Chuck Swindoll, in his defining work, The Grace Awakening, believes he is wielding "the torch of freedom" as previously held by protestant Reformers such as Martin Luther. In this Swindoll leads his readers to conceive that by closest him and his Grace Awakening doctrines that they're duration faithful to the Reformation doctrines of faith alone and grace. Chuck Swindoll says:

"Human works must accompany faith before you can be definite of your salvation. We keep on to hear that "different gospel"...It is heresy. It is antithetical to the exact letter that lit the glimmer to the Reformation: Sola Fide - faith alone" (The Grace Awakening, p.86).

"When sixteenth-century European Reformers raised the torch of ability and withstood the devout legalists of their era, grace was the battle cry: salvation by grace alone a hike of faith without despair of everlasting damnation" (The Grace Awakening, p. xiv).

Indeed, the "spark that lit the reformation" was Sola Fide or faith alone. However, the Reformers did not define their terms as Chuck Swindoll does. Swindoll's tolerant of grace promises, "regardless of how you choose to live, you can't vital so poor that All powerful says to you, 'you're no longer mine'" (Shedding Bright On Our Darkened Side, tape sld 1A). Swindoll's dogma regarding the ending salvation of still the most reprobate necessitates his elimination of the biblical (as fresh as the Reformation) linking of works to absolute faith.

Ultimately, Dr. Swindoll joins himself to the Reformers leaving the unread undergraduate with the result that his views on faith and grace are in column with those of the Reformers, on the other hand they are not. Opposite to Swindoll, Luther believed that works or "human achievement," as Swindoll says, can not be separated from saving faith. Luther wrote:

"Faith must of succession be sincere. It must be a faith that performs excellent works over love. Whether faith lacks cherishing it is not authoritative faith. Thus the Apostle bars the bag of hypocrites to the country of Christ on all sides...Idle faith is not justifying faith" (Luther, Commentary On Galatians).

R.C. Sproul, in his manual Faith Alone, wrote: "The Reformers adage saving faith as necessarily, inevitably, and these days compliant the fruit of works. Martin Luther insisted that the faith that justifies is a fides viva, a basic and living faith that yields the fruit of works." Contrary to this, Chuck Swindoll believes it is a deception and another gospel to insist that works must accompany accurate faith. And he does this as though he were speaking for the Reformers!

Plainly, Chuck Swindoll leads the uninformed reader to outlook The Grace Awakening as tome recovering the at sea truths of the Reformation from the devious hands of present-day legalists who get corrupted them. When the accuracy is that Luther himself aggressively argued against the opinion of grace and faith extolled in Swindoll's book.

Comparable those who rewrite story to bolster their agendas, Chuck Swindoll has changed the version of the Reformation to agree with his views. Does Swindoll brief that "justifying faith is a coal-and-ice faith that necessarily yields the fruit of works" as did Luther? Does Swindoll insist that "whoever doesn't close capital works is without faith," as did the Reformers? No he doesn't, rather, Chuck Swindoll teaches the opposite: that there is no apparent research of salvation or spirituality and that it is heresy to keep that works must accompany faith. And he does this in the agname of Reformation teaching! Is this not dishonest? How can this be anything short of historical revisionism?

Daniel LaLond's book, The Mendacity Promise, tests the teaching of Chuck Swindoll. The Lying Vow too examines the doctrines of eternal security, biblical salvation and the carnal Christian.