From Jacobo Santin, to the brethren called to announce and defend the message of faith of Jesus Christ to every nation, in every denomination and church, and specially those that have been persecuted out of them.
The Landscape
We are growing. This site being published marks the arrival of expansionist teaching to the Spanish-speaking world as it had never happened before.I was baptized with the Spirit in mid-2022, the message of faith reached me in December of the same year, and Cheung's writings at the beginning of 2023. Along with them, I also met the works and friendship of many brothers who are part of this movement. I contended for years on the other side of the war, most of my Christian life until now, so I am a newcomer, but this page I launch is testimony to how much God can do when his message reaches a person. It is a demonstration of how a tiny seed can become the largest tree. It's not surprising to us; we know that's how the kingdom works.
I see that the social media presence of some of you continues to increase, and your doctrines are beginning to cause both fascination and perplexity among members of the main Christian currents, who wonder how such emphatic teachings about the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, holiness, obedience, prosperity, and healing can coexist with the firmest declarations of God's sovereignty they have heard. There are dozens of educated religious people, with degrees and PhDs, who with all their intellect have not been able to respond to our arguments, and whose foolishness we have exposed for all to see. Many teeth have certainly gnashed.
But this letter is not intended to congratulate ourselves, but to warn of present and future things that the Spirit has communicated to me at this important moment, warnings that the spiritual will judge as just, correct, and necessary, which will undoubtedly echo teachings we have heard before. I thank the Lord, who has given us sufficient knowledge to discern the times and prepare ourselves in response.
Mirror
Brothers, daily we face people who have no faith but enjoy philosophizing, debating, and preaching endlessly on their favorite doctrines, sometimes doing so aggressively and arrogantly. It is evident that the Calvinist side continues to generate the greatest culprits of this, launching diehard defenders of the doctrines of grace into the world, who nevertheless know nothing about predestination or God's decree, His covenant, nor His grace. They don't care, because arguing about these topics has become their identity, it makes them feel special. They crave intellectual superiority for the sake of intellectual superiority. God may or may not exist for them, it doesn't matter, what truly pleases them is standing out because of their Biblical knowledge. Many are sectarian for the sake of it, not out of faithfulness to the Gospel, but because isolating themselves due to pious pretensions vindicates their antisocial attitudes and turns them from losers to enlightened prophets. They say some theologically sound things that nevertheless have no impact in their lives.
I blame those that are obsessed with topics like supralapsarianism or "high calvinism" of this very thing, because they fight to promote an ideology with a most-convoluted name, they quote the old, decaying books of ancient theologians, and discriminate against them that do not believe the same as they do to a tee, but it profits them nothing, it doesn't change their lives, doesn't make them better or happier, it won't even make them interesting, they have no victory over anything. They are nerds, bitter bookworms, weirdos locked up in their tiny world, I know no other way of putting it. They're terrific at fighting and being divisive on the internet, but nothing else, so they become experts in theology, not because of faith or love for God, but because parroting words like "Exegesis," "Hermeneutics," or "Orthodoxy" wins them the admiration of people as religious as them. If they are eloquent enough they could build themselves a career at some reformed institution, or become influencers and heresy-hunters on their favorite social media platform, but that would be their entire reward.
God told me we could end up being just like them.
It's no secret that some of us had those attitudes in the past; they are the traditions we escaped from. It's not uncommon that as religious people we were very zealous, although not according to knowledge. But I fear that - without realizing it - we use Expansionism as just another weapon to continue the quarrels we so enjoyed in the past, to satisfy that conflictive tendency of our personality with even more potent rhetoric. I fear that our reason for being part of this movement is fleeing Calvinism - which is already losing its edge - to reinvent ourselves in another disruptive ideology that allows us to arrive with a more novel discourse to the Christian world, take it by storm, win debates, put down the brethren with our scathing criticisms, and indulge in the superiority of our closed club once again.
