On My Walk

Evans v Erhman in Halifax

2012-01-19T23:44:00.005-04:00

I'll give an overview later, but tonight I watched Dr. Craig Evans and Dr. Bart Erhman discuss the question of if the New Testament gives an accurate portrait of the historical Jesus or not. Well... they didn't disagree on very much. Evans basically agreed with almost everything the atheist Bart Erhman had to say about the New Testament. I am shocked, furious and astounded with Evans' lack of even attempting to defend the Scriptures. I could accept if he got bested... he didn't even try.

Wallace on Ephesians 2:8-9

2012-01-16T19:56:00.000-04:00

Daniel B. Wallace has just under two pages in his Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics devoted to the debate about how to interpret what is the actual "gift" in Ephesians 2:8-9.

Recently, OMW reader and friend of mine, Stephen commented with regard to the Greek of Eph 2:8-9 under the article TESTING TULIP: Total Depravity/Inability. In his comment Stephen quoted Wallace's discussion of this passage in his Greek Grammar. I found his comment so compelling that I ordered Wallace's work to read it for myself. What I have found is a discussion of the Greek involved that confirms what I previously have discussed on the subject in an article entitled John Calvin Describes the Faith that Saves, and more importantly opened my eyes to things I have not considered. Wallace presents the four most common views on the passage, including the one that I have held to, and including one which I have never heard before but which is most interesting!

I will now introduce the four views of what the gift is in Eph 2:8-9 that Wallace discusses on Pages 334 - 335 in Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics.

1. That grace is the antecedent.
2. That faith is the antecedent.
3. That the concept of a by grace through faith salvation is the antecedent.
4. That kai touto ( translated "and this" in every translation I've read) works with adverbial force without antecedent and means "and especially".

Options 1 & 2 suffer because touto (this) is in the neuter gender while both chariti (grace) and pisteos (faith) are in the feminine. I would include a 5th option that has been told to me by some Pastors as having the same basic problem; that the gift includes both points or "each and everything involved with salvation" is the gift of God. Some argue, as Wallace notes, that the gender issue isn't a problem because there are some examples in Greek literature where a neuter demonstrative referes back to a noun of a different gender and that touto has been attracted to the gender of doron (gift). Wallace goes on to explain that this it is almost always the case that this would be done only when the pronoun is caught between two nouns of different gender. He gives Acts 8:10 as an example, and Matt 18:38 as an opposite example. Then he notes that Eph 2:8 is not a like example because doron is no the predicate nom. of touto (this) but of the implied "it" in the following clause. He finishes by saying that it is "doubtful" that either faith or grace are the antecedent of touto (this).

He calls view 3 "more plausible" and this is the view that I have come to and held through using my own limited Greek skills and training. Apparently referencing other (as of yet unknown to me) parts of his Grammar Wallace says "As we have seen, touto regularly takes a conceptual antecedent." He adds a note that mirrors my thoughts on the nature of Faith exactly at the bottom of Page 335. I will let the reader find and be edified by this as they read his book.

Of view 4 Wallace expresses surprise that it has had such a small impact on exegetical literature. He notes that BDF and BAGD assume this force for kai touto in Eph 2:8 without discussion. I'm surprised I have never heard the slightest discussion of this view before. While I am satisfied with view 3, view 4 finds an excited home in my understanding of Paul's overall argument for Pauline Justification, or Paul's view of the reception of Eternal Salvation. Wallace says that if kai touto (and this) is adverbial then it has the meaning "and at that, and especially" without having any antecedent. It focuses on the verb rather than on any noun. He brings up that this same structure is seen in 3Jn verse 5:

Beloved, you are acting faithfully in whatever you accomplish for the brethren, and especially when they are strangers; (NASB)

Wallace then suggests this translation of Eph 2:8 "for by grace you are saved through faith, and [you are saved] especially not by your own doing; it is the gift of God."

He finally goes on to note that the debate cannot be solved by grammar alone, but that syntactical considerations do tend toward views 3 & 4.

I am truly fascinated by this. What are your thoughts?

Soteriological Thesis Work

2011-12-30T08:02:00.002-04:00

A new friend of mine, Nolan, posted something here that struck a nerv with me recently. He noted that a lot of my blog is polemic against various ideas that float around in Christendom. He noted that this was perfectly valid, and in my mind I noted that the topic of the discussion we were having was based on a most polemic document; the Second Synod of Dort.

Chasing bad, or thought to be bad, theology around isn't always helpful. In fact I think it is often anything but helpful. That was a large point I made in my book Fail-Safe for Fallacy. The first time I looked at, and argued against, the "Doctrines of Grace" popularly called by the acrostic TULIP I made it clear that it is easy to argue against something but much harder to develop something that is true.

Over the last couple of years I've been feeling I should develop a Soteriological Thesis. The late Dr. Robb Lawson and I worked on a project together that we were calling The Grace Reformation. I believe it was a noble idea, but the perspective was too broad and so it was beyond my abilities and beyond Robb's ability to keep me motivated. :)

Over Christmas I have decided to limit the thesis to the methodology by which a person who is unsaved becomes eternally saved. I have a well-known dislike for systems that give answers to people who haven't (and so won't) read their bibles but I think the time has come to truly test what I believe.

This year I will be writing a book that introduces the thesis which is reasonably well developed in my mind, but has not been committed to writing as of yet.

Repentance Unto Life (Evangelism 101.14)

2011-11-29T19:34:00.001-04:00

Evangelism Update 25 Nov 2011

2011-11-25T18:02:00.001-04:00

TESTING TULIP: Total Depravity/Inability

2011-11-23T16:21:00.000-04:00

UPDATE: Please scroll down to the bottom of the Comments & click the link that says "newer" or "newest" on the lower right hand side to see the latest commets. We have now gone beyond 200 comments!

These articles are open for discussion but only within the terms described in the introduction to the series. If you wish to participate you must adhere to the requirements in order to do so. More information about my thought process and motivations can be found in a more recent post The Implications Don't Matter if it is True.

Monergism.com has this to say about the TULIP doctrine of Total Depravity (Total Inability).

Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature; therefore, he will not--indeed he cannot--choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ--it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation--it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.

These are the Scriptures that they reference to support these claims.

Genesis 2:15-17; Romans 5:12; Psalms 51:5; 1Corinthians 2:14; Romans 3:10-18; Jeremiah 17:9; John 6:44; Ephesians 2:1-10

Here are the claims they make in point form to explicitly show what claims are being made:

1. Because of the Fall Man is unable to of himself to savingly believe the Gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt.

2. The sinner's will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature; therefore, he will not --indeed he cannot-- choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.

3. The Spirit must regenerate (make alive, give a new nature to) the sinner in order that he can come to Christ.

4. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation, it is the gift to the sinner not the sinner's gift to God.

The Canons of Dort or the Synod of Dort are the basis of TULIP. The Canons are built on the assumption of the "Eternal Decrees of God" which are not found in Scripture, but assumed to be true based on logical inference from the particular view of the Sovereignty of God demanded by the Canons also TULIP. NOTE: I have worked and reworked this paragraph trying to be a generous as I can be, while also being faithful to the Calvinist position and giving an objective view of the relationship. The Calvinist would not see this as circular because they see the Eternal Decrees as being the foundation which are understood from the nature of God as they see it revealed in the whole of the Scriptures.

Wayne Grudem has this to say in his Systematic Theology (copyright 1994, Inter-Varsity Press & Zondervan Publishing House):

Of the Providence of God; that God "cooperates with created things in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act as they do" (Page 315)

Of the Eternal Decrees of God; "are the eternal plans of God whereby, before the creation of the world, he determined to bring about everything that happens." (Page 332)

Thus while TULIP's view of Total Depravity is focused on Soteriology (the study of Salvation) that man is totally incapable of believing the Gospel the modern system of theology known as Calvinism holds that man is actually incapable of doing anything (good, evil or otherwise) by his own will.

The Canons of Dort statement on the corruption of man.

On this particular topic the Canons include 17 articles or statements. These do not include Scripture references. One can read them at the above link but I will not be responding to them each. The reasons for writing the Canons can be seen in the additional paragraphs which are responses to perceived errors of theology at the time of the writing. The Second Synod of Dort 1618-1619. Most of the articles and paragraphs actually have nothing to do with our discussion because they speak to ideas that are not, have not, nor ever will be presented at this Blog. They are about a different discussion.

That being said, Paragraph 4 adds the following Scripture references in support of the idea that unregenerate man cannot believe. Eph 2:1 & 5; Gen 6:5; Gen 8:21; Ps 51:17; and Matt 5:6.

Also, Paragraph 5 adds the following in support of "infusing" something into the will of man so that he will believe prior to belief. This is support of the TULIP view of regeneration prior to faith. Jer 31:33; Isa 44:3; Rom 5:5; and finally the church practice of praying "Restore me and I will return" from Jer 31:18.

On page 678 of Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology he discusses the idea that "Election based on Something Good in Us (Our Faith) Would Be the Beginning of Salvation by Merit."

These are the claims of Monergism.com, the Synod of Dort, and Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology with regard to the doctrine of Total Depravity (Inability). These are the foundational teaching resources of modern Calvinism. If anyone reading is inclined to say that I have "misrepresented" Calvinism then theirs is not the Calvinism of the Calvinists and they should find someone who wants to talk about their own Calvinism. I will be discussing the Calvinism of the Calvinists here. I do not have the energy or the will to chase a moving target. Either the Calvinism of the Calvinists is either biblical or it is not biblical. It is my soul purpose here to find out and demonstrate either possibility as it so happens to be factual.

The last time I looked at TULIP I gave statements on each of the passages cited in the reference document. This time I am not forwarding an alternate view at all so I will only comment on verses that either do or could support each of the claims.

Here we go!

The Calvinists I interact with, and leading proponent Wayne Grudem all seem to agree that if a person can believe then they have reason to brag. I have always found this hard to understand. Can one brag because they believe the Sky is blue? However, in light of the sort of gospel that must be preached in accordance with Limited Atonement - that Jesus didn't necessarily die for your sins, and so Eternal Salvation may or may not be available to you - now I can at least understand why it would seem reasonable to TULIP believers that a person would have to do something amazing in order to believe. That I understand one potential reason why it may seem to a TULIP believer that one could brag about believing in Christ doesn't make it biblical however. There is no Scripture given as reference so I must simply consider the claim itself. Is faith meritorious?

Romans 4:16 a "Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace..." It had to be by faith so that it could be of unmerited favor. It would seem that both the primary concern of TULIP believers, that of stealing glory, praise, or credit from God in the Salvation process by a Believer being able to claim to have believed and also the secondary concern of being able to claim to be better than the person who didn't believe are not concerns which are in accord with the Scriptures.

NOTE: For each of the claims I will review all of the referenced passages, but only comment on those which I can imagine someone might use to support the claim.

Claim 1. Because of the Fall Man is unable to of himself to savingly believe the Gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt.

Gen 2:15-17 contradicts the claim as it indicates that Man would gain the knowledge of good and evil.

1Cor 2:14 is part of the 2nd Chapter of 1st Corinthians. The chapter starts with Paul explaining that he had determined to know nothing among them but Christ and Him Crucified. He goes on in Vs 6 stating that "However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature.." Paul continues his thought in 1Cor 3:1-4 where he states. "And I Brethren could not speak to you as spiritual people but as to carnal, as babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it. And even now you are still not able to receive it; for you are still carnal." It is clear that the wisdom that cannot be received is explicitly NOT the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For though these new and disorderly Believers were unable to receive the meat of wisdom Paul knew they could receive the message of Christ and Him Crucified. In fact they had already received that message. Acts 18:8 Thus, 1Cor 2:14 actually contradicts Claim 1.

Rom 3:10-18 states that no one does these things. Not that no one is able to do them. It says that no one seeks after God, not that no one can believe the Gospel. Is one saved by grace through seeking? By grace through understanding? No. Eph 2:8-9 says that we are saved by grace through faith.

Jn 6:44 is the problem, Jn 12:32 is the solution. Each use the same word for draw.

Here are some potentially interesting notes:

Jn 6:37 give/grant 1325 All that the Father gives will come
Jn 6:65 give/grant 1325 None can come to Me unless it has been granted.
Acts 11:18 give/grant 1325 They glorified God saying "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life!"

Jn 6:44 draw 1670 No one can come unless the Father draws him.
Jn 12:32 draw 1670 If I be lifted up, will draw all men.... speaking of the Father drawing because He was explaining why the Father had spoken.

Clearly Israel had the issue of thinking they were exclusively God's people. We read this over and over again. They thought they were safe because they had a blood line back to Abraham. They were God's Elect Nation. If one was to come to God one had to be converted to Judaism, they had to go through Israel to get to God. Now however, God has granted repentance unto life to the Gentiles and we come to the Father through Christ alone.

Thus Jn 6:44 does not indicate that one cannot believe the Gospel. It is speaking of the problem of accessibility of God, not ability to Believe in Him.

Eph 2:1-10 can be read in such a way that it sounds like faith is the Gift of God. However, Greek doesn't work like English. Faith is not the gift of God. Salvation that is by grace and accessed through faith is the gift of God. "The Gift of God is Eternal Life in Christ Jesus our Lord" Romans 6:23 not the faith that we have in Him. To see how the Greek works in this passage view this previous article "John Calvin Describes the Faith That Saves." Here's a diagram that may help.

Faith and Gift are different Genders. Faith cannot be the gift of God.

Thus Eph 2:1-10 does not show that man cannot believe the Gospel.

Gen 6:5, 8:21 talk of the intent or desires of the people's hearts. They do not speak of their ability, but of their intent. Further, we are saved by grace through faith, not by grace through intent or desire.

Jer 31:33 This is about the New Covenant with "The House of Judah and the House of Israel" Jer 31:31-38. The promises here are national. This is not about individual Eternal Salvation at all.

Jer 31:18 is not speaking of regeneration, it is about restoring blessings to the Northern Kingdom. Ephraim is used by the Prophets to indicate and personify the Northern Kingdom. This is also about returning, not about becoming saved.

On the matter of Claim 1

There is no scriptural support for the idea that man cannot savingly believe the Gospel provided by these sources. I am not aware of any passage that would, or could, give credence to this claim. Man's heart is wicked and deceitful, but it has not been demonstrated how this means that no one can believe the Gospel.

Claim 2. The sinner's will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature; therefore, he will not --indeed he cannot-- choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.

Firstly, one is eternally saved when they receive (or believe, or have faith in, or have trust in) the Gospel found in 1Cor 15:1-11, not by "choosing good over evil." 1Cor 15:1; Acts 18:8

Eph 2:1-5 Most assuredly the one who is still in his sins is dead in them. Gen 2:17 is the warning that this would happen and 2Cor 5:14 is the affirmation of the absolute proof that it did indeed happen. However, the claim is not about if the person is dead or not, it is about if they are in absolute bondage (no free will) to their evil nature. Genesis 6:5 says that the people of the world only desired evil things. Depravity is clearly a biblical truth which many of the passages referenced affirm. Yet do any of them say that people are in complete bondage to their evil nature and are unable to believe the Gospel? Of course no passage says any such thing.

With regards to works the Bible is clear that all our righteousness is like filthy rags. Isa 64:6 Even after we are saved OUR righteousness profits us nothing. We need the righteousness of Christ which is by faith. Phil 3:1-11 So it is true in a sort of way that unsaved men can do no good. Further, even the good that saved people can do is meaningless for right-standing (righteousness) with God; so the point is moot.

Jesus Christ said "Most assuredly I tell you; whoever commits sin is a slave of sin" John 8:34 The Lord did not make distinction between regenerated and unregenerate persons. He said whoever sins is a slave of sin, and He said "most assuredly" so I don't think this is really up for debate.

There are endless examples of God giving instructions and choices to saved and unsaved persons and nations. I am making it a point that this discussion and evaluation will not be about the implications. If Calvinism is biblical then I need to "Suck it up Buttercup!" and accept the implications - no matter if I like them or not. Likewise, if Calvinism is NOT biblical then those who have previously held to it also need to accept whatever implications that brings. That being stated, I find it hard to reconcile a God who "cannot lie" with a God who says "Whoever may" but really means "Only those I regenerate first may." If God gives a choice must be able to respond to that choice, based on the biblical fact that God cannot lie and does not tempt. Tit 1:2; James 1:13

On the matter of Claim 2

None of the referenced passages indicate that the claim is true, further the issue is about a person's ability to believe the Gospel and not "choosing good over evil."

Claim 3. The Spirit must regenerate (make alive, give a new nature to) the sinner in order that he can come to Christ.

It must be noted first that the language here says what the Spirit "must" do. This is because it is a logical inference from the other claims made in the doctrine of Total Depravity. There is not a single verse in the Scriptures that says that the Spirit does regenerate prior to faith. In fact there is not a single passage that says (or even implies) that this "must" happen either.

People must be drawn, and people are drawn. See the notes above under Claim 1 about drawing. Clearly drawing is not being regenerated.

Jer 31:18 is also noted under Claim 1 above.

Scripture says that the Holy Spirit "convinces" or "convicts" the world of sin, righteousness and judgment, not regenerates them so they can believe. John 16:5-11

I am glad to see that the Monergism website rightly notes that regeneration is when God makes someone alive again, imparts life to them, and gives them the New Nature. When the Lord explained Salvation to Nicodemus He told the man about how Moses raised the bronze serpent up and those who looked at it lived. John 3:1-21The Lord of course is referencing Num 21:4-9 where we read "So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it on a pole; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived." We see that it was only when the person looked that they lived. Not that they looked after they had been given life. Both the Lord, and Moses agree. One looks and so lives, not one lives and so looks.

