Faust's Views Examined Under the Searchlight of Scripture

Here are some thoughts on the nature and purposes of the Father’s “familial discipline" of His own, in contradistinction to “condemnation/retribution/bearing and paying for sins/justice,” etc.

 (1) The Father’s familial discipline of saints in Christ, which involves sufferings of sorts, is restricted to this present life on earth, while we still have the sin-nature or flesh in us (see, e.g., Rom. 8:18; 2 Cor. 4:17; 1 Pet. 4:12-13); whereas the fate of the lost in “condemnation/retribution/bearing and paying for their sins” is sealed upon their death and continues for all eternity according to the “justice” of God.

 “For whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. For chastisement ye are enduring: God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom a father chasteneth not? But if ye are apart from chastisement of which all have been made partakers, then are ye bastards and not sons.” (Heb. 12:6-8)

 Notice that, according to Heb. 12:6-8, every single one of God’s sons – no exceptions – is a recipient of the Father’s familial discipline. Thus, discipline must be limited to this present life on earth, otherwise all believers would experience discipline in life after death, which according to Faust would entail (varying degrees of) torment in Hell and Outer Darkness in separation from God. As such, Faust “proves too much” in claiming that discipline extends to life after death. But that which proves too much proves nothing, except its own disproof.

 The fact of the matter is that there is not one passage (and thus not one contradictory passage) of scripture that extends the Father’s familial discipline of saints in Christ beyond this present life on earth. And this for many obvious scriptural reasons, some of which we’ll see as we proceed.

 (2) The Father’s familial discipline of saints in Christ has absolutely nothing to do with “the absolute justice of God” (see, e.g., Faust p. 6, 408). Faust shows that he understands neither the nature of the Father’s familial discipline nor God’s justice.

 "But the psalmist knew better, saying (Psalm 143:2), 'Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.' Were God to enter into judgment even of His servant, there could be no justification for him; for judgment must deal inflexibly with sins. And what servant of His has not sinned since his confession of the Saviour? No, salvation is by grace through faith, but impossible on the ground of judgment according to works, which is reserved for those who refused the Lord and rejected His 'so great salvation.' Only of the wicked Rev. 20: 11-15 speaks. 'The dead were judged out of the things written in the books according to their works.' " – William Kelly

 To hold saints personally accountable for their sins according to God’s justice would mean certain eternal condemnation.

 But let us hear the apostle Paul on where God’s justice is actually revealed in connection with believers and their sins:

 “Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiatory through faith in His blood, for a declaration of His righteousness on account of the praeter-mission of the sins that had been before, in the forbearance of God, with a view to the declaration of His righteousness in the present time, in order to His being just and justifying him that is of faith in Jesus.” (Rom. 3:24-26)

 On the Cross, Christ our Substitute was genuinely held accountable for our sins, according to the infinite righteousness and justice of God -- thus we never will be!!

 (3) What exactly are the nature and purposes of the Father’s familial discipline of His own?

 “As to failure and sin on the part of true saints through unwatchfulness, there is the plain duty of the church to exercise discipline; and the Lord acts as we read in 1 Cor. 11, dealing even to death of the body; just as the Father judges in loving care, as 1 Pet. 1: 17 says no less than John 15. They are thus chastened in this life. Nowhere is there a hint of saints detained in [Hell or Outer Darkness]…while their brethren reign. Saints by call are disciplined now that they may be saints practically.” – William Kelly (W. Kelly’s Writings on Prophecy, p. 176, “The Prize of Our High Calling” by J. Sladen: A Review by W. Kelly)

 “As to every branch in Me not bearing fruit, He takes it away; and as to every one bearing fruit, He purges it that it may bring forth more fruit.” (John 15:2) [See the supplemental note on this passage at the end of this discussion.]