We know that it's possible for someone to preach Christ out of envy and strife (Philippians 1:15-18) and that even the greatest spiritual gifts and acts can be successfully performed without love (1 Corinthians 13:1-3). The gospel is proclaimed and the mountain is moved, but there is no profit at all for the one who does it. The truth is the truth, even if the greatest sinner of all or Satan himself tells it to you, but no matter how many souls a hypocritical preaching saves, the hypocrite will be condemned to hell. No matter how many souls a loveless preaching saves, the preacher who doesn't love will be condemned to hell, because he doesn't know God. (1 John 4:8) We don't want to be in such a position.
We are aware that someone could dedicate themselves to being a Bible expert (they can even turn it into their livelihood) but not believe it at all. There are a huge number of academics and researchers who are like this. A Catholic priest studies philosophy, theology, and receives all kinds of pastoral preparation before being ordained, but despite his handling of the Scriptures we don't consider him an authentic minister of the Word. Similarly, many charismatic preachers know how to repeat God's promises on anointing, healing, and abundance, but they are charlatans. The errors of the priest and the liberal scholar are evident, as are those of the reformed; their doctrines contradict the Bible; but many charismatic preachers perfectly repeat what God teaches about signs and miracles, without performing any. What is the difference between them and those who do have results?
Faith.
And I don't state it lightly. We affirm the Cheungian adage, "What you believe God will do for you is what God is going to do for you" and "What you believe is going to happen is what is going to happen," which is another way of expressing what Jesus taught, "According to your faith be it done to you." What we believe will happen, without doubting, is exactly what will happen. What we believe God will do for us, without doubting, is exactly what God will do for us.
The woman with the issue of blood believed that by touching the hem of Jesus' garment she would be healed, and it was just so. Joshua believed that at his word the day would stop, and so it was. Samson believed that the Lord would devastate the Philistines through him, and so it happened, even in the midst of his immoral life, again and again. Elijah believed that his prayer would bring back rain, and so it was. David believed that God would give him victory over the giant, and he did.
If the Pentecostal or charismatic believes what they preach, it will become a reality in their life. If they believe a lot, it will become apparent; if they believe little and are just going through the motions, they will receive little.
And if we believe what we preach, we will receive it. If we preach that God wants to give us healing, prosperity, miracles, and many more things, what are we going to receive? And if it doesn't happen to us, what's the most sincere explanation? It's obvious.
Consistency
I believe that one of the clearest evidences that an expansionist has a problem of unbelief and his heart is disconnected to some extent from what he preaches is that he doesn’t see those promises manifesting in his life. It shouldn't be controversial, it's exactly what we teach! If we're not capable of accepting this reality, we're being guilty of what we accuse the entire Christianity of: deceiving themselves and accumulating excuses and justifications.
"You, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself?" (Romans 2:21) You who rebuke unbelief in your brothers, do you rebuke yourself? You who criticize the lack of results, do you criticize your own? You who demand faith from a suffering brother, do you demand the same of yourself in the midst of trial? Because doing these things is good, but if you don't do them to yourself, you're excluding yourself from momentary pain, but also from the Gospel. Take into account that your brothers probably don't have even half the knowledge of the Word that you do, so when you judge yourself you must be twice as forceful as you are with them, not more indulgent.
On the other hand, you who announce to your brothers that God has loved them with everlasting love, do you announce it to your soul as well? You who teach that God wants to heal, prosper, and care for your brother, do you teach it to yourself too? You who apply Jesus' promises and bless your brothers with them, do you believe those promises apply equally to you? You who pray fervently for the desires of others and firmly believe that God will grant them, do you believe that God will hear and answer you in your need as well? All these things are good, but if you don't do them with yourself, once again, you're excluding yourself from the Gospel. Remember again that those brothers probably don't have the knowledge and obedience to the Word that you have, so you should be twice as confident in your prayers.
