Martyred For Resisting Man’s Theology: Joan Waste

I’ve been doing some reading about the history of the area where I spent my childhood. I was born in Burton-on Trent in England and for my first 13 years lived in South Derbyshire.
I was interested to come across the story of Joan Waste, a blind woman who was martyred for her faith during the reign of Queen Mary.

Even though she was blind she wanted a bible of her own, intending to find someone who would read it to her. Despite the expense she worked and saved until she was able to afford a New Testament. She then had the problem of finding someone willing to read to her on a daily basis. Eventually she found an old man in Derby jail, imprisoned for not paying his debts. He appreciated her visits and read to her on a daily basis until his health started to fail.

She then turned to the Clerk of All Saints Church (now Derby Cathedral) and persuaded him to read to her. When he was not available others would charge her a penny to read a few chapters. A penny was about a full days pay

Joan started memorising passages of scripture and began to speak out against false religion which abounded at the time.

Edward VI died in early 1553 and his Roman Catholic sister Mary became Queen. Almost straight away attendance at the Roman Catholic Mass was once again made compulsory and Protestantism was denounced. Joan refused to attend mass and at twenty two years of age was summoned to appear before the Bishop on a charge of Heresy.

Joan declared that she believed only the things taught by Scripture and told them was also ready to give her life for her faith rather than embrace Catholicism.

The order was given to burn Joan to death. She was taken away to a place called the Windmill Pit on the Burton Road in Derby where, holding her brother's hand, she prepared herself for execution.

She was hanged over the fire with a rope and she fell into the fire when the rope burned through.
There is a memorial to her in Birchover church Derbyshire. The place where she was executed is now the site of a Roman Catholic Church.

Scripture under attack again.

Yet again I’ve come across an argument intended to reduce the importance of the Bible in the believer’s life. Not surprisingly it came from someone whose faith is based upon a theological system instead of the revelation of God that we have been given through scripture.

The argument mentions the billions of Christians throughout history who didn’t have access to the Bible and uses their example as a reason why it’s not necessary for US to pay too much attention to scripture.

The fact is that we DO have access to the Bible and as such we have no excuse for ignoring it. The generations that didn't have access to the bible will not be held accountable for what they did not have.

It's amazing that those who DO have easy access to the WHOLE of scripture (and usually multiple copies) are the ones who create reasons for ignoring most of it.

Global Sustainability. Saving the Planet. Possible or Not?

I came across the following article on a site dedicated to sustainable living.

http://simple-green-frugal-co-op.blogspot.com/2009/08/shifting-towards-global-sustainability.html

I think the article brings to light some interesting points.
Firstly there is awareness that the world and its people can not be sustained for much longer if current trends continue.
In other words, the planet earth and its inhabitants are in for some significant changes. Either mankind (particularly those of us in the WEST) will have to willingly make some harsh and painful changes to our lifestyles, or those changes will be made for us.
The natural resources upon which our prosperous and comfortable lives have been built are rapidly being depleted.

In the article, the writer mentions our reliance on oil – not only for fuel but for “everything in this modern era”. So many man-made materials are oil based. Lose the oil and we not only lose our mobility and our source for heating, we lose commonly used fibres and plastics. Many commonly used products also have an oil base: toothpastes, shampoos and medications. Most of our food production is heavily reliant on oil-based fertilizers and herbicides…

But oil is not the only commodity heading for crisis. In recent years (and even months) I’ve read about water and food shortages. Not so long ago I lived in Sydney and at the time predictions were made that it could become the first major city to run out of water. Its major water source had fallen to less than 40% of capacity with no immediate sign of change. Rainfall in recent years has seen that situation turn around, but for a time the vulnerability of a major water supply was highlighted.

Concerns are also being expressed about food shortages. Some say it is a greater threat than climate change while others blame climate change for the shortages.

The article makes suggestions for action that could halt and maybe reverse what seems to be inevitable. The suggestions may seem harsh and unrealistic, but they also give an indication of how the world’s situation has become so desperate. Take some of the suggestions and reverse their emphasis and we can see the behaviours and attitudes that have led to the crisis being faced.
Basically mankind has taken the easy immediate option and has acted to make life as easy as possible NOW, giving no thought for the sustainability of their existentialist emphasis. As long as it benefits US in the NOW we have given no thought of the future, knowing that we won’t personally be around to face the consequences. However, that future had to arrive some time and it could very well be sooner than we had hoped.

Anonymous comments made at the end of the article suggest that:

“There is one word for the cause of what is happening to our Earth, and that is ‘sin’. If you read your Bible you can find out what is going on, why, and how we can fix it, though that won't happen, once again, because of sin.”

It is likely that those comments won’t be given much consideration by most readers of the article. Some will see them as merely another fundamentalist spouting ill-informed religious opinion. Therefore the link will not be made between the “sin” that “anonymous” mentioned and the selfish drive for more more more for me me me that is so obviously behind the anticipated crisis.
What is sin but doing things MY WAY for my immediate perceived benefit no matter what the consequences may be for others? Sin is man considering himself and his own immediate comfort and pleasure no matter what the long-term cost may be.

Biblically, man was introduced to sin through an act of rebellion against God, committed in a perfect paradise where mankind had need of nothing. Every necessity was provided. Yet man gave in to a desire for more than he was due and he took what seemed to be the most expedient way of obtaining it. He gave in to the offer of something NOW – ignoring the warning he had been given of the ultimate price that would be paid for trying to obtain it.

And what was that ultimate price? For mankind it was death. In a spiritual sense it separated mankind from the intimate relationship they’d had with their Creator, to the point where there is often no acknowledgement at all that there IS a Creator.
Denial of God's existence is a major symptom of that spiritual death, a denial through which mankind can abrogate all responsibility towards both Creator and His creation.
The price imposed on creation was a subjection to "frustration", and "bondage to decay". The world has been heading downhill since man’s first act of rebellion and now it’s becoming more noticeable.

“Anonymous” said “If you read your bible you can find out what is going on…” and that is true. The decline and degradation of this planet was foretold thousands of years ago, as were the physical effects and political fallout of that decline. Significantly, even then, the decline was attributed to mankind’s rebellion against the Creator; at a time when mans’ effect on the earth was barely noticeable. At a time when the technological, economic and philosophical developments of the past century and a half could not have even entered the human mind.
It is those relatively recent developments that made it possible for our current situation, in which mankind has come dependent upon very tenuous resources to fuel a ravenously selfish pursuit of comfort and pleasure.

Since the Bible made these things known, should we therefore consider what the Bible reveals about the outcome of the predicted degradation of the planet? The news may not be encouraging for those who have hopes that mankind could turn the situation around. But the reality is not as grim as some would suppose. There is reason for hope.

The Bible describes creation as “waiting” for an appointed time. It promises that it WILL be liberated from its “bondage to decay”. Its current state is depicted as “groaning as in the pains of childbirth”; but all of the optimism expressed in these statements is not dependent on mankind’s efforts. The answer lies in the Creator alone.
He has provided the means of putting everything right. The effects of man’s sin (his rebellion) will one day be erased from His creation. He has made a way for man to be cleansed and freed of the sin that set everything in motion; the sin that is at the root of the decay and degradation of the planet and its inhabitants.
The world’s crisis can not be solved by attending to the symptoms. The Creator is dealing with the root cause. The means of dealing with the cause can be found in the person of Jesus Christ, revealed to us through the account given in both the Old and New Testaments.

While observing our world today, there is genuine reason for a lot of “doom and gloom”, but if we look to the Creator for His answer instead of to our own questionable resources, we will see that there is an offer available to become part of something much more glorious than this creation has yet known.

---
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."

What is YOUR Relationship with Scripture?

An interesting article can be found here:

I Love the Bible

The writer starts with the following paragraph:

“For the third time in my life as a disciple of Jesus I have been accused of a serious sin: I love the Bible too much! Now before you go and start laughing, let me tell the stories of my three accusations.”

--------
I don’t know how many times I’ve come across the same kind of thing. It seems like some “Christians” will make all kind of excuses to distance themselves from scripture.
I totally agree with the writer's rhetorical question: "How do we know we are meeting the real Jesus apart from knowing the Scriptures?"

On the other hand I have also come across those who in their zeal for the scriptures seem to overlook the fact that the scriptures are NOT an end in themselves. Scripture is a revelation of God, showing us who He is, what He is like and how He relates to mankind. Scripture also reveals God’s intentions and His purposes for his creation.
Unfortunately many use the scriptures for their own reasons – to support their own philosophies and theologies. I have found that the Bible is not primarily a doctrinal book (though all true doctrine has its foundation in scripture), instead it is an account of God’s relationship with mankind, demonstrated through real life stories and situations.

