By Pastor Tod Brainard
There has been a resurgence of interest in a short book entitled The Calvary Road
written in 1950 (reprinted in 2004) by Roy Hession. Hession borrowed much from
Keswick teachings of the late 19 th and early 20th centuries to write his booklet. In it he
expressed his beliefs in a "deeper experience of the Lord Jesus" or "victorious life". A
little history is in order. With the release of Hession’s book in 1950, copies made their
way to Far Eastern Asia where missionaries began to digest the book. After a few
months, several missionaries were teaching the book to their people and special prayer
meetings were initiated for the purpose of .emptying self of all known sin, a key
principle in Hession’s book. Several missionaries went into bouts of depression
because of failure to receive the .victorious life. That would be the sign of the filling of
their lives with the Holy Spirit. There was confusion and divisions that arose as some
claimed to have received "the second blessing" while others had not yet reached the
plateau. Hession taught that the Christian was capable of eradicating all known sin
through confession and repentance. In other words, it was possible to reach a certain
measure of spiritual perfection, a level very close to the eradication of the sin nature. He
believed that the Christian must constantly empty himself of self and all known sin
before he could be filled with the Spirit to be victorious. Still further, Hession taught that
a Christian could lose his salvation and in order to be saved again, must reapply the
blood of Christ. to once again be restored to faith in Jesus Christ. His theology was not
original for Pelagius, Arminius, John Wesley, the Keswick movement, the Salvation
Army and Pentecostalism have all believed and taught this false doctrine.
The late missionary, Dr. Gerald Johnson, related this account to our founding editor,
Dr. Dayton Hobbs, concerning what took place in Japan and Southeast Asia in the early
1950’s with the arrival of .The Calvary Road. theology or Hessionism. In 1952, Dr. Bob
Jones, Sr. received word of what was happening on the mission fields of Japan and
Southeast Asia with this wave of .second blessing theology and he traveled to East Asia
to meet with the Bob Jones graduates who were serving as missionaries there. As a
former Methodist, Dr. Bob Jones, Sr. understood this second blessing doctrine well and
was greatly opposed to it. When he arrived he told the missionaries that what they were
teaching and practicing from Roy Hession’s book amounted to heresy. He warned
those who had been ordained through Gospel Fellowship Association that any who
continued with the heresy of Hession would be removed from the association. Because
of Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.’s great act of courage, the heresy that had spread among
Fundamental missionaries was extinguished. In the preface to the 1973 edition of
The Calvary Road, Hession wrote that through revival, believers are coming to
experience ....the blood of the Lamb... to cleanse us from all sin.... Hession had an
infatuation with the blood of Christ that went beyond the bounds of Scripture.
Hession referred to his understanding as .the disposition in the Blood. (Pages 29,30).
The blood of Christ is indeed the foundational truth of the forgiveness of sin provided
by Christ. However, Ephesians 5:25-27 is very clear that sanctification is carried forth in
the believer’s life through the .washing of the water by the word.. The daily cleansing of
sin in the believer.s life is handled through the washing of the Word of God, thereby
walking in the Light (which is a synonym for the Word of God) and confession of
sin ( I John 1:7-9). His understanding of .the disposition in the Blood implies several
things: 1) it implies that the blood of Christ only covers sin insofar as the believer
confesses all known sin; 2) it implies that any unconfessed sin is not covered by Jesus’
blood sacrifice and therefore must be exposed and identified; 3) it implies that revival
is an experience equal to a second work of grace beyond initial salvation as the believer
comes to experience the power of the blood to reach us in cleansing power
(page 31). In other words, the blood is limited in its efficacious work for it can only reach
us as individuals confess every sin In addition, in his preface to the 1973 edition,
Hession references Psalm 102:13 and Nehemiah 2:13 (very little Scripture is used by
Hession to back his beliefs) in relation to revival and his vision for the Church. These
verses obviously pertain to Israel, yet Hession applies them to the Church.
Brokenness
In Chapter One it is clear that Hession does not understand true conversion. He sees
salvation and sanctification as two separate acts. Furthermore, he does not understand
positional sanctification and practical sanctification. Positionally, the believer is HOLY,
hidden with Christ in God,. (Colossians 3:3). But the Christian still has the old sin
nature including self-will. This sin nature will continue in the body until death. We cannot
empty the old nature. What Hession does not understand is that Christian perfection is
not perfection of conduct. Rather, Christian perfection is a perfect relationship
between man and God, perfection of motive and love (I Cor. 10:31; I John 4:17,18; Matt.
