God and gods

 Dr. Michael Heiser’s You tube on this subject is just too good to pass up.  Here’s the Cliff Notes version of one session.  Let’s begin with Psalm 82:1-7, using the English Standard version:

God has taken his place in the divine council;
    in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
² “How long will you judge unjustly
    and show partiality to the wicked? 
³ Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
    maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
⁴ Rescue the weak and the needy;
    deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”

⁵ They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
    they walk about in darkness;
    all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

⁶ I said, “You are gods,
    sons of the Most High, all of you
⁷ nevertheless, like men you shall die,
    

The first word of the Psalm, God, is Elohim in Hebrew; this is the standard word for God.  But Elohim is also used for “midst of the gods” in verse 1, and “you are gods” in verse 6.  Interestingly, whoever these mystery beings are, are also called “sons of the Most High” in verse 6 as well.  The thing that disturbs us is, in these second and third use of Elohim, the surrounding Hebrew words definitely say it is plural.  So now it looks like a pantheon, Greek and Roman mythology stuff, doesn’t it? Our God, and the mystery gods.

In this Psalm, who is God talking to?  Who are these ‘gods?’  They seem to be in a ‘divine council’ with our God—and they are His sons!  (Before you get carried away, the word “sons” here simply means “direct creation by God.”  Adam was a son of God.  Angels were too–including Satan.)  To reconcile the use of Elohim in all these verses, some have suggested, ‘It’s the Trinity.’ But God is not talking to the other members of the Trinity, because He is chastising them for corruption; nor are any of the Trinity sentenced to death! So God is rebuking them and predicts His judgment upon them, yet they are also called ‘sons of the Most High.’  Hmmm.  Could these be angels–since we know that some angels are corrupt–namely, those led by Satan, who was once an angel.  Isaiah 14:12ff gives the event that they fell. 

Modern commentaries suggest that God is talking to people, either Jewish elders or members of the Sanhedrin. But that can’t be; He calls them ‘gods,’ but God's Word is not suggesting that man becomes godlike.  Also, Jesus never says or implies that men are actually ‘gods,’ somehow the same as Jesus (as some apostate religions teach today).  So, the verses are not men either.

Look at Psalm 89:5-6, to learn more:

Let the heavens praise your wonders, O Lord,
    your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones!
⁶ For who in the skies can be compared to the Lord?
    Who among the heavenly beings is like the Lord,
⁷ a God greatly to be feared in the council of the holy ones,

The “assembly of the holy ones” or “heavenly beings,” or the “council of the holy ones,” or our “divine council” in Psalm 82 earlier—they are all “sons of God,” or “sons of the Most High.”   And they’re also “gods;” and “gods” are all translations of Elohim in Hebrew, which we usually associate to our good God.  And they are counseling with God Most High, in the heavenlies, “in the skies.” So, we’re thinking, who are these guys? How do they get a position in council with Him?

 Well, here’s some thoughts an expanded brain might see. For those who ask, why does God need a council anyway? He’s omniscient.  In our response, we might first ask, why did God create Man?  He didn’t need us either; He’s not deficient for knowledge or lonely.  The best guess is:  He must like our company; maybe He liked the angels’ company–even after they became corrupt. If that seems hard to believe, consider: He has love for us–and we’re corrupted in sin.  

I Kings 22:19-25 adds to this subject, but first a little background:  The Jewish kingdom at this time was divided—Israel in the north, under Ahab, and Judah in the south, under Jehoshaphat.  Ahab is trying to persuade Jehoshaphat to join him in conquering Ramoth-Gilead.  Ahab asks his own prophets about the battle, but these are an ungodly Baal-worshiping bunch that, of course, predict his victory (whatever he wants to hear–just like many of our pastors today).  But Jehoshaphat persuades Ahab to bring forth a godly prophet, Micaiah. So let’s pick it up at verse 19:

And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; ²⁰ and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead?’… ²¹ Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ ²² And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And He said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ ²³ Now therefore behold, (Micaiah said), the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; (but) the Lord has declared disaster for you.”

God is again partnering with likely a council of fallen angels in the heavens, this time called “the host of heaven.”   But this group is not to be confused with the ones that serenaded the shepherds in Bethlehem.  In this case, they are deciding how Ahab is going to die, to be judged for his life of evil.  The fallen angels are evil spirits in His presence. They are ready to deceive Ahab.

Dr. Heiser concludes, after all this, that God has a heavenly council of spirits, made up of His first creation of “sons,” (remember, the Hebrew is defined as "direct creations") which were called ‘angels.’  But since some of them turned evil, these verses must be after some angels fell.  Yet they are allowed to participate with Him, and they are correctly translated“ gods” (from Elohim) and “sons of God,” since they are a direct creation by our God. All under the term Elohim. But clearly, we can determine by things that are said, who the real God (also Elohim in singular) is; He is Higher than they are, and judges them as well. So clearly everyone in council knows that there is not an equality in the council.  There are several verses that confirm that Yahweh, our God, is “God of all gods” (Psa 86:8, 95:3 for instance). 

So evil gods—angels, after they fell— are all called Elohim, like our good God. We, as Westerners, like to associate unique, and good, attributes with the term Elohim—like omniscience and omnipresence, terms of a God who loves us–and we like to ignore any other possibilities. We also want to make Elohim in a singular context only–our God. We’re “used” to having only one God; and we get creeped out when the word is plural.  And we wonder why God would allow His enemies to be present in heaven, even participate, in divine counsel. But, as we can see with Scripture (if we use an open mind), they plainly did. The Biblical writers were evidently unfazed by these gods, this expansion of the definition of the Hebrew Elohim—we have to believe they simply knew their Scriptures better than we do. Don’t forget, God is the ultimate writer of all Scripture, so we cannot doubt its truthfulness. 

Elohim, as it turns out, is used for three different things that are not our God of the Bible:  (1) The mysterious “council” in heaven, as we have already seen; (2) gods of the nations, called Elohim in I Kings 11:33–they are named, such as Asherah, Ashtaroth, Chemosh, and Milcom—each of which really was a powerful demon (the "best" demons ruled nations) worshipped and ruled, each as god of a nation close to Israel. While we’re on that, it seems to me, given the terrorism gripped in a nation like Iran, that the fallen angels still have a role as powerful demons over nations. 

The third use for "Elohim" is demons.  For proof: A relative word, "shedim," in Deuteronomy 32:17 is translated correctly as “demon” in the ESV (the bold word below).  The thing I want you to note, is that it is the same creatures translated “gods,” Elohim.  

They (Ed. note: Israel) sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded.

This Hebrew word shedim, gives us another bit of knowledge about demons. Shedim literally means ‘territorial entity.’ Compare that to “the gods of the nations” (Elohim), in #2 above, and we conclude that demons are ruling in different sizes of playing fields. This suggests a hierarchy of demons.

The above #3 example for Heiser’s sermon is in I Samuel 28:13, which is the story of Saul needing a medium (or witch) to prophesy the winner of his upcoming battle with the Philistines. When he approached her, she says, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” (speaking of a physical appearance of the dead. But she doesn’t really believe it will happen. She probably plans on producing a hazy mist of smoke and then convince him it’s Samuel).  He said, “Bring up Samuel for me.” (Samuel had died, don’t forget). She was totally surprised when Samuel actually appeared and spoke. (His appearance could have been an artifice of a body, too). She was afraid.  Saul said, “Do not be afraid.  What did you see?” She said, “I saw a spirit…”  The Hebrew word for spirit is Elohim. Another proof that Elohim is also used to describe disembodied human dead, as well. 

Thus we conclude that Elohim is not simply used only for our God, with all His good attributes.  There are lots of Elohim, in these cases demons, because there are lots of spirit beings. All are called Elohim.  But no other Elohim is like Yahweh—simply by reading the text, you can deduce that. He is the Creator, He is sovereign over all. There is a judgment day coming for the other Elohim.   

Let’s give another Scripture.  In Daniel 4:13-24 we read of a vision of Nebuchadnezzar.  Daniel interprets it. The king learns that his vision was predicting God’s decree of temporary insanity upon him (because of his pride), such that he would be wandering in fields eating grass for food.  These verses start with Nebuchadnezzar’s words:

“I saw in the visions of my head while on my bed, and there was a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven. ¹⁴ He cried aloud and said…”And let him graze with the beasts on the grass of the earth.
¹⁶ Let his heart be changed from that of a man,
Let him be given the heart of a beast, And let seven (years) pass over him.