Some years ago I wrote an article “The Essential Scriptures our Defence Against Deception”
to answer some of the anti-scripture “wisdom”.

PATHETIC AND IMPOTENT GOD?

The EXTRAVAGANT GENEROSITY of GOD and HIS GOSPEL.


In the comments section of an earlier topic I was accused of having a:

“…theology of an impotent little god that can only wring his hands hoping some sinners might look towards what he hopes for them but cannot accomplish."

Compare this to the type of theology held by the accuser, of a God who can only obtain the glory He feels to be His due by condemning billions to an eternity in hell, for no reason other than they fulfilled the destiny He had predetermined for them.
A God who can only obtain a people by “stacking the deck” – forcing people to follow Him through exerting a mythical force known as “Irresistible grace”.

I am well and truly fed up of the pathetic “wisdom” and theologies of man – through which God is maligned and His ways perverted: all to satisfy man’s theological ego.

Do people think that God is so desperate for people to be saved that he would “wring his hands hoping some sinners might look towards what He hopes for them…” or that His need to see some saved was so strong that He would actively ensure that a specially chosen minority HAD to follow Him?

It is mans’ UNDERSTANDING of God and His gospel that is pathetic and impotent.

No, you worshipers of man’s theological “wisdom” – God is not impotent. He is not desperate. He is not a tyrant.

He is GENUINELY sovereign and has never needed any man to follow Him. Instead He has CHOSEN to demonstrate His love and His merciful nature by reaching out to mankind with the offer of an opportunity to enter a new creation.

His gospel is a result of His extravagant generosity; it is not a display of desperate need.

GOD’S GOSPEL OR MAN’S?

I want to express some thoughts about the Peter Hansen article “Where did the gospel go.”

On first reading I was a bit wary of statements like these made by Hansen:

“People are seriously desperate for finding a deeper meaning, hope and inner peace. This world seems to have everything to offer, but in reality is more out of control morally and spiritually than ever. I can boldly say that this world needs the full gospel message of Jesus Christ. Not another sermon or conference about self happiness, but the pure full gospel of salvation. That is the one and only thing that can bring peace to the mind and restore the soul.”(my emphasis)

I could see too much of a similarity between THAT kind of gospel and the “gospel” of the “seeker sensitive” churches: “…that feel good gospel, a light lukewarm message that only talks about happiness, prosperity, self-development and “me, me and me” instead of “Him, Him and Him!” This seemed to maintain the focus upon human need, as if the gospel was offering a freedom from that need and providing some kind of fulfilment to humanity.

How easy it is to get caught up with religious attitudes until those attitudes cloud our minds to the truth!

Yes, there maybe some APPARENTLY common elements between the gospel Hansen promotes, (a gospel “that can bring peace to the mind and restore the soul”) and the gospel of the seeker sensitive church that he berates. Both gospels aim to provide something to mankind.
Many would see that aim as being too man-centred and not focused enough on God. And I confess that is the way I saw it at first, hence my initial reservations. But after a while I started to see things differently and I realised how much those reservations were baseless.

I have spent so much time refuting the errors of Calvinism and its God-maligning, man-belittling views that I had started to overlook the fact that God’s gospel is very much man-focused. Without man and man’s need for salvation there would be no need for a gospel. The gospel is God’s message of salvation to bring freedom to mankind. The gospel is God’s message of the benefits He has graciously provided for mankind.

At the start of His own ministry Jesus proclaimed:

Luke 4: 18-19 "The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news [the gospel] to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Dare we suggest that Jesus gospel was too man-centred because it focused on human need?

The gospel is God’s message offering salvation to mankind. And in case someone missed the point I’ll emphasis it: it is GOD’S gospel. It is about GOD sovereignly acting in love towards mankind.
How easy it is to become overly “pious” in our attempt to glorify God and we can effectively deny the very purpose of the gospel. The intention to glorify God has the opposite effect when His gracious love demonstrated towards mankind is pushed into the backseat (if not out of the rear window).

What is the most significant difference between the two gospels mentioned above?
It is not so much what benefits are available to mankind through the gospel, but what does the gospel require of mankind to enable the receiving of those benefits. Hansen’s message can perhaps be summarised in the following paragraph from his article:

“It is so easy for self-proclaimed prophets to make up weird crazy doctrines and get thousands of followers, because in many churches there is a great lack of Christian discipleship based on the word of God. The focus on Jesus and his teaching and
discipleship has been replaced with “feel-good teachings” that totally lacks the important teachings about repentance, sin, hell, grace and holiness.”

While the gospel IS directed towards mankind, offering mankind benefits we can’t fully understand; OUR RESPONSE to God’s gospel MUST be focused ON CHRIST, in accordance with the conditions HE has established.

WHERE DID the GOSPEL GO?

Here is another article received through Andrew Strom’s mailing list. I would be interested in what others have to say about this message. I have a couple of reservations about parts of the article (which I intend to address in the comments when I get the opportunity).
I agree with the overall message that the true gospel is missing from the “church” and its agenda; that other things have been given priority to the point that the “gospel” has been redefined to suit those changed priorities.

Also see Andrew Strom's own article found here:
We've lost the gospel

-----------
WHERE DID the GOSPEL GO?? -by Peter Hansen.

A Desperate World in Need of the Pure Gospel!

The world is in deep trouble!

Billions of people are living in poverty around the world. About 2.8 billion people are living on less than two dollars a day. Millions are dying from starvation and diseases in the Third World. The global financial crisis has caused millions to lose their home and the world has probably just seen the beginning of a major global crisis that not even the financial experts could have foretold. The threat of nuclear war is hanging in the air and the most powerful nations of the globe are fighting for the last reserves of oil.

While some families can’t even afford a single meal on the table each day, others are addicted to drugs, gambling and alcohol. Millions in the west are so mentally depressed that they try to escape this world of loneliness in alcohol, drugs, perversions and suicide. The world is screaming for help and solutions for a messed up society that has nothing to offer but endless talk shows and online entertainment.

People are seriously desperate for finding a deeper meaning, hope and inner peace. This world seems to have everything to offer, but in reality is more out of control morally and spiritually than ever. I can boldly say that this world needs the full gospel message of Jesus Christ. Not another sermon or conference about self happiness, but the pure full gospel of salvation. That is the one and only thing that can bring peace to the mind and restore the soul.

But how sad it is that the preaching of the full gospel has been downgraded to some cultural light gospel show with fancy stage performance and blinking lights! Where are the full gospel preachers who dare to stand up for the truth, who dare to preach salvation, hope, hell, holiness and grace. Where are those who proclaim that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven?

The problem is that millions of people have been deceived and blinded with a feel good gospel, a light lukewarm message that only talks about happiness, prosperity, self-development and “me, me and me” instead of “Him, Him and Him!”

Where did the gospel go?

Is today’s modern church really afraid of teaching the full living gospel? Is it afraid of being politically incorrect and offending the masses? Many churches are on a very dangerous path. A path that will only lead to possible destruction. Let me point out, that if there is no gospel message of sin, grace, repentance and salvation there is zero!

And while thousands of churches are playing “seeker sensitive churches” and being politically correct, millions of non-believers are screaming for spiritual truth that can give them real hope and reality based on the word of God. The truth of the gospel will set them free, but if there is no one preaching the truth of the gospel, many will go to hell, believing in a different gospel (2 Corinthians 11:3-4) (Galatians 1:6-7) . That is the hard facts. A very good place to read and study what Jesus is saying is in Matthew chapter 24. Jesus mentions here in chapter 24 that many will be deceived by false prophets and teachers.

It is so easy for self-proclaimed prophets to make up weird crazy doctrines and get thousands of followers, because in many churches there is a great lack of Christian discipleship based on the word of God. The focus on Jesus and his teaching and
discipleship has been replaced with “feel-good teachings” that totally lacks the important teachings about repentance, sin, hell, grace and holiness.

On a five week mission trip to Ethiopia recently I was scheduled to speak in different churches. In my sermon preparation I felt a deep conviction to preach and focus more on the gospel that Jesus taught and His life, more than I had ever done before. And the
pastors and local evangelists were amazed and almost shocked by the clear gospel teaching, because they were not used to that!

We have to remember that the gospel is what sets us free. We need to bring the full gospel back in our churches, mission fields and to a desperate seeking world. There is only one hope and that is Jesus Christ. We have to renew our passion for being in the
presence of Jesus. We must take up our cross and lay down our lives and follow Christ and be filled with the Holy Spirit. We must renew our minds daily in God’s presence. We must study the life of Jesus and the Word of God and let it become part of us, inside out.

