A Revealing Poll

 

A great sermon by Dr. John MacArthur summarized:

There was recently a survey of ‘evangelicals.’  People were defined as evangelicals if they believed the Bible, if they believed Jesus and the resurrection, the gospel, and if they felt they were responsible to communicate the gospel to other people.  Those who believed this were considered evangelicals.

Check this, though: the survey revealed that the majority of ‘evangelicals’ really have no idea what they believe.  One survey question posed to evangelicals was, “The Holy Spirit is a Force, not a personal being”; 53% of evangelicals agreed. That would mean there is no Trinity. Another question: “the Bible is literally true,” agree or disagree?  Only 45% of evangelicals agreed. Evidently, they must feel that much of Scripture is fable. Probably when it records supernatural events, people are definitely less likely to believe it. They might say, ‘how can someone live 900 years?’  Finally, “Our God accepts worship from all religions.”  56% agreed. But truth is, every religion except one has the wrong view of Jesus, and He is the only Way to heaven. Here is the worst result of all: “Jesus was a good teacher, but not God.”  43% of evangelicals agreed! It seems that half of evangelicals care little about theology, and many are apostate—without knowing it.

This is so shocking, that anybody who presumably has a sound sense of Biblical doctrine could ever answer “agreed” to these untruths.  How did we get ‘evangelicals’ who don’t believe what is necessary to be saved, let alone be a true evangelical?   Dr. MacArthur believes “this is the legacy of their pastor or leaders.”  People don’t rise above their teachers.  Truth is, the evangelical pastors and churches, over the last 30 years, have been too busy trying to find ways not to offend non-Christians, and trying to take the offenses out of the message.  They design ‘salvation’ approaches to non-believers that don’t engender hostility, or rejection.  But that man-truth voids the gospel of the truth. Such pastors are man-scared—but not God-scared—for preaching a false gospel. In reality the gospel requires humility and submission to accept. But that’s a hard thing for people to do.

Why do they react this way?  Because, honestly, the gospel is offensive.  The ‘good news’ is hated by non-believers. For proof, see John 15:18:

“If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.

One thing that the original disciples knew, people of the world hated Jesus.  Especially they hated the Jews.  (The “Christians” had a large part in causing this).  People professed that they followed God--but Jesus is God Incarnate, contrary to their ‘beliefs.’.  But once they heard the message of Jesus and He preached it, they rejected it—and Him. But why the hate—toward Him who was the most merciful, compassionate, loving Person in all the world?  Here’s the answer, in blunt language in John 7:7:

The world…hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil.

The whole human race is sinful.  But that ‘negative view of me’ brings out hate in everyone unsaved. People generally consider themselves ‘good enough,’ so they have a dominant sin of Pride. It’s easy to create an image of ourselves that seemingly escapes ultimate condemnation—by spinning a web of delusions about ourselves.  Man says that he is ‘better than most’—he will say anything without acknowledging that his ‘deeds are evil.’ This is pride in operation—we all are sinners, and unacceptable to God without a supernatural feat—being born again.

You can see, in the Gospel of John, how the hate plays out.  In 5:16, the offense was He was doing these miracles on the Sabbath.  He could have avoided much of the hate by only doing God’s work six days a week, but God doesn’t work under man’s restrictions.  Limiting God?  Who would do that?  In 5:18, Jesus said the Jews were plotting already to kill Him.  It’s only the fifth chapter of John and they want Him dead already. Note in those three verses that His persecutors were not listed as “Pharisees,” but Jews. And this: The crowd made quite a noise in demanding that Barabbas be freed. And think how many were even insulting Him at the Cross?

Of equal offense to them was that Jesus called God His Father, making Him equal with God in the Jewish religion.  They judged that ‘blasphemy.’  Of course, their thinking was irrational because His deeds were things that only God could do.  Later in John, they tried to arrest Him. They wanted to stone Him, but His time was not yet.

Isaiah 53 prophesied that He would be an offense. Definitely proven true; the Jewish leaders treated Him as nobody, nothing.  But He was compassionate to widows, to the disabled, to the children.  He brought a message of eternal life and forgiveness. In John 8, Jesus says “you cannot hear my words—you are of your father, the devil.” A hard slap against their character. But please don’t judge the Jews alone:  ALL OF US began life separated from God, and our father was the devil.  And he still is, unless we are truly saved.  We do not start out ‘innocent,’ you see?  We got this terrible trait from Adam.

Jesus, in John 8:45, says,

But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me

The world’s minds have a natural tendency to be irrational on this subject. We are pre-programmed to believe lies—because, as Jesus says, the devil—our father if we are not saved—is the father of lies. This is a profound diagnosis of the human condition. Please don’t fall into the trap of excessive pride; face up to the truth. We are sinners; in the eyes of a perfect, holy God we deserve hell. He is our Judge; we cannot change where we are by yelling “unfair.” Submit to the Lordship of Jeus over your life. He owns you, having given His life to buy you out of slavery to sin. Seek His will, since He loves you and knows what you need more than you. Otherwise, it could cost you eternal life.

So the Jews concluded about Jesus, ‘you have a demon. Not us.’ But that is the worst blasphemy of all.  Their world was inverted.

Dr. MacArthur gets back to his original complaint:  I don’t know what kind of evangelistic strategy you, as an evangelist, can devise to tell the truth and yet overcome the natural human resistance that results; the truth is, you can’t.  Think of this:  Jesus had no strategy to bypass reality.  We are, before we reached out to Christ, sinful, dead, blind, ignorant, darkened to the Scriptural facts, and under satanic control. This truth is alien to our nature.

When we “evangelize,” we talk the gospel, but we have a fear of being ‘brutal’ and so we avoid certain subjects, like the depth of human sin.  To speak of that harsh truth takes courage, a willingness to obey Jesus who said we must endure persecution when we tell all the truth.  When they begin lashing back, we should train ourselves to think, that’s what we expect, a further evidence of the sinful characteristics of man.  Jesus said we should rejoice when this occurs—even though we kick ourselves because we could have said it better.  We hope for them to think rationally and grasp the truth. We thought that ‘that person seemed a wise thinker.’

A side thought: I must reveal the Calvinistic sway of Dr. MacArthur here, his belief in Total Depravity.  The words of Calvin say that we have no capacity to receive the truth, until the Holy Spirit puts the spark of regeneration in us first.  That work is done by God randomly, without regard for our previous moral behavior or not.  God chooses who is saved and who is not saved—and the latter is doomed to be hell-bound.  I do not believe in this, since I consider it a non-Scriptural characteristic of God.  I agree more with Jacob Arminius, who argued against Calvin in the 1600s by stating that God gave us ‘prevenient grace,’ that He gave us enough will to choose Him, even in our tragic condition, if we desired to seek after Him. 

But let’s not get sidetracked.  Our subject is how we have strayed from the whole gospel because people hate to hear it. Because people are so hostile--and the feeling is, “how can we convert them in this state of hostility?  Because of their hostility, they’re not thinking straight, so let’s avoid that subject.”  Truth is, people aren’t thinking straight to begin with.  You can’t do anything to prevent it.

You must let the Holy Spirit work in your prospects’ heart. We laid the seed—if we gave the whole truth, God will approve. That’s all that counts.

You should burn the bridge totally, by telling them that they are under eternal judgment of Judgment.  Paul does that at the Areopagus on Mars Hill, Acts 17:29-34:

…we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. ³⁰ Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, ³¹ because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

³² And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked, while others said, “We will hear you again on this matter.” ³³ So Paul departed from among them. ³⁴ However, some men joined him and believed, among them Dionysius the Areopagite, a woman named Damaris, and others with them.

