and mercy of God (which Paul means by GRACE and which constitutes his GOSPEL) that arouses in our hearts the RESPONSE of FAITH which energizes us to dare to repent and change our attitude toward God and the doing of his will. Which takes me back to the opening pages of Elder Hafen's book where the idea was expressed that we need to understand that only after "we have done all we can do" does grace save us, not only initially, but ongoingly. The concern behind this viewpoint is that any idea of pure grace will lead us to become careless toward our responsibilities and will further result in what Elder McConkie describes as the belief that "we are saved by grace alone... while we continue to live in our sins."

But I believe that a correct understanding of Paul's gospel is the most powerful and effective way of preventing any such false idea of grace. Quite the contrary to Elder Hafen's fears, the Gospel is the only means for INSPIRING and MOTIVATING us to good works. Finally, I can't put my finger on the exact page, but somewhere in his book Elder Hafen calls attention to what he believes was an improvement on Matthew's version of the first beatitude as set forth in 3 Nephi 12:3. In Matthew 5:3 it is written that Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." But in 3 Nephi 12:3 it is written that Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit who come unto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Here, it seems to me, is another example of bias against what I believe to be the Gospel at its best. In other words, here again a preference is expressed in favor of the idea that only after we do our part (which, in the case under consideration is that "we come unto Jesus") will we be blessed by him. But this is to miss the major point communicated in Jesus' beatitudes: namely, that it is Jesus who comes to the people and pronounces them to be blessed. He doesn't wait for them to come to him; rather, he takes the initiative and goes to them.

After having said all of this, however, I want to end by highly commending Elder Hafen's book. As I said at the beginning, it is the best book on the atonement I have read by an L.D.S. author. He shows a wonderful awareness of how great the need is among his readers for more teaching directed toward alleviating the burdens of men and women who have struggled so hard to be good but who have thus far failed to measure up. He sees us as "the broken hearted" whom Jesus came to heal. We are the ones he had in mind when he said, "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you REST . . . for my yoke is easy and my burden LIGHT." Matthew 11:28-30 (Emphasis Mine).

Yes, I am well aware of the dangers of what can rightly be called "cheap grace." But for people like me the major danger is that I will not depend sufficiently on God's grace.  

The essence of what I am trying to convey is namely that what God wants from each of us more than anything else is our UNCONDITIONAL commitment of ourselves to Him. Yet most of the preaching, teaching, and exhorting I have heard during most of my life attending church services is conditional talk, "if you will repent and keep God's commandments He will bless you and reward you." The result of all this on the part of anyone who takes it seriously is to cause us to make every effort to qualify ourselves (or make ourselves worthy) to obtain God's blessings, and in the process end up exhausted and burnt out. Of course this approach does take us a long way. But I am not sufficiently helped by conditional talk alone. It's good as far as it goes, and definitely has a place in God's process of "saving" us. But we need something much bigger, better and effective; and that is precisely what God provides us in His Gospel (Good News) which Paul articulates more clearly than anyone else, namely, the Good News of God; His UNCONDITIONAL commitment of Himself to us in Jesus Christ!

It has always amazed and puzzled me why it should be that we humans have recognized only one relationship in which unconditional commitment is expected, namely that of marriage (in which we take each other for better or worse). Yet, as things have turned out, an increasing number of men and women have found it impossible to maintain such commitment. And of course, the large number of people who find themselves unable to remain committed to God and his church continues unabated. So what is the solution to all of this inability to remain committed? I believe that it is mainly a matter of getting our eyes opened to God's unconditional commitment to us. Why? To begin with, God knows at least as much as we do that whatever we want from others we must first be willing to give. Therefore if God wants unconditional love and commitment from us He can not obtain it by giving us nothing better than conditional love and commitment.