Cheung mentions it in one of his texts:
You can appear entirely sound in doctrine, but as long as it is only God’s opinion, and as long as you refer to it with nothing more than reverent detachment, you will not partake of its promises. It would all be the gospel — for someone else. You can appear totally right just by repeating what God says, but as long as it is only what he thinks and not what you think, then it only means that God is right, and not that you are right.
And speaking of healing miracles elsewhere:
It takes faith to succeed. If you fail constantly, then among other things, you have a problem with unbelief.
(I'm quoting Vincent, but I'll clarify what's evident to us: Expansionism is just a label we use for convenience, Cheung is a man of God whom we respect and honor because he teaches the Bible correctly, but our faith doesn't depend on what he says or does, or believes. The man could be an artificial intelligence developed as an experiment by the Chinese government that accidentally discovered the truths of the Bible, but that wouldn't make a difference. I reference what he says because it can illustrate what I'm saying, as well as remind you, brothers, of things you've already read.)
Even if none of us believed what we preach, our doctrine would still be true. God would be true, though every man were a liar in his heart (Romans 3:4). But is this what we want, to be heralds of the promises but not their heirs? The Expansionist who delights in writing and writing, debating and debating, and adding argument after argument in favor of his ideology, but who is not receiving any spiritual, material, or physical blessing through faith, is just another fanatic, a useful fool for the movement, or worse, another reprobate. Is it not one of us who has often taught that having answers to prayers is a proof of orthodoxy and salvation? Would it be too much to make it a test for anyone who wishes to be heard among us?
The pessimistic Christian is entirely congruent in being a loser; the cessationist is exactly as his theology dictates: a Christian born at the wrong time. The depression of the man who believes himself to be an unworthy worm is consistent with what he thinks. But you, who attribute the greatest blessings to faith, see no change in your life since you believe? How can this be? Rather, you do not truly believe; you have no faith. At best, you have it only for others, I understand that, but you need to do something about it, because if it were about eternal life, you wouldn't be so calm announcing it to others while doubting it applies to you.
You may justify yourself, "Not all blessings are received instantly; I'm going through trials. I'm showing my patience; that's why the promises haven't manifested yet." I tell you: perhaps you're right, but be careful not to use the same rhetoric of unbelief that we denounce; you could be deceiving yourself. Perhaps these convenient excuses are the reason why you haven't received yet. The Spirit has already come to the world, but your new faith has only resulted in more waiting. Is this how God rewards you? Is this what you preach, that God in His sovereignty has not yet honored His Word? You already have the perfect justification for years to pass without experiencing His power and for your life and that of an unbeliever to be the same. It seems to me that you can be an expansionist of lips, and a cessationist of heart. An expansionist for others, but an unbeliever for yourself. This theology may defeat ministers, seminarians, and teachers in debate, but it has not managed to refute the hardness of your heart.
It is common for our fiercest opponents - when they run out of Biblical arguments - to cast doubt on our doctrine by questioning how prosperous, miraculous, healthy, and successful we are personally. We do well to point out that they want to base their beliefs on experience - their own and others', on empiricism, and not on the Scriptures. Surely they will receive no sign, only the fruit of their inconsistency, unto eternal perdition. But we must be very careful that the spiritual blindness of these Pharisees does not become an excuse for our own faults.
Can you demonstrate through a sermon that the Word teaches prosperity and healing? Very well. Can you expound how God has promised to answer the prayer of faith? Excellent. But the doctrine of faith is not just good homiletics; its fruits should deliver to you the healing, prosperity, and answered prayers that you proclaim, not just that you step down from the pulpit satisfied one more Sunday.