He gently attacks idols, but turns the heat on and calls their beliefs in them “times of ignorance.” Then he suggests that they repent, or turn their mind away from this—because the real God will judge them, through a Man who has been raised from the dead. Likely they had heard of this “Jewish fantasy.” Paul was not as sophisticated as they were used to, as ‘everyday philosophers,’ but he did know how to present the whole truth.

Some mocked, some called him a “babbler.” But some would do some thinking, and a few believed.

That’s the way you should expect it to go. Matthew 7:13-14 says few are saved.

But what evangelistic preaching do you hear now? ‘Jesus wants you happy, He wants you successful.  They imply that He is willing to satisfy your carnal desires without pain, without inconvenience.  Truth is, He paid the price on the Cross for our sin—so we are His servants, we should avoid our carnal desires, but simply seek His will for all we do in all our lives.  We realize how we deserve hell (for ANY sin to a perfect God), but we who are willing to be His disciples can gain heaven if we endure, so we love Him for saving us from hell, and are willing to do that.  We aspire to the goal of seeking earnestly in Scripture for His commands, to find true godliness, and in developing love for our Savior.

Today’s sermons tend to leave off the sinful condition that we’re born into.  It avoids that Jesus is the Judge, the Son of God whose second coming will be for judgment as well.  When you die, your destination is fixed, hell or heaven, depending totally on your relationship with Christ while alive.  Today’s gospel twists the simple fact that Every word in Scripture—even the negative ones—are all true.  By not preaching on some subjects, we still think we ‘follow’—but we don’t believe in those subjects.

By doing this, we paint God as an idol of our own making, a grandfatherly, forgiving type, ignoring the Old Testament.   That god accepts pretended humility from all religions.  Hence the terrible answers that you see in the poll, as proof that what I’m saying is an accurate conveyance of this false and incomplete understanding rampant in society.  No other religion has this doctrine, even false forms of ‘Christianity,’ even the Jews in Jesus’ time (they twisted the truths in Old Testament Scripture).  They are all dooming more people to hell, teaching that basically, we are good, and we can reform ourselves into a better life (or lives), and eventually, through purgatory or temporary renewal, as long as we try, be sincere, can hopefully gain heaven.  Or universal peace. This way, they say, God will approve of our righteousness. Most people go to church to relieve some guilt.  Most pastors don’t shake them from this fable.  People in the pews, who say they are Christian, hate the bad news that they are sinful, according to God—and thus reveal that they don’t begin life Christian, even if baptized.  Most pastors are deluded enough to believe that the people that are there regularly are Christian.  But the pew-sitters believe lies, nuanced distortion of the truth, believe what’s convenient, like the survey above shows.  Many of their pastors would get fired if they preached the truth for more than three weeks straight.  So it has come to be in America. The best Scriptural summary for our history might be in Ephesians 2:1-3--you decide if you are before or after:

And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, ² in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air (Satan), the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, ³ among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

The concluding statement says that we are all hell-bound, unless we grasp Christ as our Savior, and hang onto Him with all we have. Are you in Ephesians 4:18?

…having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart

Ephesians 4:19 adds the word “callous” in the ESV. That means that our minds, if we remain unsaved, are scarred over by ignoring Him so that we cannot sense the truth. 

God can be a killer. In Genesis 6, God destroyed humanity except 8 people, saying all He saw was evil continually. Jeremiah 17 says our hearts are desperately wicked.  Scripture spells out the sad facts and destination for us, if we don’t dispose of pride and grasp Jesus, who is God, in humility to avoid hell.  We don’t have to look far for it.  Jesus raised the issues of hell and final judgment in EVERY chapter of Matthew, from chapter 3 to 25.

Dr. MacArthur simply finally says that we must be reborn, as Jesus told Nicodemus.  Truly we cannot fix ourselves, our ‘reforming ourselves’ to heaven is not an option.  Truly, we don’t know where the source that sparks our salvation comes from.  Maybe we can’t ‘see the light,’ and get the real gospel. We are here maintaining simply the main point of the sermon; that we need to get the truth of Man back into the gospel to appreciate the deep love and sacrifice of God.  We need that aspect of the gospel to have the motivation to realize that we need to cling to Him, that we want to forward His kingdom by anything He wants us to do.  Only by knowing all the gospel will we be eager to read Scripture to know more about all three Persons of God. Only with the true gospel will we be eager to follow our Lord’s commands, to please Him and to know what godliness really is.  Today’s preached “gospel” leads to ‘mental assent’ salvation, not deep-rooted enough to fight off the worldliness.  If you still have worldliness, you have idols—of materialism, of envy, of greed, of jealousy.  God does not save idolaters at the Judgment, because there is no love for Him there.  Today’s gospel leads to a Church of Laodicea salvation, which is not a salvation at all; as Revelation 3 says, He will vomit some of us out of His mouth—thus, we would not be part of His body.  Let us spread the word. The reason why churches have lost their power is because they most teach a false gospel. I urge you to read Scripture, and find out what Scripture really says.  Try reading the Gospels first.  Your eternal life or hell depends on it. May God bless you.

 

 

 

 

 

Can We Know the Exact Day When Christ was Crucified?

 First clue to finding the correct day: In Jesus’ time, the seventh day, Sabbath, or Saturday to us, was a day in which no real work is to be done. It followed the example of God at Creation. In Jeremiah 17:22, God says…nor carry a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, nor do any work, but hallow the Sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers.

That means they had to double-gather crops for food on Friday. So Friday was called the day of Preparation. As it so happens, all four Gospels record Jesus’ death and crucifixion on a Preparation day, so He was presumably crucified on a Friday (Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54, and John 19:14). Friday was also accepted by the earliest church fathers and scholars through the ages.*

A second clue: Jesus is crucified on a Passover day, which happens once a year. John 18:28-29 says:

Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover. 29 Pilate then went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?”

This is important. Passover is on the 14th of Nisan, a specific date in a Hebrew month. So that means, of course, its day of the week changes year-to-year. But we now know that Jesus was crucified in a year in which Passover, Nisan 14, is on Friday. That narrows the field.

A third clue: As you can see in the previous verse, Jesus was crucified when Pilate ruled. Scholars have no trouble giving the years: AD 26-36.

A fourth clue: Luke 3:23 records that Jesus was “about 30 years of age” when He began His ministry. John records Jesus attending three Passovers: 2:23, 6:4, and 13:1. This narrows the field further (assuming birth in 2 BC, see my “Birth of Jesus”  blog), to Jesus being crucified from AD 28 up to the early 30s.

Nisan 14 happens on Friday only twice during this time period: 4/7/30 and 4/3/33. Which is it?

To get the final answer, oddly, we turn our attention to Sejanus, an extreme anti-Semite and Pilate’s boss through late 31 AD. Pilate, to conform to his wishes, did terribly brutal things to Jews, and denied their every request—just to tick them off. But Sejanus was assassinated 10/18/31, along with many of his appointees (but not Pilate). Then, Pilate’s new boss had an opposite approach to the Jews: “Leave the Jews alone unless they threaten to insurrect.” Pilate, to conform to this, to save his skin, had to be careful not to appear cruel.

 Here’s the question: Since Pilate was ambivalent toward Jesus (John 19:12), which leader was he under? Pilate couldn’t have been under Sejanus, so it must be that Jesus was crucified after his death, which happened 10/18/31. Of our two possible dates above, we now have only one choice:

Jesus was crucified on April 3, 33 AD

Maybe you’re thinking “That year selection seems sketchy, perhaps it was the other date and Pilate was just feeling good, or he wanted to give Sejanus a hard time.” Well--there are lots more confirming evidence about the date we chose—typical of the Bible’s layering of proofs, its unassailable accuracy.