Eph 2:1-10 states that those who are saved have been made alive. It does not state or imply that this happened, or must happen, prior to faith.

On the matter of Claim 3

This claim is a logical inference of the other claims made by the doctrine of Total Depravity/Inability and is not found in the Scriptures.

Claim 4. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation, it is the gift to the sinner not the sinner's gift to God.

The characterization of faith in the claim is false. Faith is not a "contribution" at all; it is a reception. 1Cor 15:1 Faith is not a gift to God, for it is without merit. Rom 4:16.

As established above under Claim 1 in discussion of Eph 2:8-9, faith is not the gift of God.

Jer 31:33 is discussed above under Claim 1.

On the matter of Claim 4

It is clear that Scripture does not say that God gives people saving faith.

CONCLUSION

Based on my review of the Scriptures referenced by Mongerism.com and those from the other Calvinist sources that I went looking for there is no support for the claims of the doctrine of Total Depravity/Inability.

I hope it will be noted by those reading that I didn't just limit myself to the few passages that Mongergism.com suggested. I actually searched out other credible Calvinist sources to find the strongest support possible for this doctrine. I hope that my Calvinist friends reading will concede that I did not seek to build a Straw-Man to burn. No one building a Straw-Man seeks out MORE support for the opposing position. I am also unaware of any way I could possibly have "misrepresented Calvinism" by simply quoting these highly respected Calvinist resources.

I do not want to propose an alternate theory to the doctrine being discussed, but while the Scriptures say that man is unwilling Mat 23:37-39; Luke 13:34-35; Mat 22:1-14 the Scriptures do not say that man is unable. If man were unable, if he were bound to only do evil, and was not able to know the Truth then he would have excuse at Judgment. Yet God has left man without excuse. Rom 1:18-21

I am thus constrained to report that the doctrine of Total Depravity/Inability as detailed by Monergism.com and the Synod of Dort is not biblical.

I look forward to discussion about these things. I however, do remind all of the rules (and my disclosures) for this discussion and some additional thoughts.

Resources for the discussion below:

Image 1 Parsing Jn 10:26 - The Lord used "not" twice.

The Implications Don't Matter, If It Is True

2011-11-22T01:13:00.001-04:00

As I have been studying and praying for wisdom in this new "TESTING TULIP" series I have found myself brought back to a thought I try to get people to honestly consider when I'm trying to help them with tough issues.

If TULIP is true, then the implications don't matter. They simply are the implications of truth. Evaluating the implications will accurately determine if TULIP is true or not.

In similar fashion, any lack of truth or validity in any view other than TULIP does not prove TULIP. Therefore it doesn't matter what my view of Election, or Depravity or the Atonement, or how God draws men, or Eternal Security... my view can be wrong at the same time as TULIP is wrong. My view being wrong does not aid the validity of TULIP whatsoever. Obviously if an opposing view is true then this would have the effect of negating TULIP. However, I am not seeking to produce an alternate theory to TULIP in these articles.

I will be testing TULIP. It is either in accordance with the Scriptures or it is not. Alternate theories are not part of that equation.

So I won't be trying to draw conclusions as to what the implications are and I won't be offering alternate theories either. I had previously said that I would give my view of each point, but I think that would lead to distracting arguments about issues that have nothing to do with TULIP.

This will allow me, hopefully, to spend more effort in the Canons of Dort as well. I think what I will be doing is to only use those for more Scripture references for the points of TULIP. I am not going to be trying to answer the very long Canons.

The Expected Day (Evangelism 101.13)

2011-11-19T14:13:00.001-04:00

A Roman Catholic Atheist? (Evangelism Update 9 Nov 11)

2011-11-09T14:01:00.002-04:00

TESTING TULIP - INTRODUCTION

2011-11-07T22:03:00.001-04:00

This post will serve as the introduction to the upcoming series testing TULIP according to the Scriptures. I am not seeking to refute TULIP, but to critically examine it in accordance with 1Thess 5:21 and by using the Scriptures not my intellect or preferences in accordance with Acts 17:11. Like the Evangelist, Teacher, theologian, and scripture translator John N. Darby I have no sacred cows in theology. I do not love my theology and will gladly throw it away to know truth without reservation.

THE STANDARD

Good Doctrine meets particular standards. Deut 32:1-4, Prov 4:1-4, 1Tim 4:13-16, Tit 1:9-12, Tit 2:1.

God's Word is perfect, sufficient, complete, reliable, covers all topics and is my first and final authority. Ps 119:89, Ps 119:160, Ps 119:96, Ps 119:102

No teacher (or resource) no matter how dear to me, or offensive to me will have influence above the Scriptures in this discussion.

THE INTENT

To determine if TULIP (or any part thereof) is faithful to the Scriptures or not.

THE DISCLOSURE

At one time I believed in TULIP but this belief was based on teachings I had received. As I grew in my study of the Word various points of TULIP were removed from my theology. I currently deny all 5 points as they have been explained to me.

I do not claim the name "Dispensationalist" but I do believe that God has and will continue to work in Dispensations or Administrations in His dealings with mankind and as He works out His perfect plan for History. (Ephesians) That being said, I have long since come to the conclusion that Covenant Theology is not a faithful representation of God's workings and His plan. I will not be dealing with this in this series, but it is worthy of disclosure. A good representation of my views on the subject can be found in Renald E. Showers' "There Really is a Difference!"

I hold strictly to the Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutic. I do not deviate from this from cover to cover of the Bible. It is fair to disclose that I will find it hard to understand why anyone would deviate from this at any point.

I have noted that contemporary believers of TULIP tend strongly and consistently toward the heresy commonly known as Lordship Salvation. This tends to poison the discussion for me, and it is very hard for me to divorce this heresy from the discussion.

I am not a great theologian but I have a great resource in the Scriptures.

I have received very poor treatment by TULIP believers almost without exception for a period of years. I tend not to trust those who hold to these beliefs to interact above the board. I will do my level best to give everyone a fair shake.

THE RULES

If any of the points of disclosure indicate to you that I will not be fair in this discussion then please stay out of it. I will not be defending these disclosed points. They are provided to aid the discussion in being open and Christ-honoring.

A commenter may ask one question of a person at a time, no more. Once the commenter's question is answered they will be expected to answer the question of the person they asked. There may be several people talking with each other at once. This will keep questions from being buried under comments, and will hopefully keep participants from feeling overwhelmed.

Intimidation will not be tolerated at all. I alone will decide if someone is dealing in intimidation. Intimidation will result in no further comments being posted by that person.

Questions will be asked and answered clearly by all who participate. Underhanded questions, or answers will not be tolerated.

There will be no links to articles or other resources. Commenters may explain a point and link only to scripture.

Finally, each of the discussions must at some point come to an end. The debates about Calvinism have gone on for centuries. I hope to have a better understanding at the end, and that others will as well. If a conversation is no longer productive it will be helpful if we just end it and move on to the next topic. I understand this can be exceedingly hard in some instances.

I think that's it. If something else unexpected comes up then I reserve the right to change these at any time. Of course, no one is obligated to participate and my intent is to have several people actually do so. I have no desire to make rules that leave people in an unfair position or feel abused. I am just trying to ensure there is proper discussion.

The Faith Problem (Evangelism 101.12)

2011-11-04T18:55:00.000-03:00

The problem with preaching the Gospel any other way than how the Apostles preached it is that we will probably remove the ability of the person we are witnessing to, to come to true faith.

Tripping TULIP (Again)

2011-11-04T18:11:00.000-03:00

I've decided to take another look at TULIP. A few years ago I wrote a series of articles called "Tripping TULIP" It generated no small amount of offense.

I'm a couple of years older, perhaps more familiar with the Scriptures, perhaps more mature, perhaps... well perhaps I'm not any of those things! I'm going to go back to TULIP and see if I can be convinced this time. Recently I've tired of debating Calvinism. The endless accusations of "straw-man arguments" and "misrepresentations" really bug me. Half of the problem is that it is very very hard to find a Calvinist who will state plainly what he believes and why, AND be willing to have his theology be tested by what he says he believes and why.

Recently I've been discussing things like Double Predestination as a logical result of Total Inability and Unconditional Election. Now John Calvin believed this was logical, and necessary, and so does John Piper.

Here's what John Calvin taught:

" By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death." Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 Chapter 21

The other topic I've been involved with recently is how the idea of a Limited Atonement gospel gives nothing for the sinner to put their faith in. If you can't know that Christ died for you, then you can't put your faith in the fact that He did. The other issue that has been discussed at the same time is how preaching a Limited Atonement gospel to "every creature" forces the preacher to lie to nearly everyone. If Jesus Christ only died for a very few people who will ever live in all of History then preaching to everyone that He died for their sins (1Cor 15:1-11) results in the preacher almost always lying.

Now I'm under no illusions... I know that Calvinists are going say "We don't say that!" I have been searching for a clear, freely available, complete presentation of TULIP that contemporary Calvinists would agree is an accurate representation of those points. I intend on using the presentation that is available on the Moergism.com website.

The Canons of Dort are what these points were formulated from, but frankly because of how they are formatted and the language used in them they are not clear enough. It would be too easy for someone to say "That's not what it means!" I'll have none of that thanks. I will take TULIP exactly as it is presented at one of the most popular Calvinism websites and hold the theology to that presentation.

In testing each point I will take the description and break it down into a series of claims made. I will then see if the scripture references supplied actually validate the claims or not. Any claims which are made by Scripture will be held to be true. Any claims found not to be directly made by Scripture, and are not directly required by a plain reading of the Scripture will be found to be false.

I'll also consider things that seem to be directly required by the points of TULIP if they are to be considered true.

At any point, Calvinists may suggest further passages in support of the points of TULIP as detailed by the reference article. If the Calvinist does not agree with the article I have chosen to review they should say so, but not expect me to debate several "flavours" of TULIP. I am reviewing this article because it is a clear reference at a high profile Calvinism website. I expect it to be faithful to what Calvinists believe. If it is not, then I would suggest making a complaint directly to the owners of Monergism.com

Finally, I have not gone over my previous articles, nor have I pre-read the source article beyond to see that it seems to match other similar articles I've seen. I will be starting from as close to scratch as I can. We'll see how it goes together!

Accurate TULIP Presentation?

2011-11-03T07:47:00.000-03:00

TULIP?

I am looking for what contemporary 5 Point Calvinists would agree is an accurate and complete online presentation of TULIP. I would like this to include descriptions and scripture references for each of the points. If you would stand by a presentation of these points, that I can get to freely, please drop a link in the comments.

Thanks!

Faith (Evangelism 101.11)

2011-10-19T18:12:00.000-03:00

A Christian in Canada Presents - Faith

What is Faith and where does it come from?

John Calvin's commentary on Eph 2:8-10 is quoted in the video.http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/comment3/comm_vol41/htm/iv.iii.iii.htm

And here we must advert to a very common error in the interpretation of this passage. Many persons restrict the word gift to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating in other words the former sentiment. His meaning is, not that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God, or, that we obtain it by the gift of God.

God declares, that he owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but unmixed grace. The next question is, in what way do men receive that salvation which is offered to them by the hand of God? The answer is, by faith;and hence he concludes that nothing connected with it is our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all commendation, it follows that salvation does not come from us.

When, on the part of man, the act of receiving salvation is made to consist in faith alone, all other means, on which men are accustomed to rely, are discarded. Faith, then, brings a man empty to God, that he may be filled with the blessings of Christ.

Created to good works. They err widely from Paul's intention, who torture this passage for the purpose of injuring the righteousness of faith. Ashamed to affirm in plain terms, and aware that they could gain nothing by affirming, that we are not justified by faith, they shelter themselves under this kind of subterfuge. "We are justified by faith, because faith, by which we receive the grace of God, is the commencement of righteousness; but we are made righteous by regeneration, because, being renewed by the Spirit of God, we walk in good works." In this manner they make faith the door by which we enter into righteousness, but imagine that we obtain it by our works, or, at least, they define righteousness to be that uprightness by which a man is formed anew to a holy life. I care not how old this error may be; but they err egregiously who endeavor to support it by this passage.

When Paul lays down the cause of justification, he dwells chiefly on this point, that our consciences will never enjoy peace till they rely on the propitiation for sins.

The Gospel (Evangelism 101.10)

2011-10-19T17:20:00.000-03:00

The bad news is we're all sinners who are going to be judged by a perfect righteous Judge.

The Good News (the Gospel) is that Jesus Christ paid our price!

In this video I review the content of the Gospel to see what "in accordance with the Scriptures" means.

Here's the Gospel as prophesied in the Old Testament.

Christ's substitutionary death (Isa. 53:5), burial (Isa. 53:9), resurrection (Isa.53:10), and manifestation to His offspring (literally "seed," Isa. 53:10; cf. Jn.12:23-24, 14:19, 16:16-22,20:19-23, etc.). David records a similar prophecy outlining the Messiah's death (Ps. 22:14-16), burial (Ps. 22:15; cf. Ps. 104:29), resurrection (Ps. 22:19-21), and manifestation to His brethren (Ps.22:22; cf. Matt. 28:10; Jn. 20:17; Heb. 2:11-13).[3] This is also the gospel according to the apostle Paul (cf. Acts 13:26-41, 26:22-28; 1 Cor. 15:1ff, etc.)

The order of witnessing the Risen Christ:
• Mary -- John 20:10-18
• Mary Magdalene and the other Mary -- Matthew 28:1-10
• Peter (Cephas) -- 1 Corinthians 15:5
• Two Disciples -- Luke 24:13-35
• Ten Apostles -- Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19-23
• Eleven Apostles -- John 20:24-31
• Seven Apostles -- John 21
• All Apostles -- Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:14-18
• 500 Brethren -- 1 Corinthians 15:6
• James -- 1 Corinthians 15:7
• All Apostles -- Acts 1:4-8
• Paul -- Acts 9:1-9; 1 Corinthians 15:8

Many more prophecies are detailed at this websitehttp://bible.org/article/messianic-prophecies

I do not endorse this website or the organization that runs it. I have found particular page to be helpful.

I'm a Christian in Canada. What about you?

God Who Cannot Lie?

2011-10-10T11:20:00.000-03:00

I've asked a question in other places, and I will ask it here as well.

Can God, who cannot lie, say something that is subjectively true but NOT objectively true?

I'm most interested in how 5 Point Calvinists will answer this question, but how would YOU answer this question? Are you sure?

Think Different Video

2011-10-06T13:01:00.002-03:00

Share this video with those you think it may help reach.

Think Different

2011-10-05T23:35:00.001-03:00

It is terrible news that Steve Jobs died today at age 56. We are handed an opportunity to explain why this world truly has nothing to offer however. Let us remember the severity of the eternity sinners face, and let that terror drive us to reach them, to reason with them, and PLEAD WITH THEM to be reconciled to God.

Asking About Sin (Evangelism 101.9)

2011-09-30T09:30:00.000-03:00

Taken from the YouTube description:

In this episode of A Christian in Canada Presents Kevin discusses how he gets to the heart of the issue with people he witnesses to. The tough conversation about sin, righteousness and judgment. Hear the kind of questions he asks and why.

Finally hear how you don't have to leave the Sinner in guilt and shame. In this episode Kevin shares the Gospel of Jesus Christ, with you, and also in the hope that you would share it with everyone else.

Tracts & Arguments (Evangelism 101.8)

2011-09-24T15:17:00.001-03:00

A new episode of A Christian in Canada Presents is up on YouTube.

Can One Choose to Believe, or Just to Disbelieve?

2011-09-16T13:16:00.002-03:00

Did you make a good choice?

As a sort of follow up to my last article Can One Have a False Faith or Just a Delusion? I am asking you to consider the reversal of a criticism that I hear from Calvinists who hold to the Total Inability understanding of Total Depravity.

In conversations with Calvinists I will often be accused of attributing a person's Eternal Salvation to being the result of a "good choice" that they made to believe the Gospel, or accept Christ or however they want to express how one becomes saved. I invariably point them to Romans 4:16 which shows us that salvation had to be accessible through faith alone in order that it could bey by grace, or unmerited favor. I explain that this shows that no one can boast, or feel good about, having faith. Only works give us reason to brag or expect rewards. Rom 4:1-25, and Eph 2:8-9 show this clearly.

No for me this ends the debate. As far as I'm concerned the question of giving someone something to brag about, or contributing to one's own salvation if that person is responsible and able to bring faith is answered absolutely by the fact that God does not look on faith as something "good" and to be rewarded.

So if my faith is "MY faith" and I'm saved by Grace through that faith, then is salvation "not all of God"?Have I made a "good choice" have I done something "good" by choosing to believe? I actually think the Bible gives us the answer in even more detail than I had previously thought. Rom 4:16 settles it, but the concept is explored even more.

Romans 1:18-32 shows us that people do know there is a God and choose not to worship Him. Acts 28:24 says that some believed because they were persuaded and others "disbelieved." In John 3:18 the Lord says that those who have "not believed" are condemned but in John 3:20 He explains that those who do not believe actually refuse to believe.

I don't think that one "chooses" to believe. I think one is persuaded (as per Acts 28:24) God and His agencies (Creation, the Bible, Preachers, Situations...) persuade someone and that person then passively believes. Other people will refuse to believe, they will harden their hearts.