Can you demonstrate the fallacies of others with your brutal argumentation? Good. Can you prove that they are incoherent and do not truly affirm Sola Scriptura? Excellent, you have given them something to think about. But the doctrine of faith is not just good apologetics, it is not just the best position you can defend in a discussion or the best ideology to preach in a sermon, it is rather the absolute truth of the Bible. So if you determine that the Bible teaches that every disciple will do the works of Jesus, and you truly believe it, by necessity there must be these signs and miracles in your life, even if you never show them to the cessationists. With all this, Jesus did appeal to His works for His opponents to believe, even if they did not trust directly in Him: "Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves" (John 14:11). And although He could not do much in Nazareth because of the people's unbelief (Matthew 13:58), on occasions He did heal in front of the religious leaders, as a testimony to them. "And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, 'Stretch out your hand.' He stretched it out, and his hand was restored." (Mark 3:5)
It is worth quoting Cheung one last time:
"Compassion is our motivation. We already believe the truth, and we have faith to receive for ourselves, so we are going to be fine no matter what other people believe. We teach people the word of God for their benefit. We do not need them to believe before we can receive. If they refuse to believe, it will only hurt them. Our motivation is not to vindicate ourselves."
Actor and Politician
In debate competitions it is customary to draw lots for the positions that participants will defend. They do not choose the idea most aligned with their personal convictions, but the one dictated by the piece of paper they draw randomly from an urn. A common discussion topic is whether corruption is cultural or not, for example, or whether political parties should be sponsored by their own militants. The point is that each contestant has to assume the position they obtained randomly for the duration of the debate, no matter how different or contrary it is to their genuine ideology. I remember the time I took part in such a contest and had to represent the dictator of a poor South American country. I won first place in a landslide, although I didn't have the slightest sympathy for the political philosophy or discourse of the autocratic government I was interpreting. In fact, my ideas were diametrically opposed, but I knew how to play the role assigned to me perfectly. I took advantage of my villainous position to become the center of attention, and I took every opportunity I had to throw in my opponents' faces the inconsistencies of their own governments. I delivered powerful speeches and always had an answer for every objection, but in my heart I believed nothing of what I said; I simply used a controversial position to win.
Many politicians do the same: they survey the anxieties and hopes of the electorate to adopt the ideas that will win them the most votes for the campaign, even if they personally disagree with them. We must examine ourselves to be sure that we are not doing the same with the Bible. Using the promises to win adherents and discussions, but without harboring them in our hearts.
This danger will be ever greater as our movement grows, because there will be those who feel attracted by the aggressiveness with which we defend the doctrines, and will demand that we share our weapons with them, not by the Lord's calling or out of sincere passion for the cause, but out of a desire to fight. Like joining the army - not out of patriotism or vocation - but out of a desire to kill. These fanatics will not have the love we have for one another, because they will lack the same Spirit, the Spirit that allows us to agree and keep peace despite how militant we are with the positions we hold on practically everything the Bible says.
Perhaps it sounds exaggerated to envision a future where Arauto's Sectarians come into conflict with the Olivarian Legion in the Supreme Expansionist Council of America, while the Jacobin Heroes of Faith disapprove of both and the Cheungian Maximalists denounce all three as heretics, but our aspirations for this movement are enormous, in size and influence, to the point that it is reasonable to foresee both divisions and infiltrations if we are succeeded by men lacking in faith. Most, if not all, awakenings and revivals have eventually degenerated into partisanship and an excessive search for prominence, with people saying "I am of Paul" or "I am of Apollos" or swearing "The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord," ignoring why the temple is there and who dwells in it, which makes it clear to me that I have not prophesied in vain.
Finally, I want to reaffirm that this letter does not intend to include every observation that can be made about the movement, but only what the Lord has urged me to share so far. Nor does it intend to give voice to the criticisms we may receive from the outside, since our opponents have logs in their eyes and neither what they believe nor their attacks are congruent from any perspective. If they interpret this writing as a rebuke (which it is not), they must first rebuke themselves three times, and judge their creeds, denominations, organizations, and churches, before daring to accuse us, the expansionists, of any error in our doctrine.
The peace and grace of the Lord be with you, amen.
Yorumlar