 We can nail down the year a second way: check Daniel 9:25-26, KJV:

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks… 26 “And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off…

First off, the word “weeks” is incorrect—the Hebrew word is “sevens.” But seven what—days, months? If you make a week 7 years, then “seven weeks” becomes seven sevens, or 49 years, and “62 weeks” becomes 62x7, or 434 years. Then you get “from the going forth of the command…until Messiah there shall be” 49+434, or 483 years…and after (that), Messiah shall be “cut off”-- killed.

Then you need to know that the Jewish people had a 360-day lunar calendar, vs our 365.24 day solar one. So from the king's “command” to restore Jerusalem to the killing of Messiah is 483 x 360/365.24=476 of our years.

It also happens that the “command to restore and build Jerusalem” came under the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Nehemiah 2:1-6). Historical books confirm this as 444 BC. Adding 476 years (and considering that there is no year between 1BC and 1 AD), you get 33 AD as when Jesus was “cut off.”!

You’re still not convinced? Here’s a third proof where the sky comes in. A mathematician named Kepler proved (see, again, our "Birth" blog) that the positions of the stars and planets are absolutely predictable, in the past and future. Now note the period of darkness in His crucifixion. In Mathew 27:45:

Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land.

Changing Roman time to our time, this means darkness from noon to 3 pm—so 3 pm was when Jesus died (Matt 27:46-50), as soon as darkness ended.

Now turn to Acts 2:20, 22, and 31, where Peter, on the Day of Pentecost, only ten days after Jesus had been ascended into heaven after His resurrection, quotes a prophecy in Joel 2:30 (this was in the Old Testament, hundreds of years before He was born as a human), about the Anointed One—and then makes some intriguing remarks:

“The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood…” Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know—he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ… ²³ Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

He is saying that this prophecy had recently been fulfilled--and that the crowd he was speaking to had seen these signs, the darkness AND the “blood moon”—which is a lunar eclipse. In such an eclipse, the sun, the moving earth, and the moon are lined up (briefly while the earth passes by) so that the moon only gets sunlight around the edges of the earth, but refracted through the earth’s atmosphere. The moon, from the earth, takes on an eerie redness. Jesus died when the moon was red. This would’ve spooked everyone (along with the graves being opened, and “zombies” walking about—oh, yeah—Matthew 27:52). So Peter is reminding everyone of this creepy event. Odd that the Gospels don’t record the blood moon when it happened (perhaps because it was not quite a complete eclipse), but this quote by Peter definitely proved it happened at His crucifixion. Evidently no one in the audience accused him of lying that those events actually happened; Scripture reports the good and the bad.

Well, as it so happens--There was a lunar eclipse and a blood moon on 4/3/33!

Thus you have my three proofs of His crucifixion day. (For a deeper analysis of how we can know the exact day, see my “birth” blog comments and the author’s notes in my source).

At the very same time Jesus died, Jewish priests were sacrificing innocent lambs to be eaten at Passover, a holiday celebrating freedom of slavery from Egypt, and for escaping the Angel of Death. This conjunction of Passover and Crucifixion was no coincidence; it was in the plan of God. Jesus was our Lamb, voluntary sacrificed and temporarily given to the hand of Satan as payment for our sins. Our salvation frees us from the slavery of sin, and His blood, applied to our hearts, saves us from eternal death—and brings us eternal life.

Thank You, God, for your incredible accuracy. Wise men follow the Lord.

What you can’t miss in all this, is an unassailable fact: from the moment our omniscient God flung the stars out in space, He positioned them knowing that there would be a redemptive plan that we would need to approach Him because of our sin. He knew then that His very own Eternal Son would have to die. His power then raised Him in Resurrection like He can raise us again—if we believe and follow His commands—with the help of the Holy Spirit given to us at our initial salvation. He left His love letter to us, His Word, the Bible. It is perfect in its accuracy, as we have seen here, as perfect as God is in His grace. Let us read His Words to us to learn how we can avoid Hell and make it to Heaven. Scripture says that most people go to Hell (Matthew 7:14). His Word is the way to life in heaven.

(PS: Some of these proofs are not on the DVD, but in the “study” section on bethlehemstar.com.

* In case some of you are still scratching your head about Jesus spending 3 days in the tomb, when He was crucified on Friday and resurrected on Sunday, there is a simple answer. Who said He had to spend 3 days in the tomb? Yes, Matthew 12:40 says “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Translators might have failed us here. The phrase “in the heart of the earth” doesn’t necessarily speak of the tomb—it may speak of in the core of Satan’s grasp. I’m using the reputed W.E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. The Greek word “earth” doesn’t necessarily speak of burial. Quoting Vine’s again: “the earth (is) the world...where the context suggests the earth as a place characterized by…weakness.” (Does the crucifixion of this Man suggest our weakness? Definitely.) If you know what Grok is, this is an alternative translation: τῆς γῆς (tēs gēs) = "of the earth" (from gē, meaning earth, land, ground, or the world/soil)

Remember, Jesus had dodged their capture time and time again, saying “my time has not yet come.” But in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus emphasized something else: Then he came to the disciples and said, “Sleep now and take your rest . . . The time has come! I am into the hands of evil men! (TLB)

This is saying, Jesus gave Himself over to Satan on Thursday at the Garden. He was in Satan’s wicked hands from Thursday until Sunday morning suffering and paying for our sin. (He suffered much before the Cross). Thus He was in the heart of the earth’s wickedness for 3 days…and nights, just as Jonah was under the sway of the big fish for 3 days. (P.S. This lengthy note is not from Prof. Larson, but from Amazingfacts.org).

 

Martyrdom Then and Now

 Jesus gave His life, but He was not a martyr.  He was God in the flesh, and the only One who was capable to pay the price for our sin—which was/is a problem, since God is holy. He was our Sin-bearer.  Isaiah 53:4-6 gave this prophecy:

Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted.⁵ But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.⁶ All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way (NKJV);
And the Lord gave Him up for our sins (LXX).

Jesus has rescued us from hell, the place we deserved for our sin.  So now he has a rightful claim on us; our lives are His.  He asks that we follow His commands.  Some of those commands, when carried out, threaten Satan’s domination of the earth.  So, if we are to clearly live our faith, we might have to give our life.  But as Jesus said in Matthew 10:24-26, 27-28:

A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.²⁵ It is enough for a disciple that he be like his teacher, and a servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub (which means Lord of the flies), how much more will they call those of his household! ²⁶ Therefore do not fear them….  “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops. ²⁸ And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

“Those who kill the body” include people and Satan. But “Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” means God. Our soul is more important than our bodies. Our soul determines where we spend eternity. Jesus knew that those who believe and abide in Him are set for an eternity with Him, thank God.  But if we are to abide in Him, we cannot weaken in those crucial moments, if such moments should arrive.  We must assert we are His and not deny Him when persecution heats up.  To do that would put our soul in eternal danger. So let’s look at martyrdom carefully, face to face…..

Man’s inhumanity to man is often most destructive in religious zeal. Satan’s emissaries seem to be working hardest in this arena, knowing that if they can get “Christians” to kill Christians, it tears down the reputation of Christ the most.  In men’s demonic state of irrational hatred, morality is lost, and unimaginable cruelties on innocent people are “justified” on religious grounds. We know of the recent outbreaks of horrors by ISIS.  Need I remind you, they are a group grounded in the religion of Islam, whose Quran teaches them to hate Christians (see my other blog for proof).  You should also read up on Boko Haram, an Islamic State Western Province group, who since 2009 have killed 20,000 in Nigeria and displaced 2.3 million people from their homes.  In Nigeria, many whole villages had previously turned to Christ.  Boko Haram targets these villages and raids them with guns and machetes, carrying on unspeakable slaughter against Christians.  Boko Haram began his career by listening to an Islamist preacher, Mohammed Marwa, renamed Maitatsine (meaning: the one who damns) in the 1970s..