¹⁷ ‘This decision is by the decree of the watchers,
And the sentence by the word of the holy ones,
In order that the living may know
That the Most High rules in the kingdom of men…

²⁴ (Ed. Now Daniel speaks): This is the interpretation,  O king, and this is the decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king…

The Bible is consistent, as always.  This decree was pronounced by the ‘holy ones,’ the fallen angels, but this time they are called the ‘watchers.’  Yet the decision was made by the Most High (our God).  But there is still council participation … again allowed by God.  He evidently likes to do that.  We surmise that when He created spirits, He wanted children who were part of the family. The angels rebelled. But so have we. He feels that way toward us Christians, only stronger, because those of mankind who are saved will stay with Him; the demons will all end in the lake of fire.  (I might surmise that God, for the angels who were left on His side after the angel rebellion, took away the good angels' free will so that no new dark angels will arise. Unfortunately, the evil angels are immortal like the good angels).  God gives us the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20) to have us participate in giving Him more children. 

This has given me another thought: this might explain another strange Bible verse that had left me puzzled.  I’m talking about God creating Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:26-27:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea… and over the livestock over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”  27 So God created man in his own image,  in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

How does your Study Bible explain the plural “our”?  Mine says it’s like a single king sovereignly using the plural to explain his individual action.  So that "explanation" says, “God was taking counsel, and talking with Himself.” Sounds fishy. Or, it could be that God was speaking with the other members of the Trinity.  But why couldn't it be, He was speaking to His heavenly council?  If you take that view, note that when he is done speaking with the council, He creates us in His singular “image.” So it’s our God doing it, nobody else–we’re created in His image. The same wording is also in Genesis 11:7 at the tower of Babel, by the way.

And we can’t avoid Job 1:6 and 2:1, which start out with “the sons of God:”  One of them is Satan.   It seems shocking that He gave him permission to speak his accusations of God’s favorite child, Job:

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them…. 

So, it’s clear that Satan had access to the heavenlies. This further adds to our proof about these beings are fallen angels in the Elohim council. Thank God, someday He will no longer have to listen to these accusations. Scripture says He will banish him from His presence, and later throw them down to hell.

Yet my brain thought another question about “sons of God.”  You may have asked this: How is Jesus the ‘only begotten’ son of God (John 3:16, King James) now that we know that other sons of God exist?  

A different issue is raised, too: Some religions also say Jesus can’t be eternal if He is ‘begotten,’ which suggests His life began when He was born.

The answer to both questions is this: The problem phrase is the mistaken ‘only begotten,’ which was based on a study of ancient Greek manuscripts that had been dug up and were available in the 1600s.  The Greek word the Apostle John wrote was ‘monogenes,’ but the word fell out of use and, 1500+ years later, men were uncertain as to its meaning. It was guessed that it was made up of two words, monos, or ‘only,’ and ‘gennao,’ or ‘beget, bear.’  But according to more accurate koine Greek (from earlier parchment found by recent archaeological digs), it should be ‘monos,’ or ‘only,’ and ‘genos,’ which means ‘class or kind.’  Thus, the ‘only begotten’ translation was wrong–it should be ‘one of a kind,’ or ‘unique.’  Jesus was/is eternal, a definitely unique characteristic. Jesus was the Immanuel, God with us.  His uniqueness separates Him from the angels and demons. He WAS God, as other Scriptures prove. 

There is still another interesting verse that raises yet another question: Hebrews 11:17:

By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son (ed. note: “only begotten” is a KJV translation, which is when they were still guessing its meaning.  In the more recent ESV,  it is translated as “only son”)   

But neither ‘only begotten son’ nor ‘only son’ can be an accurate translation, since Isaac was preceded in birth by Ishmael.  But it is correct
if we substitute the correct words, “his unique son” (ESV should have translated it that way).  And Isaac was unique, unlike Ismael; born from a freewoman, Sarah, born when his parents were 100 and 90 years old, an impossibility. He was a child of promise, instead of a child of a slave woman (Hagar). In the same way, Jesus is ‘unique’ in John 3:16: Yes, because Jesus is God!  Philippians 2:6 (NIV) says:

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage…

"Equality with God" is accurate, since Jesus was God.

Back to Dr. Heiser.  He finishes his session by clearing up another difficult phrase, in John 10:33-36, when the Jews were ready to stone Jesus because He claimed to be God:

 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

³⁴ Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’? (Ed. Note: He is quoting Psalm 82:6, our head-scratching verse at the beginning of this paper) ³⁵ If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— ³⁶ what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?  ³⁷ If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; ³⁸ but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.”

Jesus, to defend His claim of deity, is saying, “Look, doesn’t Scripture have God speaking to other gods?  So, Psa 82:6 asserted there are other gods, and sons of god, who are real. So, since our own Scripture says that category exists; therefore when I say that I’m more than a man, it’s possible. You can’t just assume I’m blaspheming if I make such a claim. So you only have to decide if I’m a fallen angel ‘god’ or God’s unique Son. If you want to condemn me, you can’t have as your ‘proof’ that I’m a mere man, and committing blasphemy. Your real proof of what I am can only be by my works. Do I do works of God?  Or do I do works that demons do?  

 Was Jesus a great debater? Of course. 

Let nobody say that Jesus did not claim to be God.  He did! 

I hope you enjoyed this paper and Dr. Heiser. I’ve got more from this knowledgeable man later.

Was Creation Done in Six Days?

 There are huge debates that flare up in Christendom about Creation.  IF you believe that the Bible is the Word of God, it is very clear in what it says:  God created and populated our planet with life, ending with the crown of creation, Adam and Eve, in six literal days.  The very first words of the Bible, Genesis 1:1 says:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 

Then He says, at the end of the First day,

So the evening and the morning were the first day.

It uses the word ‘day,’ with "evening" then "morning," which has to be implying 24-hours literally.  Then He repeats this exact phrase after each day of Creation: ….evening …morning …second day, and so on.  This repetition of 24-hour parameters supports the literal meaning of the word ‘day’ being 24-hour periods. In Exodus 20:11, at the time the Ten Commandments were given, it says this:  

For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

It plainly says “six days.” It’s also true that the Sabbath day is, of course, one 24-hour period, in a week of 24-hour periods. Exodus 31:17 says the same thing, except it says that “on the 7^th day He (God) rested.”  Does it make sense to stretch the word ‘day’ to millions of years on the seventh day?  Does it take millions of years for God to get up enough strength to continue on? There’s a rule in Bible hermeneutics that says, use the literal meaning if at all possible. Many theologians have violated that rule.  But  given God’s omnipotence, it’s certainly possible He created all this in 6 days.  He could have created the earth to look old. Or, the Flood (since it reached mountaintops in depth) unleashed in rapid fashion a gigantic compression of weight, and a layer-upon-layer of mud in a disaster that could explain what has been found—but we never hear about that.  The problem is, science won’t seriously considered that idea; the experts evidently ignore those “wacko Christian scientists”--because, they say, their explanations are Biblical, not scientific, in origin. Is it possible for something to be Biblical and scientific? Why not look up Institute for Creation Research, at ICR.org, or visit the narratives on the walls around Noah’s Ark in Kentucky for some real facts?  The Bible is scientific, too. Today, though, "smart" people put no belief in the supernatural--also in the Bible. But given the “findings” of science, and their theories on evolution, we’re supposed to expand the word “day” in Genesis 1 to mean millions of years to allow their “science” of evolution to be assimilated into Scripture. Too many theologians and pastors compromise on Scripture and bow to the world's science when the Bible has legitimate theories of explanation. These men will pay their due. 

Even modern commentaries of Scripture often cave, and say ‘Yes, the word “day” in Genesis 1 could mean (or even "likely means") millions of years.’ So here we have a translation of a simple Bible word, “day,” bandied out for political purposes and redefined simply because science says so.  Our pastors and theologians are intimidated.  Some pastors are even mind-lamed enough to accept evolution.