22:37-40; I Cor. 13). Enoch "walked with God". Whether Enoch’s relationship with God
was perfect or not was known only to God. Others saw its fruit in Enoch’s life, but the
fruit did not convince others of his perfection of relationship with God, for man judges
the outward appearance and finds imperfection. Yet Enoch walked with God right into
heaven without dying. Hession seems to believe that one cannot walk in newness of life
unless we are continually confessing and emptying ourselves of self. his definition of
brokenness.. Now, do not misunderstand me, the Christian is to confess sin to God.
God is faithful and just to forgive us of our sins and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness. The problem is that Hession and the Keswick teachers of his day
taught that we maintain brokenness by emptying ourselves of self through
continued confession. While it is true that we are indeed selfish and willful, does the
New Testament teach us to empty ourselves of self? If by self, Hession is referring
to the "flesh" he is not preaching a Biblical concept. The flesh is corrupt. We cannot fix
the flesh nor can we empty ourselves of the flesh. Romans teaches in Chapter 6:6,
"Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of
sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin" (NASV).
We, therefore, are "to reckon ourselves (the flesh, self) to be dead indeed
unto sin and alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore do not
let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey the lusts thereof" (Romans 6:11-
12).
There is no teaching of sin eradication, but rather crucifixion of the flesh and sin’s
removal from power (the reign of sin) in our mortal bodies. He breaks the power of
canceled sin, He sets the prisoner free,. as the hymn says. There is indeed a big
difference in that understanding. "For sin shall not be master over you, for you are
not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14). We are no longer slaves to sin, but
slaves to righteousness (Romans 6:16-18). The error of Hession is the same error upon
which Methodism, the Holiness movement, and the Salvation Army was founded in the
19 th century. The promises related to contrition and brokenness are linked to salvation,
not a "second blessing" - "the Lord... saveth such as be of a contrite spirit" (Psalm
34:18). To apply this to some additional work of revival and appearance of a "second
blessing" is to rewrite Scripture to fit a human belief system, not a Biblical system. For
excellent studies on the doctrine of sanctification (holiness) and the false doctrine of
the "second blessing" read Holiness: The False and the True by H.A. Ironside and The
Doctrine of Holiness in These Times by Chester Tulga. 21st Century Hessionism
Hessionism is the profound belief that daily brokenness (emptying of self the flesh and
all known sin in order to obtain or gain something in return) is the secret to revival and
the "victorious life" and that sanctification cannot come unless we live out a daily
emptying of the flesh and all known sin. Yet, we read in Galatians 2:20, "I am crucified
with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which
I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself for me". As Paul says, we are to "reckon (lit. continually consider)
yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but ALIVE unto GOD through Jesus
Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:11). Paul did not say we are to be broken everyday, he
says we are to continually consider1 ourselves to be two things: 1) DEAD indeed to
the reign and rule of sin, but 2) ALIVE UNTO GOD. Hessionism also accepts a new
definition of GRACE; it calls it REVIVAL. How did the early Christians miss this
definition? How did Grace, God’s favor against human merit, become revival, with
no context of revival being given? The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath
appeared to all men. (Titus 2:11). The grace of God is the way God saves and
sustains us. There is absolutely no excuse for any Christian to live a life of defeat and
failure for,..."where sin abounded, grace [not revival] did much more abound"
(Romans 5:20). Paul warns the believer in II Corinthians 6:1-10 that the Christian not
receive "the grace of God in vain". In otherwords, God supplies His grace in the day of
your salvation (vs.2) and continues to supply His grace in Christian living (vs. 4-10).
Grace is certainly exhibited in revival but the two words are not synonymous. One
Fundamentalist evangelist recently wrote in an article on Brokenness 2, that James
4:6 and I Peter 5:5 mean the following: God resisteth the proud [the unbroken], but
giveth grace [revival] unto the humble [the broken]. This translation of Grace is
saying something that is not in the text. Grace is nowhere in the Scriptures the very
same as revival. Grace, God’s favor against man’s merit, is manifested every
moment of every day to the child of God. Revival may or may not be manifested for it is
the sovereign work of God. In addition, God does not give revival to unregenerate
sinners; He gives ETERNAL LIFE on the basis of His righteousness (Romans 5:15-17).
Revival assumes ETERNAL LIFE, not DEATH. You cannot revive that which is dead.
You can only give resurrection life to that which is dead. Hession admits this in the
preface to his 1950 edition 3 , however, he ironically presents a differing conclusion in his
explanation of revival when he says, Revival is just the life of the Lord Jesus poured out
into human hearts.4 Is that not what happens at the moment of salvation (John 3:16-18;
36)? Hession continues, "Jesus is pictured as bearing the golden water pot with the
Water of Life. As He passes by, He looks into our cup and if it is clean, He fills to
overflowing with the Water of Life".5 Have we not eternal life at the moment of salvation?
How can we have more water of life one day and less water of life the next based
on whether we are clean or not? Hession is confused doctrinally. What we need is
Christ’s daily bestowing of His Grace to live the Christian life. Eternal life is not
something we run out of over time that has to be filled up. We either have it or we do
not!