 “And ye have quite forgotten the exhortation the which discourseth with you as sons, My son, regard not lightly the Lord’s chastening, nor faint when reproved of him: for whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. For chastisement ye are enduring:  God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom a father chasteneth not? But if ye are apart from chastisement of which all have been made partakers, then are ye bastards and not sons. Then indeed we had fathers of our flesh as chasteners, and we reverenced them: shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of the spirits and live? For they indeed chastened for a few days, as seemed good to them; but He for profit in order to the partaking of His holiness. Now no chastisement for the time seemeth to be of joy but of grief; yet afterward it yieldeth peaceable fruit of righteousness to those that have been exercised thereby.” (Heb. 12:5-11)

 The Father’s familial discipline of saints in Christ is in no way a matter of receiving punitive judgment, bearing and paying for sins, undergoing the wrath of God, being dealt with according to divine justice, sins being remembered in a penal/retributive sense, etc.; whereas such is precisely the case with God’s condemnation toward those who believe not on the Lord Jesus Christ.

 i. The Father’s familial discipline of His own is of infinite love; whereas God’s condemnation of and retribution toward lost sinners is of justice and wrath.

 ii. The Father’s familial discipline of His own is not a cause of fear/terror. As the Father’s familial discipline is indeed of infinite love, then it has absolutely nothing to with the principle of fear/terror; whereas God’s condemnation of and retribution toward lost sinners is absolutely a matter of fear/terror.

 "Herein has love been perfected with us, [with the result] that we may have boldness {not terror} in the day of judgment {at the Bema}, because even as He is, we also are in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has torment, and he that fears has not been made perfect in love." (1 John 4:17, 18)

 The Father’s elect ought not to fear His loving hand of discipline, even though “no chastisement for the time seemeth to be of joy but of grief” (Heb. 12:11); for “we know that all things {including the Father’s familial discipline} work together for good to those who love God, [that is,] to those who are called according to [His] purpose. Because whom He has foreknown, He has also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He should be the firstborn among many brethren. But whom He has predestinated, these also He has called; and whom He has called, these also He has justified; but whom He has justified, these also He has glorified. (Rom. 8:28-30) 

 Not only does fear/terror have no place in the Father’s familial discipline, but it has no place as a modus operandi in the Christian life as such.

 "And to put the fear of falling away [or torment in Hell/Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years] before a soul, in order to keep him right, is only to pervert the whole character of his life and service.  Just so far as he takes up the motive we present to him, he becomes really one living to himself, in a religious way no doubt; but none the less really, and none the less offensively to God. The love of Christ, it is assumed, will not keep me straight, except a large measure of self-love works along with it! What a dishonor to Him, and what a lowering of the whole character of God’s work in the soul of a saint!  Except I am in danger of eternal damnation [or torment in Hell/Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years], I shall be sure to go wrong. But the Lord says, 'If ye love Me, keep my commandments;' and the apostle, 'Though I give my body to be burned, and have not love' ('charity' in the common version), 'it profiteth me nothing' (1 Cor. xiii. 3); the apostle John again, 'There is no fear in love.' (1 John iv. 18.)  How does all this agree with the advocacy of a principle essentially and necessarily a principle of fear? for if there is danger of being lost, I ought certainly to be afraid of it."  -- F.W. Grant (The Perseverance of the Saints)

 iii. The Father’s familial discipline of His own occurs for the purpose of having His saints forsake their sin (i.e., to correct sinful behaviour); whereas condemnation of and retribution toward unbelieving, Christ-rejecting sinners is God forsaking them in, and because of, their sin (i.e., remembering their sins everlastingly in a penal, punitive, retributive sense, according to His infinite righteousness and justice).

 “I will not leave thee [God’s own], neither will I in any wise forsake thee.” (Heb. 13:5) Why? For at ”about the ninth hour Jesus [God’s own Son] cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?  that is, My God, my God, why has Thou forsaken Me?” (Matt. 27:46)

 iv. The Father’s familial discipline of His own occurs to bring about self-judgment, confession of sin, thus resulting in familial forgiveness, cleansing from all unrighteousness, and immediate restoration of fellowship with the Father and the Son in the Spirit, and of the joys of salvation, etc.

 v. The Father’s familial discipline of His own may occur to prevent any further sin and dishonor to the Lord – to put a final end to the sinful behaviour or course of a saint – while also serving as an example, correction, instruction to others (as in the death of a sinning believer).

 Nonetheless, every single genuine believer may be confident that “to be absent from the body [is] to be present with the Lord,” and that “departing and being with Christ is very far better.” (2 Cor. 5:8; Phil. 1:23)

 vi. The Father’s familial discipline may occur to engender further spiritual growth, spiritual fruit, and conformity to Christ.