The living word of God will change your life and you will see its powerful effects, and not only will you be empowered by his Word, the world around you will experience the saving and healing power of Jesus Christ. Make the gospel the focus of your life and ministry and tell others as well.

-Peter Capili Hansen.

SOURCE: gospelmiracle.org

--
YES! - You have permission to post these emails
to friends or other groups, blogs, boards, etc. Go for it!

To subscribe, please send a 'subscribe' email to-
prophetic@revivalschool.com

See our website and discussion board-
http://www.revivalschool.com/

Andrew Strom,
32 Coleridge Cres,
Killay,
Swansea, SA2 7DJ,
UK.

GOD IN THE HANDS OF ANGRY CALVINISTS by William Watson Birch

The article linked below would be worthwhile just for the title alone. But don’t stop there, read the whole lot!

GOD IN HANDS OF ANGRY CALVINISTS


This part at the beginning immediately stood out:

“According to John Piper, typically, certain types of people are prone to accepting Calvinism. "What types of people are these?" you ask. These, according to Piper, are the intellectual types…”

After reading some of the Calvinist arguments I’ve seen lately, that statement does not surprise me. The arguments have paid little regard for scripture but have been centred on “reasoning” the “truth”. For example, if God really wanted all to be saved, then all WOULD be saved. All are not saved, therefore the atonement is limited. This application of reason results in an outcome that is totally contrary to clear scriptural statements.

I have also found that the Calvinist obsession with election and predestination is based on particular interpretations being projected into various texts. However a clear leap in logic needs to be taken when references to predestination and election are assumed to be referring to “unconditionally elected for salvation”.
That leap of logic is not warranted, and in reality it leads to an entirely false conclusion that contradicts many CLEAR and CATEGORICAL scriptural statements.

(See 1 Corinthians 1: 17-29 regarding man’s wisdom and intellect.)

LIMITED ATONEMENT IN JOHN 10?

In the comments section of my previous article (Election, Salvation & God’s Purposes) I was asked the following (relating to John 10):

-----

I have a question; I am curious as to how non-Calvinists will understand a text that (I think) plainly teaches a distinction between those for whom Christ died for and whom he didn't die for. You claim that Jesus died for everyone in your post, so I suppose it is relevant.

How do you interpret the text from the Gospel of John where Jesus is recorded as saying the following:

22 At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter,
23 and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon.
24 So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”
25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me,
26 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
30 I and the Father are one.”

And prior to this Jesus claims that he lays his life down for the sheep.


Here he clearly, it seems to me, describes two different group of persons: the sheep, for whom he lays his life down, those whom the Father had given him, who will never die (because they have eternal life); the non-sheep, who don't believe in him because they are not a part of his flock, for whom he does not lay his life.

This text seems clear to me; it may not teach exactly what I understand it as teaching however.

What sense can you make of it?

-----

I see that the question above specifically relates to the Calvinist doctrine of “Limited Atonement” but a second Calvinist doctrine is also inferred due to its close relationship to the first. It is that of Unconditional Election: that God unconditionally elected some to be saved, and that Jesus laid down His life ONLY for those whom God had unconditionally elected for salvation.

Firstly, before considering the portion of scripture quoted, I again draw attention to the fact that scripture as a whole is a revelation of God and His purposes. Any interpretation of a PORTION of scripture MUST be compatible with the revelation contained in the rest of scripture. If an interpretation contradicts the clear meaning of the rest of scripture, that interpretation is clearly wrong.

The excerpt from John, taken in isolation, could be seen to give some support for the Calvinist doctrines that are alluded to in the question. However, should that inferred support lead us to ignore very CLEAR statements elsewhere in scripture that categorically say that God desires ALL to be saved and that he provided His Son to die for ALL and not a limited few?

“This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires ALL people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”(1Ti 2:3-4)

“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that ALL should reach repentance.” (2Pe 3:9)

"For God so loved THE WORLD, that he gave his only Son, that WHOEVER believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that THE WORLD MIGHT BE SAVED through him. (John 3:16 -17)

“And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL people to myself." (Joh 12:32)

“For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on ALL.” (Rom 11:32)


Could any statements about God’s will be CLEARER than those? Are they in any way compatible with the view that God has already chosen an elect few to be saved, and by His will and His will alone has determined that the rest will be damned for eternity?

Therefore is it even remotely possible that John 10 is promoting those Calvinist doctrines of limited atonement and unconditional election when it is made blatantly clear elsewhere in scripture that He desires ALL to be saved and that he gave His Son for THE WORLD and not for a pre-elected minority?
Clearly not without some very creative redefining of what is meant by some very simple words such as ALL, the WORLD and WHOEVER.
Unfortunately, that is exactly the approach taken by those who choose to protect their theology from the exposing light of scripture. When scripture reads “ALL” the Calvinist sees “All of the elect”, and therefore changes the meaning of scripture to enable him to justify his theology.

So how do we reconcile John 10 with the broader view of scripture, as demonstrated above? Who are the sheep according to Jesus?

The answer is given half way through the excerpt from John 10.

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” (John 10:27)

His sheep are those who hear His voice and follow Him. Those who do not hear His voice and follow Him are not His sheep. We see elsewhere in scripture that there is a relationship between hearing Jesus’ word and faith.

Rom 10:17, tells us that “faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ”.
Within its context, this quote from Romans 10 addresses Israel’s disobedience to the word they have heard. They heard the word but remained disobedient and contrary. They heard the word but did not HEED the word.
Faith (belief) will not come to those who do not hear (give heed to) the word of Christ.

This is exactly the picture of those to who Jesus is speaking in John 10. They are people who have witnessed the miraculous works Jesus has done and have heard His teaching, and yet remain contrary in nature – refusing to accept the clear evidence readily available to them, they ask for more.
They refused to heed what Jesus had already said and done and therefore were not His sheep. They did not hear his words so they were denied the faith that comes through the word of Christ.

See another passage also loved by Calvinists that Calvinists assume limits the redeemed to a group specifically chosen and given to the Son by the Father.

Joh 6:37–39 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.

But the following verse adds the qualifying statement of :

Joh 6:40 “For this is the will of my Father, that EVERYONE who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."


EVERYONE who looks on the Son and believes in Him.

Compare with the famous John 3:16 (and especially note its context)

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (Joh 3:14-18)

In the wilderness everyone who LOOKED UPON the serpent were saved from the poison of the snakes. Those who chose not to look upon the serpent were not saved.

Likewise, it is the will of that Father that EVERYONE who looks on the Son and believes in Him should have eternal life. Those are the ones who the Father gives to Jesus, those who look upon Him and believe in Him.
Who are those able to believe in Him?

Those who hear and give heed to His word.

Rom 1:16 “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes”


“If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."

“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says…”


Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness, where your fathers put me to the test and saw my works for forty years.
Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, 'They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.'
As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest.'"
Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God.
But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
As it is said, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion."
For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses?
And with whom was he provoked for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who were disobedient?
So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. (Heb 3:7-19 )


Relationship with Jesus is conditional upon BELIEVING in Him. Belief (faith) in Him comes through hearing (giving heed to) His word and acting upon it.
Who are the sheep that are able to believe in Jesus? Those who give heed to his word and follow Him.

How can they give heed to his word? Because there is POWER to SAVE in HIS gospel.

So who are you going to hear and heed? Jesus and HIS word? Or the word of man's theology?

ELECTION, SALVATION & GOD’S PURPOSES

(A brief summary in the form of some personal thoughts)

Salvation is CONDITIONAL. Those conditions are revealed in scripture. And include repentance and faith. God does not choose specific “elect” individuals to be saved. The elect are those who are IN CHRIST, those who are IN HIM.
The redeemed are the elect and all references to people being “elect” are directed towards the redeemed. Election does not occur apart from Christ – that means Christ comes before Election. Election does not precede our being In Christ. Whether we are in Christ or not determines whether we are part of the elect. It is NOT election that determines whether we will be In Christ.

God’s salvation plan was already established before He started His creation. Man’s fall was already factored into this even before Adam sinned. God KNEW what would happen and used that to His purposes. God did not ordain Adam’s sin but He knew the outcome before it happened. God’s salvation plan is NOT a compromised way of salvaging something good from His creation. God’s salvation plan has ALWAYS been directed towards the creation of a new heavens and a new earth to be populated by a people who willing serve Him.
The new heavens and new earth where only righteousness will dwell is the pinnacle of revelation that God has given. He has revealed nothing beyond that.
To be part of that new creation, mankind has been given a way to be freed from the sin that would prevent it. That way comes through faith in Jesus. Through turning from our own ways and turning to God (repentance), that results in fruit that is evidence of their repentance.