Therefore, I believe, it is not that I did something good that resulted in my salvation, nor did I even make a decision. My will was not involved. However, others harden their hearts by wilfully disbelieving and actually make a BAD decision to refuse to believe.

The only human will involved was to make the choice to not believe. Believing is passive, no will required. Rom 9:16 One doesn't choose to believe, they are convinced by whatever God does to convince them. There is no "ability" involved. One does not exercise some skill, ability or goodness to believe. They are persuaded.

Here are some Bible refs to reasoning with the Lost and persuading them. These do not fit with Total Inability.

Reasoning Isa 1:18; Acts 17:2; Acts 17:17; Acts 18:4; Acts18:19; Acts 19:19; Acts 24:24-25
Persuade 2Cor 5:11; Luke 16:31; Acts 17:4; Acts 18:4; Acts19:26; Acts 28:24; Gal 1:10;

The Supporting Evidence (Evangelism 101.7)

2011-09-16T12:49:00.001-03:00

Whatever gets you into an encounter with the lost and gives you the opportunity to witness to them probably isn't what you want to focus on when you're actually sharing Christ. So what should you talk about?

2011-09-09T09:00:00.000-03:00

No one has seen the Father, but we can see the Father if we look at the Son.

Can One Have a False Faith, or Just a Delusion?

2011-08-31T11:43:00.002-03:00

Do" false converts" stick their head in the sand?

This is a serious question. I write a lot of commentary on the views of Lordship Salvation (LS) proponents. I haven't had anyone really support that view, or challenge my assertions about it here here in a long time. I hope that some of you LS proponents will comment on this article though.

I've asked the following in another location, and have not yet had it answered. I hope someone here will take a stab at it.

LS proponents say you can evaluate to find out if you have really believed in Jesus. Can anyone give another example of something you could only "think" you believe in?

As far as I can discern, only delusions are false beliefs. Belief in vain, in something that isn't real or true. That's Paul's point in 1Cor 15 wrt to believing in vain.

Even in the case of a delusion the person really believes it.

Can you not be sure if you believe 2+2=4? I can see not having confidence in it... if you don't know yet - but that is the definition of NOT believing. Not "thinking" you believe.

So can anyone give another example other than faith in Jesus where it would be possible to only think you believe in something?

I don't buy it.

Is there an example of something that a person might truly believe they believe to be true, and yet somehow they don't actually believe it?

If the answer is what I expect it to be: No there is no example of something that someone could believe they believe, but somehow not actually believe it - then what use is evaluating your faith to find out if you have truly believed? There is no such thing as a false faith, there can only be faith and delusion. Both are equal in quality, but a delusion is a true faith in something that is false. The person has been deluded into believing a lie.

I hope someone has an interesting answer.

Tithing and Circumcision

2011-08-28T11:33:00.003-03:00

Really? A cleaner, fresher soul?
10% or more for "best results"?

Galatians 5:1-6

¹ Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.

² Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. ³And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. ⁴ You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

⁵ For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. ⁶ For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.

Have you ever been in a discussion about Tithing where the idea comes up that while it is true a Christian is not under "The Law" but that Tithing was instituted prior to "The Law" so "it has always been God's plan/requirement"? Have you ever heard someone give that argument, or given it yourself?

I've discussed this subject many times and I categorically hold to the view that a Christian is not to be compelled to "tithe." As I point out often, the person claiming a Christian must or should Tithe often has little idea what a "Tithe" is. They think it is 10% of a person's income. I've often been satisfied (because I'm sometimes needlessly rude) by asking a person to define the Tithe using the Scriptures. Can you? To be honest, I can only do so in a very rudimentary way myself. It's actually a pretty complicated system with lots of if/then type clauses. Go ahead, do an honest study of the subject. What did the Jews really have to do in order to fulfill the Tithe? Once you know the answer, then try to figure out how a Christian is supposed to do all of that, and who exactly the Tithe is supposed to be given to. OK so that's a complicated, and actually somewhat rude way of killing the argument. It is only partially helpful though, and much too complicated to be practical.

Galatians 5:1

Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.

Stand fast in the Liberty Christ provides and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Since a specific yoke is not identified this means any yoke of bondage - including some religious system that includes following rules about giving.

So this is all well and good, but what about the idea that Tithing was instituted before "The Law" was given and therefore just because a Christian is not under "The Law" we still must follow what God has always required? Well firstly, the Christian is not under law, not just not under "The Law" Rom 6:14. Further, "The Law" means Torah, not just the 10 Commandments. There is no revelation, practice or requirement instituted by God for Mankind prior to Torah. So that argument is dead, but I want to nail the coffin shut because bad teaching tends to get resurrected by men all to often, many times even with good intent.

Galatians 5:2-4

² Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. ³And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. ⁴ You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Here Paul is telling us that if one becomes circumcised that one is in debt to keep the whole law. How often have we read this and not thought about Tithing? Pretty often!

When people talk about Tithing (or their understanding of Tithing anyway) being instituted or recognized or accepted (depending on the person's level of faithfulness to what the Text actually says) before The 10 Commandments were given in Exodus 20:1-17 they are talking about Jacob's vow to God.

Genesis 28:18-22

¹⁸ Then Jacob rose early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put at his head, set it up as a pillar, and poured oil on top of it. ¹⁹ And he called the name of that place Bethel; but the name of that city had been Luz previously.

²⁰ Then Jacob made a vow, saying, “If God will be with me, and keep me in this way that I am going, and give me bread to eat and clothing to put on, ²¹ so that I come back to my father’s house in peace, then the LORD shall be my God. ²² And this stone which I have set as a pillar shall be God’s house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You.”

God accepts Jacob's vow, and people use this as a precedence for requiring the Christian to "give God" 10% of their income. Because God accepted this, we are required to follow suit.

Yet we read in Galatians 5:1-6 that if a person becomes circumcised that they are in debt to keep the whole law which Christians are not under (as we read in multiple places in the NT).

It's interesting that Circumcision wasn't just recognized or accepted by God it was commanded by Him. Further it was commanded by Him 11 chapters prior to His accepting Jacob's vow. (*see update) This command was given to our spiritual father - Abraham (Abram). Another argument used to support Tithing is that Abraham paid "a tenth part" to Melchizedek Heb 7:1-10 and so we must also do likewise.

*UPDATE: I did make an error here. Abram is recorded giving a tithe to Melchizedek in Genesis 14:18-24, several chapters earlier than Circumcision is commanded. I do not believe this changes the argument, or lessens it's accuracy. However, it does take away some of the emotional impact of stating "11 chapters prior"...

Yet, Circumcision was commanded by God to Abram for him and all his descendants.

Genesis 17: 9-11

⁹ And God said to Abraham: “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. ¹⁰ This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised; ¹¹ and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you.

This is 11 chapters prior to the first mention of paying a tenth, it is a command not just an accepted vow, and Paul tells us unequivocally that if we attempt to follow this instruction that Christ will profit us nothing.

My Brethren, do not again subject yourself to a yoke of bondage thinking that somehow you are honoring God through your supposed obedience. You are reducing the perfect sacrifice of Christ from complete fulfillment to a mere enabler.

How can a Christian decide how much to give, and who to give it to?

2Cor 9:6-15 and 1Tim 5:17-18 can be of considerable help, but you'll notice there is no rule (neither law nor Law) to follow in either passage. Not even a suggested minimum...

The Defense Team (Evangelism 101.4)

2011-08-26T00:39:00.002-03:00

Criminal Defense Lawyers get a bad rap, but the defense we go up against when we're witnessing with God to the Lost is truly evil.

Meet the Defense Team.

Evangelism 101: The Preliminary Trial

2011-08-18T22:31:00.000-03:00

Here's another episode of A Christian in Canada Presents!

When we're witnessing with God to the lost we have no right to put them on trial. It is however, in their absolute best interest that we help them through a sort of preliminary hearing of the evidence that will be presented against them at their ultimate judgment if they don't plead guilty while they can. If one sees their guilt, then hears how that guilt has been paid for at the Cross, believes in the Gospel of Jesus Christ 1Cor 15:1-11 then they will be saved.

That's why we help them judge themselves, but never judge them ourselves.

Make sure you watch in HD!

Spent the night in the hospital

2011-08-16T20:51:00.000-03:00

So I hit the trails on my mountain bike really hard last night. I wanted to impress my wife, who is an athlete, with my best possible time on a 24KM route that we really enjoy. I was out by myself and going as fast as I possibly could. I got home and was able to take a moment to brag, and then things started to go south. Eventually I collapsed and she had to call 911.

As I lay on the floor in the recovery position try to stay conscious we prayed. The Gospel I preach is the same Gospel that gave me comfort in those moments as we waited for the ambulance to arrive. I can tell you there is no assurance like the assurance that comes from full and complete confidence in the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

The ambulance showed up and they went to work on me... then they took me to the hospital were my wife I spent the night. As I laid there in my emergency room bed I was very uncomfortable, but the man in the next bed beside me was in agony. He was very scared and the pain was wearing him down.

Late in the night/morning he said something that really struck a nerve with me. It scared me. I started to think again about why I share the Gospel with people. Here's what he said to his wife:

"Dear this hurts too much. It hurts too much.... (pause)... OK that's it that's all I can take I can't take any more. We have to get out of here. It hurts too much I have to get out of here."

I wonder if this is what it will be like for those who suffer eternally in the Lake of Fire. Will they say these same words, and mean them, and yet not be able to escape? We have a pure and holy Gospel which offers people salvation from such a unthinkable eternity.

We MUST get it to them!

Calvinism, Religion and Worldliness

2011-08-15T14:58:00.000-03:00

Lou has posted an article by Yours Truly over at his In Defense of the Gospel blog. Here's a short snippet from it.

Let’s consider that Calvinism, in its practical sense, is fundamentally concerned with how people bring God glory. God is said to be orchestrating every instance of history to bring Himself glory and we have no actual say in our part of His sovereign plan. It is explained that any choice made by a person to serve God would violate His sovereignty, because all things are by His decree alone. Decree is actually a very accurate rendering for the word grace in the Calvinistic understanding that salvation is “by grace.” It is said the sinner is used to bring God glory through his/her judgment and subsequent eternal punishment while the saint is used through obedience and good works. Logically, since God is orchestrating every instance of history, it is said that one can evaluate which part of God’s program one is on through evaluating how one is bringing glory to God. Are you characterized by sin that will be judged and punished, or are you characterized by righteousness? This is how Calvinism is practically applied in the lives of those who are taught it: look at yourself and evaluate.

Being an Expert Witnes (Evangelism 101.2)

2011-08-11T23:31:00.000-03:00

Here's Episode 2 of A Christian in Canada Presents in the Evangelism series of videos. This video is entitled "Being an Expert Witness"

Being a witness for God is a lot like being an Expert Witness in a criminal trial. You're not the Judge, the accuser, jury or even a witness to the crimes (sin) -- you're just there to testify about the truth you know about.

Some Things I've Noticed

2011-08-04T13:08:00.003-03:00

What a Summer! What a Summer....

I recently decided to stop fellowshipping at the same church I've been at for the last two years. You know compromise seems like such a good idea... but think about the whole debt ceiling thing in the USA. They've just come to some, non-specific, compromise that will let them stick their heads in the sand until 2013.. when (if the Lord tarries) they'll have the same "crisis" all over again and they'll have all the same issues to deal with.

Compromise isn't always helpful. Do you compromise in life? Sure, about desires... about wants... about schedules... but not about TRUTH. You can't "compromise" about TRUTH because then TRUTH becomes compromised - and does not remain TRUE.

I'm truly sick of the Lordship Salvation movement. So here are a couple of things I've noticed about it that really make me scratch my head.

When I hear a Lordship Salvation proponent talking about repentance being turning over a new leaf, changing direction, turning from sin, forsaking sin, stopping sin, feeling remorseful enough to never want to sin again, hating sin, changing from disobeying God to seeking only to obey Him, submitting one's self to the mastery of Christ over all areas of your life... or any number of other definitions that go beyond what the Scriptures say.... well I almost invariably suggest that the person take a listen to a very good, very complete study of all the usages of "repentance" in the OT and NT in the form of a course freely offered online by the Bible Believers Network Bible Institute. I always note that the course is about 5 hours long.

You know what response I get? Consistently, actually without exception, the Lordship Salvation proponent will balk at taking a free 5 hour course on repentance that goes through the Bible passage by passage. I cannot tell you the motivation of the person - only God knows a person's heart - but I can tell you about how hypocritical it looks to me, every single time. You see the person will have been telling me how "true" Christians are sold out for God and seek to obey Him at all times in all ways, that they have completely submitted their will to that of God. Yet they balk at spending 5 hours on the fundamental doctrine they preach.... Seriously? How am I supposed to react to this?

Consistently, I react by telling that I understand that 5 hours is quite an investment (while trying to keep from either sighing or sounding sarcastic - sometimes neither is at all easy) and so I suggest that they pick up a copy of HA Ironside's Unless You Repent. You can get it from Amazon.com and Amazon.ca and in many GOOD Bible stores. It costs about $12... Guess what? That's too much apparently... or they don't want to order from Amazon.. or they have some other excuse. OK I understand that sometimes money is tight, and one might not be too sure of the validity of the work of a Canadian. ;) So how do I respond?

Well there is a free version of this work online but it is in older King James English. It can be found at Wholesome Words (PDF). At this point the one I'm speaking with will sometimes tell me they will "take a look at it" however, I have yet to ever have a single person come back to me to tell me that they have actually done so.

So what am I to think about all of this? Well I think you know what I think about all this. I also have a deep, deep dislike of how some people will preach to others that they must be sold out for Christ in order to qualify for Salvation, that they must forsake all in order to attain Eternal Life, and that if they haven't submitted every area of their life to the mastery of Jesus Christ that they will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire - and yet the preacher is himself very worldly.

You know, the Lord did say that you can tell a Prophet by his fruit. Do I believe the gospel you preach? Not much chance if I must first ask you; do YOU?

A Christian in Canada Presents: E101 Episode 1: Introduction

2011-07-26T12:54:00.001-03:00

Here is the first episode of my new video series on Evangelism. I'm still working on the quality of the video, and there is a compatibility issue with the mic I'm using. So there is a bit of hiss, and my skin tones are way over the top. None the less I must move forward! So here ya go!

John 16:5-11

Make sure you watch it in HD

UPDATED TO NEW EDITED VERSION

A Christian in Canada Presents

2011-07-20T11:47:00.000-03:00

So while the sun has been shining I've been working away at a project that has been tugging at my heart for over a year. A series of videos made freely available to the Church, and the Lost, about Evangelism, the Bible and Salvation. I have been passionately learning as much as I can about videography, Final Cut Pro X and a few other things in order to be able to produce the series. Here's the title sequence for the upcoming video series.

Make sure to watch it in HD.

Faith Submission Service

2011-06-09T15:07:00.000-03:00

FAITH RECEIVES

SUBMISSION OFFERS

SERVICE GIVES

ROMANS 4:16

Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all

It takes trust

2011-06-06T21:30:00.000-03:00

There can be no denying that it takes trust to obey God when He is growing you. Hebrews 11 tells us of God's heroes of faith, or those He calls the "elders." It is sometimes called the "faith" chapter. I think I may start calling it the "by faith" chapter.

Heb 11:1-2 tells us what faith is.

¹ Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. ² For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.

God says that these elders obtained a good testimony BY faith. Does this match what the Lordship Salvation(LS) proponent says about faith? They say that one will persist in good works, in submission to the Lordship of Christ (obedience) and good Christian character if they have true faith.

One might say that the LS proponent says that one obtains a good testimony IF (or because) they have faith.

See my previous articles Testing the Test and 'But' Theology for examples of LS proponents saying that IF you have faith you will have a good testimony. In fact they use a person's testimony as a test to determine if the person has faith.

The question is this: Does God explain faith this way in His chapter on faith? In every example given God states that "by faith" (or through faith) a person (including all believers today in verse 3) DID something amazing. God then closes the chapter (though there were no chapters or verses in the original manuscripts) with these two verses.

Heb 11:39-40

³⁹ And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise,⁴⁰ God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.

Now it would do the LS proponents some good to study the lives of these people and consider if they are truly good examples of their theology. What is evident is that these people trusted God and obeyed in these instances and that this had amazing results - yet God did not leave us out. He did not simply save them, He also has saved us and will save all who trust Him now.

I started out by saying that it takes trust to obey God when He's growing you, and it does. But does trust = obedience? Or can you subtract obedience from my life and still have trust remaining? If I have trust will I automatically have obedience? If I don't have trust will I then be unable to obey?

These are all huge questions!!

I retired from the Canadian Forces recently. Military service is all about obedience. For a large portion of my career I could find few people in my Chain of Command whom I actually trusted, yet my obedience was full. I had to obey people I didn't really trust because they were in command of my service. I believe this shows how trust and obedience are not intrinsically linked. I obeyed because of my desire for a paycheck, and because of my fear of punishment. I obeyed out of desire and fear - not out of trust.

There are some UNSAVED people in the Bible like that you know, read John 6 to see what happened to the people who followed Jesus, obeyed Jesus in many things, feared Jesus, and desired the rewards of following Jesus - they were not saved because they could not put their faith in His broken body and shed blood. They were like hired servants, like slaves- they had no faith or trust but they obeyed.

When I was a child I trusted my sister deeply. I had faith in her that she would look out for and provide for me. We were tight, and I needed her. However, I didn't seldom obeyed her even when she was caring for me. I didn't obey because I didn't fear her, and she had nothing to offer me for my obedience. I trusted her completely, but I did not often obey her.