 (4) With this clear understanding of familial discipline before us, how can it possibly be imagined that having unfaithful, unworthy saints consigned to the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness in spiritual death and separation from God for 1,000+ years (including the intermediate state and subsequent to rapture/resurrection) is an expression of anything resembling the Father’s loving hand of discipline toward His own, as outlined above?? The torments of Hell and Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years (involving retributive/punitive condemnation, wrath of God, perdition, separation from God, the 2^nd Death, the Lake of Fire, in accordance with God’s justice) is nothing short of having saints pay, or partial pay, the wages of their sins – and is thus a satanic assault on the sufficiency and value of Christ's atoning sufferings and death, overthrowing the finished work of the Cross.

 How does the nature and purposes of the Father’s familial discipline of His own, as outlined above, square with the idea that they encompass consignment to Hell and Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years? The former encompasses the latter just as much as light encompasses darkness, or life encompasses death!

 Take, for example, the Father’s familial discipline of His own bringing about self-judgment, confession of sin, thus resulting in familial forgiveness, cleansing from all unrighteousness, and restoration of fellowship with the Father and the Son in the Spirit, and of the joys of salvation, etc.

 Being consigned to the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness, in spiritual death and separation from God for 1,000+ years, makes this impossible. For if the unfaithful, unworthy saint were to judge himself, confess his sins to the Father, upon being consigned to the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness, then he would instantly receive familial forgiveness, cleansing from all unrighteousness, and immediate restoration of fellowship with the Father and the Son in the Spirit, and of the joys of salvation, etc. – that is, immediate deliverance from the retributive/punitive condemnation, wrath of God, perdition, spiritual death and separation from God in Hell and Outer Darkness. But that cannot happen, for, according to Faust, these saints are sealed in Hell and Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years, in accordance with God’s justice. It is, therefore, crystal clear that such retributive condemnation is in no way familial discipline.

 The same goes, for example, with the Father’s familial discipline of His own engendering spiritual growth, spiritual fruit, conformity to Christ. Such is impossible in the spiritual death and separation from God in the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years.

 Not only that, but keep in mind that when saints die, we cease to have the sin-nature or flesh in us. And in such a state the Father’s familial discipline has absolutely no place or purpose.

 Faust reasons that if the Father’s own can be disciplined in this life without in anyway undermining the finished work of the Cross, then we can also be disciplined after departing from this life and as a result of the Bema of Christ, without in anyway undermining the finished work of the Cross. And from that hollow ground he goes forth spinning his web of further deceit. But the utter puerility of his reasoning is all too evident, in that what Faust has unfaithful, unworthy saints undergoing (after departing this life and as a result of the Bema of Christ) is not, and can in no way be, the Father’s loving hand of familial discipline – not in any shape or form.  

 No, in consigning unfaithful, unworthy saints to the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness for 1,000+ years, Faust has them bearing their own sins, actually atoning for them to some extent. In fact, he has unfaithful, unworthy believers being subjected to anything and everything that the unsaved are subjected to (retributive/punitive condemnation, wrath of God, perdition, Hell, Outer Darkness, separation from God, the 2^nd Death, the Lake of Fire) -- only not for all eternity.  Faust’s benighted reasoning is that if such retributive torments are anything short of being everlasting (i.e., temporary, whether they be for 1,000 years or 1,000,000 years), then they are expressions of familial discipline and not any sort of payment or partial payment for sins.  (By such logic I suppose that the judgment of the Flood in the days of Noah and the judgments of the future Great Tribulation are to be reckoned as nothing more than the Father’s loving hand of familial discipline!)

 Thus Faust cannot cloak his wicked system of doctrine behind the scriptural fact that we are lovingly disciplined of the Father in this life. And stripped of this cloak, he is completely naked, with his theories revealed for exactly what they are – doctrines of demons of the most fundamentally wicked kind.

 (5) Another conclusive factor that makes it impossible for the Bema of Christ to be disciplinary in nature, purpose or result (but which we will not enter into at this time, though it can be demonstrated amply from the NT Epistles) is the fact that all saints in Christ, who comprise His heavenly Body & Bride, will appear before the Bema in a glorified, perfected, and physically immortal state via the Pre-70^th Week Rapture.