I understand this current creation to be a “testing ground” where our response to God in this life, in this creation, gives us the opportunity to become part of His new creation.

“Regeneration” and “born again” are terms that are used very little in scripture but some traditions have created major doctrines around those terms. At their very simplest, they describe the new start and new life we are given through Christ.
Many Calvinists teach that someone needs to be born again before they are able to believe and repent. To those people it is regeneration that changes man from a totally depraved creature and makes him capable of repenting. That prior to regeneration man is entirely incapable of reaching out to God in any way.
Scripture teaches that new life in Christ comes through faith and repentance – not vice versa.

God does not force salvation upon anyone and he does not prevent anyone from coming to Him in repentance. He has given mankind enough free will to allow each individual to respond according to the light they have received.
The preaching of the gospel is God’s way of approaching the human heart. It is the power of God that leads to salvation for those who believe. The Holy Spirit brings conviction to the hearer of the gospel and that hearer has the responsibility and opportunity to respond to the gospel. That response will either be to repent or to remain in rebellion. Eventually, those who continually resist the gospel will be hardened to its message and God will give them over to the decision they have made and will finish off the hardening process. Romans 1 & 2 describe God handing people over to those things they desire. Likewise 2 Thessalonians describes how God will send delusion to those who refuse to receive a love of the truth. Note it is up to the individual to RECEIVE the love of the truth. God does not force such a love onto anyone. To the contrary – those who don’t want to receive the truth will be given exactly what they have proven that they want: a lie, deception, delusion.

Jesus died for everyone. The atonement is not limited by God. Its benefits are for everyone but they are only received by those who receive them through faith in Jesus.
God chooses no one for salvation. His salvation is freely available to all who believe and act on that belief by repenting.

God has not preordained everything that happens. He has given mankind the freedom to act within certain constraints. The overall destiny of His creation is determined but the determination of man’s place within that destiny depends upon the individual and their response to God’s grace.
The presence of sin within the world and the fact that the world is under the influence of Satan also has an effect on events within the world and among those who have not turned to God.
God allows Satan’s influence to continue in the world because He is patiently given mankind the opportunity to repent. However that patience will one day come to an end and God will deal with the evil that has corrupted His creation.

GOD'S REVELATION: in case someone missed it previously.

God has given us a revelation of Himself throughout the WHOLE of scripture. It is a revelation given NOT in the form of a systematic theology, but through life situations and through examples of personal interaction between God and mankind.

Any interpretation of parts of scripture that contradict the revelation of God given throughout the whole of scripture is a wrong interpretation. False interpretations are guaranteed when we start with individual texts. When we take those false interpretations and project them onto the rest of scripture we can not fail to produce a false view of God and His purposes.

That is the inevitable result of the traditions and theologies of man: teachings that focus on texts rather than on God’s character. It is far easier to intellectually debate the meanings of individual verses of scripture than it is to receive and share the revelation God has given of Himself.
The first we can pick up from books and teachers. The latter comes through relationship with God through His Son, by His Spirit aided by the scriptures He inspired.

THE QUESTION that CHANGED MY LIFE by Dr. David Ryser

A number of years ago, I had the privilege of teaching at a school
of ministry. My students were hungry for God, and I was constantly
searching for ways to challenge them to fall more in love with
Jesus and to become voices for revival in the Church. I came across
a quote attributed most often to Rev. Sam Pascoe. It is a short
version of the history of Christianity, and it goes like this:

Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship; it moved to Greece
and became a philosophy; it moved to Italy and became an institution;
it moved to Europe and became a culture; it came to America and
became an enterprise. Some of the students were only 18 or 19
years old--barely out of diapers--and I wanted them to understand
and appreciate the import of the last line, so I clarified it by adding,
"An enterprise. That's a business." After a few moments Martha,
the youngest student in the class, raised her hand. I could not
imagine what her question might be. I thought the little vignette was
self-explanatory, and that I had performed it brilliantly. Nevertheless,
I acknowledged Martha's raised hand, "Yes, Martha." She asked
such a simple question, "A business? But isn't it supposed to be
a body?" I could not envision where this line of questioning was going,
and the only response I could think of was, "Yes." She continued,
"But when a body becomes a business, isn't that a prostitute?"

The room went dead silent. For several seconds no one moved or
spoke. We were stunned, afraid to make a sound because the
presence of God had flooded into the room, and we knew we were
on holy ground. All I could think in those sacred moments was,
"Wow, I wish I'd thought of that." I didn't dare express that thought
aloud. God had taken over the class.

Martha's question changed my life. For six months, I thought about
her question at least once every day. "When a body becomes a
business, isn't that a prostitute?" There is only one answer to her
question. The answer is "Yes." The American Church, tragically,
is heavily populated by people who do not love God. How can we
love Him? We don't even know Him; and I mean really know Him.

... I stand by my statement that most American Christians do not
know God--much less love Him. The root of this condition originates
in how we came to God. Most of us came to Him because of what
we were told He would do for us. We were promised that He would
bless us in life and take us to heaven after death. We married Him
for His money, and we don't care if He lives or dies as long as we
can get His stuff. We have made the Kingdom of God into a business,
merchandising His anointing. This should not be. We are commanded
to love God, and are called to be the Bride of Christ--that's pretty
intimate stuff. We are supposed to be His lovers. How can we love
someone we don't even know? And even if we do know someone,
is that a guarantee that we truly love them? Are we lovers or
prostitutes?

I was pondering Martha's question again one day, and considered
the question, "What's the difference between a lover and a prostitute?"
I realized that both do many of the same things, but a lover does
what she does because she loves. A prostitute pretends to love, but
only as long as you pay. Then I asked the question, "What would
happen if God stopped paying me?"

For the next several months, I allowed God to search me to uncover
my motives for loving and serving Him. Was I really a true lover of
God? What would happen if He stopped blessing me? What if He
never did another thing for me? Would I still love Him? Please
understand, I believe in the promises and blessings of God. The
issue here is not whether God blesses His children; the issue is
the condition of my heart. Why do I serve Him? Are His blessings
in my life the gifts of a loving Father, or are they a wage that I have
earned or a bribe/payment to love Him? Do I love God without any
conditions? It took several months to work through these questions.
Even now I wonder if my desire to love God is always matched by
my attitude and behavior. I still catch myself being disappointed
with God and angry that He has not met some perceived need in
my life. I suspect this is something which is never fully resolved,
but I want more than anything else to be a true lover of God.

So what is it going to be? Which are we, lover or prostitute?
There are no prostitutes in heaven, or in the Kingdom of God for
that matter, but there are plenty of former prostitutes in both
places. Take it from a recovering prostitute when I say there is no
substitute or unconditional, intimate relationship with God. And I
mean there is no palatable substitute available to us (take another
look at Matthew 7:21-23 sometime). We must choose.

-Dr. David Ryser.

-------------------------
As received from Andrew Strom's revivalschool newsletter.

--
YES! - You have permission to post these emails
to friends or other groups, blogs, boards, etc. Go for it!

To subscribe, please send a 'subscribe' email to-
prophetic@revivalschool.com

See our website and discussion board-
http://www.revivalschool.com

Astute Humour

See the cartoon at the following link:

PREORDAINED

GOG – MAGOG, Ezekiel Prophecy and the New Testament?

The basic framework of end time prophecy isn't too hard to grasp - but when we try to narrow it all down to specific timetables we are guaranteed to get it wrong. This is MORE likely if we try to read and understand scripture with a bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other.

We need to be wary of allowing our preconceptions to mislead us from the truth. The Gog-Magog prophecy in Ezekiel is one example to consider. This has often been interpreted as referring to Russia invading Israel, but what is the prophecy really about and what is its significance in the end time program? To gain understanding without being misled by speculation, it is important that we don’t deviate from what scripture itself reveals.

I tend to think it is not prophesying a single event. OT prophecies can predict separate events as if they are one. OT prophecies about Jesus were like this, in which there was no distinction made between His first and second comings.

I have heard this combining of two events into one prophecy being described with the illustration of an observer looking at two distant mountains one behind the other. The distant mountains seem to be one peak because the valley between can not be seen by the observer. Likewise two events (two mountain peaks) separated by time (the valley) are seen as a single event (mountain) by the prophet (the observer).

A battle involving Gog and Magog is mentioned only twice in scripture. There’s an extensive account in Ezekiel and a brief one in Revelation 20. Despite the brevity of the Revelation reference there are several similarities that indicate it is possibly describing the same event as the Ezekiel references.
But, while parts of the prophecy match this event in Revelation 20, there are also aspects that don't fit that scenario, but they do fit descriptions given in Revelation 19 of Armageddon.