Dr. John MacArthur has some wise words on this.  As before, I will Cliff Notes them, changing several phrases so as to offer explanation--but I have changed nothing of his ideas, or most of his words.  Read with enjoyment: 

No one gets past the first verse of the Bible without facing the test of submission to Scripture.  Is the ‘day’ actually a day?  It isn’t unclear--it is crystal clear that it is a day.  But that’s hard to swallow.  So you never get past the first chapter of Genesis without declaring whether you submit to Scripture being God’s Word.  You either accept it or reject it--but you don’t have the right to alter it by changing the meaning of "day" beyond what is clearly before you.  There are times when the literal meaning of "day" is not the meaning—such as hyperboles, anthropomorphisms, prophecies, poetry, idioms—but God wouldn’t start the Bible out in fuzzy words, and none of the examples I just gave are implied in Genesis.  So you must fall back on a literal day.

Flat out, there is no evolution in Genesis 1, 2, or 3—or anywhere else in the Bible. Our God is a God of truth, and of unbelievable power and knowledge.  In all the debates on inerrancy of original Scripture being passed down accurately or with error, the archeology over the centuries hasn’t dented one thing that has any real importance being in error—and no scholar has suggested that translations of Genesis 1-3 have been altered any over the millennia.  So, we’re faced with those words being the words God wanted to tell us. Do we believe that God created ex nihilo, out of nothing?  He did.  But evolution maintains that something came out of nothing, yet without God.  That requires more faith than belief in God!  Those that would argue that ‘God used evolution’ have no Scripture to stand on—only ‘science,’ so called.  Which would you choose?  The current word of science?  Or the Word from God?

Keep one important thing in mind as you consider:  “Creation science” is an oxymoron (i.e., words that have opposite meanings in a phase, and can’t go together).  Science is a study of natural law; but Creation is supernatural.  No scientific method has the tools to study Creation. Scientists are supposed to rely on observable repetition. But the only one who knows how Creation happened is the One Who was there—God.  So a critical proof of science—‘observation’—has nothing to say. So when people say, ‘Don’t we have to apply science to the Genesis account?’  The fact is, you can’t apply science to a miracle.  So, you Christians out there, you don’t have to apply scientific methodology to explain Creation.  You can’t.  Because all science is based on observation, and verification by repetition.  But Creation has no observers, can’t be verified, and isn’t repeated.  It cannot be described by any predictable facts that science are used to.

So you can believe God, Who always tells the truth, or you can believe Charles Darwin.  He’s pretty convincing, apparently, because 99% of the universities are Darwinian in their "science" department.  Of the National Science Academy members who were self-described atheists, 100% of them believed in evolution.  It is our belief that they backed into atheism from how they interpreted biology to suit their own needs.

You should know that moving from Biblical Creation to Darwin is apostasy—a defection from God's Word, His truth, and the Christian faith. This means a bad eternal ending for its believers. Take a look at other people who move away from the Bible to teach other ‘acceptable’ doctrines--like Karl Marx (founder of socialism and communism), and John Dewey (founder of secular humanism).  Though Darwin was later than these other two men who did everything they could to shred Christianity, his theories were, like theirs, a way to explain the universe without God.  Apostate scientists looking for pseudo reasons to reject Christianity and God finally found an acceptable theory in Darwin. It’s what they want. (That shows an unscientific predisposition). If God can be separated from origins, then we could be separated from God; and if we could be separated from God, then we don’t have to worry about sin, and guilt, and judgement—and we’re free to do whatever we want.  So evolution is not a logical door that you enter and accept it; no, you back into it amorally (or immorally) because you want to get rid of God, and do whatever sin you want.

That is the baggage you’re accepting with Darwin.  Here’s some more baggage:  He believed in eugenics and even genocide (Editor’s note: see my blog on Margaret Sanger). Historians say he was a sadist and took great enjoyment in torturing and killing animals as a child.  He loved to kill birds by pounding on their heads with a hammer. Grown up, he carried on one voyage several guns, and hoped that he might be able to ‘kill cannibals’ (his quote).  Reliable historians wrote that he, as an adult, suffered from depression, agoraphobia (fear of crowds), insomnia, vision alterations, hallucinations, malaise, vertigo, shaking tachycardia, fainting spells, shortness of breath, trembling, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, muscle twitches, spasms, tremors, cramps, bloatings, headaches, nervous exhaustion, skin blisters, tinnitus, sensations of loss of consciousness, and fear of impending death!  So said his doctors. I suspect much of this might have been brought on by more than a little guilt.  For assaulting God!  Now if you want to pick Darwin for your hermeneutical genius to interpret Genesis, you just need to know that. And yet, his book has redefined the worldview. But those who believe in it are using faith—because no one has an explanation for the Very Beginning.
 But as I proved before:  Creation had no observable beginning; so choosing it is totally by faith. Why not believe the revelation of the Creator? He is the only one who was there. All that’s left for you is, are you going to believe Scripture, or are you not?  But don’t come and layer Charles Darwin in God’s Holy Word. “Well,” somebody says, “couldn’t God have used evolution?” That’s an irrelevant question; that’s an irritating question.  He didn’t, because He told you what He did. He said He made everything in six days.  If you really believe in the attributes of God, are you going to argue with Him?  

Turn to Job 38; Job and his friends are searching for an explanation of why God has made him sick and poor when he has served God all his life.  Here is part of God’s response to him:

 “Who is this who darkens counsel By words without knowledge?
³ Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me.⁴ “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding.⁵ Who determined its measurements? Surely you know!

God goes on like this for 4 chapters. This is in response to His sovereignty under attack. We of finite minds cannot question the infinite mind of God --his mind is not our mind.  We can't begin to understand some things. This is a beatdown; poor Job— hurry, hit the count of 10, the beatdown is over.  Finally Job says (Job 42):

I have uttered what I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. But now my eye sees You.⁶ Therefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes.”

This is what the evolutionists in this country need to do. Who do we think we are, rejecting God’s Word of what He has created, or rejecting His power?

Yes, God is sarcastic and seemingly unfeeling in Job.  But there are at least three truths we learn.  (1) God is omnipotent and His motivation is past understanding; (2) He does bless Job abundantly later in his life; and (3) Job, because of sin, is not beyond suffering in the world, as we all do.  This is supposed to motivate us to seek heaven beyond this troubled life. My point here is, questioning God is a serious situation to be in—because it shows a lack of faith in Him.  Consider Hebrews 11:3: 

By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. 

Evolution proposes that what you see was made from something else that you see.  But God’s Word says that what you see was made out of nothing.  

Some people say, “We have to accommodate science, go easy on it so we don't appear strange;” so they came up with Intelligent Design (ID) as a “safe” middle ground of moderation. Truth is, this is done so the “Christian” scientists who encourage this “cop out” don't have to name God to their peers. They avoid embarrassment. Truth is, they don’t have the faith that God will honor them someday for standing up for Him. And without faith, we cannot please Him, as Hebrews 11:6 says. Their refusal to name God as Creator is essentially a rejection of God. They are naming an impersonal force of intelligent design--but that’s not God; He is not impersonal.  They are denying His attributes.  For the Intelligent Design people, here is a word:  "lukewarm." Consider the moderation exercised by the “lukewarm” “believers” in Revelation 3:15-16:

 “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. ¹⁶ So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 

What is the effect of Jesus vomiting them out of His Body?  Being out of His Body means your place for eternity is the only other location—Hell. Same place as the evolutionists, who are really trying to escape God, unless they repent. They want to avoid accountability, morality, and God’s judgment. Effectively, the ID people have the same witness as the evolutionists.  Please go all the way with Christ in standing up for Him.

Here's another weak testimony.  A president of an  international Christian denomination was sent a question on his organization beliefs on Creation.  His response:

 The organization takes no stand on creation, avoiding such secondary issues; our efforts are designed to bring people together, based on the historically essential doctrines of orthodoxy. Creation falls into the category of non-essentials like spiritual gifts, eternal security, and the rapture.

Amazing response…secondary issue?  So it doesn’t matter how life started (or how it ends, for these guys). These are not ‘secondary;’ they are primary.  Clearly by the ‘list of avoidable topics for taking a stand,’ this leader hates controversy. 

Think about this before giving money for the Lord's work. You want to know about whether a ministry truly stands up for the Bible?  Just call the head of the ministry PR and ask:  “Do you believe in a 6-day Creation as revealed in Genesis?”  If they say, “no,” then they don’t believe Scripture there, and they may also have other areas they feel like backing away from (or will in the future).  

Think about your stand on Genesis 1 and 2.  Our answer to Genesis 1 and 2 also reveals our attitude toward Scripture everywhere else.  But those who pick and choose "acceptable" subjects to discuss or take a stand, this amounts to judging God on what we like and what we don’t like in His Word. It's also to avoid seeming peculiar.  If we allow the culture to win over Christians on Genesis, then the culture can win over the Bible anywhere else.