But these horrors are just a repeat of the past, I’m sorry to say.  Past martyrdom was uglier--it was done, not by Islam vs. Christian, but by "Christian" vs Christian. In the 1400-1600s, it was Catholics killing Protestants, and even some Protestants killing other Protestants.  But--when it came to a group so pure as the Anabaptists, their Christianity was so Christlike that they were “dangerous” to established religion--so both Protestants and Catholics went about killing them. Luther and Calvin were Protestants, but also found excuses to kill them.  Not surprising, since Luther and Calvin were incomplete reformers of the Gospel (as I have proven in my other blogs).  The Anabaptists were closer to Kingdom living, the real gospel, than they were, generally. Though some Anabaptists went off the rails, too..

With “Christians” killing Christians in those days, the problem is that in that time, entire nation-states declared themselves Catholic “Christian” or Protestant "Christian," and many people were coerced, or intimidated, into going through the motions of accepting God on their terms, and people were trained, from birth, to hate the other--but hatred is not Christian. They ignored the Bible, which plainly speaks out against hate. But there were actually few who really read their Scripture (the Catholics made sure of that) AND followed Christ's commandments--those were the real Christians.  The haters, especially those who killed other religious observers, though, were Christians in name only. After all, who attacked Jesus with the most abusive language?  The religious leaders, who twisted Scripture to gain wealth and reputation.  And did Jesus say many people would be saved, or be a real Christian?  No.  Read Matthew 7:13-14:

13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it.14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

I have other blogs exposing the truth about terrible things done by Calvin and Luther, both Protestants. For balance, I would like to lift some enlightening literature from Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and Martyr’s Mirror, exposing horrific deeds done by Catholics.  There are three things I would like to say.  First:  Don’t read this to your kids. The things that were done are just too grisly to repeat.  Secondly, this is not a sad tale, really.  The endurance of these real Christian martyrs, and their uplifting words, are an inspiration to all.  In Christ, they really knew the meaning of Paul’s words—“O death, where is thy sting?”  Thirdly, these stories—even their quotes—are not exaggerated fables.  Foxe lived in the 1550s, in the midst of it all, and most of the Mirror, from the 1600s, both of my volumes--were taken from contemporary journals.  May God allow you to be horrified—and yet inspired to Him—as you read.

Our first reading is subtitled “the Valleys of Piedmont in the 1600s.”  (These were the Waldenses, one of the earliest groups protesting against Catholicism's departure from Scripture. The Waldenses were persecuted in northwest Italy and Switzerland).  Here is the quote:

Pope Clement VIII sent missionaries into the valleys of Piedmont, to induce the Protestants to renounce their religion.  These missionaries erected monasteries…(which became) sanctuaries for all cowards to fly to that had injured the Waldenses). This inspired them to further assaults.  The Protestant Waldenses, therefore, petitioned the duke of Savoy for protection.  But instead of getting any redress, the duke published a decree, in which he declared that one witness should be sufficient in a court of law against a Protestant, and that any witness who convicted any Protestant of any crime whatsoever should be entitled to a hundred crowns reward.  As may be imagined, many Protestants fell martyrs to perjury and avarice.

To encourage the apostasy of the Protestants, the duke published a proclamation that exempted from all taxes for five years if the heretics would recant and embrace the holy Roman faith.  There were also several successive edicts, prohibiting the Protestants from acting as schoolmasters, from holding any places of profit, trust, or honor, and commanding them to attend mass.  This last, if ignored, was a sure signal for a persecution, which soon followed. (The Waldenses said that the mass was not the body and blood of our Lord, and the Catholics committed blasphemy.)

Before the persecution commenced, the missionaries employed kidnappers to steal away the children of the Protestants, that they might privately be brought up Roman Catholics.  Later they took away children by open force, and if the poor parents resisted, they were immediately murdered.  One of the first persons who attracted the notice of the papists was Mr. Sebastian Basan, a zealous Protestant teacher, who was seized by the missionaries, confined, tormented 15 months to effect recantation, and then committed to the flames (i.e., burned at the stake).

That was followed by a most cruel order, dated January 25, 1655, that every family of the reformed religion, inhabiting estates in Lucerne, St Giovanni, etc, (in Switzerland) within three days of publication of said order, must depart out of said places, and translated into the places tolerated by his highness—namely Bobbio, Angrogno, etc. In between was a mountainous terrain.  And all this was to be done on the pain of death, and confiscation of house and goods, unless within the limited time they recanted and turned Roman Catholic.

The winter was remarkably severe.  (Ed: This trip was, on average, 140 miles through the Alps, so they spent many overnights outdoors.  But they were unfamiliar with living in wilderness, and hadn’t had time nor money, to pack for this weather.)  The duke’s troops drove them from their habitations and were assisted by French troops, Irish brigades, and several bands formed of outlaws, smugglers, and prisoners, who had been promised pardon in the world, and absolution in the next, for assisting in their extermination.  (Ed: Plus, they might win a confiscated house.)

Many of the Protestants perished in the mountains from the weather or lack of food. Refusing to move was a poor alternative.  An armed multitude, encouraged by the bishops and monks, fell upon the remaining Protestants in a most furious manner.  All now was horror and despair:  blood stained the floors, dead bodies bestrewed the streets, and groans and cries shocked the ears of humanity from every quarter. There were several men, women, and children flung from the rocks, and dashed to pieces (ed:  From castle heights or cliffs).  Mary Raymondet had her flesh sliced from her bones until she expired.  Anne Charboniere had one end of a stake thrust through her body, and the other end fixed in the ground; so she was left in that manner to perish.  Giovanni Michialin, with four of his children, was apprehended; three of them were hacked to pieces before him; the soldiers asked him at the death of every child if he would recant—but he constantly refused.  One of the soldiers then took up the last and youngest, by the legs, and putting the same question, he replied as before, when the inhuman brute dashed out the child’s brains.  The soldiers roasted alive another girl, about ten years of age, at Villa Nova.

Jacob Birone, a schoolmaster, was stripped naked, and had the nails of his toes and fingers torn off with red-hot pincers, and holes bored through his hands.  He was led through the streets, the soldiers saying, “Will you go to mass?”  He replied in the negative, and being at length taken to the bridge, they cut off his head on the balustrades.

Daniel Rambaut, of Villaro was seized and committed to the jail.  Here he was visited by several priests, who with continual importunities, strove to persuade him to turn papist. He refused.  Then the priests pretended to pity his large family, and told him that he might yet have his life if he would subscribe his belief to the following articles:  1. The real presence (of Christ) in the host. 2. Transubstantiation (Ed: The belief that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus).  3. Purgatory.  4. The pope’s infallibility.  5. That masses said for the dead will release souls from purgatory.  6. That praying for saints will procure the remission of sins.  To these Rambaut replied (in part):  1. To believe the real presence (of Jesus) in the host is blasphemy and idolatry….5. Saying masses for the dead is only meant to keep up a belief in the fable of purgatory, but the fate of all is decided by the time of departure of the soul from the body. (i.e., trying to change God's decision after their death is a waste of time).  6. Praying to saints for the remission of sins is misplacing adoration, as the living saints themselves have a need for an intercessor in Christ; therefore, as God only can pardon our errors, we ought to sue to Him alone for pardon.  (Ed:  Scripture does not have support for the six Catholic claims).  Filled with rage at these answers, the priests determined to shake his resolution by the most cruel method imaginable; they ordered one joint of his fingers to be cut off every day; then his toes; afterwards, they alternately cut off, daily, a hand and a foot, and finding that he bore his sufferings with the most unconquerable fortitude, and maintained his faith with steadfast resolution, they stabbed him to the heart, and gave his body to be devoured by dogs.