So could Ezekiel be describing the events of Revelation 20?
Is he describing Armageddon? (Rev 16 & 19)
Is there possibly a combination of the two?
Or is it an event that the NT ignores? (I personally think this last option is unlikely)

Following is a comparison of the Ezekiel prophecy with the two different events in Revelation. Because the Ezekiel account spreads over three chapters I’ll note the relevant verses but won’t quote the text here. The Revelation accounts are much shorter so I’ll quote the whole relevant sections at the end of this article.


Similarities between Ezekiel and Rev 20 (end of millennium)

1) Gog and Magog are involved.
2) Their attack is directed upon on Israel
3) The attack is at a time when Israel is at peace (Eze 38:11) (Rev 20. end of the millennium, after 1000 years of Christ’s rule on earth)
4) It involves “the nations” or “many nations”.
5) The battle is ended before it begins by fire from God. (Eze 39:6)


Similarities between the Ezekiel account and Revelation’s description of Armageddon.

1) Attack directed on Israel.
2) Many nations join the attack
3) Massive earthquake and mountains thrown down (Eze 38:20)
4) Great hailstones fall (Eze 38:22)
5) Dead are left for the birds of the air to eat (Eze 39:4)


Those are the similarities but what about the differences?

The latter three events are not mentioned with regard to the post millennium battle.
Gog and Magog are not mentioned in the Armageddon account.
Will Israel be at peace and living in safety leading up to Armageddon?
The Antichrist’s army at Armageddon is not destroyed by fire from heaven – but by Jesus who has returned to earth.
The leaders of the battle at Armageddon are thrown alive into the lake of fire. The leaders in Ezekiel are given a grave.(Eze 39:11).

Other questions raised:
The aftermath of the Ezekiel battle leaves a battleground strewn with weaponry that is gathered and used for fuel. If this is after the millennium, it would mean that life continues on this earth for several more years prior to the second resurrection and the judgment. This is not suggested in Revelation – but then again it is not ruled out either.

If the Ezekiel battle does not fit anything described in Revelation, then the NT is entirely silent about a major event that happens in the end times. I don’t see this silence is likely but I suppose it is possible.

Armageddon, before millennium


Rev 16:16 -21
Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, “It is done!”
Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since the human race has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake.
The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.
Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found.
From the sky huge hailstones, each weighing about a hundred pounds, fell on people. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.

Rev 19:17-21
And I saw one angel standing in the sun. And he cried with a great voice, saying to all the birds that fly in mid-heaven, Come and gather together to the supper of the great God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of commanders, and the flesh of strong ones, and the flesh of horses, and those sitting on them, and the flesh of all, both free and slave, both small and great.
And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth and their armies, being gathered to make war against Him who sat on the horse, and against His army.
And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet doing signs before it, (by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast), and those who had worshiped his image. The two were thrown alive into the Lake of Fire burning with brimstone.
And the rest were slain by the sword of Him who sat on the horse, it proceeding out of His mouth. And all the birds were filled from their flesh.

Scriptural account of Battle After the Millennium

Rev 20:7-9
And when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be loosed out of his prison. And he will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle. The number of them is as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth and circled around the camp of the saints, and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of Heaven and devoured them.

Total Depravity: Depraved or Deprived?

In a recent contribution to a Christian forum, I was commenting on the Calvinist understanding of “Total depravity”. Within that article I got my words confused and instead of using “depraved” I wrote “deprived”.
This mix-up was soon brought to my attention.

However, looking again at the differences between the definitions of the words “depraved” and “deprived” – I now see that my use of “deprived” was totally appropriate.

In the Calvinist scheme of things man comes into the world DEPRIVED of the ability to seek or desire God in any way. It is NOT man’s depraved nature that leads him to be condemned to hell. The determination of his eternal destiny was made before creation – therefore it was made PRIOR to the man being born with a depraved nature and obviously before he has had the opportunity to sin.

According to Calvinist doctrine a man is destined to hell entirely because God withheld his saving grace from them. In other words they have been totally DEPRIVED of the very thing that they need for salvation.

TRUTH or Tolerance and Compromise?

It is becoming increasing evident that the teachings of men have replaced the authority of scripture in the church’s theological foundations. The evidence has become overwhelming. Rather than accept and trust scripture, people will go to all kinds of lengths to explain why it doesn’t mean what it is clearly saying.

We have Calvinism redefining salvation and the means by which God has made it available. Then there are the extreme charismatics who have redefined signs and wonders and have turned God’s love into an expression of His desperation to be accepted. And what about the “extreme prophetic” and the “New Apostolic Reformation”? They’ve created new definitions of the prophetic and apostolic?

No matter which direction we turn there’s someone trying to improve on the truth God has provided in His written word.

I don’t know how many feel the same kind of frustration that I’ve been experiencing increasingly over the last year. From regular involvement with a variety of blogs and forums I’m coming across more and more people who are content to tolerate clear cut doctrinal error.
The first clear (recent) examples came in response to concerns about Todd Bentley and his Lakeland “revival”. No matter how weird and perverse things became there were always those who jumped up to defend what was happening. No matter how aberrant the preaching; no matter how many flaky prophecies were given; no matter how much occultic mysticism was mixed with a sampling of bible quotes – there was always a stridently vocal cheer squad singing the “revival’s” praises and condemning the ‘heresy hunters”.
Even Bentley’s open immorality was not enough to open the eyes of many. Instead the support continues.

But the modern day charismanic circus is only one aspect of the problem. The deceiver knows that you can’t tempt everyone with the same flavours. There are other things he provides for the unwary to taste. Those without a sweet tooth, who are not attracted to fluffy, sugary carnival treats, might prefer something a bit meatier; something with more substance. While the extreme charismatics prefer a scripture-lite approach that shuns “traditional interpretations”, others cling to traditional teachings as if they have the authority of scripture itself. They prize scripture – as long as it’s been filtered through a trained and ordained intermediary. Scripture is beyond the average believer and contains mysteries that are best left to those more qualified to seek out its truths.
And so centuries old traditions are passed from generation to generation and defended ferociously should they be challenged.

My personal journey over this last year (and more) has included experience with these opposite extremes of Christian tradition. One group interprets scripture through a centuries old theological system while the other group seems to make things up as they go along.

One group gives lip service to the authority of scripture while in reality authority is given to their theological tradition and how IT interprets scripture.
The other group gives lip service to scripture while in reality giving authority to spiritual experiences and glib clichés.

One group esteems long dead theologians the other adores the flamboyant man (or woman) of the hour.

In these different groups it seems that the Word of God and the Spirit of God are pitted against each other. One is governed by established doctrines, and interprets scripture according to those doctrines. The other is governed by “the Spirit” and interprets scripture according to “spiritual” revelation.

There are obviously some very distinct and irreconcilable differences between these two groups. And yet they have at least one common factor. Both in reality have applied some kind of condition to their approach to scripture that takes away the average believer’s relationship with God’s word. Those average believers are TOLD what can be believed and how it should be believed. They are told that scripture doesn’t necessarily mean what it seems to mean, promoting the understanding that a (traditionally) college trained or a (charismatically) anointed teacher is required to convey what scripture really saying.

Of course, the extent of how this affects the church is immense and it would be impossible to go into every aspect of the problem. But to the person who wants to know and understand the truth, and is willing to spend the time and make the effort required, the truth is easily accessible. Everyone reading this blog has the means and the ability to search the scriptures for themselves because they can obviously read. But are they willing to utilise that ability?

To a great degree we have been conditioned to believe that scripture is hard to understand and that we need someone to explain it all and to share its hidden secrets. We lack confidence. But we should recognise that it is not only a lack of confidence in ourselves – we are lacking confidence in the God who desires to make Himself known through the revelation of scripture. We lack confidence in the One who promised to send His Spirit to be our teacher, and we lack confidence in His Spirit’s ability and willingness to teach us.

The conditioning process that has distanced us from scripture has also worked by giving us an expectation of how scripture should be approached. Our exposure to scripture has been through “texts” – often meaning isolated verses that are expounded upon at length by an appointed teacher of the word. In most cases little attention is given to context and meaning is given to the selected “text” that indicates some kind of special insight has been needed to get to what was really meant by that text.
Through this experience, we ourselves then try to delve into parts of scripture according to the same method used by the teacher. We dig around and try to find the deeper things hidden within those parts of scripture. And this is usually done before the student has developed even a rudimentary understanding of how the whole bible fits together, and what its overall revelation is about.
There is little understanding of how God has related to mankind throughout history and there is little understanding about the significance of God’s relationship with Israel. To most believers, the Old Testament account is a total mystery – beyond a few half remembered stories of certain bible characters.