A few years ago there was a report done by the Christian Coalition who had polled 105 “Christian” colleges on the subject of Creation, among others. Only 5 (five!) believed in the literal Genesis account! I have a blog that shows their compromises. In God’s plan of events, Creation is a primary issue in the Gospel.  I Corinthians 15:22 tie Gospel and Creation together, when it says for the first man created (not evolved):

 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 

Adam and Christ—the first and the last—the created and the Creator--are also explained in Paul’s Gospel teachings in Romans as well as other New Testament Scriptures.  These comparisons of Adam and Christ are important salvation opposites.  Consider belief in Christ a "restart" button, creating a new life--since you are born again (John 3), and a new creation (II Corinthians 5:17), you get to start over, repenting from the old ties to the world, and live a righteous life.

What is the purpose of Creation—for us?  It glorifies God for His creation power.  The comparison of Adam and Christ points to God’s redemptive purpose; God is gathering a bride for His Son. God determined Redemption before the world began.  Then He performed Creation.  While we’re on earth, we know we are accountable to God.  We have forgiveness for our sins.  We are the Church, to display His grace and mercy, His compassion and kindness.  A redeemed humanity will glorify God and Jesus Christ forever, and will always stand up for His Word. 

Prolife activists face 11 years in prison for praying

 This is a straightforward article my M. Walsh.  This is where America has gone.

In the first week of October 2022, 100 days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Joe Biden held a highly publicized meeting with his so-called “reproductive rights task force” in the state dining room of the White HousAt the meeting, Biden announced a plan to subvert the Supreme Court’s ruling, to the extent that he could. He instructed Congress to pass legislation that would prevent any state from banning abortion. He also announced millions of dollars in federal funds to promote abortion, and threatened legal consequences for any university that tried to punish a student for killing her child. 

What Joe Biden didn’t announce is that, as he spoke, his enforcers in the DOJ were planning a “shock and awe” style raid designed to intimidate and punish pro-life activists. Just hours after the meeting of Joe Biden’s “task force,” at 7:00 a.m. on October 5, a team of heavily armed FBI agents arrived at the Centerville, Tennessee, home of Paul Vaughn. One of the agents apparently delighted in telling one of Vaughn’s children, who was waiting for him to drive them to school, that their father was going to jail. And indeed, agents arrested Paul Vaughn in front of his children and hauled him away as they refused to answer any of his wife’s questions. Here’s some of the footage she recorded from that morning:

What was Paul Vaughn’s crime? A full year and a half before that FBI raid — in March of 2021 — Paul Vaughn participated in a protest at an abortion facility in Mount Juliet, Tennessee, along with several other pro-life activists. These activists sang and prayed in a hallway outside of the facility. Local police arrived, told these activists to leave, and they refused. So a handful of them were arrested for misdemeanor trespassing.

To add some dark irony to the situation, one of the protesters was booked for “contributing to the delinquency of a minor,” because the protester brought a child to the demonstration. So, taking your kid to pray and sing at an abortion facility is “contributing to their delinquency.” But killing your kid at the abortion facility is great, apparently. And this is in Tennessee, a state that’s controlled for the most part by the Republican Party.

Interestingly enough, Paul Vaughn himself wasn’t arrested by local police that day, because he was outside, functioning mainly as a liaison between the police and the demonstrators. They didn’t see any reason to arrest him because he wasn’t even trespassing in the hallway. And really, the whole situation was obviously overblown anyway. At a press conference following the arrests, a reporter asked the police spokesman why they were bothering to clog the court system with trivial trespassing cases like this. It wasn’t exactly the crime of the century, and everyone knew it. In case you need a reminder, here’s what it looked like:

Watching these people praying and singing, the Biden administration saw an opportunity. They decided to make an example out of Paul Vaughn and everyone else who protested at that abortion facility. In all, the DOJ  arrested 11 people for participating in the demonstration, including an 87-year-old Holocaust survivor named Eva Edl. They charged these protesters with violations of the federal “Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act,” (or FACE Act), which carries penalties of up to a decade in prison.

There was never any way to justify this charging decision, even using the standards of Joe Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland. Prior to the arrests, Garland stated  under oath in the Senate, “We prosecute without respect to ideology, but we do focus on the most violent acts, the most dangerous actors and the cases most likely to lead to danger to most Americans.”

No part of that statement was true, as it turns out. Not only does the DOJ prosecute explicitly on the basis of ideology, but they’re also focusing on the least violent and dangerous acts imaginable — namely sitting and praying in front of abortion facilities. And their strategy appears to be working. 

Yesterday, a federal jury convicted  six pro-life activists, including Paul Vaughn, of FACE Act violations, as well as engaging in a “conspiracy against rights”. The jury apparently agreed with the DOJ that Paul Vaughn and another demonstrator, simply by negotiating with police, were really engaging in a “delaying tactic.” And therefore, they’re just as guilty as the demonstrators in the hallway. And now all of these defendants are facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, and up to a decade in prison.

Unfortunately, in the federal system, cameras aren’t allowed in the courtroom. So we can’t show you video footage of what the prosecutors said. But thanks to reporter Leif Le Mahieu from The Daily Wire, we do know that in closing arguments the prosecutor stated  these demonstrators were not in fact peaceful protesters simply by virtue of the fact that they committed a crime. As was said: “During her final statements to the jury, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Klopf likened the actions of the six pro-lifers to that of a group of people attempting to convince someone not to vote, and blocking the entrance of a polling location. She said that, ‘something is not peaceful if laws are broken.'”

That’s actually what Joe Biden’s assistant U.S. attorney said. Her argument is that all crimes are inherently violent simply by virtue of the fact that they involve breaking the law.

Whatever we think of that reasoning, it’s obviously insanely inconsistent with Joe Biden’s own stated goal to release “nonviolent offenders” from jail. Sarcastically, that’s why he pardoned all of those marijuana offenders, supposedly. It’s also why the DOJ paid out  a massive settlement to those BLM rioters who occupied Lafayette Square near the White House, even though some of them threw  frozen water bottles and rocks at police officers. And it’s why the DOJ dropped more than a third of the criminal cases against BLM rioters who siezed  a courthouse in Portland. We’re told all of these offenses were nonviolent and therefore no charges should be brought. Apparently it’s only when you pray silently outside an abortion facility that you go to prison. That’s the only nonviolent offense that cannot stand.

So there’s no denying this argument from Joe Biden’s DOJ is hypocritical. But that’s not the point, really. Everyone knows that. The point is that under the U.S. Constitution, the government isn’t allowed to be hypocritical when it comes to enforcing the law. We have something called the Equal Protection Clause. We have Due Process. And if that means anything, it’s that the government can’t selectively enforce laws, depending on which ideology it wants to punish. That’s the problem here. 

Yes, the people who gathered inside that hallway did violate the letter of the FACE Act. They apparently convinced someone not to kill their baby that day, and go home instead, and as the law is written, that’s a crime. These peaceful activists did violate federal law.

That law, however, happens to be atrocious and unconstitutional for many reasons, one of which is that the law is being unevenly enforced to an extreme degree. The White House isn’t even attempting to hide this. Joe Biden announced  his pardon of nonviolent marijuana users literally a day after the FBI raised Paul Vaughn’s home, just to underscore the message he’s sending. They are absolving one class of nonviolent criminals while hunting down another class of nonviolent criminals like they’re an Al Qaeda cell.

But they’re not terrorists, or even close to it. These pro-lifers — a collection of elderly retirees and parents with young children — were engaged in an act of nonviolent civil disobedience. Sending these demonstrators to prison for 11 years for that civil disobedience — which harmed no one and caused no damage to property — is both cruel and clearly unjust.

Maybe it could be explained on some theoretical level if the administration had established a precedent of bringing the hammer down on everyone who violates the law for the sake of making a political point, but that is obviously not the case here. BLM rioters who torched police stations have gotten a fraction of the time. People who harassed Supreme Court justices at their homes haven’t even been arrested, to my knowledge. The administration is punishing political disobedience depending on the politics of the people involved.