There are some SAVED people like that in the Bible too. Read 1st and 2nd Corinthians for some excellent examples.

Sometimes my wife, whom I trust completely and whom I am head over heals in love with, will ask me to do something - and yet I won't obey. Usually there is something I would rather do, a competing desire. Sometimes I don't obey because of what other people might say - "look at Kevin, he does whatever his wife tells him heheheh." Sometimes I just don't think the effort is worth it - I won't be recognized enough.. I won't get that new computer that I want anyway.... whatever it is - I don't obey because I don't value the return, or I have competing desires.

There are SAVED people in the Bible just like this too! Peter comes to mind prominently. There is also several people who feared what other people would do and say so they only followed Christ in secrete.

It TAKES trust to obey God when He is growing you because God is going to tell you to do things you can't do. This idea that God will never give you more than you can handle is BUNK. It is nothing more than new age religion and man's evil self-glorification at play. Read the "by faith"statements in Hebrews 11 and see how many of those were things that those people could "do for God."

Obedience, when God is calling you to do something you can't do, takes trust and God calls you to do those sorts of things when He is growing you up in the faith - when He is perfecting your faith. James 2:22

But obedience doesn't happen because of faith, it is not the substance of faith. No! God says that faith is the substance of a good testimony, NOT that a good testimony is the substance of faith!

A person can have faith (trust) and yet be distracted by competing desires and so not obey. A person can have faith but not fear and so not obey. A person can have faith and not desire for God's reward and so not obey.

A person who trusts God, and is discipled (taught in the ways of God, corrected, inspired, motivated and empowered and so on..) will obey God when He tells them to do something they can't do. You can't obey God in that situation without first trusting Him - so by faith you obey. But a person may trust God but have some other lacking as detailed above and not obey Him. Not because they don't have faith or trust, not because they have a false profession of faith or trust, but because they have a matter of disobedience going on.

I do not see anywhere in Scripture where God says that one obeys BECAUSE they have faith, but I see in many areas that one must have faith to do the sorts of things that God tells us to do when He is growing us up in the faith.

This is already a long article, but I need to ramble just a bit more. I believe this is why we have such a problem with Evangelism (or the lack there of) in the Church today. Not because people don't love and trust God - but because they don't have the proper motivation. This is the number one task for the Church and it is hardly being done by anyone who believes. The LS proponent must then say that only about 2 - 5 percent of people who claim to believe are actual believers - or they ought to go back and read the Bible again.

Denying

2011-06-01T13:09:00.000-03:00

When I'm interacting with someone who preaches Lordship Salvation I often get asked how one can be saved while "denying" Christ's lordship. Of course by "lordship" the person means the mastery of Christ over all aspects of one's life.

The conversation often degenerates from there. The person will often use this as the pivot point in the conversation and will stop listening while declaring a philosophical victory. I have yet to find a single LS advocate who is able and willing to show in the Scriptures where submission to the mastery of Christ over your life is required to become saved in the Scriptures, but even if they would or could very few will continue the conversation after their philosophical victory.

They characterize my clear, and unchanging, statement that the Bible does not require this kind of submission for a person to become saved in the most philosophically offensive way they can manage and then take the distaste of their statement as an indication of victory.

So I would like to ask the three following questions, given that not requiring submission to something is equivalent to denying that thing.

Question 1. Where does the Bible explicitly state that one cannot be saved while denying Christ's mastery over all aspects of one's life? Ref:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/explicitly

Question 2. What of the following things may one "deny" and still be saved? Please include an explicit reference in your answers.

Advocate ( 1 John 2:1 )
Almighty ( Rev 1:8 Mt 28:18 )
Alpha and Omega ( Rev 1:8 Rev 22:13 )
Amen ( Rev 3:14 )
Apostle of our Profession ( Heb 3:1 )
Atoning Sacrifice for our Sins ( 1 John 2:2 )
Author of Life ( Acts 3:15 )
Author and Perfecter of our Faith ( Heb 12:2 )
Author of Salvation ( Heb 2:10 )
Beginning and End ( Rev 22:13 )
Blessed and only Ruler ( 1 Tim 6:15 )
Bread of God ( John 6:33 )
Bread of Life ( John 6:35 John 6:48 )
Bridegroom ( Mt 9:15 )
Capstone ( Acts 4:11 1 Pet 2:7 )
Chief Cornerstone ( Eph 2:20 )
Chief Shepherd ( 1 Pet 5:4 )
Christ ( 1 John 2:22 )
Creator ( John 1:3 )
Deliverer ( Rom 11:26 )
Eternal Life ( 1 John 1:2 1 John 5:20)
Gate ( John 10:9 )
Faithful and True ( Rev 19:11 )
Faithful Witness ( Rev 1:5 )
Faithful and True Witness ( Rev 3:14 )
First and Last ( Rev 1:17 Rev 2:8 Rev 22:13 )
Firstborn From the Dead ( Rev 1:5 )
Firstborn over all creation ( Col 1:15 )
Gate ( John 10:9 )
God ( John 1:1 John 20:28 Heb 1:8 Rom 9:5 2 Pet 1:1 1 John 5:20 etc.)
Good Shepherd ( John 10:11 John 10:14 )
Great Shepherd ( Heb 13:20 )
Great High Priest ( Heb 4:14 )
Head of the Church ( Eph 1:22 Eph 4:15 Eph 5:23)
Heir of all things ( Heb 1:2 )
High Priest ( Heb 2:17 )
Holy and True ( Rev 3:7 )
Holy One ( Acts 3:14 )
Hope ( 1 Tim 1:1 )
Hope of Glory ( Col 1:27 )
Horn of Salvation ( Luke 1:69 )
I Am ( John 8:58 )
Image of God ( 2 Cor 4:4 )
Immanuel ( Mt 1:23 )
Judge of the living and the dead ( Acts 10:42 )
King Eternal ( 1 Tim 1:17 )
King of Israel ( John 1:49 )
King of the Jews ( Mt 27:11 )
King of kings ( 1 Tim 6:15 Rev 19:16 )
King of the Ages ( Rev 15:3 )
Lamb (Rev. 13:8)
Lamb of God (John 1:29)
Lamb Without Blemish (1 Pet. 1:19)
Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45)
Life (John 14:6; Col. 3:4)
Light of the World (John 8:12)
Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5)
Living One (Rev. 1:18)
Living Stone (1 Pet. 2:4)
Lord (2 Pet. 2:20)
Lord of All (Acts 10:36)
Lord of Glory (1 Cor. 2:8)
Lord of lords (Rev. 19:16)
Man from Heaven (1 Cor. 15:48)
Mediator of the New Covenant (Heb. 9:15)
Mighty God (Isa. 9:6)
Morning Star (Rev. 22:16)
Offspring of David (Rev. 22:16)
Only Begotten Son of God (John 1:18; 1 John 4:9)
Our Great God and Savior (Titus 2:13)
Our Holiness (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Husband (2 Cor. 11:2)
Our Protection (2 Thess. 3:3)
Our Redemption (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Righteousness (1 Cor. 1:30)
Our Sacrificed Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7)
Power of God (1 Cor. 1:24)
Precious Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:6)
Prophet (Acts 3:22)
Rabbi (Mt. 26:25)
Resurrection and Life (John 11:25)
Righteous Branch (Jer. 23:5)
Righteous One (Acts 7:52; 1 John 2:1)
Rock (1 Cor. 10:4)
Root of David (Rev. 5:5; 22:16)
Ruler of God’s Creation (Rev. 3:14)
Ruler of the Kings of the Earth (Rev. 1:5)
Savior (Eph. 5:23; Titus 1:4; 3:6; 2 Pet. 2:20)
Son of David (Lk. 18:39)
Son of God (John 1:49; Heb. 4:14)
Son of Man (Mt. 8:20)
Son of the Most High God (Lk. 1:32)
Source of Eternal Salvation for all who obey him (Heb. 5:9)
The One Mediator (1 Tim. 2:5)
The Stone the builders rejected (Acts 4:11)
True Bread (John 6:32)
True Light (John 1:9)
True Vine (John 15:1)
Truth (John 1:14; 14:6)
Way (John 14:6)
Wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24)
Word (John 1:1)
Word of God (Rev. 19:13)

Question 3 is intended to be humorous.

Question 3: If the LS advocate comes to the conclusion that there is no Biblical authority given to allow anyone to "deny" any of these and still be saved, then how long is the ACTUAL LS Gospel then??? Do you schedule weeks or months to present it?

"No Sir! You cannot be saved and deny that Jesus is the Stone that the builders rejected!"

"But what does that even mean???"

"Submit!"

To return to seriousness we could all take up a position called "Bridegroom Salvation" and argue it with all the same arguments that we hear about LS theology...

LS is about philosophy, not Scripture.

Interview with Textual Critic William Warren

2011-05-26T08:07:00.000-03:00

Dr. William Warren

Brother Liam has an interview with William Warren at his Into This Grace blog about his work in Textual Criticism on the Scriptures. This is an important topic that I just recently realized has been greatly ignored in the Church to our own detriment.

Here's a snippet of one of the questions Warren answers that should show anyone who is concerned with the accuracy of their understanding why this field is worthy of our attention.

Question: How does textual criticism affect the translation process?

Dr. Bill Warren: Whenever someone picks up an English translation (or one in any other language for that matter), they become the recipients of a huge amount of "hidden" work that has been done to make that translation feasible. First, the manuscripts had to be studied to compile their data. Then that data had to be evaluated based on what seems to have happened in the transmission history of the text. And then the best Greek text is determined from these sources, a text that we would say as conservative Christians is virtually identical to the original form of the text, although of course there are some in the larger field of textual criticism that would highlight where the "virtually" part applies so as to say that it is not equal to the original text (like Bart Ehrman), but I'll say more on that below. After the resulting Greek text is published, that is what translators use as the foundation for their work. So all translations are built on the shoulders of textual critics who did the work that undergirds the Greek text on which the translations are based. One more facet of making a translation is that sometimes the translators don't agree with the textual decisions reflected in the published Greek text, in which cases they build the translation on their own conclusions about the right Greek text at a given point in the text.

Preaching Ministry for the Weak

2011-05-17T12:19:00.000-03:00

This is the message I preached this Sunday morning entitled Ministry for the Weak. It is about the restoration of Peter after he had denied the Lord. After establishing that salvation is absolutely free, I go on to explain how discipleship bridged the gap between where Peter was weak and unfruitful to his later great ministry - and how we can have that for ourselves as well.

Here are the passages I reference, in order.

John 21:15

John 21:16

John 21:17

John 21:15

I pronounce Agapao as "Agapeo" sorry... it should be pronounced Ah Gap Ah Oh. I knew this but was nervous.

John 3:16

John 21:16

John 21:17

Eph 2:8-9

Eph 2:10

John 21:18-19

John 21:20-21

John 21:22

Rom 4:3-8

Psalm 32:1-11

Mat 11:28-30

2Pet 1:5-11

Street Witnessing and Open Air Preaching Tonight

2011-05-14T01:14:00.000-03:00

It's been a while since I've been out on the streets but tonight I managed to get down town and get to it!! What a wonderful thing! The Gospel is still God's power unto salvation for all who believe!!!

It was my plan to just observe, but it was like putting on a comfortable pair of shoes - I had to walk in them!!! The open air preaching wasn't great - but it did lead to a GREAT conversation with a heckler!! What a beautiful warmup for my preaching on Sunday!

:)

Preaching this Sunday

2011-05-11T10:55:00.000-03:00

I'm preaching at the main congregation gathering this Sunday. I'll be teaching about Peter's restoration in John 21, and what it means to us as believers. In particular I'll be preaching about how we can each have fruitful ministries despite our weakness and inability. God has prepared works for us to walk in. How do we get over the fact of our weakness to do the work that He has prepared for us to do? That's the topic for this Sunday!

Woe to you who make entrance hard

2011-05-01T15:07:00.000-03:00

Matt 23:13 ¹³ “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in."

These are harsh words of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Do you say one must "forsake" their sin in order to be saved? Woe to the hypocrite who has not forsaken his own sins.

Do you say one must obey laws and commands in order to be saved? Woe to the hypocrite who has does not obey in all things himself.

Some take great joy in preaching what they call a "strong" gospel or a "hard" gospel saying that it is "hard to believe!" They take joy in shutting the kingdom of heaven up against man so as to keep those who would enter by faith out.

Romans 4 & Psalms 32

2011-04-27T09:13:00.001-03:00

Romans 4 is a landmark explanation of Eternal Salvation by grace through faith alone. It clearly contrasts faith to works, and is absolutely clear that faith is not meritorious. Something that is meritorious has "merit" or is worthy of praise or reward. As important as this is the chapter goes on to be clear that justification is by imputed righteousness, not imparted righteousness. That is to say that faith is accounted as righteousness, not that the one who has faith becomes or is made righteous in practice.

This one chapter, even if it stood all by itself alone in the Bible which it does not, separates Christianity from every religion ever dreamed up by man.

Last night at a men's Bible study I was searching for a Psalm and I ran across Psalms 32. I read the first few verses and I realized something I have missed. We'll start in Romans 4 and then look at the Psalm.

Romans 4:1-8
¹ What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? ² For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. ³For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” ⁴ Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

⁵ But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, ⁶ just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

⁷ “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; ⁸Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”

Perhaps you are familiar with the Rabbinical teaching method of speaking the first few lines of a passage in order to bring the entire passage to the mind of those who are hearing you? Jesus Christ did this from the Cross when He spoke "My God, My God! Why have You forsaken Me?" These words are often thought of as His being in despair in His flesh - but it was not. There was no "moment of doubt" on the Cross. He remained obedient unto death, as we read in Philippians 2:8. He was declaring that the prophecy of Psalm 22:1-31 was being fulfilled before their eyes.

With that in mind look at Romans 4:6-8 and then read Psalm 32 which I will now quote.

Psalm 32:1-11

A Psalm of David. A Contemplation.

¹ Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose sin is covered. ² Blessed is the man to whom the LORD does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit.

³ When I kept silent, my bones grew old Through my groaning all the day long. ⁴ For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; My vitality was turned into the drought of summer. Selah

⁵ I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I have not hidden. I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” And You forgave the iniquity of my sin. Selah

⁶ For this cause everyone who is godly shall pray to You In a time when You may be found; Surely in a flood of great waters They shall not come near him. ⁷ You are my hiding place; You shall preserve me from trouble; You shall surround me with songs of deliverance. Selah

⁸ I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will guide you with My eye. ⁹ Do not be like the horse or like the mule, Which have no understanding, Which must be harnessed with bit and bridle, Else they will not come near you.

¹⁰ Many sorrows shall be to the wicked; But he who trusts in the LORD, mercy shall surround him. ¹¹ Be glad in the LORD and rejoice, you righteous; And shout for joy, all you upright in heart!

This is an amazing teaching!!

It might be noted immediately that Paul's quote stops halfway through verse 2. Of course the Scriptures were not separated into verses in Paul's time. Some will say that "in whose spirit there is no deceit" shows that the person has a "changed life" but look at the rest of the Psalm. This deceit is defined as keeping silent about your sin instead of confessing it to God. David explains the misery of trying to keep this deceit, but offers the solution in verse 5. Psalm 32:5

David goes on to explain in verses 6 & 7 that God's faithfulness is why those who know Him pray to Him knowing that He hears and will act.

Psalm 32:8-9 switches to God's words to David and these words are most instructive with regard to the Lordship Salvation point of view, or the "become a slave to be saved" view as it is being presented so often recently. David declares in Psalm 32:5 that he confessed his sin to God and that God forgave David. This is something that has happened already, and now God is telling David what He will do now.

⁸ I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will guide you with My eye. ⁹ Do not be like the horse or like the mule, Which have no understanding, Which must be harnessed with bit and bridle, Else they will not come near you.

God tells David that He will instruct and teach David in the way he should go. Paul by pointing us to this passage in context of Salvation, faith and works shows us that God's words to David are also to us. So listen up!

In verse 9 God tells David to not be like a mule that must be harnessed and overcome in order for it to come to it's master.

This is what Lordship Salvation, and the most recent love affair with the concept of slavery as an illustration of Salvation in Christ Jesus tells us. That we must become bridled, have our will overcome, and be drug to Christ as a slave in order for us to be saved.

Did you listen to God speaking? Do you hear His words? Do not be like that! This is not God's will. God's will is that you would be forgiven and that you would listen to Him and let Him guide you in the way you should go. Not as a slave, but as a disciple - a student.

Hear how the Psalm closes.

¹⁰ Many sorrows shall be to the wicked; But he who trusts in the LORD, mercy shall surround him. ¹¹ Be glad in the LORD and rejoice, you righteous; And shout for joy, all you upright in heart!

I hope this is a help to many!

On My Walk

2011-04-23T09:15:00.000-03:00

So here I am a couple of weeks into my retirement from the Canadian Forces and I'm being recruited by a very large defence contractor to go back to work on the same base I retired from as a civilian. It's a new career that would build on everything I've learned already yet require me to step up and learn so much more. I've decided to follow the challenge and see where it takes me.

I'm also working on several books, with not a lot of progress this past week. I've been very sick for the last two weeks - retirement doesn't sit well with me perhaps?

The specter of Lordship Salvation raised its insidious head at my Brethren assembly recently.