 We will all appear before the Bema as glorified saints, perfectly conformed to the heavenly image of the Son (1 John 3:3), fully knowing even as also we have been been fully known of God (1 Cor. 13:12). Again, in such a state the Father’s familial discipline has absolutely no place or purpose; it is completely incompatible with “the likeness to Christ consummated at His coming to present the Church glorious to Himself (not part but the whole)”! [William Kelly]

 How utterly wicked, monstrous, and preposterous is the notion of any saint in Christ, having been, by infinite grace, fully, perfectly, finally and eternally conformed to the image and moral likeness of the glorified Son of God – in a twinkling of an eye at the Rapture, in the consummation of our so-great salvation – and presented before the Father unblamable, unimpeachable, and in the full blaze of the glory of the Heavenly Head & Bridegroom, that he should then be consigned (by the very One whose heavenly image he now bears experientially in perfection!) to the torments of Hell and Outer Darkness in separation from God (and that under the guise of discipline)!!

 “[Citing JND:] ‘When the Christian is thus manifested [at the Bema], he is already glorified, and, perfectly like Christ, has then no remains of the evil nature in which he sinned. And he now can look back at all the way God has led him in grace, helped, lifted up, kept from falling, not withdrawn His eyes from the righteous. He knows as he is known. What a tale of grace and mercy! If I look back now, my sins do not rest on my conscience; though I have horror of them, they are put away behind God’s back. I am the righteousness of God in Christ, but what a sense of love and patience, and goodness and grace! How much more perfect then, when all is before me! Surely there is great gain as to light and love, in giving an account of ourselves to God; and not a trace remains of the evil in us. We are like Christ. If a person fears to have all out thus before God, I do not believe he is free in soul as to righteousness – being the righteousness of God in Christ, not fully in the light. And we [our persons] have not to be judged for anything: Christ has put it all away’ (Synopsis of the Bible).’ Thus the believer has no more fear of death, for he knows what awaits him; and the judgment seat of Christ has also no terror for him.” – Arno C. Gaebelein (Gaebelein’s Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible, p.961)

 “In what state does the believer appear before the Lord at the Bema? He is raised in glory. No judgment can apply to him which can affect his being in glory, for he is in it already when he appears There. What is judgment, if we are completely like the Judge – we in His image, in a body like unto His glorious body, and Himself our righteousness and very Life? “Herein is love made perfect with us [marg.], that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as He is, so are we in this world” (1 John 4:17). We shall be in glory. We shall not have the nature, the flesh in which we sinned. But we shall know as we are known, and give account of ourselves to the Father, re‑pass our whole life and all His blessed ways with us. We shall see it all as our Father sees it, and wonder at the all‑perfect grace which has led us onward from our birth. We shall see the thousands of instances of how His loving eye has watched over us to bless us.” (JND, as cited by MJS)

 "Finally, we have boldness in the day of judgment. 'Herein is love perfected with us, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is so are we in this world.' Here we reach the very loftiest point to which the love of God could conduct us. I read, that 'for every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.' But so completely am I taken off this ground by union and identification with a risen and ascended Saviour who met death and judgment on my behalf, so entirely am I taken off the ground on which, as a man in nature, I once stood exposed to judgment for every idle word, that I actually have boldness in the day of judgment, 'because as He is so are we.' Is there any judgment for Him? Surely not. He met it all. Death and judgment are behind Him. Well, as He is so are we. This is the perfection of love. May I then speak idle words? Far be the thought. 'Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin.' The very nature which has been communicated to me is incapable of sinning; and although my old nature is as bad as ever, and ready to speak idle words, if not mortified, yet am I called and privileged to walk ever in the power of the new nature, which cannot sin, because it is born of God. I do not refrain from idle words because I am afraid of the day of judgment, but because I possess a nature which cannot speak idle words; and if my old nature betrays me into an idle word, I judge it, because I am not to come into judgment." (CHM)