It’s hard to imagine a more Soviet system of “justice.” But it’s the approach that the Biden administration is now committed to. They aren’t just going after these pro-life demonstrations in Tennessee. They tried to do the same thing to Mark Houck, who was arrested  in September of 2022 for an incident that occurred a year earlier, in October of 2021. Houck’s alleged crime, as I’ve discussed previously, was shoving a volunteer at an abortion facility, after the guy started harassing Houck’s 12-year-old son. This was such an absurd non-crime that local police didn’t pursue any charges, similar to the case of Paul Vaughn. But the DOJ decided to revive the case, around the same time that Joe Biden needed to convince his base that he’s going to wage a domestic war against pro-lifers.

Notice the pattern here. An incident happens involving pro-lifers. Nobody thinks its a big deal. Local law enforcement isn’t that worried about it. Nobody is harmed. Everyone moves on. Then the federal government comes back around months or years later and decides to literally make a federal case out of it.

This is the very essence of a political witch hunt.

There are many more cases like these. For example, there’s the case of five pro-life activists who were convicted by a Washington, D.C., jury last year for FACE Act violations. One of the activists is a woman named Lauren Handy. Handy began to attract the DOJ’s attention when she found the bodies of five preemie-sized aborted babies in a box outside an abortion facility in the D.C. neighborhood of Foggy Bottom. According to The Daily Signal, the box “also contained over a hundred pulverized remains of first-trimester babies.”

One of the doctors at that clinic, Live Action had previously reported, admitted on a hidden camera that he would allow babies to die if they were accidentally delivered during abortions:

So Lauren Handy and several others decided to protest this butchery. They looked into this abortion facility. And of course, D.C. police and the DOJ took the side of the people who are murdering babies for profit. Again, they pursued a 10-year sentence for activists engaging in peaceful protest.

To give you an idea of how incomprehensible all of this is, they don’t even treat pro-life activists this badly in one of the most godless places on the planet, the United Kingdom. Around a year ago, police in Birmingham arrested  a woman for praying silently outside of an abortion clinic. But the case was so absurd and so wildly unpopular that within a few months, they apologized to her and dropped the charges. Even in Britain, this was too far.

But in this country, conservatives are allowing this purge of pro-lifers to take place, with barely any pushback. You’ll hear more from conservatives about Taylor Swift than you will about this ideologically driven, unconstitutional attack on civil liberties in this country. What this means is that if these tyrants get another four years in office, there is no doubt that they will ramp up their political persecution. There will be absolutely no one to stop them. Should that come to pass — especially if you care about things like human life and stopping child sacrifices — then before long, there’s a very good chance they’ll be knocking on your front door as well.

 

It's About That Gallup Poll

 The most recent Gallup survey on the subject, May 7, 2017, makes sad reading:  Only 24% of Americans believe the Bible is the “actual Word of God, to be taken literally.”  This compares to 37% in 1984.  This is the lowest number for this category in the 40-year history of Gallup polling.  Since the number is even lower for college grads (only 13%) and the young (only 12%), we will continue on this downward path, unless there is a revival, for a very long time.

These miserable numbers are confirmed at the other end of the poll:  The skeptics.  Those who believe the Bible is “fables, history, moral precepts recorded by man” went from 15% in 2005 to 26% in 2017, in only a 12 year period.

But there is a third option that Gallup included—what some analysts are calling a “medium” view (and we want to avoid being called an extremist, right?).  Those who believe the Bible is “inspired by God, but not all of which are to be taken literally” are recently 47%.  This has remained fairly stable through the years.  Gallup’s commentary puts a rosy image to all this data, by saying, when you combine 24% literal+47% medium, ”thus 71% continue to believe the Bible is a holy document.”

Well, I beg to differ.  Let's focus on the 47% “medium” folks.  When people say the Bible is “not all to be taken literally,” they’re really saying that they reserve the right to disbelieve the Bible when it suits them.  For instance, they believe the Lord’s Prayer is inspired, and may have memorized it, or sang it, or heard many sermons on it; but does Matthew 5:31-32 inspire them the same way?  It records Jesus saying:

 “Furthermore it has been said (Deut. 24:1), ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ ³² But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

This verse would stop most "true Christian” divorce lawsuits cold—if Jesus’ command were believed. But this Scripture clearly is being ignored, since divorce rates among those who call themselves “Christian” are as high as those who are of other faiths--or no faith.  This recent data is from Barna Group Research, a Christian poll-taker.  However, Barna takes great pains to point out that regular, more dedicated churchgoers have a lower rate of divorce than the “nominal” ones that just call themselves “Christian” and do not attend church regularly.

Well, that’s exactly my point.  There are lots of people who think they are Christians, tell people they’re Christians when it suits them, but they think they don’t have to obey Scriptural commands when it doesn’t suit them; they cherry-pick Bible verses for their moral structure.  The truth is, they are under serious deception. These “medium” believers are more than likely not Christians at all--and have a wrong destination when they die.

It’s fairly easy to prove my last audacious statement Scripturally.

Let’s start with Jesus, who claimed to be God.  John 10:30-33 says that:

 I and My Father are one.” ³¹ Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. ³² Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” ³³ The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

Jesus, who indeed was God, actually believed the Bible was the literal word of God:  In John 10:35, He said “the Scripture cannot be broken.”  He asserted the literal inspiration of Genesis, despite its “fabled” stories of God’s creation, and its opposition to evolution.  He spoke of Jonah as a real person--agreeing that Jonah was swallowed by a big fish and being vomited out alive three days later.  So, if the God-man, Jesus, believes every word, it’s obvious that we, His disciples--if we really fit the definition of "disciples"--should as well. If we "cherry pick" Scripture, we deny its rule over our lives.  Thus, we don't believe Jesus was telling the truth about it being the Word of God.  If you think you can ignore Scripture and decide yourself on something as important as divorce doctrine, you are not His follower.  So, you are not a Christian. And, again, we know where that takes you when you die. Unless you sincerely repent of considering divorce, or repent of doing whatever Scripture you "don't like."

So, you “medium” folks, if you say that not all Scriptures are literally inspired, aren’t you calling Jesus a liar?  Can you call God a liar?  Of course, the traditional escape that people do here, is to say that we don’t have the original inerrant Bible, and man has made copies of copies, and we all know what happens, right?—errors creep in.  Well, here’s the thing.  If you believe that God lovingly gave His gospel and His Word, showing the way to get to heaven, why on earth would He allow errors to distort the gospel, where people reading it-- carefully--yet supposedly, because of "errors," miss out on the heaven-trip?  It makes no sense that He would allow that to happen.  So we have to conclude that the commandments of Christ, and the way to heaven, did not get distorted.  Every fair study determines that errors were minor, and not detracting from His gospel.  God loves us too much to allow the way to heaven to become ill-lit.

We also have to consider the Dead Sea Scrolls, a collection of portions of 37 of the 39 Old Testament books discovered in 1947.  They were written 1,000 years older than any scroll previously discovered--thus, a spectacular discovery--and we find, despite the passage of a millennium, they are identical in pretty much every sentence, to modern translation. Differences are mostly only a few unimportant prepositions, or a word that we have not seen before (Scriptural scholars have determined the exact meaning of all but about 50 Greek words, I read recently.  In almost all cases, the meaning of the word can be reliably guessed at, given the surrounding sentences.)

The original completed Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) was probably written only 100 years before the Dead Sea Scrolls were written, which no other writing from that time period can come so close to the original.  While  there should not be any questions about defining the word "day" in Genesis, the modern "Christian" Bible commentators consider broadening the word "day" in Genesis to make it mean "millions of years" (because they want to allow room for the antichrist theory of evolution). Nor do they  like the proper words "big fish" in the Jonah story.  They just hate the supernatural, or the power of God!  This should be a word of warning for you:  These are typical of the "Christians" making modern commentaries.

Well, you may say, "We don't intentionally call Jesus a liar.  Some Scriptural doctrines are just old-culture, and what they see as supernatural has scientific explanation. We have to modify Scripture slightly for current culture.  That should be safe; after all, He’s got your back by giving sincere seekers a pass; He knows their intentions to do good, right?”  Well, where does it say in Scripture that “good intentions,” when the results are evil, mean anything?  It doesn’t.  Does the traffic cop give you a pass?  No, your "good intentions" will come across as a whine. You still get the ticket.  God is like that.  Perfectly just--even if we do not own up to our sins.  As I have written in several other blogs, the way to heaven is to form a relationship, an abiding with Jesus through (1) repentance of sin and (2) belief in Him and His reconciliation for our sin--then (3) daily, through reading Scripture and applying His commands, and asking the Holy Spirit to help me change.  True belief involves trust in His decisions for your life, which never change like sinful culture does.  After all, if you’re saved, He is the sovereign Lord of your life, who loves you, and His wisdom exceeds ours for what's best for our lives.