We have unity on the Gospel at the assembly. We do not spend any time talking about "Free Grace" or "Lordship Salvation" or anything like that. Frankly, we just get on with preaching the Word. Longtime readers of On My Walk will know that I am very uncomfortable with accepting a label or title for my beliefs. One cannot control what the label means to the person who reads or hears it. To some Free Grace is equated with the Brethren of old, with the likes of H.A. Ironside... to others Free Grace is associated with the Grace Evangelical Society. There is a gulf of difference between them. Likewise there is a gulf of difference between various interpretations of Lordship Salvation. We are charged to 'preach the Word' and so that's what we do. Blogs, conventions and meetings are good places to deal with various heresies, the pulpit is for preaching the Word.

Anyway, someone brought the theology of Lordship Salvation in and I was afraid at how it was received by many. Many didn't immediately recognize it because they don't spend near the time that I do examining it. Some did recognize it though, and I'm thankful for that. Discussion with the Elders led to a clear and decisive move to ensure such theology is not preached to our assembly met with my approval and great relief.

In short we retained unity in the Gospel, and that's a big deal.

I've found that since I'm retired from the military and so no longer subject to moving around the world, and since we've decided to stay here in this city that the importance of everything at my assembly has greatly increased. Everything matters, I mean really matters and this is a new development in my walk. I've always loved those I fellowship with, and it has always been important that they are doing well. Now though, this importance is overwhelming.

So that's where I'm at on my walk right now. How are you doing?

Make Your Election Sure

2011-04-21T09:22:00.001-03:00

2 Peter 1:1-15 is a section of Scripture that stands in stark contrast to the concept that 'saving faith' is a faith that works, or a faith that perseveres, or a faith that DOES. Most specifically 2 Peter 1:5-9 indicates that works must be added to our faith, it is not our faith that works.

⁵ But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, ⁶ to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, ⁷ to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. ⁸ For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. ⁹ For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

I've written about this passage before, and made no small point of verse 9. That a person who has faith, but does not add these things to it can forget that they were saved. This is a shocking revelation for anyone who believes in the TULIP concept of "Perseverance of the Saints." However, today I want to talk about the one part of 2nd Peter chapter 1 that gets used to support the idea that "true saving faith works."

2Pet 1:10

Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble;

A proponent of the view I'm opposing might say:

If you're really saved you'll do all the things that Peter wrote about; so make sure you're really saved.

On the surface this statement and conclusion has an appearance of some validity; if the point is that one can have assurance of salvation by seeing these things happening in their life. The person might note that the one who forgets that their sins were purged (Verse 9) would have no assurance of salvation.

On the surface perhaps... but it's convoluted isn't it? This is taking all of what Peter wrote and twisting it two different ways. One that really saved people do these so if you're really saved then you'll do them. The other that this is about assurance.

Now I've had multitudes of conversations with people who hold to Lordship Salvation, and Perseverance of the Saints about these tests of salvation. I have consistently found that their arguments jump back and forth between testing the validity of one's salvation and offering assurance to those who are saved. When the one is shown to be false they simply move to the other; wash rinse repeat ad nausuem.

Instead of continuing the cycle let's see what Peter says his point is.

2Pet 1:10-11 is the whole point, not just verse 10 by itself.

¹⁰ Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; ¹¹ for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

For so an entrance!!! The NIV renders this as a "rich welcome" into the eternal Kingdom. This whole passage is about ensuring fruitfulness and experiencing the nature of Christ in your own life while we are here - so that when we go to Heaven we will be greatly rewarded for bringing glory to the Name of Christ.

But instead of just reading a short snippet and hoping we have the context correct, let's look at the whole passage.

He begins the section with these precious verses 2Pet 1:1-4

¹ Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
² Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, ³ as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, ⁴ by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

We may be partakers of His divine nature - according to His promises! Then of course we read how we can partake by adding the various things of His nature to our faith in 2Pet 1:5-9. (see above). Peter then finishes the passage with these encouraging words 2Pet 1:12-15

¹² For this reason I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are established in the present truth. ¹³ Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, ¹⁴ knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. ¹⁵ Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease.

It is because of our promise of being able to partake, and the great rewards that await those who do that Peter will not be negligent to remind us always of these things - even though he knew those he was writing to were established. He is so passionate about this that he wants to make sure that his reminders continue even after he is deceased.

He's not concerned that these people may not really be saved. He's not concerned that they might not know if they are saved or not. He is concerned with the fruitfulness of their walk, and the richness of their entrance into Heaven.

So Brethren, add to your faith all the things of Christ's nature and you will have a rich entrance into Heaven.

New Free Grace Blog

2011-04-13T10:48:00.000-03:00

Brother Liam Moran has a new (as of December 2010) Free Grace blog titled Into This Grace. Liam has a Masters of Divinity, and a Doctorate of Ministry from Andersonville Theological Seminary and a BA in Pastoral Studies from Moody Bible Institute.

Please check Into This Grace out, Liam's passion for protecting and proclaiming the message of God's grace is a drink of cool refreshing water for anyone who also carries this same burden in their heart; like I do.

Right now he's looking at how assemblies of believers search for Pastors. Specifically dealing with search committees, transition and candidacy. This is something I'm going to be reading this week with interest because my own assembly is considering a candidate for the position of Associate Pastor.

Please pray for Liam and for the ministry that God would have for him through his blog!

I've added Into This Grace to the links and blogs I follow here.

The Prodigal Son and the Slave Brother

2011-04-12T08:57:00.000-03:00

http://www.cooneyillustration.com/zparable-prodigalson.htm

Much is said of the (so called) parable of the Prodigal Son, yet not nearly enough if you ask me! In fact the common name for the parable itself is a big part of the problem. It leaves out half the story!! It leaves out the part about slavery! Perhaps we should call in international conspiracy theorist Dr. MacArthur (Dr. Jones of the Bible perhaps??) who keenly picked up on how there had been an international, near double millennia conspiracy to coverup the concept of slavery in the New Testament scriptures. See The Bible X-Files? and my Final Thoughts on Slave (the doctor's latest book).

Perhaps there has been a conspiracy to cover up the slavery concept that is clearly portrayed in the original Greek but not often revealed in the English translations of the New Testament? Let's crack the case by going to the source!

The whole parable is found in Luke 15:11-32, but let's start with a few English translations of verse 29. In this verse we find the complaint of the elder brother to the father who had just accepted his lost son back into the warmth of the family with a celebration! I have bolded the words which are rendered from the Greek word douleuó which is a from the word doulos which Dr. MacArthur claims to have uncovered 'a conspiracy of biblical proportions' to cover up the true meaning of "slave." douleuó means "I am a doulos" or "I have been a doulos." Check out Strong's Numbers Greek 1398.

NKJV - which is my preferred preaching & teaching version because of its readability.

²⁹ So he answered and said to his father, ‘Lo, these many years I have been serving you; I never transgressed your commandment at any time; and yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might make merry with my friends.

NIV (2011 - I'm not sure how the previous version rendered it)

²⁹ But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends.

ESV - The version Dr. MacArthur heaps praise on.

²⁹but he answered his father, 'Look, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed your command, yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might celebrate with my friends.

OK so what's my point? I have to admit I have more than one. Least important is the obvious incongruence between MacArthur's video about his new book Slave, and his video about his new ESV Study Bible. The ESV is said to be an accurate word for word translation, but it calls slavery service?

More important is the fact that the elder brother had served his father like a slave, and the prodigal son had not - yet the father welcomed him as a son he was delighted with! Read the whole parable again. Luke 15:11-32.

The younger son is horrendous to the father, takes off with his wealth and squanders it on his fleshly desires. No one can deny that this was a horrible thing for him to do. Things quickly got miserable for him. He was a Jew and it got so bad that he had to try to feed himself by looking after pigs - unclean animals according to Levitical Law; Lev 11:7 (for example).

Then the ESV says that the young man "came to himself" Luke 15:17, and decided that even his fathers slaves/servants were more prosperous than he was! Much is said about the son's intent to serve his father, but he never actually said that to his dad. He only managed to say that he was not worthy to be called his son. At that point the father, who had already ran out to meet the young man before he could return home, sent his servants for the finest robes and put a ring on his hand. Then they had a huge celebration!

Now there is much debate about the application of this parable to salvation. Is this about restoration of fellowship or is it about a sinner getting saved? Is it a son who was always a son who went away and was welcomed back or is it about a son who "was dead, and lost, but now is alive and found"? I actually tend to think of it as a salvation message, he was dead and is now alive.... but it really doesn't matter for the point of this article.

The elder son had slaved for his father, and the younger son didn't and was not required by the father to do so. They both had full fellowship, and sonship. The only difference is that the younger prodigal one enjoyed the celebration because he knew he was not worthy to be called a son. Luke 7:47 comes to mind.

God the Father doesn't require slavery for one to be saved. He requires us to see ourselves as we are, and see our need for reconciliation to Him met fully in His Son Jesus Christ. We are not worthy to be called sons and daughters, but He runs out to us and cloths us in the finest Robe anyway.

Galatians 3:26-29

²⁶ For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. ²⁷ For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

On Finishing Well

2011-04-11T10:34:00.002-03:00

Last week I retired from my career of 20 years and 4 days in the Canadian Forces. There is almost an endless amount of material from my career that might be worthy of comment, helpful in explaining some truth, or an example of what not to do in a particular situation; however it is my last year of service that truly defines my career.

Over the past few months, as I've been considering what to do next there has been ample time to review previous performance reviews and I've found that I can gladly include every review I can find (the last 7 years) with any resume I give out. I can honestly say that I have served my country well and that I was recognized for doing so. That being said for some time now it has been clear that it was time for me to move on to something new. A lot of situations in my life have changed me, changed my desires, dreams, ambitions and what I am dedicated to; not the least of which was getting saved and learning to help others hear about Christ. The last few years in the Canadian Forces were challenging for me on many levels. I didn't want to be there any more, but I had sworn an oath.

Now I want to be clear, I love the Canadian Forces. No matter what you might think of the concept, I am proud of the service I gave and of the Force I served in and with. I have been part of an organization that somehow mixes pride with pure unselfishness to stand between the citizens of Canada and danger.

I do not subscribe to "Lifestyle Evangelism" but can't deny that when you live and work as the Lord has instructed that people DO take notice. I submitted my intention to release, and turned down all further contracts over a year and a half ago. Nearly everyone expected me to stop working, or do the bare minimum. Again and again it was commented that I should be slowing down. Instead, I caught my second wind and found joy in my work again. Overcoming challenges and accomplishing goals were no longer about getting promoted, now they were about me growing and truly working for my earthly masters as though I was working directly for the Lord. It made no sense to anyone - not even my superiors who seemed to be unsure what to do with me.

By the time my last week came around my superiors were no longer surprised that I was continuing to work harder than all my peers. As I was doing the final administration to retire a superior came to me and asked if I could finish a personnel evaluation report - a dreaded task! He was in a bind, and buttered me up by saying the "one guy I can always count on is leaving." I didn't even consider saying no to him, and not one single person in the organization was surprised to find me working away on it three days before I retired. It had become normal to see me to be going above and beyond.

So what's the pay off? Is it just so great to be admired? Hardly. The pay off is that while many of my other (truly saved) Christian co-workers will probably never get the opportunity to credibly share their faith with these supervisors - I did.

It took a lot of work.

It is not the type of evangelism that I suggest be your primary style.

It worked.

As it played out a couple of times the day I left; as I stood in the office of a superior two ranks above me he asked me with a coy face - "Kevin, are you trying to change me?"

I was able to answer truthfully and emphatically "I would do anything for that to happen, but it's not up to me." Acts 26:28-29

He knew it was between him and God, and that I wasn't asking him to join a club, or a religion. He knew I was serious, and that I wasn't just some flake. He knew God is serious. My mission was complete, those who believe will be saved and those who don't will be condemned. Mark 16:16

As much as I wanted to leave the Canadian Forces two years ago I'm glad the Lord kept me there - just long enough to finish well.

Fail-Safe for Fallacy eBook Edition for $2.99

2011-04-07T07:03:00.002-03:00

Fail-Safe for Fallacy: Every Believer Can Cut Straight to the Truth was written during a very challenging time in my life. I thought everything was falling apart. Looking back on that time now though; I see God clearing my schedule and focusing my mind so that I could share what He had taught me up to that point. Fail-Safe is my first book. God willing it will be my first of many.

The title may make the book sound intimidating, or worse pretentious, but the book is an easy read and I'm told by many people a very helpful work. Whether you're a new believer, or an old soldier wanting to sharpen your sword Fail-Safe is a great help. The focus of the book is protecting the Church by protecting individual Believers from fallacy, or false teaching through learning to study the Bible above theology.

If this blog has been a blessing to you then I hope you'll check out Fail-Safe for Fallacy and ask someone else to do the same. The print book sells for $11.69 but the eBook is priced for everyone at $2.99.

Visit the Amazon.com Kindle eBook page to get your copy!

If you don't have a Kindle eBook reader you can get the application free for PC, Mac, iPhone/iPod Touch, Blackberry... the list goes on.

Here's the product description from Amazon.com

This is the eBook edition of Fail-Safe for Fallacy, an easy to read book which helps the reader study Scripture above theology.

Here is the original book description:

A sure faith and a clear understanding of the Bible is available to every Believer, not just Pastors and theologians. There is no need for any of us to be led astray and have our hopes dashed because they have been built on fallacy. God who cannot lie has breathed out truth in His Word to us in such a way that we each really can understand it.

We live in an age of unprecedented access to knowledge yet the popular media thrives by selling us news bites we seldom verify. Most church goers today get all their theology in 40 minute purpose filled messages on Sunday mornings. Many have almost no ability to "rightly divide the Word of Truth" and so leave the deeper things of God and the sure faith they build to be experienced by only those who have been to seminary. This makes us easy prey for false teachers, and prophets. Shockingly, it mostly goes unnoticed that the lost are being inoculated against Eternal Salvation by false conversion experiences. We need a fail-safe against all this error and God has given it to us in His Word.

Fallacy lays in wait for every unprepared believer but the Bible was written to reveal truth to us. Fail-Safe For Fallacy can help anyone confidently learn this truth directly from the Scriptures. Every Believer really can cut straight through to the truth God has given us in His Word instead of being tossed to and fro by the various doctrines of men.

You can know truth, and be sure of it!

A Discussion About Unconditional Election

2011-04-01T10:36:00.002-03:00

So I'm reading Norman Geisler's Second Edition of Chosen But Free copyright 2001 for the first time. It is a discussion about Election seemingly from a "Moderate Calvinist" perspective. It would be reasonable to term myself as a "Moderate Calvinist" in that I tend to hold to a lot of what John Calvin wrote about, but I do not at all go beyond that. An "Extreme Calvinist" is someone who is more "Calvinistic" than John Calvin was, and that would include all 5 Point Calvinists, and many 4 pointers as well. I'm currently at page 69 of 290 (according to my Kindle).

For the most part up to this page I thought the book was presenting a view which is "more Calvinistic" than I am but it is extremely well thought out and presented so I have been enjoying it nonetheless. Turns out I was reading some of my ideas about Calvinism into what the author was writing. Also, he has opened my understanding and I believe my views have changed ever so slightly - functionally, but not practically - if that is clear at all...
I previously believed that Election was mostly about what we are elected to do BECAUSE we have been saved; ie works prepared beforehand for us to walk in, suffering, sanctification, glorification... and that also some people (perhaps John the Baptist and the Apostle Paul) were Elected to Eternal Salvation... that there is a group who were elected to Salvation, but that believing the Gospel was open to every person. I have discussed as much before. See Tripping TULIP Part 3: Unconditional Election. In that article I had these closing thoughts:

This is probably the doctrine I come closest to believing in TULIP. I believe that God has elected some to be Eternally Saved. Many are called, few are chosen sort of thing. However, I cannot let my thoughts decide what Scripture says. Scripture must always define what I think. Theology that is an inch deep and a mile wide comes from the presupposition that Salvation, Justification and Repentance are always about Eternal Salvation.

My struggle with the concept was clear back then, and has been on going since.

The Moderate Calvinist view of Election is well explained in a story shared on pages 68-69 of Chosen But Free. I'm going to quote that story here because I believe it is invaluable to understanding how God can "choose" who is saved, without also choosing who will be damned - and it is this very point on which our understanding either offends all of God's attributes or offends some or all of them.

Discussing a young Believer who is interested in marriage Geisler relates that the man (Jim) is interested in pursuing one of two women, Joan or Betty. Geisler states that the man has three possible courses of action. (1) to propose to neither of them; (2) to propose to Joan; or (3) to propose to Betty. He then notes that the man is under no compulsion to propose, or not to propose to either. It is his "free will" choice to make. Now here is the story, please read it carefully because without the context of the previous 67 pages one may jump to the conclusion that Geisler is making an Arminianistic argument that supposes God is dependant on the decisions of men; he is not.

Suppose further that the young man happens to konw that if he proposes to Joan she will say yes and if he proposes to Betty she will say no. Suppose then, in accordance with this foreknowledge of how she will freely respond, that Jim chooses to propose to Joan. Suppose even that he knew she would be reluctant at first but with persistent and loving persuasion she would eventually--freely--accept his offer. The decision on his part was entirely free, uncoerced, and not based on anything outside himself. But it was also a decision that was with full knowledge of the response and which respected the free choice of the person to whom he decided to propose. This is analogous to what the moderate Calvinists believe about God's unconditional election.