(Ed:  Even crueler acts—if it were possible—are detailed in Wikipedia’s “Waldensians,” along with a never-to-be forgotten horrifying illustration, as well.  It seems that the only ones to belatedly organize help to these people were some Protestants).

Now let’s go to another true story in Martyr’s Mirror.  Under the heading: “Weynken, a Widow, of Monickendam, November 20, 1527” (Ed:  This was in Holland). Weynken, an Anabaptist, was persecuted by both Zwinglians—Calvinist Protestants—and papists.

On November 15, Weynken was brought prisoner from the castle to the Hague.  On the 18^th, she was arraigned before the Governor and the full council of Holland.  There a woman asked her:  Have you well considered the things which my lords proposed to you?

Ans:  I abide by what I have said.

Ques:  If you do not speak differently, and turn from your error, you will be subjected to an intolerable death.

Ans:  If power is given to you from above, I am ready to suffer. (Ed: Here, please read Note 1 of 11--See Scriptures at end).

Ques:  Do you, then, not fear death, which you have never tasted?

Ans:  This is true; but I shall never taste death, for Christ says, “If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.”(Note 2) The rich man (the only way to get rich in those days was, your family had oppressed the poor, so it was assumed he was non-Christian.  Jesus didn't have many nice words about richness either) tasted death, and shall taste it forever. (3)

Ques:  What do you hold concerning the sacrament?

Ans:  I hold your sacrament to be bread and flour, and if you hold it as God, I say that is your devil.

Ques:  What do you hold concerning the saints?

Ans:  I know no other Mediator than Christ. (4)

Ques:  You must die, if you abide by this.

Ans:  I am already dead. (5)

Ques:  If you are dead, how can you speak?

Ans:  The Spirit lives in me; the Lord is in me, and I am in Him (6)

Ques:  Will you have a confessor, or not?

Ans:  I have Christ, to Him I confess; nevertheless, if I have offended any, I would willingly ask them to forgive me.

Ques:  Who has taught you to this opinion, and how did you come to it?

Ans:  The Lord, who calls all men to Him; I am one of His sheep; therefore I hear His voice. (7)

During the two following days she was entreated and tempted by various persons, by monks, priests, women, and her nearest friends.  A woman, prompted by sincerity, commiserated with her after this fashion:

Ques:  Dear mother, can you not think what you please, and keep it to yourself?   Then you will not die.

Ans:  Dear sister, I am commanded to speak, and am constrained to do so.  Though they burn me tomorrow, or put me into a bag, I care not; I will adhere to the Lord.  It grieves me to see that these good men are all so blinded; I will pray the Lord for them.

(Ed Note:  This phrase “adhere” to the Lord was like its synonym “abide,” to be found at John 15:5-7, 9-10, where our Lord says:

“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit…⁶ If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. ⁷ If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you…  ⁹ “As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love. ¹⁰ If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love

(You can see why Meynken was critically interested in adhering to Christ; if we don’t do it in everyday life, we are in danger of hell.)

Two Dominican friars came to her.  One showed her the crucifix, saying, “See, here is your Lord and your God.”  She answered, “This is not my God; the cross by which I am redeemed, is a different one.  This is a wooden god; throw him into the fire, and warm yourselves with him.”  (Ed:  Nothing is wrong with the crucifix—but in those days, and to a limited extent now, it was supposed to have special powers and was worshiped. Thus it became an idol.  That was her problem with it).  The other friar asked her in the morning she was to die, whether she would receive the sacrament (presumably Last Rites, which supposedly granted final absolution of sins if you hadn’t committed a mortal sin).  She refused.  Upon his mention of Mass, she told him bluntly that he had crucified Christ anew.

Ques:  What do you hold concerning the holy oil?

Ans:  Oil is good for salad, or to oil your shoes with. (Ed:  Her great desire to eliminate popish practices went too far here, for as James 5:14 shows, oil might, with faith, bring on healing):

Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 

(She still might have had just cause to reject it in her day, because the Catholic church, in those days as now, has assumed several other powers of oil, thus calling it “holy oil.”  And even water, calling it “holy water.”  Those are unscriptural)

When she was again brought before the court, a monk held the crucifix before her face, saying, “Do recant before sentence is passed.”  But Weynken said, “I adhere to my Lord and my God; neither death nor life shall separate me from Him (8).  The Dean of Naeldwijck, the inquisitor, read the sentence in Latin and Dutch.  She was found in error with regard to the sacrament.  Thus she was a called a heretic, so he delivered her to the secular magistrate...but then he retired from the council, evidently impressed by her godliness.  The chancellor however immediately read that she should be burnt to ashes, and all her property to be confiscated.  Then Weynken said, “Has all been done now?  I beg you all that if I have harmed or offended any, that you will forgive me.”

As they were leaving the council chamber, the monk said to her that she should call upon our Lady to intercede for her.

Ans:  our lady is well content in God.

Ques:  Call upon her.

Ans: We have Christ, Who sitteth on the right hand of His Father; He prays for us (Ed: actually, it says “makes intercession for us”) (9).

Ques:  Will you condemn all these (Catholics)?

Ans: Not all.  Judgment belongs unto God. (10)

Ques:  Do you not fear the severe judgment of God?

Ans:  God comes not to condemn sinners, but to give them peace. (11)

On the scaffold (these people were martyred publicly), the monk said, “Now you will have to go into the fire; do recant.” She said, “I am well content; the Lord’s will must be done.”

The executioner then made ready the ropes with which he was to strangle her.  She put the strap around her neck.  The monk finally said, “Do you renounce all heresy?”  She: “I do.”  Monk: “This is well; are you also sorry that you erred?” She: “I formerly did err indeed (ed:  When she was a Catholic).  "This however is no error, but the true way, and I adhere to God.”

Then the executioner did his work.  November 20, 1527.

Our last entry is from 1572, in Foxe’s, called “A Horrible Massacre in France,” relating to St Bartholomew, in Paris.  To quote: A massacre was plotted by Catharine de Medici, mother of the king Charles IX. It was carried out by Parisian nobles and citizenry.  The victims of this slaughter were yet another Protestant group, the Huguenots.  Unparalleled cruelties spread to other provinces, and within one month, an estimated 60,000 Protestants were slain of men and women alike.  When intelligence of the massacre was received at Rome, the greatest rejoicings took place, and a medal was struck to commemorate this “victory of the faith.”  The pope and his cardinals went in solemn procession to the church of St Mark, to give thanks to God.  A jubilee was also published.  Similar rejoicings were celebrated all over France. (End of quote).

I think it is appropriate now to present the final words by a courageous man, vanquished in body, but not in soul, which is in heaven forevermore: “I trust that my salvation is already sealed in heaven, and that the blood of Christ, in which I firmly trust, has washed away my sins.  I now cast off this mantle of clay, for robes of eternal glory.”

Now let us ponder the words of our Lord, in John 16:1-3:

“All this I have told you so that you will not fall away. ^{2 ...}the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. ³ They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me.”

Notes:  1. John 19:11   2. John 8:51   3. Luke 16:23  4. I John 2:19  5. Galatians 2:19   6. John 14:20   7. John 10:27  8. Romans 8:39  9. Romans 8:34   10. Hebrews 10:30   11. Luke 9:56.