Now naturally, unless God had already revealed this truth about Himself in His word, I would indeed be presumptuous in saying what He should do. But thank God, He has left us in no doubt about this. The classic statement of this truth is one I have already alluded to in Luke 6:35 where Jesus says that we should be like our heavenly Father who lends (or gives) EXPECTING NOTHING IN RETURN. When this truth soaked in on me at age 21, I was drawn to God like never before and that was what made me a lifelong "missionary." It was the kind of good news that I wanted to shout from the rooftops! Precisely when I learned that He demanded nothing from me I suddenly became willing and desirous of giving Him EVERYTHING, unconditionally. I was hooked for all time and eternity. The dynamic involved in all of this has been the source of my energy for the past 50 years, and has kept me joyfully committed to God and His church (which cuts across all man-made boundaries). And interestingly one of the places where Paul explicates this truth so beautifully is in connection with the marriage commitment which he discusses in Ephesians 5:21. He begins that discussion in verse 21 by laying down the rock-solid basis on which all interpersonal relationships must be based, "Be ye subject to one another, out of reverence for Christ." In the following verse he applies this first of all to the husband-wife relationship, after which in chapter 6, he applies it to the parent-child relationship, and then to the employer-employee relationship. But what is of most importance in Paul's teaching is that all of his "imperatives" (commands) are based on the "indicative" (a statement of what already is) contained in verse 21, namely the last five words, "out of reverence for Christ."

Why do we reverence Christ? Paul answers this question in subsequent discussion of the husband-wife relationship by likening it to the relationship of Christ to his Church. And what is that? It is a love for his church so great as to cause him to give his life for her, a demonstration of unconditional love. Paul is thus saying that when we allow ourselves to absorb the example of how God loves us, we will be energized to do likewise in all of our relationships, (to be subject to one another as Christ subjected himself to us). For it is not possible to subject oneself to another more radically unconditionally than to allow oneself to be killed by the other, as Christ did for us on the cross. 

Now I want to elaborate a little more on two words I introduced into this discussion, namely the words "indicative" and "imperative." Someone once said that all of God's imperatives to us are based on his indicatives. In my reading of the Bible I have found this to be true. Before God issued the super-heavy imperatives of his ten-commandments to Israel He prefaced those commandments with a recitation of what He had done for them in delivering them out of Egypt: the indicative of His gift of deliverance from Egypt (Exodus 20). 

Now what is of supreme interest to me is that when Jesus delivered his well known SERMON ON THE MOUNT in which he greatly magnified the imperatives of God's law he prefaced those words by what have been called THE BEATITUDES (Matthew 5:1 and Luke 6:20). Up until I was nearly 40 I had always read the entire Sermon on the Mount (including the beatitudes) in the imperative mood (as a command). But then someone called my attention to the fact that the beatitudes were spoken by Jesus in the indicative mood. What an eye opener that was to me! By thereafter reading them in that light I began to see that the Beatitudes were not commandments but rather were statements of what Jesus WAS DOING (indicative mood) for the people and was giving to them. Thus for example, his very first beatitude was "blessed are you poor, for yours IS the kingdom of heaven." He did not say, "yours is the kingdom of heaven IF you do all that you can do, or anything at all." The kingdom IS bestowed on them as a pure, no strings (conditions) GIFT. It is no wonder therefore that they began to cry for sheer joy. Thus Jesus was lead to speak to them his second beatitude, "blessed are you who cry, for you shall be comforted." Again he didn't say "you will be comforted if you cry" but rather "you who are crying in front of me for having been given my unconditional love will as a matter of fact experience comfort." And that is what the kingdom of heaven is all about. This then led to the third beatitude where Jesus said, "blessed are the meek" for he discovered that the people he had blessed by giving them the kingdom of heaven had melted into meekness. 

Harry Robert Fox

 

You may write to him at

Harry Robert Fox

276 N. El Camino Real, #60, Oceanside, CA 92058 (Snail Mail)

Harry's writings

Harry's Chart on Law Versus Gospel

The Glory Road

Uploaded to the web on Oct. 20, 2000

by Jan Antonsson, webmeister

and last edited on Dec. 12, 2009.