Note here that Jim's election was done according to his foreknowledge, that he determined, but she freely chose. She was not compelled, it was freely Joan's decision to accept. Jim also freely chose, soverignly chose. Yet he did not make his choice a violation of the one he chose. He did not force himself on her. He also did not choose that Betty would remain unmarried. It was not his choice, it was hers.

This view may be complicated to wrap your head around based on one short story, but note this: It lines up, I would say perfectly, with all election passages - including that God does not will that any will perish but desires all to come to repentance. Jim didn't will that Betty would be alone, she wouldn't accept him so she willed that she would be alone. Also - for those God foreknew he also predestined.... Jim foreknew Joan would accept, so he chose her - she wouldn't have been able to marry Jim if Jim didn't ask her. She was reluctant at first and he had to pursue her. She was not seeking him, he was seeking her. Sound familiar?

I find rest in my thinking, a removal of needless tension in the Scriptures, and clarity of understanding with this view.

So that's my take on it, what are your thoughts?

The Gospel is a Report to be Believed

2011-03-29T06:56:00.000-03:00

On my seldom updated blog, The Demonstration, I've posted another short article on the nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Gospel is a Report to be Believed

Dr. Clay Nuttal on Platform Sharing & Identification

2011-03-28T07:58:00.000-03:00

Lou has an authorized reprint of an important article up at his blog this morning; Dr. Clay Nuttal, Platform Sharing & Identification.

Here's a snippet:

I confess that I do not know why people protect error. Is it that they do not know better? Is it that they do not believe, or are there other possible motives? In academia, the young theologian is taught to have respect for other people’s views. It would be better to say that we should have respect for the right of other people to hold different views. To say that all views are equal is an affront to God. One of my administrators plainly told me that I was not allowed to say that someone else’s theological view was wrong; obviously, that person was not a biblical theologian. Can you imagine the cowardly attitude and disobedient heart that would fail to say that the denial of the virgin birth is error?

What is The Word Bowl?

2011-03-27T15:54:00.001-03:00

Read. Discuss. Learn. Grow. Publish.

~ www.TheWordBowl.com ~

Coming soon!

Bad Kool-Aid: Paul's Lordship Salvation Testimony

2011-03-24T21:58:00.001-03:00

If you don't know what I mean by "Bad Kool-Aid" please read the introduction to this series.

On occasion it is said that the Apostle Paul was saved through submission to the Lordship of Christ when he was famously stopped by the Lord on the road to Damascus.

Acts 9:1-9 are cited in support of this, verses 3 - 6 form the basis of the argument.

³ As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. ⁴ Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” ⁵ And he said, “Who are You, Lord?” Then the Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” ⁶ So he, trembling and astonished, said, “Lord, what do You want me to do?”

It is said that Saul (who would later take the name Paul) submitted to the Lordship of Christ immediately, bowing down and asking what he could do for his Lord.

This is Bad Kool-Aid for a couple of reasons. First, the Lord blinded him and he had to be lead by the other men with him. The Lord wasn't looking for service from Saul, He wanted him to believe that He (Jesus Christ) is God, and that He is alive again after having been crucified. This brings us to the second reason, and I would have you remember Paul's explanation of how faith comes about in a person;

Rom 10:17

So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ

Paul retells the events, including what happened at Damascus;

Acts 22:6-16

⁶ “Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me. ⁷ And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ ⁸ So I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ ⁹ “And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me. ¹⁰ So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.’ ¹¹ And since I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of those who were with me, I came into Damascus. ¹² “Then a certain Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good testimony with all the Jews who dwelt there, ¹³ came to me; and he stood and said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that same hour I looked up at him. ¹⁴ Then he said, ‘The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth. ¹⁵ For you will be His witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. ¹⁶ And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Here we see that Ananias witnessed to Paul at Damascus; he spoke the word of the Lord to him. Just like Paul (and Silas) later did with their jailer Acts 16:25-34 when he asked them what he must do to be saved - believe on the Lord Jesus Christ they told him, and then they witnessed to him by speaking the word of the Lord to them. Acts 16:32

What is this word of the Lord? It is the Gospel that Paul declares in 1Cor 15:1-11 Look at what Paul knew about Jesus Christ by the time that Ananias implored him to be reconciled to God 2Cor 5:20-21- Jesus is the Just One who died for our sins, was buried and rose to life again, and that by this we can have our sins washed away.

Saul (Paul) wasn't saved on the road to Damascus. He was not saved by submitting to the Lordship of Christ. God made sure he knew it didn't work like that by immediately blinding him so he couldn't consider his getting to Damascus his service to the Lord. He was taken to Damascus, he didn't "go obediently." Saul was saved when he received the Gospel as preached to him at Damascus. Then and only then were his sins washed away!

Link To This Answer!

If you encounter someone spreading the Bad Kool-Aid of "Paul's Lordship Conversion Testimony" please link them and their audience to this post. Here's a TinyURL to use: http://tinyurl.com/67dqxpf

Church Order - Submit Yourselves One to Another

2011-03-22T12:29:00.005-03:00

Don't let your assembly earn this warning.

Eph 5:15-21

¹⁵ See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise, ¹⁶ redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
¹⁷ Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is. ¹⁸ And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, ¹⁹ speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, ²⁰ giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, ²¹ submitting to one another in the fear of God.

Over the years I’ve struggled to understand what “Church Order” is and what the implications of it are in the assembly I am joined with, and in my own life; perhaps you have too. Church order is established and maintained through submission; submission to the will of the Father, to the Lordship of Christ, to the promptings of the Spirit, to the revelation of Scripture, to the leaders of the local assembly and each believer one to another.

Having served for 20 years in the Canadian Forces I understand a thing or two about submission. From the outside the Church can look like a military, but this view is not accurate. It looks like we have a Great High General in God, and then various ranks down through to the individual soldier in the pew – but this is not how God has organized His Church. In a military organization one is submitted to a person of higher rank because of that higher rank’s authority over the lower rank. In the Church, the people who might be seen as having a higher rank are actually gifts to the people who might be seen as lower ranks; at least from a cursory look from the outside. In a military the higher ranked person is responsible for the wellbeing of the lower ranked person, and at least this much is the same in the Church – but in the military this is again a function of authority. The higher ranked person can impose their will on the lower ranked person, so they are ultimately responsible for imposing that will in a proper way. In the Church the higher ranked person has great influence on the lower ranked person – not imposable authority, but spiritual influence.

Have you ever heard people joking about not wanting to give to charities? They may say “Charity starts at home!” It’s a play on words, abusing the notion that giving should be a foundation of our lives to make it be about ensuring our own homes are prosperous before we give to anyone else. That concept is funny to the world, and rightly offensive to the mature Christian. However, submission does start at home – or with one’s own person.

In the Church we submit ourselves one to another. In a military the higher rank imposes their will, and those below must submit to it. This isn’t submitting one’s self to the higher rank, it is capitulating to their will. When we submit ourselves it is exactly that, people deciding to and willingly submitting to someone else. When someone actually out ranks me, has more power, has more authority, then I am submitted by their power and I can only surrender or capitulate. This is not how the Church is organized. Eph 5:21 finishes Paul’s immediate thought with the words “submitting to one another in the fear of God.” Willingly submitting ourselves one to another is actually submitting, or even capitulating to the will of the Lord Eph 5:17. I submit myself to each other believer as a wilful act of my own, based only on my own relationship with Christ – not based on the other believers whatsoever. I also am not to require any be submitted to me, I am only to be focused on my own submission.

Eph 4 makes it clear that the gifts given to each believer and most specifically the giving of people to hold offices in the Church are an explicit operation of the Lordship of Christ.

Eph 4:7-16

⁷ But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. ⁸ Therefore He says:
      “ When He ascended on high,
      He led captivity captive,
      And gave gifts to men.”
⁹ (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first^[c] descended into the lower parts of the earth? ¹⁰ He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)
¹¹ And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, ¹² for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, ¹³ till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; ¹⁴ that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, ¹⁵ but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— ¹⁶ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

Verses 7 – 9 explains the basis for His giving gifts being that He is God – He alone has descended and ascended, He is Lord.

Verses 11 – 12 tell us why He gave us these people to hold offices; for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for edifying the body of Christ. And for how long; for as long as we are here in our bodies and not in Heaven with Christ when we will be “as He is” 1Jn 3:2 a “perfect man” in “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ”

Verses 14 – 15 give us the result; mature believers

Verse 16 tells us how; according to the effective working of each believer edifying the whole.

This brings us back to Eph 5:15-21 where we are told that exercising the will of the Lord, or the Lordship of Christ is being controlled by the Spirit, worshiping God and submitting ourselves one to another.

Brethren, for the sake of the Angels (who desire to look in on this salvation we have 1Pet 1:12) we need to maintain order. 1Cor 4:9 1Cor 11:10 1Tim 3:16 1Tim 5:21 and for the sake of the great cloud of witnesses Heb 12:1 (the best examples of which are found in Heb 11) we need to recognize the Lordship of Christ over us and His Church by submitting ourselves one to another.

This is Church Order, and how we will each grow in godliness.

1Tim 3:14-16

¹⁴ These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; ¹⁵ but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. ¹⁶ And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

      God was manifested in the flesh,
      Justified in the Spirit,
      Seen by angels,
      Preached among the Gentiles,
      Believed on in the world,
      Received up in glory.

The Line in the Sand

2011-03-20T19:18:00.006-03:00

Where do you draw your line Brother?

In essentials unity.

In non-essentials liberty.

In all things charity.

Biblical Separation goes beyond just being sanctified (separated from the rest of the world) to the Lord; it often means separating from other Brethren who are disorderly or for whatever reason are preaching against some essentials of the Christian faith, making them false teachers. Victims of false teaching are not to be quickly separated from, because they are victims and may be able to be returned to good order through fellowship. Paul fellowshipped with and corrected the Corinthians who were taught to reject the resurrection, but he did not fellowship with those spreading the heresy.

Last year I learned a thing or two about practicing Biblical Separation; it is not easy to do gracefully, it costs you dearly and in many ways, people resist it in many diverse ways, people don't tend to think they are the ones that need to be separated from. Here is something I have learned - HOW you separate is every bit as important as the reasons for the need to separate. You must be clear, graceful and decisive.

I wasn't as graceful as I could have been last year when I separated from an organization I had poured my life into. I could have been more gentle, and as recently as last week it was brought up that I caused hurt in doing it the way I did. It hurts me to think about causing pain for people I love. Here's the thing though, separation is a ministry of warning to people you love - it is, and always will be painful. It never feels good to be shown, clearly, what error you are spreading.

This week, I had to repeat the process somewhat. I still owned an asset of the organization (for several complicated reasons). I should have shut the asset down so that it could not benefit the proliferation of heresy, but I did not because I couldn't bring myself to cause more pain. I was wrong not to shut it down, I pretty well knew it at the time, but I was - frankly - too chicken to do what I knew to be right. (again... sigh) The result? The person I was separating from feels justified in their views... thinks it isn't as serious as I told him it was... The issue was fidelity to the Gospel in accordance with the Scriptures - it doesn't get more serious than that.

When separation occurs everyone thinks they are at least mostly right, and they think it should be OK to continue fellowshipping. This week I was told that because other organizations of somewhat similar views to mine work with organizations which preach the Lordship Salvation heresy that it should be OK for me to as well. Apparently it is unreasonable for me to expect people to simply stick to what the Bible teaches about the Gospel or consider them accursed. Gal 1:6-9 This is just how people act... I was told that it had actually been ME that changed my views on the Gospel and drifted away from what had previously been preached - however, those who go looking for a statement of faith at the organization's website will no longer find the previous exhaustive statement; now there is only a very generic statement. Of course you will see the all important statement:

We believe that all are justified solely on the ground of faith in the shed blood of Christ, and that only by God's grace through faith alone are we saved.

It's a shame that these words are so seldom tested when they are spoken by teachers. They are, so often, a false letter of commendation 2Cor 3:1-3 that false teachers use to get their feet in the door. Unfortunately when this statement is made a huge "but" follows it. But you have to define "faith" or "belief" in a special way. The "faith alone" that is spoken of here is about "forsaking sins and turning to serve a living God" not trusting that Christ died for your sins, was buried and rose again the third day all in accordance with the Scriptures. No not faith, but service.... "but" they don't preach works salvation as their Pastor explains.

So what is to be done? I spent months developing a statement of faith with that old organization, each person had to sign it stating full agreement, each person's Pastor had to acknowledge it.... that was not enough. Brethren, the solution is only clear, graceful and decisive separation from those who preach and practice error on the essentials of the faith; anything that affects the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Here are a number of passages that ought to help you draw your line in the sand. I pray you will read these, they will convict you and you will be faithful to stand on the truthful side of the line with only those who will faithfully stand there with you.

2Jn 1:9-11

⁹ Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. ¹⁰ If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; ¹¹for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.

Acts 20:26-32

²⁶ Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. ²⁷ For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God. ²⁸ Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. ²⁹ For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. ³⁰Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. ³¹ Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.
³² “So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

Rom 16:17-19

¹⁷ Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. ¹⁸ For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple. ¹⁹ For your obedience has become known to all. Therefore I am glad on your behalf; but I want you to be wise in what is good, and simple concerning evil.

Mat 7:13-23

¹⁵ “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. ¹⁶ You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? ¹⁷ Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. ¹⁸ A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. ¹⁹ Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ²⁰Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

Gal 1:6-11

⁶ I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, ⁷ which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸ But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. ⁹ As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
¹⁰ For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.

Gal 5:7-12

⁷ You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? ⁸ This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. ⁹ A little leaven leavens the whole lump. ¹⁰ I have confidence in you, in the Lord, that you will have no other mind; but he who troubles you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is.
¹¹ And I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why do I still suffer persecution? Then the offense of the cross has ceased. ¹² I could wish that those who trouble you would even cut themselves off!

2Pet 2:1-3

¹ But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. ² And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. ³ By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does not slumber.

2Tim 4:3-4

³ For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; ⁴and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

2Thes 3:6

⁶ But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.

1Cor 15:1-11

¹ Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, ² by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
³ For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ⁴ and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, ⁵ and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. ⁶ After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. ⁷ After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. ⁸ Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.
⁹ For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. ¹⁰ But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. ¹¹ Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

2Thes 3:13-15

¹³ But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary in doing good. ¹⁴ And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. ¹⁵ Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

2Tim 3:10-15

¹⁰ But you have carefully followed my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, love, perseverance, ¹¹ persecutions, afflictions, which happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra—what persecutions I endured. And out of them all the Lord delivered me. ¹² Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. ¹³ But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. ¹⁴ But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, ¹⁵ and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

These are just a few passages which are relevant to separation on the subject of the Gospel. Scripture doesn't make it a minor issue at all - do you?

Final Thoughts on Slave

2011-03-16T10:54:00.008-03:00

I finished reading John MacArthur's new book "Slave: the hidden truth about your identity in Christ" back on January 14th. Before I started reading Slave I had intended to do a huge review of the work. All the way back on January 13th I recorded my initial impressions of the book. As I was formulating those initial impressions I was still expecting Slave to be the focus of a detailed review, and a new focal point in the pro/anti Lordship Salvation heresy discussion. I stand by my initial impressions, but my anticipation would have been better spent waiting on the ketchup to come out of a bottle...

Since that time, perhaps, some of you have been anticipating my review of the book. After-all I've been saying that I would review it. In the two months since I finished reading Slave I've been contemplating how to review it fairly. I’ve decided to do less than a review and simply offer my “final thoughts” on the book. I had expected a much stronger work that would need to be answered in detail. I expected it to be compelling. I expected it to at least almost live up to how it was promoted.

Well before I get ahead of myself let's look at the promotional video for Slave. Even if you've seen it before please watch it again. Back in December I described this video as the Bible X-Files, and I think that description is pretty close to the mark.

The very first words of this promotional video, spoken by Dr. John MacArthur himself, are "Exploring the New Testament I uncovered a distortion truth when it came to the word doulos." So Dr. MacArthur claims to have uncovered a distortion of truth when it comes to the word doulos. I want you to get this claim straight from his own mouth - because it is central to one of the most common criticisms of the book.

According to Amazon.com the hardcover is 240 pages long (I read it using the Kindle app on my Macbook Pro and iPod Touch). Though MacArthur claims there has been a cover-up of biblical proportions to hide an essential truth from the world he has 373 references, and a full chapter entitled "Voices From Church History"... it is true that some chapters have several scripture references, so we can take maybe 30 references out of that number... that would still give us around 343 references of other people telling us about the word doulos. On my kindle app the references for each short chapter are several pages long. The video for the book makes this “cover-up” sound, well impressive. The book makes the failed attempt seem pathetic, or perhaps it may make one think there was no cover-up at all.

When I read and reviewed MacArthur’s The Gospel According to Jesus, I found myself getting upset with the man. The book was filled with proof-texts (out of context short quotations of Scripture) and conjecture. He would posit something over a number of pages – without support from the Scriptures, then move on to another topic which would be supported by saying since we know such and such is true then… and the such and such would be whatever he had just posited without support. I really thought it was intentional, and perhaps I still feel like some of it was. Now though, I’m beginning to think he has been blinded by his own argument. He’s not able to imagine a real argument against it so he doesn’t even bother to try to support what he claims.

Slave is, in my opinion after having read it and then considered it for two months, is a shockingly limp, lazy and loose work which doesn’t even make a point let alone bother to argue for it. I realize that Slave is just one cog in a machine designed to drive MacArthur readers to embrace the theology that I can only describe as the Lordship Salvation heresy. The whole system might be described like this:

Christians are slaves, Roman slaves had no will of their own and were totally subjected to their masters, Christians therefore have this same relationship with their Master, Jesus Christ, therefore Lordship Salvation is true and one cannot be saved unless they are completely, radically, fully, wholly, subjected to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in every aspect of their life, for their entire life time.