His commands, unlike what skeptics accuse, are not unclear.  The above command on divorce is crystal in what it expects.  (Frankly, there are other loopholes--if you, as a wife, are in genuine fear for your life, God will give you a pass.  But none of this "we do not agree, so I'm getting a divorce" stuff.)  You don’t want to be one of those folks who “made a decision for Christ” simply as a “fire insurance from hell,” then live life making your own decisions about what is moral and acceptable, and what is not—that makes your decision to “follow Christ”--which is necessary for salvation--meaningless.  Catch yourself before thinking, “This Scripture I like, that Scripture I don’t like.”  I would think that our God, who is jealous of idolatry, or letting anything get in the way of His being close to you—would have a problem of you setting yourself on His throne and pushing Him out so you can make final decisions on your own morality.

So I’m saying, unlike Gallup, that it's not true that 71% of Americans regard the Bible as a “holy document,” if you consider the real meaning of “holy.”  No, I’m saying that only 24% truly consider following Scripture totally, and have faith that all its commands are good for them—because they were ALL given by a God who loves us more than our moms do.  The other 76% are more than likely not Christian, because they are not standing up for God when it's inconvenient, rejecting His word at critical decisions.  I’m saying that a huge number of people (maybe even close to 47% of the sentient population) who call themselves “Christian” are not really Christian--they have deceived themselves. Surprise in the judgment day awaits them. Jesus acknowledges that surprise will happen, to those who don't follow His commands, in Matthew 7:

Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ ²³ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness ²⁴ “Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:

What proof do I have for asserting that all this  self-deception is going on?  Well, in another blog, “Most Americans are Not Saved,” I prove, using Scripture, that it is a statistical impossibility that anywhere near all the people who claim to be Christian are truly Christians. I also prove it on the basis of the above-stated fact that those who call themselves “Christian” have the same rate of divorce as non-Christians. I also prove it on the basis that we were so weak in our testimony to the world that it took nearly 50 years to rescind something as evil as the murder of innocent babies, Roe v. Wade, after its terrorizing innocent babies caused 60 million—60 million!—deaths of human life in America.  Since, in Congressional chickenry, it is up to the states, we are still killing almost as many as before.  The pro-life clinics that will help are terribly underfunded.  It’s horrible to think of what God will do to our country.  This is ten times the Holocaust.  Science is clear that the baby is a separate human being—yet we allow this lethal disgusting belief that “I get the say over my own body.”  It’s convenient, but it’s totally non-Scripture—and non-scientific.  IF we actually had 71% Christians who truly respected the Bible, this overwhelming majority would be motivated to do something--there would be huge protests by Christians in outrage and fear of what God could do to us as a nation.  And judges would be moved to flat-out refuse this murder.  If we’d saved most of those 60 million little ones, I can’t even imagine about how God would have blessed us.

I can also prove my assertion on the basis of our “Christian” teenagers, who indulge in pornography and premarital sex, otherwise known as fornication.  This is a raging problem, so youth ministers tell us.  They’re not respecting Scripture either.  They think that their “decision for Christ” will get them to heaven, but they seem to ignore the clear teaching of Scripture like I Corinthians 6:9b-10:

Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals nor sodomites, ¹⁰ nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 

“Fornicators” includes 'way too many of our young people.  Verses in Ephesians 5:5-6, and Revelation 21:8, mentioning “sexually immoral,” echo the same end-result of being turned away from heaven.

The “escape from hell clause,” thank God, is this--that if you truly repent from these things, and cease indulging in them, and truly follow Christ as your Lord, you can be on the heaven-bound path again. But doing it, repenting, then doing it again and again.  In the end, that’s not repentance, and that’s not following Christ.  You’ve deceived yourself again.

Finally, I can prove my assertion by referring to how Christ highlighted self-deception in Matthew 24. Deception was His first warning for the end of days:

Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” ⁴ And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you.

 You are into self-deception if you say, "Yes, I 'have to' get an abortion; yes, I will get a divorce.  The Bible is not the best way for my life here; I do not have to follow it “literally.”  Not in this case, they say. And misguided people will pray for them, that “God will guide you in your crisis.”  Well, does any of these searching souls realize that God has already guided them in His Word?  If someone wants to be embarrassed out of a prayer group, all you have to do is quote Scripture and take away their deception.  I remember my “Young Marrieds” Sunday School group.  The teacher was really up on future events in Scripture.  Turned out that every single couple in that group—except my lovely wife and I—got divorces.  Their reasons were almost always off the Scriptural acceptance map, but on the cultural map.  They all felt that they were saved, but maybe they’d “lose a reward” when they go to heaven.  Well, they’re part of the pathetic 47% “medium” literalists. You could lose more than "a reward."

What these people need is a hot seat, put there by a preacher who isn’t afraid to heat up the sanctuary with hot Scriptures—which nobody does anymore in the ‘burbs.  The Dangers of Hell is not a top-10 sermon, but using it on occasion, you can get more souls in heaven by some inoculations now and then.  All you folks with the gift of evangelism:  Preach it; don’t let those people get away still deceived!  If you’re a preacher and never gotten anybody really angry with you, you’re not preaching all the Word.  Jesus never did a thing wrong to anybody, yet He was killed after only 3-1/2 years of giving them the blunt truth—He spoke of both God’s love and God’s “other side” of wrath on those who formed their own moral structures, distorting His Word. The way things are now, if you want to be honest, we have to warn you: Are you ready to suffer some persecution? Ready to be treated the same as the Master?     As goes the teacher, so goes the students, as Jesus said.

Pastors may say, “Well, I’m persecuted—my people ignore my sermon advice and fight over petty things.”  That’s not persecution—that means you have a bunch of baby "Christians," who are possibly not even saved at all.  Maybe you fed them milk, milk, milk.  Bland, bland, bland.  Make the sanctuary a boot camp.  Slap some sense with some "tough love" Scriptures; maybe they’ll eventually march together and accomplish things that the church should accomplish.  Such as living their lives for others, being humble and sacrificial.  You should be giving them meat.  Make them grow up.

I guess you can tell that I’m tired of “medium” Christians and medium pastors.  Oh, yeah, I can’t resist laying down one more Scripture: What Jesus said about people that are neither hot nor cold—i.e., “medium,” or lukewarm.  Revelation 3:15b-17:

I could wish you were cold or hot. ¹⁶ So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot I will vomit you out of My mouth. ¹⁷ Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked—

In truth, most of those “medium” believers, those who straddle heaven and the world—an untenable position—are there because they still had love for the world and still wanted to be called “Christian.”  In the world, maybe they accumulated comfortable assets.  But spiritually they are poorer than Bangladeshis living at the trash pits.  For the most part, they are not bound for heaven.  Maybe they thought that “God made me rich, so He must love me.” Sorry, no such rule in the New Testament.  A fantasy of your own brain.  Don’t listen to the prosperity preachers.  Follow Scripture.  God is perfectly clear there on how to get to heaven.  Only a minority of people get there.  Do you fear God enough to get out of the mediocre majority?  They’re headed down the broad path.  And you know where that goes, right (Matthew 7:13,14)?

The Bad News You Should Know

  

Some churches don't like the phrase “getting saved.”  More pastors feel this way all the time. But let’s look at that phrase:  What is it we want people saved from?  The answer to that question, per Scripture is:  We want people saved from eternal punishment, punishment that never ends.  We’re speaking of conscious life in a body,  but suited for everlasting punishment.  The Bible speaks of that as occurring in a place that we know is hell.  It translates from the Greek word “gehenna.”  The Book of Revelation calls it the Lake of Fire--people are punished and tormented forever. 

In all honesty, pastors are distancing themselves from the reality of hell.  I travel a lot, so I've heard many different pastors; yet I don't know when was the last time I even heard the word "hell" on Sunday.  We avoid thinking about it too. I live in a senior community, and I was shocked at how never a conversation has a religious bent. No urgency there.  We don't want to think about it.  As if there is no God who will judge us, or we're just "rolling the dice" that He is nice and overlooks our shortfalls (we don't like the word "sin" either).  For most pastors in today’s sermons, such a negative topic is kryptonite—when the truth is, it ought to be the first thing we talk about when the subject is the Gospel, the good news of how to be saved from hell. 