Truth Versus Error
Salvation is brought about by the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (one event), the new birth.
You get as much of the Holy Spirit of God in the new birth as you will ever receive.
He does not come in pieces and in parts. Being filled with the Holy Spirit simply means
submitting to the Spirit of God given at the new birth and His coming to have greater
control of you in every part of your being (Ephesians 5:18). Hessionism, as in its
original release in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s, leads to unprofitable fleshly
introspection, externalism (perfection of conduct – changed exterior with a corrupt
interior), and false claims of reaching a higher plane of spiritual life. The folks, especially
young people, who get wrapped up in this line of thinking usually conform outwardly
for a period of time only to break away to proceed into the depths of iniquity and sin.
Spiritual, as well as physical, depression has often followed this doctrine when it has
reared its sanctimonious head. This is not what God would have for us. May God help
us to follow the Bible and not men’s fleshly ideas about the Bible.
Footnotes
1 Fritz Rienecker/Cleon Rogers, Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament; Zondervan
Publishing House; (Grand Rapids, MI: 1980); p. 361 . 362; logizesthe - present middle
indicative of reckon, to consider, to figure, to count. The present imperative could mean
.do this continually, .or .continue doing this. 2 John Van Gelderen, Revival Magazine,
2008 Issue II, p. 15. 3 Roy and Revel Hession, The Calvary Road, Christian Literature
Crusade, (Fort Washington, PA: 1950), pgs. 4-5. 4 Hession, see Chapter 1 on
Brokenness, particularly pg 5 and 6. 5 Hession, pg. 7. Ω (Continued from page 9 - The Calvary Road)
am too busy serving Jesus to spend my time and energy engaging in contemporary dialogue.
I think I know what .contemporary dialogue. means. It means that all of those intellectual preachers
are busy reading the news magazines so they will be able to comment on the world situation from
their pulpits on Sunday mornings. But that is not what God called me to do. He called me to preach
the gl o r i e s of Ch r i s t . He commissioned me to tell my people there is a kingdom of God and a
throne in the heavens. And that we have One of our own representing us there. That is what the early
church was excited about. And I think our Lord may have reason to ask why we are no longer very
excited about it. The Christian church in the first century was ablaze with this concept of the risen and
victorious Christ exalted at the right hand of the Father. Although it worshiped no other man, it urged
the worship of this glorified and exalted Man as God, because He had always been the eternal
Son, the second Person of the Godhead. -Excerpt from Jesus, Our Man in Glory by A.W. Tozer;
compiled and edited by Gerald B. Smith, Christian Publications, 1987, pp.4-6. Ω
sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin" (NASV).
We, therefore, are "to reckon ourselves (the flesh, self) to be dead indeed
unto sin and alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore do not
let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey the lusts thereof" (Romans 6:11-
12).
There is no teaching of sin eradication, but rather crucifixion of the flesh and sin’s
removal from power (the reign of sin) in our mortal bodies. He breaks the power of
canceled sin, He sets the prisoner free,. as the hymn says. There is indeed a big
difference in that understanding. "For sin shall not be master over you, for you are
not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14). We are no longer slaves to sin, but
slaves to righteousness (Romans 6:16-18). The error of Hession is the same error upon
which Methodism, the Holiness movement, and the Salvation Army was founded in the
19 th century. The promises related to contrition and brokenness are linked to salvation,
not a "second blessing" - "the Lord... saveth such as be of a contrite spirit" (Psalm
34:18). To apply this to some additional work of revival and appearance of a "second
blessing" is to rewrite Scripture to fit a human belief system, not a Biblical system. For
excellent studies on the doctrine of sanctification (holiness) and the false doctrine of
the "second blessing" read Holiness: The False and the True by H.A. Ironside and The
Doctrine of Holiness in These Times by Chester Tulga. 21st Century Hessionism
Hessionism is the profound belief that daily brokenness (emptying of self the flesh and
all known sin in order to obtain or gain something in return) is the secret to revival and
the "victorious life" and that sanctification cannot come unless we live out a daily
emptying of the flesh and all known sin. Yet, we read in Galatians 2:20, "I am crucified
with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which
I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself for me". As Paul says, we are to "reckon (lit. continually consider)
yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but ALIVE unto GOD through Jesus
Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:11). Paul did not say we are to be broken everyday, he
says we are to continually consider1 ourselves to be two things: 1) DEAD indeed to
the reign and rule of sin, but 2) ALIVE UNTO GOD. Hessionism also accepts a new
definition of GRACE; it calls it REVIVAL. How did the early Christians miss this
definition? How did Grace, God’s favor against human merit, become revival, with
no context of revival being given? The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath
appeared to all men. (Titus 2:11). The grace of God is the way God saves and
sustains us. There is absolutely no excuse for any Christian to live a life of defeat and
failure for,..."where sin abounded, grace [not revival] did much more abound"
(Romans 5:20). Paul warns the believer in II Corinthians 6:1-10 that the Christian not
receive "the grace of God in vain". In otherwords, God supplies His grace in the day of
your salvation (vs.2) and continues to supply His grace in Christian living (vs. 4-10).