Now I’ve waffled on and on about this for long enough. A lot of it I’ve touched upon before on this blog and on others. But is the message getting through? Is what I’m saying having any effect?
It seems not. From what I’ve read elsewhere people are quite content to cling to their personal traditions and to tolerate the traditions of others. Relativism is alive and thriving within the “church” and it has been demonstrated time and again in some of the responses my writings have received.
While I have made it abundantly clear that I am totally opposed to Calvinism and its abhorrent “doctrines of grace” – those Calvinists that have been most ferocious in their responses to me have at least shown a devotion to those things that they believe. They recognise the exclusivity of their beliefs and see little room for compromise. The same can not be said for so many others who demonstrate (though they would surely deny it) that they accept the relativity of “truth” – that what is true for one person is okay for that person, and what is true for me is okay for me. There is a clear opposition to any idea of bringing correction to others – such actions would be seen as divisive, and it seems like division should be avoided at all costs, even if it meant compromising on the truth.

Recently I have seen time and again how people will twist scripture in every direction possible to avoid accepting what it clearly states. All kinds of mental and logical gymnastics are performed to come to an understanding that contradicts or ignores what would be unavoidable if only the actual words of scripture were accepted for what they actually said.
Why do so many persist with this wilful blindness? And why do so many let them persist, all in the name of keeping the peace?

21 Things My Bible Didn’t Teach Me.

This list is potentially endless so I’m limiting it to those things that I’ve come across personally. Even with that limitation I might have to do a second list at a later date.

1) The correct response to the gospel in order to be saved is to either a) ask Jesus into your heart, b) say the sinner’s prayer c) respond to an “altar call” in which you do both a & b.
2) Believers will be “raptured” from the earth immediately prior to the Great Tribulation.
3) Upon death Christians go to their eternal home in heaven.
4) Satan and his demons reside in and rule their kingdom from hell.
5) Between His death and resurrection, Jesus was tormented in hell by the devil
6) Jesus victoriously snatched the keys of death and hell from the devil.
7) The devil made me do it.
8) Baptism is optional (it can also be done to babies with a sprinkling of water).
9) Sin in the life of a believer doesn’t matter because all of our sins have been forgiven
10) God loves the world so much…
11) TULIP
12) God offends the mind to reveal the heart
13) People need hours of counselling/ inner healing/ deliverance sessions to be freed from hurts and problems caused by their past.
14) Faith is a force
15) Confess and possess
16) We should not question our leaders (“touch not the Lord’s anointed!)
17) There are different kinds of anointing and some Christians are more anointed than others
18) Tongues is THE sign of being baptised in the Holy Spirit
19) Scripture doesn’t really matter
20) God knows the future because He has fore-ordained everything that will happen.
21) Man has no free will.

God’s word or Man’s – the choice is ours.

Almost daily I see more and more examples of Christians who have little respect for the scriptures. They give more authority to the words and teachings of men than they do to some of the clearest and simplest parts of the Word of God.

All manner of twisted and convoluted theologies are used to manipulate scripture into a form that is acceptable to their own wisdom. During discussion they quote page after page of their teachers in an attempt to demonstrate that scripture doesn’t really mean what it is clearly saying.

What more can be said about this? Doesn’t anyone trust God anymore? Why do so many “believers” put more faith in men and men’s wisdom than they do in God Himself?
Do they consider their own wisdom is greater than God's that they can reinterpret scripture to force it into their own ideas of acceptability?

Problems due to change of template.

I have recently changed the template of my blog to (hopefully) improve its appearance. Unfortunately the change has affected some of the text leaving large sections of blank space; seemingly deleting some paragraphs.

As I notice these “deleted” sections I try to fix the problem. It is not always easy to find those sections that are missing so if anyone comes across a problem of missing text please let me know.

"Weighed And Found Wanting"

THE FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM
"Weighed And Found Wanting"
George Bryson.

I recommend the article at the following link. It is long but well worth reading if you want to get an understanding of Calvinism as promoted by Calvinist teachers. The first part of the article (pages 1-26) is constructed mainly of quotes from Calvinist writers. In my opinion their statements expose the lie of Calvinism more effectively than any opponent of Calvinism could. Of course that is conditional upon how affected by Calvinism the reader’s theology has become.

I don’t think the second part of the article has the effect of the first. The writer doesn’t always present his own arguments as clearly as he could – and he doesn’t expose the errors of Calvinism anywhere as efficiently as the Calvinists have already done themselves earlier in the article.

I came across this article recently and have only just read through it. I don’t agree with all of the conclusions the author makes, but it’s still a very interesting read.


The Five Points of Calvinism -"Weighed and Found Wanting" by George Bryson

1 Corinthians 10:13 – regarding “The Believer and Sin”.

In a (now deleted*) comment from the “Am I an Arminian” thread, I was accused of “proof-texting” when I made reference to 1 Corinthians 10:13.
I quoted that verse to show that when a believer sins it is a result of his/her choice and not because of some irresistible tendency to sin that drives the believer to live in disobedience to God.

“No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.”

That verse makes it clear that no believer is tempted by anything that is beyond their ability to withstand. God Himself makes sure that all temptation we face IS resistible – and we therefore need to take PERSONAL responsibility for our sin. If we do not take that personal responsibility, then I cannot see how we can genuinely come to the Lord to confess OUR sins in order to receive forgiveness and cleansing from unrighteousness.

It is clear that I am not the only one to be faced with this same accusation of “proof-texting” by drawing attention to the promise God gives in the above mentioned verse.

See the blog entry at the following link:

A Contextual Examination of 1 Corinthians 10:13


---------

* I do not make a habit out of deleting comments, but the person referenced above became abusive and showed himself to be a wilful liar. Further information on the reason for the deletion of of his comments can be found in the comments section of the “Am I an Arminian” thread.

God’s Foreknowledge and Man’s Free Will

Two recommended articles by David Servant that address the issues of God’s foreknowledge and man’s free will.


God's Regrets
The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them" (Gen. 6:6-7).
I [the Lord] regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following Me and has not carried out My commands (1 Sam. 15:11).
I suppose it is comforting to know that even God has His bad days. But on a more serious level, we can't help but wonder why God would regret something that He himself did. We just read that God said He was sorry that He "made man on the earth." He wished He hadn't done it. But if God is all-knowing, and if He knows everything that is yet to happen, why didn't He decide not to create man on the earth before He got started, knowing that He would regret it otherwise?


Deception is an Election

Moses' warning about false prophets in Deuteronomy 13:1-4 raises a question. If God knows everything, then why did He say that a false spiritual leader could be a means for Him to "find out" if we love Him with all our hearts?
The simple answer to that question is that God didn't create us as pre-programmed robots. Our choices are exactly that—our choices. Loving God is something we choose to do or choose not to do. God must therefore test us to see what we will choose.
Certainly God foreknows what we will do, but His foreknowledge is based on the outcomes of our tests. If there were no outcomes, there would be nothing for God to foreknow.

Duelling Quizzes.

In the comments section of one of my articles, a Calvinist commentator provided a (now deleted) quiz intended to demonstrate the “truth” of the Calvinist approach to scripture.
The following link provides an answer to that quiz, demonstrating how vastly different theological viewpoints can be supported by the selective use of scripture.

quiz-for-your-calvinist-friends

As a personal comment, I have to say that THIS quiz has much more value than the Calvinist equivalent. At least I can recognise the God that is being promoted – I can’t say the same for the god being promoted by the Calvinist mob. That god is an imposter.


-----
While I have deleted the Calvinist quiz from this blog, it may be accessed via the "Wesleyan Arminian" blog at the link provided above.

THE BELIEVER AND SIN

Can the believer live without sin?
Or maybe a better question would be “Why can’t the believer live without sin?”

Scripture makes it clear that we are EXPECTED to live in obedience but do we always live up to that expectation? I think Scripture also makes it clear that we have been equipped to live up to that expectation.
If God does not allow us to be tempted beyond our ability to resist – what does that mean to the believer? Does it mean what it clearly says? That we CAN resist ALL temptation we face? I can’t see that it means anything less than that.

If that is the case, how can we say that we always inevitably sin? That outlook is denying the clear promise God has given in His word.

When we DO sin – is it because we had no control, that we are totally incapable of doing anything else? Not if God is true to His word. He has made it clear that He has provided the way for us to avoid sin. If we give into temptation it is because we have chosen to do so, because we have not recognised and applied the resources God has provided – it is not because the temptation was beyond our ability to resist.