Acknowledgements:  Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and Martyr’s Mirror.

 

Predestination and TULIP: True or False? (Part 2 of 2)

 

We began our study of Calvin predestination last week by looking at T=Total Depravity and U=Unconditional Election.  We found both doctrines false and unscriptural.  This week we will finish the study by looking at L I and P, rounding out the famous "TULIP" doctrine.  Here we go with the letter "L."

Limited Atonement     

This is the teaching by Calvin that our Lord died on the Cross only for the elect, those who were predestined to be saved.  Many knowledgeable Calvinists do not hold to this doctrine these days. How could any Calvinist defend this idea, when there are too many Scriptures that indicate that Christ died for all people, giving all a means of salvation, if they choose it.  The verses I will cover prove that God makes Christ’s atonement available to everyone.  All people have the potential of being right with God.  God wants all to be saved (see I Tim. 2:3,4 for instance).  His love does not stop with a few lucky people, arbitrarily (and capriciously) selected.  Here’s a good verse to start with, II Corinthians 5:15:

and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

Of course, the Calvinists’ response to the above verse is, “all” doesn’t really mean “all.”  They seem to have plenty of verses that show that all doesn’t always mean all.  But what do they say to this verse—I Timothy 4:10:

 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

Now if you know anything about English grammar, you can see how this word “especially” thrown in puts a damper on their doctrine.  It clearly says that Jesus died even for the "un-elect" as well.   

Another pair of comparison verses will prove it again, Romans 5:12, 18:

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

The verses are saying, since by one man, Adam, sin and death entered and infected all men, so by one Man, Jesus, the free gift came (or was made available) to all men.  There is no way to get around the logic here.  Theologians of every stripe believe that Adam’s sin affected everybody; no man has ever been sinless their entire life since him (except Jesus).  So, likewise, Jesus’ atonement was available to every single person so infected.  If “all” means “all” in verse 12, it has to mean “all” in verse 18.  The same word does not change meaning in an obviously complementary pair of verses.  If you’re a Calvinist, the “all” in v. 12 means “all;” but the “all” in v. 18 does NOT mean all. But Paul was exact on logic—he didn’t write that verse like Calvinists want.

The third nail in the coffin of Limited Atonement is I John 2:1-2:

My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. ² And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

Calvinists like to assume, in phases "ours only" and "for the whole world" he is speaking for the saved Jews (“ours”) and ultimately for the saved Gentiles.  (As long as it’s for saved people only). But this is speculation; the Greek gives no solid basis for that interpretation.  When taken in context with other verses like I showed above, it leans toward this conclusion that “not for ours only” doesn’t mean saved Gentiles. It proves  instead, that Christ also died for the ultimately unsaved and everyone unborn as well.

So, how could Calvinists believe what is so easily proven to be a falsehood?  Because they love the security in their “gospel.”  The early followers of Calvin were the self-righteous civil ones, the wealthy (in an age when  your wealth was a sign of whether you were marriageable, or a sign of whether you were of good character), the ones who felt that wealth was a sign of God's beneficence and a stamp on their assurance that they were saved.  They loved feeling that their way to heaven was sure.  No religion gives more security than Calvinism.  Since that possibility was laid out by Calvin, people have flocked to it, despite its evident falsehood.  A Scripture probably applies here, II Timothy 4:3-4:

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; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

Personally, this paper is an indictment of the beliefs of many of my Calvinistic friends, many of whom I believe are saved, despite believing this false doctrine.  I say that because they have testified that they seek God, have prayed for Christ to come in, and are humble in spirit, and wouldn’t say a bad word about anybody, and wouldn’t hurt a flea.  True Christianity.  However, the doctrine also makes many people arrogant, unable to self-inspect, and incapable of change. They don’t acknowledge it, but they might be the guy praying, “I think thee, O God, that I am not like this tax collector…”(Luke 18).

Irresistible Grace    

This is the idea that if God has predestined you for heaven, and God never fails in His mission, He must successfully woo you through His Holy Spirit to accept Christ.  Calvinists obtain this doctrine partly from logic—i.e., if we are totally depraved, and if God then chooses His family, and already has eternal life with your name unconditionally on it, then it makes sense that He has to regenerate you, so your eyes are opened, and you are led to Him. If someone seemed to accept Him, but then their lifestyle shows they later rejected Him, then the assumption we make about them that He elected them was wrong.  Since God cannot be wrong, we misperceived their moment of “salvation" --it didn't really exist.  God’s wooing of His elect will always be successful—it will be irresistible. And their lifestyle will prove it.

But as you can see, all this is founded upon (1) total depravity; and (2) unconditional election.  But we have disproved both of these last week, so the irresistible grace doctrine lacks its foundation of support. One of the few Scriptural verses that seem to back their doctrine is Romans 9:19:

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?

They would say, this verse teaches that no one can resist His will.  But notice the word “then;” that means this is a continuation of a previous argument.  The previous argument, in Romans 9:10-18, was discussed under Calvin’s “unconditional election”—which we disproved in our last blog.

As Romans 9:19ff explains, when people ask "who can resist His will?", they do not understand what God is saying.  They assume He controls everyone’s fate, so how can He judge them, or make them accountable, for their actions?  “He controls us,” they cry, and we cannot resist His choice to save or damn us.  So, they conclude, He is responsible if my actions make me hell-bound. That’s not fair, they say.

But the previous verses in Romans 9, as we showed last week, talk about foreknowledge. He simply knows ahead of time what choices people or nations make. And as we said earlier, foreknowledge does not mean control. Scripture is full of verses that still hold us accountable for sin, and how our own bad choices could make us hell-bound.  People still blame God for His ultimately judging them—they just don’t want to be held accountable before God for their actions. They consider their rebellion against God and His rules "freedom." Paul’s response to the accusatory question in v. 19 continues in Romans 9:20-29, pretty much as I’m outlining it here. The concepts are admittedly difficult, but their importance in light of our eternal destiny means we should spend time thinking and praying on it, and push through to understanding.  In the end, we should never assume God has bad intentions at heart.  It is reasonable that a sovereign eternal God, with omniscience, may do things that might be beyond our understanding.  We have to take it on faith that His love for us means that “all things work together for good” (Romans 8:28)—rather than lashing out, blaming Him when things go wrong. When we spend most of our time ignoring God, well, what can go wrong?

In summary, since this tenet of Calvinism rests on assumptions and verses that have been proven to be misinterpreted, we do not need to go further into discussion on this point.

Perseverance of the saints

This doctrine is that you cannot lose your salvation once God has placed you in the elect.  It is what the “once saved, always saved” doctrine is based on.  They look at Romans 8:39:

^… nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

To dispute this, I would like to mention June and October's blogs on “once saved, always saved,” and the blog on  John Calvin himself. I would like to add some fresh words from Thomas Taylor Ministries:

“The Bible is very clear that it is possible to lose one’s salvation and every Christian should be aware of that possibility.  Heb 10:26 – 31 explains it:

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, ²⁷ but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. ²⁸ Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. ²⁹ Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? ³⁰ For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” ³¹ It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

The verses clearly say that it’s possible that once you have the blessings of salvation, it’s possible to lose it. They count the disastrous things a person has done, as I have underlined. One attack that Calvinists use on this statement is, How does the verse say we were once saved when the word “saved” is not even used?  Our answer is:  It uses the phrase “received the knowledge of the truth;” and “there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins;” that was salvation that you had.