Grace is certainly exhibited in revival but the two words are not synonymous. One
Fundamentalist evangelist recently wrote in an article on Brokenness 2, that James
4:6 and I Peter 5:5 mean the following: God resisteth the proud [the unbroken], but
giveth grace [revival] unto the humble [the broken]. This translation of Grace is
saying something that is not in the text. Grace is nowhere in the Scriptures the very
same as revival. Grace, God’s favor against man’s merit, is manifested every
moment of every day to the child of God. Revival may or may not be manifested for it is
the sovereign work of God. In addition, God does not give revival to unregenerate
sinners; He gives ETERNAL LIFE on the basis of His righteousness (Romans 5:15-17).
Revival assumes ETERNAL LIFE, not DEATH. You cannot revive that which is dead.
You can only give resurrection life to that which is dead. Hession admits this in the
preface to his 1950 edition 3 , however, he ironically presents a differing conclusion in his
explanation of revival when he says, Revival is just the life of the Lord Jesus poured out
into human hearts.4 Is that not what happens at the moment of salvation (John 3:16-18;
36)? Hession continues, "Jesus is pictured as bearing the golden water pot with the
Water of Life. As He passes by, He looks into our cup and if it is clean, He fills to
overflowing with the Water of Life".5 Have we not eternal life at the moment of salvation?
How can we have more water of life one day and less water of life the next based
on whether we are clean or not? Hession is confused doctrinally. What we need is
Christ’s daily bestowing of His Grace to live the Christian life. Eternal life is not
something we run out of over time that has to be filled up. We either have it or we do
not!
Truth Versus Error
Salvation is brought about by the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (one event), the new birth.
You get as much of the Holy Spirit of God in the new birth as you will ever receive.
He does not come in pieces and in parts. Being filled with the Holy Spirit simply means
submitting to the Spirit of God given at the new birth and His coming to have greater
control of you in every part of your being (Ephesians 5:18). Hessionism, as in its
original release in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s, leads to unprofitable fleshly
introspection, externalism (perfection of conduct – changed exterior with a corrupt
interior), and false claims of reaching a higher plane of spiritual life. The folks, especially
young people, who get wrapped up in this line of thinking usually conform outwardly
for a period of time only to break away to proceed into the depths of iniquity and sin.
Spiritual, as well as physical, depression has often followed this doctrine when it has
reared its sanctimonious head. This is not what God would have for us. May God help
us to follow the Bible and not men’s fleshly ideas about the Bible.
Footnotes
1 Fritz Rienecker/Cleon Rogers, Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament; Zondervan
Publishing House; (Grand Rapids, MI: 1980); p. 361 . 362; logizesthe - present middle
indicative of reckon, to consider, to figure, to count. The present imperative could mean
.do this continually, .or .continue doing this. 2 John Van Gelderen, Revival Magazine,
2008 Issue II, p. 15. 3 Roy and Revel Hession, The Calvary Road, Christian Literature
Crusade, (Fort Washington, PA: 1950), pgs. 4-5. 4 Hession, see Chapter 1 on
Brokenness, particularly pg 5 and 6. 5 Hession, pg. 7. Ω (Continued from page 9 - The Calvary Road)
am too busy serving Jesus to spend my time and energy engaging in contemporary dialogue.
I think I know what .contemporary dialogue. means. It means that all of those intellectual preachers
are busy reading the news magazines so they will be able to comment on the world situation from
their pulpits on Sunday mornings. But that is not what God called me to do. He called me to preach
the gl o r i e s of Ch r i s t . He commissioned me to tell my people there is a kingdom of God and a
throne in the heavens. And that we have One of our own representing us there. That is what the early
church was excited about. And I think our Lord may have reason to ask why we are no longer very
excited about it. The Christian church in the first century was ablaze with this concept of the risen and
victorious Christ exalted at the right hand of the Father. Although it worshiped no other man, it urged
the worship of this glorified and exalted Man as God, because He had always been the eternal
Son, the second Person of the Godhead. -Excerpt from Jesus, Our Man in Glory by A.W. Tozer;
compiled and edited by Gerald B. Smith, Christian Publications, 1987, pp.4-6. Ω
1 comment:
I found this article very helpful. Iv'e known several people, including a pastor, who embraced this book to the nth degree. Hopefully this can help them to see the errors in this teaching.
Post a Comment