Previous works by MacArthur fit later in the system than Slave does. Slave is an enterance book – a means to draw new followers of Lordship Salvation. It’s a lite read, doesn’t draw too many conclusions and so won’t stir up many objections in the mind of a novice to the topic.

When I gave my initial reaction to a Brother I’m accountable to in regard to these matters, he counselled me not to make the review about the last page of the book. What is that last page? An advertisement for the Slave study guide. Sadly it appears to me that the book has two purposes; first to give the impression that the word doulos can only mean “slave” and that the Roman slave trade is the definition of Christianity, without exploring what that really means to the individual; and second to sell the study guide. There is no good example of exegesis in this book. He quotes several passages but does not dig into any of them to any great depth at all. Perhaps the study guide does?

The problem is that the person who reads Slave and then decides to get the study guide has likely already bought into the Roman slave trade view of Christianity based on MacArthur’s convincing before they ever get a chance to examine the Scriptures. This is a horrible reversal of how theology is supposed to be developed in a Christian’s mind. Our understanding is to be driven by the Scriptures, not the other way around. Of course one might bring up that the Bereans listened to Paul first and then went to the Scriptures but I caution to you read what is said of the noble Bereans. Acts 17:11 They listened to Paul with ready minds and then went to the Scriptures to see if what he said was actually true. They did not listen to Paul and then have him lead them in a study. Likewise we ought to obey 1Thes 5:21

One sincere person recently showed a clear example of what happens when you get this wrong. In so doing he gave me the push I needed to actually finish this blog article. I will paraphrase him anonymously because I’m reasonably sure he would not want to be quoted.

Why not just let the Word speak for itself? The word is doulos and it only means “slave.” Look it up, it’s Strong’s # 1401.

Do you see the system I described above in this man's words? Do you see how if this teaching style is used, this one word can define Christianity without even the aid (not to mention the correction) of the rest of Scripture? If not, hopefully you will before the end of this article.

Following the same pattern that I found so offensive in The Gospel According to Jesus; in Slave MacArthur makes the argument that doulos only means slave, and therefore Christianity is like Roman slavery, and every time the Lord spoke of a person doing work, or being employed by someone else He was actually using what MacArthur calls “slave language” to show what true Christianity is. It is a brilliant practice to employ with people who will not test your argument rigorously.

You may have noticed in the video that MacArthur ties the word “bought” into the equation of understanding that true Christians are slaves of Christ. This of course gets discussed in the book as well. Frankly, it is an understanding of redemption that is corrupted by forcing the doctrine of Limited Atonement on it.

If those whom Christ bought are all “doulos” to Him, and if the word doulos can only mean slave, and this defines Christianity as slavery to Christ then all those who are bought are slaves in total subjection to Him. This is how Slave helps you think, and it is the intent of the paraphrased quote above.

2Peter 2:1-3

¹ But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. ² And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. ³ By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction doesnot slumber.

Here are a group of false prophets who were “bought” by the Lord. Most obviously these people are going to be destroyed in judgment – they will be going to the Lake of Fire. These are not saved people.

But what if I’m wrong, what if they are saved people who have gone astray and will face harsh judgement at the Judgment Seat of Christ, being "saved as though by fire"? 1Cor 3:9-15 Even that doesn’t help the MacArthur doctrine. The problem remains, they are either bought and going to be destroyed or they are bought and most obviously not in subjection to the Lordship of Christ in every aspect of their lives. There is no solution for the MacArthur doctrine in this example.

That ought to be enough, but Scripture is actually full of examples that show the complete failure of MacArthur’s doctrine. We’ll look at just one more.

Were the Corinthians saved people? Yes. Were they bought? Yes. (hint: Jesus Christ paid for everyone, and everything at the Cross. The Cross wasn’t just about the Elect because it wasn’t just about people – it was about all of Creation.)

Anyway let’s look at the Corinthians.

1Cor 6:20

For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

Paul is telling them that because they were bought that they are to glorify God in their bodies and spirits. Why would you have to tell someone to do this if they were a slave, without will and in total subjection to the Lordship of Christ? Were they saved or not?

OK well one Lordship Salvation proponent might say that since all Creation was bought by the Lord on the Cross, that Paul giving a Gospel presentation, a salvation appeal even! Well no, actually the Corinthians Paul was writing to had long before received the Gospel; as we read back in Acts 18.

Acts 18:5-8

5 When Silas and Timothy had come from Macedonia, Paul was compelled by the Spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ. 6 But when they opposed him and blasphemed, he shook his garments and said to them, "Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles." 7 And he departed from there and entered the house of a certain man named Justus, one who worshiped God, whose house was next door to the synagogue. 8 Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized.

Paul was preaching that Jesus is the Christ, though many Jews rejected this message many of the Corinthians heard, believed and were baptized. These are saved people, and yet they went on to have a famously fleshy assembly filled with all kinds of infighting and sexual immorality. So can it be said that these bought and saved Christians lived in a Roman slave-like relationship to Christ for all their days? If you think they did, please… please read 1^st and 2^nd Corinthians.

In this article I have followed the example of the noble Bereans. I have listened to what MacArthur has taught and then I have gone to the Scriptures to see if what he teaches is true; it is not. I therefore must reject what he teaches in accordance with 1Thes 5:21.

Slave is a disappointing read and it builds a false view of Salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Quick Update

2011-03-13T21:09:00.000-03:00

No one likes "quick updates." Believe me, I don't like doing them any more than you like reading them. :)

The review of Slave is nearly finished and I expect to have it up in the next day or two. I'm still absolutely flat out at work, which is why I haven't been writing very much on here. However, that will be done for me in less than a month! Big news coming on that front!

I will be back to my normal level of writing very soon!

Looking for a Christian publisher in Canada

2011-03-02T17:00:00.000-04:00

My last book was published in the USA and that has proven to make receiving payments problematic. Xulon has lived up to their agreement fully, and I recommend them to anyone, but I definitely want to skip the whole cross border publication deal this time.

So I'm looking for a Christian publisher in Canada. My next book is officially in production, albeit just.

I'm going to start looking myself, but if anyone out there has a recommendation I sure would appreciate it!

Childlike Faith

2011-02-19T16:42:00.000-04:00

When I was about 15 years old my dad was teaching me to ride motocross. Specifically I was learning how to jump aggressively once reaching the top of a steep sand quarry wall in order to launch myself and the motorcycle very high into the air, land and carry on as quickly as possible. Going high into the air slows you down, but I was primarily learning how to control the bike in any give situation. I was learning how to ride just like my dad - and I couldn't have been happier!

My dad had bought me my second motorcycle, a Yamaha BW200. I loved the thing! It was nearly unstoppable. Because of the large wheels I could easily navigate mud, sand, logs... just about anything! But on the day in question I was about to come up against something I was not prepared for.

Time and again I would rush up the wall and slip into the air, land and go around again. Faster, quicker, more aggressive... more this more that... my dad kept wanting more out of me. Finally I decided to give it all I dared to! Rushing up the wall adrenaline was pumping through my system and I was feeling that the situation was getting out of control. This time I didn't just slip into the air, I launched! It felt like I was on a rocket! I freaked out. It was too much. When I landed I tried to turn too soon.. .didn't give enough gas and the bike took me to the ground and pinned me there.

I'm adopted but you would never know it based on how my dad and I look and act. I've so looked up to him that I talk like he talks, walk like he walks and even use his judgment - even today after having been married for some 19 years. My dad was my hero.

I wanted to be rescued by my dad, my hero.

I called out to him, but he just stood there looking at me.

I called out again and again.

Finally he told me he wasn't coming, that I had to pick the bike up off of myself and get back on it. "Now." He said, not harshly but with no hint that I could argue with him any further.

I picked the bike up. Threw my leg over it. Started it up. Looked at him, disbelieving. Finally I road over to him - and he explained what had just happened to me. Then sent me down to bottom of the quarry to do it again, just as fast.

You know what my dad explained to me that day? That I had to learn to pick myself up. It was time for me to start being the man I needed to become. I needed to know that I could rely on myself. I needed to know that when the situation is out of control I can control what I'm able to, and roll with the rest. I needed to be able to face the impossible, and get through it. He wanted me to be a strong man.

I had wanted to be rescued by my dad, my hero. My dad wanted me to be the man I saw him as.

Jesus' Disciples were in a boat in terrible weather. They saw a Man walking on the water and considered perhaps He was a ghost! He told them to not be afraid because "I AM." Peter recognized that it was the Lord, and said that if it was Him that he wanted to be called out to join Him on the water! WOW. Can you imagine asking such a question - and being sincere? Peter wanted to do something amazing like what the Lord was doing - just like I wanted to ride motorcycle the way my dad could.

Peter got out on to the waves and started walking on water - yes a plain old fashioned fallible man like you or I. Peter did great and the Lord must have been pleased! That is until Peter saw how the wind was affecting the water and became afraid. At that moment Peter began to sink.

He cried out to Jesus "Lord save me!" and IMMEDIATELY the Lord stretched out His arm and saved him.

Peter wanted to be rescued by the Lord, and the Lord did so IMMEDIATELY.

So what's the lesson here? Well tomorrow morning I'm leading the Breaking of the Bread service and I'm going to speak on this lesson. While my dad's goal was to bring up a strong, self-reliant, resilient man the Lord crafts His children entirely differently. My dad had an honorable purpose, and he did the right thing so far as learning to be a man is concerned from his point of view.

The Lord wants dependant children, and fully dependant at that. We are supposed to be so dependant on Him that we do not fear the waves, we simply call on Him in every situation at all times. We don't need to learn to be stronger than the waves, or to persevere through them, or to overcome them - we need to be ever reliant on the rescue of the Lord - in every situation.

The Lord rebuked Peter that day, saying he had "little faith" but who among the Brethren reading this blog has faith like Peter did to get out of a boat and walk on water?

Let us remember that the Lord didn't want Peter to perform that day, He wanted him to trust Him - no matter what. It was this amazing faith that Peter had, momentarily, that allowed him to do the amazing thing. The amazing thing was possible because of his trust, not as proof of it, not as part of it. Peter obviously had faith in the Lord even after he sank, but it was little faith - yet still enough for the Lord to save him.

How's your faith today? Are you trusting Him with everything? Are you?

On My Run

2011-02-08T18:14:00.002-04:00

I've gotten serious about running again.

I was last truly serious about running early in 2005 when I ran in the Halifax Bluenose Half Marathon, which I completed in 2:12 in near hurricane conditions. I was pleased with the result considering the crazy winds, and impressed I lived through the experience. It was a terribly hard run, but also one of the greatest experiences of my life.

Since then I have been an on again, off again, kind of runner. Having just crossed over into adulthood at the ripe old age of 40, I've decided it's time to get serious again. My loving wife has been running all along and she is very fast. So she's been training me since October and for Christmas she got me the Adidas miCoach. We first saw it at one of her 10K races last year. I wanted it badly but didn't want to spend the money on myself. I generally only ever splurge on myself with computer or music gear.

I started training with the miCoach on January 4th. I set it up to train me with the goal of completing a 10K race in May in 60mins or less. The training program seemed too easy at first, but tonight I ran my 100th KM since the program started - and it's getting pretty challenging. I've also gotten much faster! On New Year's Eve I ran 5K in 28:16 - which isn't quick for a 40 y/o male. I'm now able to do that same run in 25 mins. That's a huge improvement for such a short time!

If you are a runner who wants to get better, or someone who wants to learn how to run I can truly recommend this inexpensive bit of gear.

Quick Update

2011-02-08T08:11:00.000-04:00

I'm working on Personnel Evaluations at work and so my writing here will be slow for the next little while. I had intended on having the review of Slave posted before this... however, it's a good thing that I've waited! Kindle doesn't give page numbers that relate to the actual print copy of the book, but that is being fixed. There's a preview of the next Kindle update which will include proper page numbers out now. As soon as this is released I'll be able to accurately quote MacArthur in such a way that people can easily find the quotes in the actual book. This is going to make writing the review much easier, and hopefully make the review more helpful in the end.

One note about the review - it's going to be short and I can sum it up for you right here. The book is not influential. I can't imagine anyone changing their mind to believe in MacArthur's Lordship Salvation theology after reading it, if they disagreed in the past. It is also not going to drive away anyone who currently even loosely holds to this theological position. It makes no real statement, comes to almost no conclusions, and so in the end I expect it will be an entertaining read for those who hold the position and a disappointing read for everyone else.

On a side note; I've ordered the book Free Grace Soteriology by Dr. David R. Anderson since it has been recommended to me by Dr. Robb Lawson.

Applying Acts 21?

2011-01-23T20:19:00.000-04:00

If you were the Apostle Paul how would you have reacted to what the Church at Jerusalem was practicing? Read what he was told on his arrival in Acts 21:17-25

¹⁷ And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.¹⁸ On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. ¹⁹ When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. ²⁰ And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; ²¹ but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. ²² What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. ²³ Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. ²⁴ Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. ²⁵ But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

Paul was returning to Jerusalem after having preached that if you strive to obey the Law that Christ profits you nothing, and that you are indebted to obey the whole Law. Gal 5:2-3 (for example). What's more he talks about those who compel men become circumcised do so to avoid their own persecution of the Cross of Jesus Christ, that they only want to boast in the fleshly works of men. Gal 6:12-13 He also states that he would rather they cut their own selves off - if you know what he means. Gal 5:12 Yes that is graphic and harsh.

How does Paul react to the news of Jewish Believers being "zealous for the Law"? Well some people have said that Paul made the ultimate compromise... some say he made the biggest mistake of his ministry... some say that Paul recognized that Jewish Believers are not the same as Gentile Believers in that Jewish Believers are still under the Law while the Gentiles never were and are still are not now.

The rest of Acts 21 tells us how he reacted and what ensued. Acts 21:26

²⁶ Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them

Paul capitulated, and obeyed ceremony and entered the Temple in accordance with the Law. Was Paul recognizing that he was under the Law? No. Was he compromising? Perhaps... but I don't think so. Can there be middle ground between under the Law and not under the Law? Some teachers in the Church divide the Law between ceremony and morality and claim that Christians are under the "moral law" however, here we have Paul obeying ceremonial law. Scripture does not divide the Law any more than Paul did in his actions at Jerusalem. I don't think it was compromise.

Did he make a mistake? Perhaps an intentional mistake. I think he intentionally became a hypocrite in order to win the hypocrites. I believe Paul became all things to all men that he might win some. 1Cor 9:19-23 And even more so, Paul was acting exactly according to his words and so NOT being a hypocrite. In Rom 9:1-5 Paul says that he could wish that he was himself accursed of Christ, if by such he could win the Jews to Christ.

Was Paul, a Jew still under Law? NO! He explains his, and all Jewish Believers relationship with to the Law when he rebukes Peter, who had been living like a Gentile until some Jewish Believers showed up in Antioch. Gal 2:11-21

¹¹ Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; ¹² for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. ¹³ And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.

¹⁴ But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? ¹⁵ We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, ¹⁶ knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

^{¹⁷ “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! ¹⁸ For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. ¹⁹ For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. ²⁰ I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. ²¹ I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”}
Jews become like Gentiles when they believe because they have died in Christ, and are dead to the Law.

So was Paul mistaken to go into the Temple the way he did, under Law? No I don't think so. I think he set aside the freedom he had in order that he could win those in bondage. Read the wonderful sermon he was able to preach to the huge crowd that sought to kill him. Acts 22:1-21 I think Paul knew what would go down and used that opportunity to tell them about Christ the Just One, and the true washing away of sins - not just being purified for a moment so that one can enter the Temple.

So what's my point here?

Well, I want everyone reading to be thinking about how we can do this with our Lordship Salvation Brothers; if they have in fact received the Gospel of Christ 1Cor 15:1-11 before they were swept aside by the wind of this false doctrine.

See while successful Discipleship is not a condition for, or of true Salvation in Christ, it is the very focus of the Epistles of the New Testament. It's interesting that today in church we were studying 1Thess and I think it's the only letter from Paul that doesn't include the correction of grave disorder. The only correction Paul gives is about the reality of our hope in Christ's return being a good thing. So I can say wholly confidently that Discipleship is a HUGE topic in the Bible. We really are supposed to submit to Christ and live holy, and do good works - we really are!

Those in the the bondage of Lordship Salvation see this as a condition for and/or an unavoidable result of salvation because it is so prevalent in the New Testament. So how can we do a better job of giving ourselves the opportunity to preach the washing of sins by the death burial and resurrection of the Jesus Christ the Just?

How can we surrender freedom to win the opportunity to preach freedom? How SHOULD we do this? Can we do this without blaspheming God?

Just finished reading Slave

2011-01-14T22:41:00.000-04:00

I've just finished reading John MacArthur's Slave this moment. My first impressions still stand - though some will require some tweeking when I publish my review of the book.

In short, I feel like I've just watched a movie that was promoted to be a summer blockbuster which would win all the awards.. and it turned out to be Transformers 2.

This book is WAY over hyped...

First Impressions of MacArthur's Slave

2011-01-13T08:59:00.001-04:00

Update: Find my final thoughts on Slave here.

So I've read the Preface and Chapter One of MacArthur's new book Slave. I will of course continue reading the book but I think my first impressions are worthy of being captured here before they are lost in a whatever new thoughts come from exposure to the rest of the work.