To further prove it, I cite Revelation 22:19:

…if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life

So, the verses are clearly saying that once saved, it’s possible (but disastrous) to fall back, despising again what God has done.  He has given us access to salvation by His Son, which we would be rejecting again, thus trampling it underfoot; we would be despising Communion, which means we were symbolically taking His blood that was shed for us--and now reject; and we would be turning away from the power of sanctification, this method of freedom from the slavery of sin--that is only offered to His children.  Of course, we critically need to understand the phrase “sin willfully” that brings about these disasters from God. We're thinking "I know this is a serious sin that God hates, but I'm going to do it anyway; my pleasure trumps my concern over what God thinks." This is a brazen, broken relationship with God. Look at the words, “fearful expectation of judgment,” “fiery indignation,” “devour the adversaries,” too.  Do these not describe the anger of God, the pit of hell for these people?  Do these not prostrate us, cause us to ask, “God, what are you saying here? Have I sinned willfully?” Sincere repentance after doing so can gain God's favor again. (We have to be careful that we really “repent.” Study Scripture for what it is.) We should confess to Him regularly.

Now let's look at another phrase of importance: What is “falling away?” My own thought on defining is, The Bible speaks of “hardening of the heart.”  That implies that doing a sin, even if you repent, and then doing it over again, you likely experience hardening of the heart.  If you keep repeating the sin, eventually you don’t even believe yourself when you “repent”—and eventually you stop “repenting,” because you know that you’ll do the sin again, and you realize you’re a hypocrite for pretending to repent.  If you sin over and over and do not really improve (by sinning less or not doing it further) after you were saved, and you enjoy the sin too much to resist, and give in, and repeatedly squelch the Holy Spirit--you are unlikely to be saved anymore. But that depends on how bad the sin was.  (Sorry, I'm not giving you the "security" that everyone wants by discussing “how bad.”). Thus you can lose your salvation, and your “perseverance” ends without repentance.  And Calvinism is wrong because this downslide happens somewhere in America frequently.  I’ve seen it, and I’ve heard people testify of it. God hates us giving in to sin lightly.  Think of Jesus' discussion in Matthew 5:29-30:

If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. ³⁰ And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

This is called "hyperbole."  Jesus doesn't expect us to make ourselves go blind.  But He's making a point of the seriousness, how we could lose our salvation, and I think the grisly image will do the job.  Now, thinking about “falling away;” it so happens that this is the definition of apostasy.  In order to “fall away” from something, you had to be attached to that something, right?  So to “fall away” from the truth, you had to be attached to the truth in the first place.  Logically, that says this person was initially saved—but fell away and became unsaved.  Perhaps it also could be they came to rejecting the intellectual truths of Scripture, but preferred to conjure up doctrines to live by instead, or preferred to live by heretical beliefs of religions that aren’t even close to the Apostle’s Creed—which is the unalterable creed of a real Christian. They could, on the other hand, fall away into the world as well (some Christians call this “backsliding”). But if you’re so ensnared with the world, God cannot keep you; you must realize the danger, and try like crazy to disassociate from it. He requires that you live holy.  Assuming you've made public your attachment to Christ, you carry a light, and you must separate from the world’s culture, lest you drag His name through the mud with your sinful activities.  You would be putting Christ to an "open shame," as the verse says. And once again, you lose the salvation you once had.    So, more proof that there is no guarantee of our “perseverance,” like we can float along and not worry about sin. Calvinism is wrong for instituting such pride or complacency.

So there you have it, all 5 points of Calvinism are separated from Scriptural proof.  For those who are “3-point Calvinists,” or “4-point Calvinists,” or the hard-as-a-rock “5-point Calvinists,” it’s best to just be a “no-point” Calvinist. Just be a close follower of Jesus' Words. Learn to read your Scripture with discernment, taking ALL of it into account.  These tenets are un-Scriptural and wrong.  Its leader, John Calvin, might not have been a saved man.  (see an October blog).  Don’t just “go with the flow” of your denomination's beliefs, or consider them all unquestionable. Are you uncomfortable about feeling disloyal, or don't want to be apart from the crowd?  What if it causes the loss of heaven?   Who deserves your loyalty?  Only Jesus, not your deluded friends.  Do not other denominations have different doctrines as well?  Can we assume that all their followers are stupid?  Find the doctrine of Christ.  The question of heaven or hell is too important for this quibbling.  Read Scripture thoroughly, with meditation.  Spend time studying this—avoiding hell is worth it.

Acknowledging again the sermon of pastor Anderson, Five points of Calvinism Refuted, in 2013.  He was brief on these latter points, he was running out of time.  His ideas in Part 2 have also been softened, edited, and summarized, and much of mine added.

 

Predestination and TULIP: True or False? Part 1

 More churches are preaching Calvinism.  This system of beliefs is from John Calvin, a “theologian” of the 1550s. It was adopted by the Presbyterian, the Reformed, and the United Church of Christ doctrines a long time ago, and is an important tenet in about half the Baptist churches.  Most megachurches preach it, and most evangelical authors believe it.  It is a growing phenomenon among evangelical churches, according to a New York Times article (January 3, 2014).  But what is Calvinism?

It is represented by the acronym TULIP:

T=Man’s Total Depravity

U=God’s Unconditional Election

L=Christ’s Limited Atonement

I=The Holy Spirit’s Irresistible Grace

P=Preservation of the saints

I would like to summarize each in turn, as Calvinists see them.

Total Depravity, according to Calvinists, means mankind has no desire, or, more importantly, no ability, to approach God for salvation from his sin, which prevent God from admitting him in heaven--without help.  Man has no free will to accept Christ.  Man is spiritually dead, really dead.  Consequently, the only way he can be saved is for God to take the initiative. Not from friends, nor evangelists.  The seed they attempt to sow falls on a dead plain.  God has to initiate.

Unconditional Election means God made a choice to save certain people before they were even born, without regard for any future works of theirs, good or evil, being part of His decision about who would go to heaven, who would go to hell.  They were “pre-destined” for their final destination. The people He chose for heaven was a totally arbitrary move on His part; the decision was made before they were born. Those who would be ultimately saved were the "elect." Those not so lucky to be picked, shall we say, go to “the other place.”

Limited Atonement:  Jesus did not die for everyone; only for His ultimately saved elect people.

Irresistible Grace:  God’s action to save a person who is predestined for heaven cannot be resisted by that person.  Since they were elected, and predestined to enter heaven, God will not have His choice denied.

Perseverance of the saints:  God keeps and protects His people so they can never be lost.  Once you are saved, you are always saved.

I would like to comment on each of these points, proving that they are not taught in Scripture.  On several point, Scripture teaches the opposite, in fact. (I have another blog on John Calvin, if you’d like to know what manner of man he was.)

Total Depravity

Several of Calvin’s doctrines teach that man does not have a free choice.  Calvinism teaches that man cannot approach God; God has to approach man.  Abundant Scriptures dispute this. Consider Revelation 22:17:

And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.

 As the verse implies, "let him who thirsts...desires, take the water," we can have a desire for Christ, on our own, and see our need because of our sin. The original King James says “Whosoever will…take the water of life…”  That means “whosoever wills their mind to it, or “whosoever has a desire to…” God would not call us, as this verse indicates, unless we can respond.  To think otherwise would be a cruel hoax on God's part.  It’s our choice.  We have the power to will ourselves to turn to God. In Deuteronomy 30:19 God says, “Choose life.”  Joshua 24:15 says, “Choose this day whom you will serve; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”  The word “choose” suggests that decision is within our power. In John 5:40 Jesus says,

 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

 Would Jesus have said that if it were impossible for us to do, if we presumably are not able?  Of course not.