You should know that the doctrine of hell is still in the thinking of our people, when the subject is actually raised.  A 2016 survey said that 64% of Americans believe in hell (down from 5 years before, when 75% believed in it).    However, of those 64%, only 4% believe that there is any chance that THEY will go there. So, hell is for someone else, not me, brother. Well, that’s a problem.  Jesus said that the majority of people will go to hell.  He used the word "few" for the number who would escape it.  Here's His quote, in Matthew 7:13-14. In context of other Scripture, the word "destruction" speaks of everlasting hell, "life" speaks of heaven.

 “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.

What is the narrow way?  I have a blog on it. 

Compassionate pastors teach this subject, because they don't want any of their people to go there.  Scripture is very clear on who makes heaven, and who doesn't. These pastors warn the people, who frequently have the wrong idea about their own position when they die. Scripture is clear on it, it's like God gave us the answers before the test--but nobody believes the answers. They would rather trust their own intuition rather than search Scripture and trust God.  I can tell you right now; the answer is not "believe in Jesus, and you will go to heaven."  The Scriptural answer of avoiding hell may be totally shocking, and not what you have heard from your pastor--or, in many cases, you haven't heard anything from your pastor.  Today's pastors want sermons that are uplifting, and not filled with theology or anything negative.  That's too bad, since that's not the approach that Jesus used. Why don't they follow the greatest Teacher who ever lived?  A mystery to me.

Have those "few" verses above sunk in?  You may think--in America, it's a majority, while in those backward countries, almost nobody knows.  Well, I have two comments for that prideful response:  First, America is rich, but riches don't correlate to salvation.  Actually, riches pulls you away from God (another blog).  Secondly, I constantly read testimonials from almost every country in the world.  Because of the great efforts of translators, almost everyone has heard or read the Bible--maybe a better version than we hear or maybe don't read it.  You should ask:  Was Jesus lying with the word "few" would be saved from hell?  No. Our God Incarnate would not lie.  Was He exaggerating the "few" idea, to scare us into thinking about it?  No, that would be deception.  He is The Truth, as John 14:6 says.  The fact that most people don't personally consider that the majority of people are bound for hell is our self-deception, not His. Jeremiah 17:9 says:

“The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?

The way we should live life is:  Assume nothing about God that is not in Scripture; and assume nothing about the accuracy of your own ideas (such as I'm "good enough" to get into heaven) that isn't backed by Scripture.  Scripture is the ONLY authority for something we know nothing about--like "who gets into heaven?"

Consider Isa. 55::8-9

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord. ⁹ “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.

 Don't trust your intuition about God.  Maybe you are worshiping a God that does not exist.

So, we’ve gotten one point across (people still believe there is a hell), but we haven’t gotten the most important point across--most people are headed there and need to take steps to avoid it. This beyond the grave stuff is not a gamble. Do not approach death blindly.  For you younger folks, you do not know when you will die.  

Here’s another reason why most of us don’t think about hell, the punishment for sin:  We live in a world where sin is freely done.  Sin is so much a part of our culture that most sins are accepted in society.  For instance, I just read an article in a reputable newspaper that a feminist author was ostracized by other feminists, largely because she spoke against legalizing prostitution nationwide.  Also, we don’t seem to have any real problem with fornication (premarital sex); it's on major TV shows regularly, and I haven't even heard my conservative Christian friends complain about it.  Adultery is even expected among the upper classes; and nobody is showing much shock against homosexuality being normalized on TV--you know that it's socially acceptable when advertisers will allow it to run.  We are not often frowned upon if we perjure in court, as long as I want to avoid losing money, or I do it for a good friend, or even for "racial benefit."  Nor will any student complain if a fellow student asks them for their paper to copy, so high school and college cheating is OK, for most.  And robbery, such as on taxes—we rationalize it by saying, "I don't like what the government is spending it on."  Or, if we’re poor, “we’re oppressed, and we deserve it.”  And government supports gambling and alcohol ads, which together are the downfall of more people every year—and which hurts the poor the most.  Nobody among legislators complains about that, nor does anybody write or phone them to complain.  Equally terrible is that a majority of black children, and a growing number of white children, are born without a father present.  Statistics show the deterioration of society that results--but men and women live for their own pleasure.  A terrible sin. And let’s not forget the elephant in the room--murder of the innocents, or abortion.  Most of us “Christians” don't get overexcited about legalized murder.  We just want limits.  But that's a way of easing our conscience.  Murder is still murder when the conceived child is three hours old or three months old.  Some of us are under a gullible assumption that if we elect the right politician, they will do the job that our lack of concern will not.  Counting on a politician?  That'll go well with Jesus on judgement day. 

The problem is, we don't believe the Bible. Commit one sin, you are bound for hell. The Bible says, in Ezekiel 18:4:

All souls are Mine;  The soul of the father
As well as the soul of the son is Mine;
The soul who sins shall die..

With God, one sin (from accountable persons, thus not including children) will prevent us from heaven.  He is perfect.  He is holy.  He is sovereign. He is so different from us, there is no way we can justly say we can figure Him out.   With Him, there is no mulligan.  There are no arguments of manipulation to get Him to change His mind.

We need to realize our desperate, desperate, straits.  We are all bound for hell.  But we’re not only used to sinning, we’re very comfortable with "milder" sin—society has very few consequences that it places on people for "milder" sin. But we have warped what is "milder." So, there is now evidently a warped sense of good and evil, and a distorted understanding of justice.  

 Please do not appeal to your favorite items in the New Testament, such as how Jesus was merciful to the adulterous woman (John 8).  Let us not forget--He said to her, “Go, and sin no more,” since He saw in her a repentance of her sin.  That repentance, or turn-around, was acceptable—not her adultery. And try reading the rest of the New Testament, to get the whole picture.

Our new definition of sin is, only if it “harms someone else.”  That’s a definition most often used by teens engaging in fornication.  But what if it results in an abortion? Your fornication could result in murder.  Thought about that, you parents who think you are great because you talk with your child on (sexual) protection? Really, doing that means you have already given up on their morality.  And the child knows it.  To say, “Well, I’ve got to tell her she must only have sex with someone she loves” is totally ignoring God’s parameters about sex. To say, “Well, he's/she’s already doing it, so I have to teach them this” is to again give up on their morality.  You’re teaching them that the culture wins, God loses.  Does that sound like an acceptable article of faith, if they (or you) profess to be a Christian?    

Consider these cold facts:  First of all, today’s young females will have, on average, three or so sexual partners before marriage, so say surveys.  Secondly, there is a distinct correlation between, shall we call it, the “promiscuity rates” and the rates of later divorce.  As the National Survey of Family Growth points out in 2013, women with 10 or more sexual partners were more likely to later divorce; women with 3-9 partners were less likely, and women with 0-1 partners were the least likely to later divorce.  Thus, data proves that fornication is bad. If you get pregnant and don't abort, you likely still have a child without a present father most of the time. Working mothers have all kinds of problems monitoring or really knowing their kids.

Weird things are happening in American culture nowadays.  Schools indoctrinate our kids too much rather than teach them to analyze real facts for truths.  More men's groups, and this is grudgingly acceptable by more women, are following some form of Darwin's "we are animal," hypothesis, so they are openly refusing monogamy--"we're not made that way."   Also, some people with too many horoscope readings, perhaps, actually say, “I thought my husband was my soulmate—but I was wrong. I must divorce him and continue my quest; only one person can make me happy.”  Or they say, “I’m different now compared to when I married.  He isn’t.  We have to part.”  Or, the worst: “I can’t even imagine being with one person for 40 or 50 years—it’s got to be boring.  Marriage and divorce, or even just partners, makes variety in life.  It makes sense.”  Even grown up, much of the population has no idea of real love. The Bible’s Greek term is for truly loving is “agape”—which means “God-type-love.”  Sacrifice and submission is demanded before true love can take root.  Most divorces are for selfish reasons, such as the above.

Actually, sex surveys are pretty much beside the point:  if you want souls saved (a much more important idea than current “needs,” since it’s for eternity), consider that anyone committing fornication or adultery (and that latter term includes second marriage) is in danger of heading to hell, according to I Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:19, Revelation 21:8 and 22:15.  Just follow the term "sexual immorality" in Scripture.  (What? Your pastor never talked about that?)  BUT sincere repentance is on the way to change that horrible penalty that you might be under right now. 