MacArthur's pride is NOT my issue with his theology. That being said, one initial reaction to the promotion of the book (See this promo video for example) has been consistent and this sentiment as written by Bruce Bauer in his review at Amazon.com is a great example:

The back paper jacket to the book caught my attention: “A COVER-UP OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS: Centuries ago, English translators perpetrated a fraud in the New Testament, and it’s been purposely hidden and covered up ever since. Your own Bible is probably included in the cover-up!”

WHAT? Are we to understand that Bible translators for centuries, hundreds if not thousands of highly-trained knowledgeable men of God, have kept a well-guarded secret about the true meaning of the Bible that only NOW Dr. MacArthur will be the one scholar who will bring us the real scoop?

Is this reaction to the promotional material justified by what is contained in the book? Well this is a tough one to answer - properly. The short answer is yes, but here's the long answer. MacArthur cites two other people who have written on the subject. In 1966 Edwin Yamauchi wrote an article in his own publication the Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society entitled "Slaves of God." MacArthur's inspiration for Slave is the second. Murray J. Harris 1999 book "Slave of Christ" was his reading material on a long flight, and it gave him the idea of the big "cover-up." So MacArthur doesn't set himself up as the "one scholar" who will save us from the "cover-up." HOWEVER, MacArthur sets himself above the Reformers, and all those who have followed in their tradition. He gives them praise and then writes in the Preface:

"Though all those noble theologians in the rich Reformation tradition of gospel truth touched on this matter - no one had pulled the hidden jewel all the way into the sunlight."

So yes, MacArthur is portraying himself as this one great scholar who is doing for us what the Reformers and their followers never did. Those are big shoes to walk over... but well just because the guy has a big head doesn't mean I can discount his work. That would be the same time of behaviour that he and other Lordship Salvation preachers engage in, and I'll have nothing of it.

So with the sensational stuff out of the way let's get to the real issues!

This early in the book I have come across three practices in his teaching which give me concern.

1. Double speak. Was there an intentional "cover-up" of the meaning of doulos or not? Is MacArthur the saviour of doctrine or just following a long tradition?

In the preface he writes that Harris' Slave of Christ made him:

"realize there had been a centuries-long cover-up by English New Testament translators that had obscured a precious, powerful, and clarifying revelation by the Holy Spirit. Undoubtably, the cover-up was not intentional--at least not initially."

So it wasn't intentional at first but now it is? Then in Chapter One:

"this cover up.....almost seems like a conspiracy"

If it's intentional then then it must be a conspiracy? This double speak on this topic is classic MacArthur. Whether he's talking about how he's going to expose a long hidden truth, which has been spoken about in every generation since the Apostles.... or an intentional world wide cover-up that isn't a conspiracy.... or whatever controversial doctrine he is teaching on - it's all of grace but if you're not working as a slave of Christ you're not really saved.... MacArthur is highly adept at presenting his doctrine in such a way as to give those who follow him quotes which seem orthodox outside of the context of his teaching.

2. Using MacArthur's interpretation to define other's words. This one is a bit hard to explain. In The Gospel According (TGATJ) to Jesus MacArthur would make a claim, offer his reasoning which was never fully convincing and then a few pages later say "Since we know.... then the Apostle Paul meant..." It was down right offensive to me as I read the book. In Slave MacArthur offers stories of the torture and deaths of some martyrs. He notes how the people he talks about would only answer their questioners with "I am a Christian." Over a few pages MacArthur declares that "christian" = "slave of Christ" and then goes on to state that this is what these martyrs were stating. MacArthur makes it seem as though one person did actually say the words "I am a slave of Christ" but doesn't actually quote the man, nor the question being asked of him, or give any other context.

One interesting example may be hard for some to catch. MacArthur writes:

"In fact, whereas the outside world called them Christians the earliest believers repeated referred to themselves in the New Testament as the Lord's slaves."

While it is true that several of the writers of the NT used the word "doulos" to describe themselves and their service to Christ - they were not using it as MacArthur describes. These were a few specific people describing their own relationship to the Lord, explaining their purpose and lives. This is not how Christians talked about themselves, it is how Apostles and other men with offices in the Church spoke of themselves - and rightfully so.

3. Using extra-bibilcal reasoning to define what the Bible says. I'm all about the Grammatical Historical Hermeneutic. That being so, MacArthur throws out the context of word usage in the Scriptures and inserts the Greco-Roman view of slavery in it's place.

My first impressions are not all that surprising.

NOTE: I cannot figure out how to give page references because I'm using an eBook version of Slave and reading it on my laptop & iPod.

Update: Find my final thoughts on Slave here.

Purchased 'Slave' on Kindle

2011-01-11T17:22:00.000-04:00

So I've purchased John MacArthur's new book Slave on my Kindle account.

I'm going to be taking my time reading it but I'm sure I'll be posting about it soon. Here's a screenshot of the first page after the cover however:

If there is anything good, at all, about this book being published it must simply be that followers can no longer deny that MacArthur preaches a works based salvation. In the very first paragraph of writing in the book RC Sproul praises the work and states:

"Those who would be His children, must paradoxically be willing to be His slaves."

First review of MacArthur's new book 'Slave'

2011-01-10T06:33:00.002-04:00

UPDATE: Here are my own thoughts about Slave (and here are my first impressions).

In the coming days I intend on discussing how we can, and if we should, follow Paul's example in Acts 21 with our dealings with Brethren who preach the Lordship Salvation message. Here's the first review I've read of MacArthur's new book 'Slave.'

John MacAthur's New Apostate Book - at the Notes From A Retired Preacher blog. (a repost of Bruce Bauer's review at Amazon.com) I am also going to repost it here.

Please Note: This review by Bruce Bauer is from: Slave: The Hidden Truth About Your Identity in Christ (Hardcover), by John MacArthur

The back paper jacket to the book caught my attention: “A COVER-UP OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS: Centuries ago, English translators perpetrated a fraud in the New Testament, and it’s been purposely hidden and covered up ever since. Your own Bible is probably included in the cover-up!”

WHAT? Are we to understand that Bible translators for centuries, hundreds if not thousands of highly-trained knowledgeable men of God, have kept a well-guarded secret about the true meaning of the Bible that only NOW Dr. MacArthur will be the one scholar who will bring us the real scoop?

Yes, this is exactly what the book would have us to believe, that the common Greek term “doulos” has been mistranslated in every major version of the Bible since the earliest of printed Bible translations. According to MacArthur, “doulos” should be translated primarily if not exclusively as “slave.” Most modern translators (NASB, NIV, KJV, NKJV, ESV) as well as common Greek-English lexicons interpret the term in a variety of ways as, “servant,” “slave,” “bond servant,” “bondman,” or “attendant.” MacArthur also states on pp. 29-30 that the proper meaning of the Old Testament’s nearest equivalent term, “‘ebed” has also been hidden by modern translators:

“The King James Version, for example, never translates ‘ebed as ‘slave’—opting for ‘servant’ or ‘manservant’ the vast majority of the time. But contrast that with the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament from before the time of Christ. It translates ‘ebed with forms of ‘doulos,’ or ‘slave’ more than 400 times!”

WHAT?? The LXX translated the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek, NOT to English! So MacArthur is leaping to an inappropriate conclusion about the meaning of the Hebrew in this case.

My greatest problem with the book was that the author, MacArthur, took the ancient images of slavery and superimposed them onto modern Christianity with the intent to create the notion that our normative relationship with God and our service to God should be that of a slave to a master, instead of that of a child of God responding out of love and gratitude to an omnibenevolent (all loving) Father God. Romans 8:15 says, “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba,” Father.”

With this slave-to-master representation set into place, the author proceeded to promote his standard Lordship Salvation doctrine dressed in new clothes, slave garb. He even used much of the same argumentation that he used in “The Gospel According to Jesus.” And, once again, he freely denigrated and characterized Free Grace theology, especially in chapter five.

Recommended reading: “The Grace Awakening,” by Charles Swindoll

With some science on the side

2011-01-02T22:16:00.001-04:00

Happy New Year everyone!

Here's three notable science stories from recent days which I hope will work together to make a cool point or two.

Is this evidence that we can see the future? - NewScientist.com

Experiments with 1,000 volunteer students determined that people can recall words they've been shown in a list of words 53.1% of the time when they will be asked to type the same words in the future. That is to say they are asked to type randomly selected words from the original list they were shown only after they have already demonstrated recall of some of the words from the original list. One might expect a 50/50 result based on pure randomness. The 53.1% rate is interpreted as significant proof of pre-cognition, or seeing the future in some way imperceptible way.

Question: Would a rate of 50% (or 46.9% for that matter) have been interpreted as significant proof that people do not naturally have pre-cognition?

Why the human body temperature is 98.6 degrees F. - GIZMODO.com

Turns out our body temperature is "perfectly balanced." If it were lower we'd get fungal infections, if it were higher we'd have to constantly eat to maintain the energy requirements.

Question 1: Have we been designed with the perfect temperature or did we only happen to survive because we evolved to have this body temperature?

Question 2: If we evolved to have this temperature, then how? Did we, or rather our ancestor just get it right the first time? See if the temperature wasn't perfectly balanced then the organism COULD NOT have survived. This is sort of like irreducible complexity in that you can't gradually come to the correct temperature. It's right or you're dead.

Why published research findings are often false. - SlashDot.com

Uh oh. The New Yorker is reporting that many well-established, multiply confirmed findings are looking increasingly uncertain. Why is this happening? Apparently John Loannidis (author of Why Most Published Research Findings Are False) says that it is because of "significance chasing" or finding ways to interpret data so that it passes the test of statistical significance. That is the 95% boundary proposed by Ronald Fisher. "The scientists are so eager to pass this magical test that they start playing around with the numbers trying to find anything that seems worthy."

Question: Why do we, the very assembly of the Firstborn, allow the unmitigated and implicit trust of scientists to propagate through our society as though it were helpful in any way? The very Scientific Method is based on mistrust of findings! See the graphic above. I wholeheartedly believe in the use of the Scientific Method - I do not believe this even allows for the creation of a new High Priesthood of Scientists.

Happy New Year! How's your Worldview doing?

MERRY CHRISTMAS ONE AND ALL!!

2010-12-25T12:18:00.000-04:00

Peace is declared to you! Justice has been satisfied! Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall have peace with God!

Merry Christmas One and All!!

Faith Worth Experiencing

2010-12-22T18:57:00.003-04:00

1Peter 1:3-9

³ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, ⁴ to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, ⁵who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

⁶ In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, ⁷ that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, ⁸ whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, ⁹ receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.

This "Faith Worth..." series started with a quiet discussion titled Faith Worth Sharing. One long time reader, Look Up, commented that sharing one's faith with someone else has very little value because the object we should be sharing is Christ Himself, not "our" faith. His point is well taken, but I must point out that I would never want to duplicate MY faith in anyone else. My faith is in Christ the Lord, and my faith is my experience of THE FAITH. Look Up wasn't wrong, but he did read an argument into my articles that was not there.

This happens with the text of 1Peter 1:7 as well. I might argue in exactly the same way. The wording could be made to sound like a personal faith, but it is actually about "The Faith." If you read only verse 6 it is easy to misinterpret the passage, especially if you have a system of theology that tells people to examine the quality of their faith. However, if you read verse 6 you must find that Peter says "In THIS you greatly rejoice..."

The good student of the Bible must ask "In what?" and find the answer in the preceding verses 1Peter 1:3-5. We rejoice in the promise, protection, provision, and preservation of God. The genuineness of "your faith" is not how well you trust, obey, act on.... these things of God, it is how well God follows through with them. Our faith is genuine, and not in vain, if God is truly the God He says He is. If Christ did in fact die for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, be buried and raise again the third day according to the Scriptures. 1Cor 15:12-19

So how does this all fit in with sharing your, or the, faith? It's as I often tell people. When you step out in faith like Peter did when he stepped out of a boat on to raging water to walk with the Lord he quickly experienced the genuineness of the faith. When his personal faith started to fail, the faith was still valid because the Lord is faithful. 2Tim 2:13 "The faith" works exactly the same way with personal witnessing. You step out and God is with you.

If you have been working on the things that we discussed before, under the article Faith Worth Building then you are no doubt getting a desire to tell others about what you've learned. It's a natural progression. I'm sure everyone can remember that burning desire to tell everyone about Jesus Christ when they were first saved. It's not a requirement for Salvation.. nor is it a positive indicator of one becoming saved (or not) but it is the normal experience of a Believer.

I've learned myself, and seen it demonstrated over and over again that one of the greatest personal faith building experiences is getting out there and sharing Christ with people. On the street... at work... in church.. at home anywhere and everywhere. God will be with you and you'll experience His faithfulness which is the genuineness of the faith!

Folks it's Christmas time. This is the one time of year when people EXPECT you to talk about Jesus. So open your mouth, be loving, be truthful and tell the whole story. The bad news - sin, death, hell, and the Good News 1Cor 15:1-11.

Merry Christmas!

RECALL NOTICE

2010-12-21T17:26:00.001-04:00

Important Recall Notice

The Maker of all human beings is recalling all units manufactured, regardless of make or year, due to the serious defect in the primary and central component of the heart. This is due to a malfunction in the original prototype units (code named Adam and Eve), resulting in the reproduction of the same defect in all subsequent units.

This defect has been technically termed "Sub-sequential Internal Non-Morality" or more commonly known as SIN, as it is primarily characterized by loss of moral judgment.

Other symptoms include (but are not limited to):

· Loss of direction

· Foul vocal emissions

· Amnesia of origin

· Lack of peace and joy

· Selfish or violent behavior

· Depression or confusion in mental component Fearful

The Manufacturer, who is neither liable or at fault for this defect, is providing factory authorized repair and service FREE of charge to correct the SIN defect.

The number to call in your area is F-A-I-T-H. Simply believe that Christ died for your sins, was buried and rose again, and your unit will be regenerated. No matter how big or small the SIN defect is, Christ will repair and replace it with:

· Forgiveness

· Love

· Joy

· Peace

· Longsuffering

· Gentleness

· Goodness

· Faith

· Meekness

· Temperance

Please see operating manual HOLY BIBLE for further details on the use of these fixes. [ See sections 1Cor. 15:1-4; Eph. 1:7; and Gal. 5:16-26 ].

WARNING:

Continuing to operate any human unit without receiving this repair fully voids any and all Manufacturer's warranties (explicit and/or implied), exposing the owner to dangers and problems too numerous to list; including potential legal judgment for damage to other manufactured items including but not limited to other human units. Such continued operation shall result in the owner/operator being permanently impounded. [For free emergency service before it's too late: call upon the Lord Jesus Christ who loved us and gave Himself a ransom for our sins].

DANGER:

Any and all human units not receiving this recall action shall be destroyed by fire.

This action has been authorized by the Creator.

Systematic Theology

2010-12-20T19:48:00.002-04:00

I've often complained about Systematic Theology, and perhaps I'm not alone in this. This week, I've been checking out a new-to-me blog called The Naked Bible. This quote from the blog's author, Dr. Michael Heiser, sums up my thoughts about Systematic Theology very well near perfectly. I will be adopting his words.

I don’t really care too much about systematic theology; it’s almost always English Bible-driven and “top down.” I care about biblical theology. - From a comment in THIS DISCUSSION.

"top down" means that the System drives the understanding of the Bible not the other way around. I believe that such systems give poor theologians false confidence in their doctrine. I also believe they all to often keep good theologians from teaching good doctrine while they correct bad doctrine. Truly talented teachers are able to do both at the same time but in my experience these men are rare and far between.

When Brother Lou was reviewing my book he reacted with grace to my stance on Systematic Theology, even though he has been a teacher of the subject himself. I almost felt bad for having this view expressed in the book. It's funny to me that out of all the things I wrote about in Fail-Safe this is the one topic that comes up most often when people criticize me.

So what are your thoughts about Systematic Theology?

Resurrection Evidence: That Amazing Creed in 1 Corinthians 15

2010-12-19T22:42:00.000-04:00

Bad Kool-Aid: The Gospel According to INSERT NAME

2010-12-18T11:34:00.002-04:00

If you are not familiar with the Bad Kool-Aid series please read the introduction first.

Many Bibles have the first four evangelistic letters of the New Testament titled as "The Gospel According to" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. This has led to people offering many "takes" on the Gospel of Jesus Christ and calling their take "The Gospel According to INSERT NAME." Many of the authors of such works use their various authorities to redefine the Gospel in such a way that agrees with their own views.

This practice is so prevalent that even secular media have taken the approach. A simple search at Amazon.ca returns 10,879 books that contain "The Gospel According to".... This practice seemingly gives biblical validation to the idea of relative truth; what is true for me might not be true for you.

There are many various implications of the Gospel, but that there is more than one valid "take" on the Gospel of Jesus Christ is Bad Kool-Aid. There is only one Gospel according to the Scriptures, which is the same Gospel and the same take on that Gospel as Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul and Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Stephen, Apollos... and every one else. There is ONE Gospel, and ONE take on it. 1Cor 15:1-11, Gal 1:6-9, Gal 1:11-12

LINK TO THIS ANSWER!

If you find someone spreading the Bad Kool-Aid of a Gospel According to INSERT NAME, please link them and their audience to this answer! Tell them that they are spreading Bad Kool-Aid and that there is only ONE Gospel of Jesus Christ. Here's a TinyURL to use: http://tinyurl.com/374clf9