Calvinists love to cite John 6:44:

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

There, they say, the Father must draw us first.  But they fail to mention John 12:32, which explains what Jesus meant by being “drawn.”

And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.

His crucifixion (and resurrection) does the drawing.  Not some choice God made before we were born. Also, note the importance of that little word “all.”  Truly a non-Calvin word, considering their “limited” atonement idea.

Calvinists have another pair of favorite verses, John 12:39-40:

Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: ⁴⁰ “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts,
Lest they should see with their eyes,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.”

 Folks, the idea that God blinds our eyes or erects obstacles to people wanting to be saved from their sin is slander to His character. Let’s not forget II Peter 3:9 about God’s love for us and His wonderful desire for our fellowship:

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

So what is the meaning of, “He has blinded their eyes?”  Quite possibly, this word is Jew-specific.  The Jews had proven, by earlier chapters in John (like chapters 7 and 8) that they blinded their own eyes. They hated Jesus from the start.  He disrupted the system. The phrase “He has blinded” probably means God often sets us in a circumstance that lets us see or make public which side we’re on.  If we choose against Christ in such a test, it is the choice we do on our own. What He is doing is, He will not just let us drift into hell without a display to ourselves of where we stand. If we don't want to see it at that point, that's on us.  Such a test is to our own benefit because it hopefully makes us think of our choice, and hopefully change our mind at some point, or makes us fear judgment if we see that we are in rebellion to Christ.

So, we conclude that God would not blind our eyes, without us blinding Him.  He would love it if ALL would be saved; that’s the patient desire of His heart.

Or, consider Romans 1, where people that are reprobate have blinded vision.  Plenty of Jews were (and, sadly, are) in that category. Here's another verse:  When Calvinists read Ephesians 2:8-9:

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, ⁹ not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Think about the word “it.” What is its source? They think that faith is the gift of God. And, of course, they then assume God provides the faith—nothing we initiate.  Well, to dispute this, any Greek student who studies grammar will tell you that the sentence is set up so that grace is the gift of God. Yes, His grace is not of ourselves.  But God provides grace to everyone, not just “the elect.” True, we, under this definition, cannot boast that we did something to earn God’s grace. But this is separate from having to make a choice to put our faith in Jesus.

On a side note, Calvinists argue that the words “free will” are not used in the Bible in connection of salvation.  But the term is used 17 times in connection of offerings that we make to God, which we voluntarily give.  That is a model of God’s intention.  He does not like robots.  He desires that we give ourselves to Him voluntarily, of our free will.

Unconditional Election

This is the Calvinist idea that God chose some of us to be saved, and His determination did not require any prior action of good works on our part; (they assume that we would claim to "deserve" salvation).  It was unconditional love for the elect on His part (and unconditional bad news for the rest of humanity who were not so chosen. In effect, God chose them for hell). To dispute this, consider Romans 10:9:

…if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Well, does that place conditions on us to be saved?  Of course.  On the other hand, if God is making you open your mouth, and making you believe what He wants you to believe, then we would truly be robots.  And we’ve already disputed that.

The favorite verses for this belief for Calvinists are Romans 9:10-18:

…when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac ¹¹ (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), ¹² it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” ¹³ As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. ¹⁴ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! ¹⁵ For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” ¹⁶ So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. ¹⁷ For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.”¹⁸ Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

Calvinism tries to claim that Jacob was chosen to be saved by God’s election, unconditionally, beforehand--and Esau was not so chosen. But this is a New Testament quote from the Old Testament.  Let’s look back, as we should always do, to get context, at the original Scriptures. We will find that the subject here is NOT salvation—and it is not even about Jacob or Esau!  The first quote, “the older shall serve the younger” (see v. 12 above), was from Genesis 25:23.  Here is the original verse:

And the Lord said to her (Rebekah, Isaac’s wife): “Two nations are in your womb, Two peoples shall be separated from your body; One people shall be stronger than the other, And the older shall serve the younger.”

 With the words “nations,” and “peoples” (twice), we see God is not talking about Jacob or Esau, but about their tribes of descendants.  A very important find. You see, in later Scripture in Genesis, we don’t find Esau serving Jacob at any point (in fact, at one point, Jacob bows to him and gives him gifts).  But we do see that the nation Israel (from Jacob) dominates over the nation Edom (from Esau).  Thus, this entire quote is about nations. That’s what prophetically came true. Importantly, God can choose one nation to dominate over another without defying His rules on individual salvation.

The second quote, “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated,” (v. 13 above) is found in Malachi 1:2-3.  For context again, let’s take a look back, again, at the original:

"I have loved you,” says the Lord. “Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’ Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” Says the Lord. “Yet Jacob I have loved; ³ But Esau I have hated, And laid waste his mountains and his heritage For the jackals of the wilderness.”

Here again, the completion of the sentence put a whole different meaning on it:  it refers to “mountains and his heritage”—thus, again, the nation, the descendants of Esau, are in view, not Esau himself.  Consider also, the name Esau means "hairy;" and the word Edom (the nation) means "red." So he and the nation's DNA were red-haired folks.  The words are tied together.  So when you use the name, you could be referring to the ascendant of the nation.  Thus, there is no clear evidence that God hated the man Esau.  And thus, God does not doom a man before he is even born or “save” a man before he is born.  Thus, His election in the Calvinistic manner of defining it does not stand. The Romans 9 verses, so loved by Calvinists, does not really say what they want it to say.  The salvation of Jacob or Esau is not at issue as they think.  To me, the answer is pretty clear:  It simply makes no sense in God's character to say that He hated someone before they were born.

Let’s just talk a little about what brings about salvation in the Old Testament; Isaac was born of Abraham’s faith in God’s promise.  It took faith to believe that they could have a son, since they were too old.  Isaac was also born to a free woman, Abraham’s wife Sarah. Ishmael was born of a slave woman, born of Abraham’s weakness of the flesh.

Isaac, to show his faith, took a wife from God’s chosen people; Ishmael took a pagan wife.  As you can see, they made choices. Faith in God produced salvation in the Old Testament.

God simply foreknew that Esau’s descendants would hate God, and worship idols (which is the case); so He chose the nation Israel to carry His Commandments and Old Covenant to the world, so people could see their sin before His judgment.

Let’s talk more about the big elephant in the room, the major flaw in Calvin's theology: how could God “un-elect,” and send a man to hell before he is even born?  That’s what the election of a few, and thus the rejection of the majority, means. Such a thing is not His character, folks!  All of His Word tells of His patience for all to turn to Him; He wants us to make a free choice.

For a Scriptural definition of predestination, look at Romans 8:29-30:

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. ³⁰ Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

 Note how it doesn’t begin as “whom He predestined, He foreknew...”  It starts with His foreknowledge.  What is foreknowledge?  God is the master of time; He knows what every person in the world will do all their lives in all of history—before any of it happens. An incredible feat.  What’s even neater, for us, is that He will inject Himself personally into our lives at just the right moment, doing everything with a goal of having us see His love for us and hopefully having us see the failure of the cultures of the broken world to keep us happy.  Yes, He knew before we were born which of us would be saved.  But foreknowledge does not mean that God was in control of our decision. He watched and wooed through time. He could see ahead of time that some of us would accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.  As a result, we were predestined for heaven. But even though He knew this before we were born, He never made the choice for us.  He directs outside activity to help all of us lean His way, but some people still reject Him; and ultimately He has to watch us make a choice—for good or bad.  Our election is our own.

Acknowledgement:  The sermon of pastor Anderson, Five points of Calvinism Refuted, in 2013, was softened, edited, and summarized. But we haven’t. This week we've covered the letters TU. See next week for the "LIP" of TULIP in Calvinism.