Culture is going the wrong way. Do not follow it.  We must learn to follow God's rules instead of listening to culture. You will be against the grain, but tough it out.  Jesus warned you that was expected if you are really saved.  Don't look for society for what's "right;"  society doesn’t have any spiritual guidance.  Of course, if you get saved and learn about appealing to the Holy Spirit for guidance, you learn what's true, what the consequences are to stray--and you are strengthened against co-opting to cultural norms. Continuing in sinful habits often means you weren't saved to begin with.

If you are a devoted Christian that prays for sanctification every day, and are actually moved to talking to people about the consequences of sin, be prepared:  if you introduce the (Scriptural) idea that the offenders will pay in full—forever--for every sin not under the blood of Christ (another 3-word term that pastors hate to use), that idea is simply alien to most people, and that’s why we get the ridiculous 4% who feel deserving of hell (see above).  “No, God couldn’t do that to me.  I’m better than most.”  But most are ignorant of His standard for salvation, and should be cramming to learn it, since He is the judge, not you.  He does have wrath for sin, and He has warned us repeatedly in Scripture.  Repeatedly. We haven’t bothered to read all of New Testament Scripture, which lays it all out--the frighteningly real consequences of dithering around and how important this is.  Jesus does talk a lot about the eternal consequences of sin, despite too many pastors avoiding the subject. Convincing people that there are such horrible consequences is a hard sell—especially when they believe the Bible is God’s “suggestions.”   Consider Romans 2:5—does this sound like “suggestions?” This is a portrayal of God that is true, but few people want to consider:

…in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God

 God will not have those around Him who still have unclean hands--who still carry their sin. But it is impossible to go through life with no sin--no sin in behavior, no sin with the lips, no sin with the mind (Jesus added that feature to sin), no (self) deception—you’re just accumulating iniquities, all of which will be confronted and judged.  You’re storing up wrath.  And you don’t wipe it all away by deliberate ignorance, by insincere repentance, or by repeating Hail Marys, or by penance.  But there is a way out—but the way out does not end with a one-time action. (I have other blogs on what salvation is, and, most importantly, not losing it, by keeping an ongoing relationship with Christ). 

The problem is, people are just so used to getting away with sin in this life that their hearts become, over time, seared of conscience and often permanently hardened. That makes it easy to self-deceive, and assume things about God’s love and eternal forgiveness; but these assumptions are based on what people imagine, what they hope, not based on God’s revelation of Himself. So cultural “truisms” about sin like “sowing the wild oats” or “let them go through a rebellious phase; they’re young” only increase the likely destination of hell. That likelihood is higher if people become well off.  They see no need for “being saved” (I have my bank account), no need for redemption, and all of what that word means.  They often assume God must love them; after all, He rewarded them by letting them become well-off.  The Bible talks of redemption as buying someone out of the slave market.  But this is over-the-top to a cynical public.  “Buy me out of the slave market of sin?  I’m a slave?  What are you talking about?”

Now let’s talk to the nominal complacent quiet-about-my-faith "Christian" again--maybe this speaks of you. Imagine this metaphor:  If you see someone you love walking straight at a house fire, they’re ignoring everything else, maybe they're in some kind of foggy hallucination--tell me what you, that loving person, will do to stop them from entering the flaming house.  Everything, I expect you will tell me--especially if they are your family.  You will first get into the doomed walker's face and explain bluntly and loudly what is about to happen, in the most fervent of tones.

If that doesn’t succeed in alerting him, and he is still walking that way, the concerned helper will make whatever physical obstacle he can to slow them down, or even tackling them. Is that helper crazy for acting out such extreme behavior?  No, he loves them. That explains everything. He is a hero if he succeeds.

But try to do anything “extreme” to rescue someone from the fires of hell (like actually talk to them fervently about hell, like you really believe it yourself).  You’re not a hero afterwards, are you? No, people turn you off.  Nowadays, you'll be branded a kook.  But real Christians expect to get persecuted, and we should bear that as a badge of honor, so we don’t care what they think. God talked to Ezekiel (2:3-7; 3:18-21), and made him a “watchman,” as every real Christian should be today, as a treasure of God's truth.  God told Ezekiel that if he truly was blunt with people, and if the person didn’t change and went to hell, the blood would not be on the evangelizer’s hands.  BUT if the watchman didn’t warn him, and he went to hell, the blood would be on the evangelizer’s hands too.  Did you get that?  Sin of omission, besides sins of commission.  As far as ultimate destination, sin is sin. It makes no difference to the unredeemed person how bad it is; one sin is hell.  Just in case you have a hard time believing that, how about another Scripture?  Romans 3:23:

...all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

"Short of the glory" means, no heaven for those who are complacent or ignorant of Scriptural escape.

So let me ask you, if you maintain that you are a true Christian:  What are we doing now for our loved, but unsaved family members?  Most people who actually “witness” to others approach someone with a light touch (you don't want to appear strange or intolerant of his non-belief), or they argue the unimportant, perhaps, denominational details.  Or worse, they believe a Christian has the name conservative tattooed across his chest and spends his time fighting with the liberals in their midst.  None of which, I admit to your shock, determines heaven or hell.  When you do get to the serious point about hell or heaven, and they get fidgety and brush you off, then do you just give up and add this person to your prayer list?  Such a weak witness, considering where the other party is headed. Too many of these "evangelizers" (a) assume God will let the unsaved live longer so as to accept the gospel later (no guarantee of that); or (b) assume God is grandpa-like and forgives all sin, despite all of our spitting in His face in rebellion; (c) assumes maybe because the lost person went to church and said he “believes” in Jesus, he’s saved—but where is any change of life?  If there is no evidence, can we convict them of being a real Christian? The book of James says that, regardless of their original profession, we can doubt.  Scripture backs up our doubts--we are a "new creation," we have fruits, we have an ongoing relationship with Jesus and obey Him more and more.  Separation from the world and culture is, after all, a requirement for ultimate salvation. Basically, all the (a)-(c) excuses are because few people really truly believe in how close we are to hell, or we don’t really believe that God will actually send people to such a horrible place forever. Scripture is crystal clear to the contrary.

Someday, God will brush all those assumptions aside at His seat of judgement. Once a person dies (and we don’t know when that will be, right?), there is no changing our ultimate destination. No purgatory, no second chances. Not thinking about it, or assuming it's too complicated, is a dangerous place for you to be in, since you’re also saying you don’t believe that God would be clear in His Word. Jesus, since He loved us, He warned us. But His love will NOT stop Him from His promise to carry out wrath to all those who refuse to have a relationship with Him. That's what He wants for His family.  And the majority of society does not have a relationship with Jesus.  Because they want to live life how they want to, not how Jesus wants to.  They choose sin, which is more pleasurable and "rational" (in the short run), than obeying God. We must live for the long run.  Consider how short the present life is, compared to eternity.  Does it make sense to have pleasure for 50 years, or to have joy and unbelievable sights and love for millions times millions of years in the future?  Jesus did an extreme act to make a way to save us. Now, He gives a free will choice—if a person is determined to ignore warnings, he ends up in the fire. IF we want heaven, we must--we MUST--have a relationship with our Lord.  Read John 15:5-6:

 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 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. 

Is that clear?  I don't care if you never heard it before, and your pastor is a nice guy, and wouldn't ignore something so important, etc, etc. Remember that he learns what liberal seminaries (another blog on that) have taught him in how to conduct church and sermons.  It's up to you, anyhow, to READ your Bible and learn the truth. 

For those who are true disciples of Christ, who would be willing to die for Him in the last days (which may be soon), for those who want to see friends and family saved, if we believe His Word, a real Christian’s actions in evangelism would not be reticent as it is today.  We might actually talk more frequently about hell—and in convincing tones.  I realize that's not popular, but, hey, has the lighter approach worked?  Look at society; that will tell you. 

Do you want to reject my radicalism, and go on like the past, and hope for different results? I’m talking of freedom, love, and connection with God.  Tell me, has the present world made you happy?  You know what the revised definition of insanity is,  don’t you?  Repeatedly living with and believing the “wisdom” coming from the same tragic culture and lack of love--and expecting different results.    

 Oh, of course.  I haven’t explained what “saved” is.  Read the New Testament a few times.  Try another blog, like my “Getting to Heaven:  Initial Salvation etc.” Actually, this paper, long as it is, has only given you the bad news.  For the Good news, see those references.  May God bless you.