God has provided what is necessary for the believer to be free of sin. But He has also provided a means of being cleansed again IF we sin. Through confession of sin we can receive forgiveness and cleansing.
In His promise regarding confession, God has provided a “safety net”. It’s not something we should take for granted – it is not to be treated like a trampoline. It is there to give us protection as a last resort.

Then why do believers continue to sin?
There are probably many reasons but I suggest a MAJOR reason is that we expect to sin. We fail to recognise and rely upon the provision God has given. If we expect to continue in sin – then we are likely to meet that expectation. I see part of the answer to this tendency is the renewing of our minds - learning to think according to God's word and not according to our own traditions.

Many also expect to sin because they believe it is in their nature, but his view of the believer denies the reality of the new birth. We are a new creation in Christ the old has passed away. There needs to be a distinction made between the unregenerate man bound over to disobedience and the new man who is in Christ. There is a need to recognise that the new birth results in actual changes in the believer’s life, that the believer is equipped and motivated in ways not possible for the unbeliever.
When God requires obedience and freedom from sin – He also EQUIPS those who trust in Him to make those things attainable.

Yes we WERE all sinners but God does not leave His children AS sinners. By His grace He forgives and cleanses ALL who would come to Him in faith to receive His mercy.

---------

If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.
My dear children, I write this to you so that you WILL NOT sin. But IF anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but ALSO FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD.
We know that we have come to know him IF WE OBEY HIS COMMANDMENTS. The man who says, "I know him," BUT DOES NOT DO WHAT HE COMMANDS IS A LIAR, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: WHOEVER CLAIMS TO LIVE IN HIM MUST WALK AS JESUS DID.

(1 John 1:8 onwards)

From instrument of brutality to symbol of love

I found this article in the Easter weekend Sydney Morning Herald.


From instrument of brutality to symbol of love
by
John Dickson

I have recently bought two DVD sets presented by Dickson. Both examine the historical evidence of Jesus' life and ministry in a very accessible format. They are highly recommended - though may not be easily obtainable outside of Australia.

"The Christ Files"

and

"Life of Jesus"

More details at:

http://www.publicchristianity.org/

A Book That May Be of Interest

Did Calvin Murder Servetus? By Stanford Rives

TOLERATING FALSE GODS

When the Israelites made the golden calf, they referred to it as the God who had brought them out of Egypt. In one sense it was the RIGHT God they were worshipping, but instead of recognising Him for who He REALLY is they created their own image of Him.
At that time most of their knowledge of God was based on the spoken word of Moses and upon a few personal experiences as interpreted by Moses. They had no written scriptures and the Holy Spirit was not given to them in the way he has been given to believers today.
When Moses departed their camp, leaving them without their primary link to God, they reverted to the ideas of divinity they’d absorbed in Egypt over the previous 400 years. And God did not take it lightly when they created the false image and worshipped it.

Today Christians have the written scriptures and the Holy Spirit has been sent to lead us into all truth. Therefore there is no excuse for any major misunderstanding of God. Yet His character, His ways, His purposes and His method of salvation are viewed differently across various “Christian” camps.

At what point does a God cease to be the God of the Bible and become a false God?

Most Christians would have no hesitation in recognising that Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons have departed from the truth, but what have those groups got wrong?
Their beliefs promote a different understanding of God’s character, God’s ways, God’s purposes and God’s method of salvation.
If we recognise the error within these groups and see them as false; why are we more tolerant of other “Christian” doctrines that like wise distort the character of God and His means of providing salvation?

PUTTING ARMINIUS IN HIS PLACE

Over the last couple of weeks I have visited several “Arminian” blogs and I have been encouraged by many of the articles. This has been very welcome after months of being continually confronted and battered by Calvinists and their false teachings.

I have found that I am in agreement with most doctrine I’ve read on these websites. This agreement did not come about because I was conditioned by Arminius’ teaching, but because I studied and read the same Bible that Arminius studied and trusted the Holy Spirit’s teaching abilities.

Unfortunately, along with the good doctrine, I have also seen some evidence of a very unhealthy devotion to a man. Arminius is being given praise that is not due to him.
At times his teachings are mentioned in a way that gives the impression that they are THE means by which we understand truth and his teachings are held up as THE standard of doctrinal orthodoxy. In some cases this reliance on Arminius gives the impression that his teaching overshadows the value of scripture.

This situation is yet another example of man’s teaching being given too high a priority. Arminius was a man and the soundness in his teaching is due solely to its agreement with the scriptures. Go first to the SOURCE of scriptural truth and seek GOD alone for revelation through the Holy Spirit. Arminius (and other teachers) can later provide confirmation or otherwise of what we believe we have learned from the scriptures.

Promote the writings of Arminius as a valuable secondary resource by all means – but do not make him into a standard by which all teaching is judged. There is only ONE written standard of truth – the BIBLE.

POTTER AND THE CLAY – MOULDING THE SCRIPTURES

Recently the teaching ministry of a particular woman was recommended to the members of a Christian discussion forum, so I read a transcript of one of her sermons based on “The Potter’s House”.
I was interested to see what was said about this topic because the image of the potter and the clay (from Romans 8) is a favourite proof text used by Calvinists.
While she presents some interesting ideas on potters and the use of clay – and even though she makes reference to biblical statements; it seems to me that she merely used the imagery to create her own message. It’s was the common practice of using a “text” as a springboard to present a message that the PREACHER wants to convey rather than taking the biblical text and seeing what IT has to say.To me this was made most clear by her avoidance of the interpretation GOD gives regarding Jeremiah’s observations in the potter’s house. She does make reference to Jeremiah 18 in which God has told Jeremiah to visit the potter – but then she stops after the potter/clay illustration is given. The following verses are not mentioned, and yet these give the very important context to the WHY God sent Jeremiah to observe the potter: and God’s interpretation turns the usual understanding of the story upon its head.
Usually the imagery of the potter and the clay are used to convey the idea that God is in control and that we are merely clay in His hands – subject totally to His will and His purpose for our lives. Some of us He has decided to make into vessels of honour and others He has decided to make as vessels of dishonour. The story is used to show how we have no involvement in our destiny – the potter (God) moulds the clay (us) as He desires.But when we see what God told Jeremiah we get a DIFFERENT picture.
God’s explanation of the potter and the clay shows how the clay (humanity) can change what God had decided. Those who God had determined to punish can avoid that punishment if they repent. Those who God had determined to reward could lose that reward if they turned to disobedience.The illustration shows that the clay can affect the outcome of the potter’s intention and if necessary he will make it into another pot, one different from his first intention.This sermon was a classic example of how to avoid scriptural context to mould God’s word into a form that WE choose to support our favoured theology.

----

Here is the PURPOSE of God’s message about the potter and the clay given in the part of the text that was not addressed in the sermon: Jeremiah 18 5 Then the word of the LORD came to me: 6 "O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

AM I AN ARMINIAN?

For most of my Christian life I was unaware of both Calvinism and Arminianism and the conflict between those different theologies.
My first knowledge of Calvinism came through participation on an internet forum; and I couldn’t believe that any professing Christian could believe such things about the God I’d grown to know over the previous 30 years.

Arminianism remained out of the picture until I started to be labelled as an Arminian by the Calvinists I was increasingly coming into contact with. While some used the label reasonably benignly, as if it was merely an alternative to their personal preference for Calvin; others used it as an accusation, as if an “Arminian” was something to be loathed.

From the first time I was identified as an “Arminian” I have objected to the label. Having not even heard of Arminius to that point, I knew that I was not a follower of the man or his doctrine. However, considering the number of times I was being associated with his teaching I eventually decided to find out more about him.

While I still object to be labelled as an “Arminian”, it is not because I have an objection to Arminius or his basic theology. My brief investigation into this matter has introduced me to some very worthwhile blogs associated with Arminian teachings. Through reading some of the articles I have been surprised how much I can identify and agree with their ideas and understanding. I have provided links to some of these on the sidebar.
In my previous blog entry I addressed my concerns about the use of none biblical “theological terminology”. That would perhaps be my main disagreement with the Arminian writers on the recommended blogs.
My experience with both charismanic and highly traditional churches has shown me how dangerous mans’ traditions can be, so I have a strong aversion to teachings that rely too much on sources other than the scriptures (this includes the use of non-biblical theological terminology). If these sources become too influential, then it becomes likely that we start to interpret scripture according to those sources rather than vice versa.

I was becoming increasingly discouraged by the apparently increasing influence of Calvinist thought among the Christians with whom I’ve come into contact in recent months. My first real contact with “Arminian” believers has given me a great deal of encouragement and I look forward to keeping up to date with their blog contributions.

At the moment I have the enjoyment of reading through some of their archived articles. One I found particularly interesting was “ON THEOLOGY” by Billy Birch found at the following link:

http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/2007/07/on-theology.html

His point about valid theology bringing glory to God draws a clear distinction between the Arminian and Calvinist views.

Description or Definition? :Terminology’s Effect on Theology

I have a particular aversion to non-biblical terminology being used to describe biblical beliefs. I think inevitably that such terminology will begin to DEFINE our beliefs instead of merely describe them.
Take the phrase “Total Depravity” – to the Calvinist this means a total inability to respond to God prior to regeneration. It goes much further than describing man’s separation from God due to a sinful nature.
The Arminian understands the term in a different way, allowing the sinner to believe in God PRIOR to regeneration in response to the Holy Spirit’s conviction through the hearing of the gospel.*
As far as I’ve been able to determine – both theologies believe in man’s “total depravity”, but their definitions of the term are significantly different.

Personally I prefer to have man’s condition described as being: “bound over to disobedience” as per Romans 11. At least with the biblical definition there is a scriptural context revealing the reason for and the effect of man’s condition.

Rom 11:32 “For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.”
The context reveals that man’s condition is not intended to be a totally exclusive state for anyone – but its intention is to place ALL on a level playing field with God, so that ALL may have to opportunity to benefit from God’s mercy.

Therefore which description BEST describes man’s condition and God’s response to man’s condition? Total depravity or “bound over to disobedience”? Which (in context) leaves less room for ambiguity?

Another term I’ve come across recently is “prevenient grace”. Does this not create the error of dividing God’s grace into categories or different levels, one result being the erroneous concept of “irresistible grace”?

Maybe if we stick as closely to possible to biblical language to describe biblical concepts, we would be less likely to introduce so many of man’s assumptions into our doctrine: assumptions that arise from our choice of terminology rather than the text of scripture.

----------------
*At least this is my current understanding of the Arminian belief. I’ve had little contact with Arminian theology until very recently.

SEEK MAN OR SEEK GOD?

In recent weeks in various places I have written of the need to search the scriptures and seek the Holy Spirit’s teaching ABOVE the teachings and traditions of men.

Without exception – every time I’ve written of the need, I’ve had people saying things like:

1) I’m abandoning accountability
2) I think I have a monopoly on the truth
3) I’m expecting others to adopt my beliefs
4) I’m arrogant
5) I’m a lone ranger Christian

These are only a sample of the comments I’ve received.
I am wondering why people are so challenged by the thought of seeking God for themselves through His word and Spirit rather than turning immediately to men for their teaching.

Aren’t we taking a big risk if we put our trust primarily in men’s teaching? Wouldn’t it be much more profitable if we took more responsibility and made more of an effort to search the scriptures for ourselves BEFORE we seek the opinions of men?

Have we fallen too far into the mindset of a clergy/laity division that we always need to look for a man of “learning” to teach us? Did the Lord provide the scriptures only for the scholars? Do we need to consult an academic in order to find understanding from the Bible?

Take a look sometime at the controversies that rage throughout the “church” and see how many of them result from arguments arising from human theological reasoning. Do any of them originate from the scriptures alone (when the scriptures are taken in context)? How many of those arguments rage around selected proof texts, with one side quoting one set of verses and the other side quoting another set?

Why is it so threatening to suggest that we can seek God’s revelation PERSONALLY rather than rely on a scholarly or theological intermediary?

And before the opposing voices start building their straw men again, let me state clearly that fellowship and discussion with other SPIRIT LED believers is an essential part of our lives.
As we each search the scriptures for ourselves; as we each seek the Holy Spirit’s revelation; together we can encourage each other. The Holy Spirit’s teaching will be consistent and complimentary. There will be no contradiction. So in fellowship, as we are led more and more by the Spirit, we’ll move more and more in agreement.
Where disagreements rage – somewhere there is a failure to follow the Spirit’s leading.

Often when disagreements arise, peace is made by “agreeing to disagree” – but is that a satisfactory solution?
Why not agree to seek the Lord to reveal the truth? Do we think He’s incapable of doing so?

“THE LIMITS of GOD'S GRACE” by David Servant

The greatest tragedy today is that so many are trusting in a grace that God has never offered to anyone. We are indeed saved by grace—but it is a grace that offers us an opportunity to repent and become committed disciples who love God with all our hearts and keep His commandments. God’s grace forgives and transforms those who truly believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

From “The Limits of God’s Grace” by David Servant
https://www.heavensfamily.org/ss/e_teachings/2005_02


----

I think this article by David Servant has relevance to the questions I asked in the previous post (found immediately below)

LIVING ACCORDING TO GOD'S WILL?

How far away from living “TOTALLY according to God’s will” can we be before it becomes a serious issue regarding our relationship with God?

Is it ok to be living 90% “according to God’s will”, or 70%? How about 50% - is that an acceptable pass mark?
OR are we totally incapable of living “according to God’s will” at all?

Is God’s will so far beyond our capabilities that even the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit aren’t enough to bring us into line and to equip us to live according to His will?

Does it matter whether we live “TOTALLY according to God’s will” or not? Does God overlook our disobedience all together or does He expect something more of us after we’ve been blessed by His gracious gift of salvation?

PREDESTINATION?

CALVIN'S CAMELS

Another recommended article:

“Calvin’s Camels” by David Cloud


Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!



INTRODUCTION
Having read John Calvin’s Institutes and having studied the writings of many Calvinists both ancient and contemporary, I am convinced that Calvin was guilty of straining at gnats and swallowing camels. To accept Calvinism (in any of its forms) is to deny the plain teaching of dozens of Scriptures.

I have examined Calvinism many times during the 32 years since I was saved. The first time was shortly after I was converted, when I was in Bible College, and Calvinism was one of the many topics that were strenuously discussed by the students. I had never heard of Calvinism before that and I didn’t know what to think of it, so I read Arthur Pink’s The Sovereignty of God and a couple of other titles on the subject with a desire to understand it and to know whether it was scriptural or not. Some of the students became Calvinists, but I concluded that though Calvinism makes some good points about the sovereignty of God and though I personally like the way it exalts God above man and though I agree with its teaching that salvation is 100% of God and though I despise and reject the shallow, manipulative, man-centered soul winning scheme that is so common among independent Baptists and though it does seem to be supported by a few Scriptures, the bottom line to me is that it ends up contradicting far too many plain Scriptures.

Full article can be found here:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/calvins_camels.html

PERPLEXED WITHOUT CONTEXT

I've been made increasingly aware of the importance of CONTEXT when it comes to understanding scripture.
I strongly recommend the following article from David Servant. It looks at the dangers of applying out of context statements.


https://www.heavensfamily.org/ss/e_teachings/bible-out-of-context

THIS CREATION & GOD'S ULTIMATE PLAN

What is God working towards? What is His ultimate plan for His creation?
Look to the very last thing that He reveals – look what comes after the judgement.

It is a NEW creation – a new heavens and a new earth, populated by those He has redeemed. A new heavens and a new earth where only righteous dwells.

Maybe we should ask – considering the state of THIS creation and considering the sinful state of man (and considering the claims of Calvinists); why didn’t God START with that perfect creation which will give no place at all for unrighteousness. Why did He allow sin to enter the perfect world He created in the beginning?

Why create a human race with the potential for sin, knowing that the majority would have to be dealt with severely; that the majority would end up enduring eternal punishment of the worst imaginable kind? Does He find pleasure in condemning so many to the Lake of Fire?

I don’t think the answer is difficult when we see what the scriptures reveal about Him and His character.
God wants a WILLING people who will love Him, obey Him, and give Him glory.
He wants to demonstrate His justice, His mercy and His love to the people He created.

To achieve all of that in a meaningful way, He had to allow the possibility of rejection. Love is only meaningful if it is given willingly. Obedience is only meaningful if there’s a possibility of disobedience.

God therefore gave Adam the freedom to choose: to be obedient by NOT eating the forbidden fruit – or to be disobedient by eating it. Only by giving that choice could obedience mean anything – it is no hard thing to “obey” if nothing is out of bounds.

However, God was not taken by surprise by Adam’s sin, but HE had already made provision to deal with it in the most unexpected and glorious way. Some details of this can be found in Romans 5, a truth that is more or less summarised in Romans 11.

“God bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.”

“Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.”

God did not use Adam’s sin as an excuse to EXCLUDE people from His eternal plan – but He used it to make His mercy available to ALL – that NO ONE would have access to His eternal purposes through human effort, but ALL could obtain access through the gracious and merciful gift of salvation that He made available to ALL who turn to Him in faith. To ALL who put their trust in His righteousness and His provision and not their own righteousness and their own worth!