 (6) There is not one passage of scripture which teaches that in the next life (whether in the intermediate state or upon rapture/resurrection) anyone may perish, experience condemnation, endure the wrath of God, etc.,  in Hell or Outer Darkness, on only a temporary or on only a Millennial (1,000 years) basis -- not one passage of scripture. They all speak of such judgment without the least hint of limitations anywhere. Therefore, again, Faust "proves too much" (i.e., the loss of salvation, the non-existence of eternal security) in applying these passages of scripture to unfaithful, unworthy believers. And we all know that that which proves too much proves nothing (except its own disproof). But Faust does not stop there. Not only does he inject into these passages the completely foreign notion of such judgment/condemnation being temporary in nature (where nothing of the sort is even remotely suggested), but he further annuls those scriptures which explicitly speak of "everlasting" fire and punishment by claiming that "everlasting" there actually signifies that which is only temporary or only 1,000 years in extent -- this all in his twisted zeal to have these scriptures apply to the saved rather than the lost.

Faust claims that others water-down the seriousness of such judgment/condemnation (like those who agree with him in applying some of these passages of scripture to unfaithful, unworthy saints, but who don't go as far as he does in understanding the severity of the punitive consequences depicted). But in actuality, Faust does the very same thing by reading into every one of these scriptures the absolutely foreign idea of such judgment/condemnation being only temporary or only Millennial in extent. As a result, it is Faust himself who waters-down the seriousness of such judgment/condemnation.

I have no doubt that if one sticks to such Faustinian hermeneutics consistently, he could never prove, for example, the doctrine of the everlasting punishment of the lost in Hell. For the idea of it having limits or being temporary in nature can just as easily be imported into any and every passage thought to speak of the destiny of the lost. There is no passage of scripture which Faust's interpretive scheme cannot mangle. Let Faust choose from among the few passages of scripture that may be left which he for some personal reason or other takes as speaking of the eternal destiny of the lost, and I'll show him (as he has shown us ad nauseum) what his disgraceful hermeneutics can do.

 (7) Supplemental Note on John 15:2, 6

 Having cited John 15:2 earlier in our discussion of the Father’s familial discipline of His own, some elaboration and clarification seems in order as to the proper understanding of John 15:2, as well as John 15:6.

 "As to every branch in Me [in life-union with the risen Christ] not bearing fruit [at a given point in time], He takes it away [or, lifts up]; and as to every one that bears fruit, He purges it, that it may bring forth more fruit." (John 15:2)

"If one [not a branch "in Me," as in v.2, but "anyone"] abide not [at all] in Me [in communion with Christ], he is cast out as the branch, and is dried up: and they gather it, and cast it into the fire, and it burneth." (John 15:6)

John 15:2 refers to genuine believers, while John 15:6 refers to false professors.

John 15:2 - "Takes away," or better (here), "lifts up," "raises up." Gr. airo. See the following passages for the same basic meaning of the verb airo (in John 15:2, "lifts up"): John 8:59; 11:39, 41 ("take away" or move away, lift away); Matt. 4:6; 16:24; Luke 17:13; Acts 4:24; Rev. 10:5; 18:21; Ps. 24:7, 9 (LXX).

"The vinedresser lifts up the branch which is trailing on the ground where it cannot bear fruit." He raises it "from groveling on the ground," and tends it, "that it may bear fruit."

One of the things, therefore, that may be involved in lifting up the branch is Heb. 12:5-11.

"But no chastening at the time seems to be matter of joy, but of grief; but afterwards yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those exercised by it." (Heb. 12:11)

The saint in Christ of 15:2a does not bear fruit at a give point in time as result of not abiding in communion with Christ at that given point in time. The verse does not refer to not ever bearing fruit at all. No genuine believer can be, or will be, absolutely barren of any fruit.

The false professing branch of 15:6 -- who is never said to be "in Me," or in life-union with the resurrected Christ, as are the branches of 15:2 -- has never abided in communion with Christ at all, and thus has never borne any fruit at all. If one is not a genuine believer, then he is not "in Christ," and as such, he cannot and will not ever "abide" in communion with Christ, and will never bear any real fruit.

                                                                --James Ventilato (7/03)

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *

We have a number of documents which evaluate the teachings of Zane Hodges, Joseph Dillow, Robert Wilkin and other men who share views similar to J. D. Faust, though they do not embrace his views of millennial punishment.  Please consider the following: