Meaningless Exhortation?

“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.”(John 6:44)

While Jesus' words indicate an expressed inability on the part of the unbeliever to come to Him without being "drawn," some may wonder why unbelievers should be called to repentance?  In other words, if they can't come (unless they are drawn), why tell them to come?

Something to keep in mind is what is meant by "ability" as it relates to Jesus' words.  In what way can't unbelievers come to Christ without being drawn?  In thinking about this question, it might be easy to suggest that they can't come to Christ even if they wanted to.  But such thinking doesn't correlate to how Scripture defines this "inability."

“Because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:7–8)

While this text doesn't express the full scope of the unbeliever's depravity, it does show us what is meant by "inability."  The "not even able to do so" has everything to do with desire.  That is, they can't please God because they don't want to please God.  Why don't they want to please God?  Because its in their nature as fallen sons of Adam.  And as long as God refrains from extending grace to unbelievers (i.e. drawing them), they will never come to Him.  After all, Christ says, "Without Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5)

To illustrate this further, i'd like to provide some parallel examples.  With regards to John 15:5, why would anyone rebuke others for doing evil if they aren't in Christ?  Wouldn't they need to be in Christ to live righteously?

“So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.”(Romans 9:16) 

If it depends on God and not on man, then why would Paul rebuke man for their sinning against God?  Even with the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, why would he be rebuked for something that God is doing?

“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,” (Deuteronomy 30:19)

Yet, the Scriptures declare that men are only capable of this when God has done a work in their hearts:

“Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. “I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.” (Ezekiel 36:26–27) 

So why rebuke man for things they are "unable" to overcome?  Because rebuke is the means by which salvation is accomplished.  Men will not come because they don't want to come.  But they will want to come when God gives them a new heart and draws them through the preaching of the gospel.  For that reason, we should be faithful to share the gospel with everyone since we don't know who's heart is being made new by the Spirit.

Daniel 4:34-35 and the Sovereignty of God

“But at the end of that period, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who lives forever; For His dominion is an everlasting dominion, And His kingdom endures from generation to generation. 

“All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, But He does according to His will in the host of heaven And among the inhabitants of earth; And no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, ‘What have You done?’” (Daniel 4:34–35)

I want to get in the habit of more regularly blogging my thoughts and arguments.  The reason I haven't always done so is because of, a) lack of time or b) nothing super-profound to say.  Of course, my primary focus of this blog is to bring God glory through the proclamation of the truth, assist those who are searching, and to engage in intelligent, respectful dialogue.  In addition, i'd like to hold myself accountable for what I believe.  And sometimes the best way to do this is to be vulnerable to public correction; something that having a blog with open comments can certainly do.  Sometimes your critics can be your best friend in helping one to sharpen, refine, or completely abandon held beliefs.  

With that said, if anyone would like to see something addressed, please don't hesitate to EMAIL ME or leave a question in the comments.  

Daniel 4:34-35 is a text which has always provoked some thought with regards to the sovereignty of God.  Is God in control or is He not?  That is, do some things happen in this world that God possibly allowed but had no involvement with?  Sometimes, we think that when bad things happen, God had nothing to do with it.  Again, He might have permitted it to take place, but certainly didn't decree it.  Perhaps I can put it very plainly: God only decrees good things; but man and the natural world cause bad things.  

"All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing" is the utterance of praise from the pagan king, Nebuchadnezzar.  This doesn't mean that God has no concern for the earth and its inhabitants, for the next part of this verse states, "but He does according to His will in the host of heaven."  That is, all the inhabitants are accounted as nothing in that they cannot thwart God's will.  

This raises some interesting questions for consideration.  Is God's sovereign decree, as stated in Daniel 4:34-35, related only to some things that happen in this world or all things?  If its only related some things, then would this not suggest that God is not in full control of all that happens in this world?  If God merely allows some things to happen, what would be His purpose in doing so?  Why "allow" some things to happen while at the same time "decreeing" other things to happen?

Depending on where you stand, your answers to these questions could profoundly affect how you view the world that you live in as well as the one you worship and declare as Sovereign. 

Do I really want free will?

While the term "free will" is not found in the Bible (other than "free will offerings," which is not relevant to this), different theological persuasions have contrasting ideas as to what this means. Whatever the case, I don't think I want this "free will" that so many speak of. Instead, I desire to have a will that is shaped by my Creator. Consider the following passages and how they relate to the idea of "free will" as you see it. Do these biblical authors really believe that their will is free?

“and I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me always, for their own good and for the good of their children after them. “I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me.” (Jeremiah 32:39–40)

“May YHWH our God be with us, as He was with our fathers; may He not leave us or forsake us, that He may incline our hearts to Himself, to walk in all His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His ordinances, which He commanded our fathers.” (1 Kings 8:57–58)

“Incline my heart to Your testimonies And not to dishonest gain.” (Psalms 119:36)

“Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of Your salvation And sustain me with a willing spirit.” (Psalms 51:10–12)

“Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.“I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.” (John 15:4–5)

“for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.” (Philippians 2:13)

“There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.” (1 Corinthians 12:6)

“Teach me Your way, O YHWH; I will walk in Your truth; Unite my heart to fear Your name.”(Psalms 86:11)

I do wonder how it is possible to live the Christian life while believing in free will, much less coming to embrace Christ in the first place?

Calvin on God's "repentance"

As to repentance, we must hold that it can no more exist in God than ignorance, or error, or impotence. If no man knowingly or willingly reduces himself to the necessity of repentance, we cannot attribute repentance to God without saying either that he knows not what is to happen, or that he cannot evade it, or that he rushes precipitately and inconsiderately into a resolution, and then forthwith regrets it. But so far is this from the meaning of the Holy Spirit, that in the very mention of repentance he declares that God is not influenced by any feeling of regret, that he is not a man that he should repent. And it is to be observed, that, in the same chapter, both things are so conjoined, that a comparison of the passages admirably removes the appearance of contradiction. When it is said that God repented of having made Saul king, the term change is used figuratively. Shortly after, it is added, “The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent; for he is not a man, that he should repent,” (1Sam. 15:29). In these words, his immutability is plainly asserted without figure. Wherefore it is certain that, in administering human affairs, the ordination of God is perpetual and superior to every thing like repentance. That there might be no doubt of his constancy, even his enemies are forced to bear testimony to it. For, Balaam, even against his will, behaved to break forth into this exclamation, “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: has he said, and shall he not do it? or has he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” (Num. 23:19).

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (trans. Henry Beveridge; Accordance electronic ed. Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1845), n.p.

Free will?

Does God ever invade the wills of men? If He can and does, then what does this say about so-called "Free will?" Maybe we aren't as free as we might think? Consider:

“YHWH said, ‘Who will entice Ahab to go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said this while another said that. “Then a spirit came forward and stood before YHWH and said, ‘I will entice him.’ “YHWH said to him, ‘How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.’ “Now therefore, behold, YHWH has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and YHWH has proclaimed disaster against you.”
(1 Kings 22:20–23)

“So Hushai said to Absalom, “This time the advice that Ahithophel has given is not good.” Moreover, Hushai said, “You know your father and his men, that they are mighty men and they are fierce, like a bear robbed of her cubs in the field. And your father is an expert in warfare, and will not spend the night with the people. “Behold, he has now hidden himself in one of the caves or in another place; and it will be when he falls on them at the first attack, that whoever hears it will say, ‘There has been a slaughter among the people who follow Absalom.’ “And even the one who is valiant, whose heart is like the heart of a lion, will completely lose heart; for all Israel knows that your father is a mighty man and those who are with him are valiant men. “But I counsel that all Israel be surely gathered to you, from Dan even to Beersheba, as the sand that is by the sea in abundance, and that you personally go into battle. “So we shall come to him in one of the places where he can be found, and we will fall on him as the dew falls on the ground; and of him and of all the men who are with him, not even one will be left. “If he withdraws into a city, then all Israel shall bring ropes to that city, and we will drag it into the valley until not even a small stone is found there.” Then Absalom and all the men of Israel said, “The counsel of Hushai the Archite is better than the counsel of Ahithophel.” For YHWH had ordained to thwart the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that YHWH might bring calamity on Absalom.”
(2 Samuel 17:7–14)

“The young men who grew up with him spoke to him, saying, “Thus you shall say to this people who spoke to you, saying, ‘Your father made our yoke heavy, now you make it lighter for us!’ But you shall speak to them, ‘My little finger is thicker than my father’s loins! ‘Whereas my father loaded you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke; my father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions.’”
Then Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day as the king had directed, saying, “Return to me on the third day.” The king answered the people harshly, for he forsook the advice of the elders which they had given him, and he spoke to them according to the advice of the young men, saying, “My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke; my father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions.” So the king did not listen to the people; for it was a turn of events from YHWH, that He might establish His word, which YHWH spoke through Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat.”
(1 Kings 12:10–15)

John Calvin on the workings of Satan

1.14.17. With regard to the strife and war which Satan is said to wage with God, it must be understood with this qualification, that Satan cannot possibly do anything against the will and consent of God. For we read in the history of Job, that Satan appears in the presence of God to receive his commands, and dares not proceed to execute any enterprise until he is authorised. In the same way, when Ahab was to be deceived, he undertook to be a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets; and on being commissioned by the Lord, proceeds to do so. For this reason, also, the spirit which tormented Saul is said to be an evil spirit from the Lord, because he was, as it were, the scourge by which the misdeeds of the wicked king were punished. In another place it is said that the plagues of Egypt were inflicted by God through the instrumentality of wicked angels. In conformity with these particular examples, Paul declares generally that unbelievers are blinded by God, though he had previously described it as the doing of Satan. It is evident, therefore, that Satan is under the power of God, and is so ruled by his authority, that he must yield obedience to it. Moreover, though we say that Satan resists God, and does works at variance with His works, we at the same time maintain that this contrariety and opposition depend on the permission of God. I now speak not of Satan’s will and endeavour, but only of the result. For the disposition of the devil being wicked, he has no inclination whatever to obey the divine will, but, on the contrary, is wholly bent on contumacy and rebellion. This much, therefore, he has of himself, and his own iniquity, that he eagerly, and of set purpose, opposes God, aiming at those things which he deems most contrary to the will of God. But as God holds him bound and fettered by the curb of his power, he executes those things only for which permission has been given him, and thus, however unwilling, obeys his Creator, being forced, whenever he is required, to do Him service.

-John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (trans. Henry Beveridge; Accordance electronic ed. Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1845), n.p.

Warning passages

In Scripture, there are all sorts of warning passages which seem to indicate that a true believer in Christ can forfeit eternal life. Though there are many that could be cited, this one is pretty strong:

““Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.“You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.“Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.”
(John 15:2–4 NASB)

Can one who is "in Christ," a person that produced good fruit, be "taken away" due to the fact that his works (or lack thereof) showed that he is no longer a follower of Christ? This verse would seem to indicate such.

But could there be another option? Is it possible that these warning passages serve a means to an end? In other words, the "ends" being the promise of eternal life (John 5:24) and the "means" being the warnings that unless you are bearing proper fruit (John 15:2-4), you will be "taken away" from Christ. Some might argue that this is not a possibility, given the explicit warnings in passages like these. If this argument is made, then one wonders what to make of the following:

““Yet now I urge you to keep up your courage, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship. “For this very night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve stood before me, saying, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul; you must stand before Caesar; and behold, God has granted you all those who are sailing with you.’ “Therefore, keep up your courage, men, for I believe God that it will turn out exactly as I have been told.”
(Acts 27:22–25 NASB)

Here, Paul provides a promise to those aboard the ship: they will not die. Consider the parallel:

““Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.”
(John 5:24 NASB)

"Yet now I urge you to keep up your courage, for there will be no loss of life among you...for I believe God that it will turn out exactly as I have been told." (Acts 27:22, 25 NASB)

Here, we have one spiritual promise and one material promise. The parallel is that both guarantee something.

However, in the Acts 27 account, there is something else we need to be mindful of:

“Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, “Unless these men remain in the ship, you yourselves cannot be saved.””
(Acts 27:31 NASB)

Why would Paul issue such a warning after he guaranteed that they would be safe? What seems to be the only option here is that this warning is simply a means to an end. That is, the guarantee is qualified with a warning. Thus, in this case, the warning is not even a possibility, but simply an affirmation of what would happen if these men leave the ship.

Could the same apply to the spiritual? Could it be that the warnings are not as much a reality as they are the means by which God sovereignly preserves the elect?

An exposition of 1 John 5:1 by James White

1 John 5:1 is one of those texts which has convinced me that regeneration or the new birth actually precedes our faith. That is, we don't put our faith in Christ and then become born again. Instead, we believe because we have been born again. And 1 John 5:1 provides explicit evidence that this is the case. Of course, anyone can run off to other texts in order to provide evidence to the contrary. But this text still remains. I would challenge anyone to provide an alternate exegesis of what is given below:

A short word study of "World"

Its easy to get caught up in words, especially in our day when words change meaning over time. The tendency is to take our 21st century linguistics and import them into the Scriptures. Take for example, a common phrase:

"All" means all and that's all "all" means!

Not a few educated men have used such a careless standard of exegesis. And the same goes with the word "World," or Kosmos as used in the Greek:

"World" always means everybody!

Its unfortunate that our traditions sometimes get in the way, by which we sacrifice context and the author's intent to establish a reading of a verse or passage. Fortunately, those who engage in such eisegesis don't use this standard when approaching, let's say, the resurrection or the nature of God (I'm speaking primarily of mainstream Christianity).

With that said, let's pick up our word study. The first verse in question is 1 John 2:1-2,

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

This verse is often use to substantiate universal atonement, the idea that Christ's atonement was made for every single individual who has ever lived. Its also used to substantiate universalism, the idea that every single individual who has ever lived will be saved.

The emphasis is on the phrase "whole world." Sure, most people are aware of the fact that "world" or Kosmos has a wide range of meanings in John's writings (at least a dozen). But the qualifier "whole" seems to imply, if not fully establish, that John is trying to communicate the idea that Jesus' propitiatory atonement was made on behalf of every single individual that has ever lived. What else could "whole world" mean?

Next, let's skip forward a few chapters, where we will see a familiar phrase,

"We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one." (1 John 5:19)

"Whole world" means "every single individual who has ever lived," right? Does this mean that you, a Christian who has been justified by God and sealed with the Spirit, is under the power of the devil? Not if the previous verse is true!

"We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who is born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him." (v. 18)

You can't be "under the power of the evil one," and at the same time, the "evil one does not touch him." Does "whole world" always mean "every single individual who has ever lived?" If you want to establish universal atonement from 1 John 2:1-2, then do so with words and context.

One reason why i'm reformed

"All that the Father has given me will come to me. And the one who comes to me I will certainly not cast out." (John 6:37)

The other day I was having a conversation with a friend about witnessing to cult members, such as Jehovah's Witnesses. I was asking what his experiences have been like with them and to see what advice he would give me if I ever encountered one. To sum up his advice, "Don't bother. They don't want the truth. Your time would be much more well spent doing something else." During our conversation, I didn't disagree with him because I thought to myself, "He's right! These people are so hardened and blind that there is no point in even bothering."

Later on as I went through my day, I began thinking through this. So often i've been asked the question, "If Calvinism is true, why bother witnessing? Isn't God going to save them anyways?" In fact, a friend of mine just the other day asked me this question. Its a very legitimate question. But its an inconsistent one. Let me explain.

Why would someone give me the advice to not bother witnessing to Jehovah's Witnesses? The obvious answer from their non-Calvinistic perspective would be because they have hardened their own hearts to the point that they are so brainwashed that there is nothing you could possibly say that could persuade them. But what about God? Couldn't He reveal Himself to them? Well, from an arminian perspective, God has already done all He could do. He's died for their sins and He's persuaded them with His Holy Spirit. Now its up to them to respond!

So when people ask me, "If Calvinism is true, why bother witnessing?" I simply ask in return, "If Calvinism isn't true, why bother witnessing?" If God has done all He could do, and if cultists have hardened themselves to the point of us giving up, then what more could we possibly do? In fact, why should we even pray for them? After all, its all up to them now!

But as I got to thinking through this, I was reminded of John 6:37, where the Father decrees the giving of of His chosen people to the Son; all that the Father gives to the Son will come to the Son. Is it possible that it could happen any other way? Could there be disunity in the Godhead? Could the Father command something of the Son that couldn't be accomplished because of the "almighty" will of man? Of course not! So how could I even think of believing that there are people out there that are too "hard" for God to save? My God can save anyone He wills to save! And yes, this includes even the most hardened Jehovah's Witness.

"But Mike! You are being inconsistent! If these people aren't God's 'chosen ones,' then you are wasting your time!" This could only be true if all of God's elect had glowing halos over their head so that I could distinguish them from the non-elect. But because I don't know who the elect are, I can truthfully and boldly proclaim the Gospel to all men and trusting God to do the rest. After all, Salvation is completely and totally of God and is not in any way dependent upon the will of man. This is called Monergism: God alone saves apart from the cooperation of man's "will."

One good point my friend did bring up that I agreed with is casting pearls before swine. If someone does not want to hear what I have to say, i'm not going to sneak into his bedroom at night, tie him up and scream through a megaphone, "accept Christ!" I think there needs to be a balance here. But if you know a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness who seems set in his beliefs, it is in no way a waste of time to share with him, even if it takes years. It would be absolutely wrong to conclude that this person is just like any cultist who refuses to even listen to what you have to say. And furthermore, this person may possibly have never heard the Gospel! Just because they proclaim Christ and his love, this doesn't mean that they know the true Gospel. We can never assume anything. Proclaim the truth, because God is always glorified when His truth is proclaimed. This is just one of many reasons why i'm a Calvinist.

A review of "The Potter's Freedom" by James White

If I had to choose any modern text to defend the doctrines of grace, it would be "The Potter's Freedom" by James White. Well over 6 years ago, Dr. Norman Geisler wrote a book called "Chosen but Free." At first glance, one might think that "chosen but free" might be a defense of Calvinism, hence the word "chosen." But what James White effectively demonstrates is that Dr. Geisler will have nothing to do with what he called, "extreme Calvinism." But because I haven't read Dr. Geislers book, thus rendering it unfair for me to comment on it, I will choose not to comment on James' refutations. Fortunately, "The Potter's Freedom" is more than a refutation of "Chosen but Free," but a defense of the Reformation.

Many protestants (particularly baptists) are unfamiliar with their roots. If you fit into this category, it would be of much interest for you to find out where you came from. Most people who have had any kind of History course knows enough about the Reformation to know that the Catholic Church split as a result of Martin Luther. But little do they know what started all the controversy. Was it over the sacraments? Indulgences? The Mass? Purgatory? No. It was a debate between Luther and Erasemus over the depravity of man. In fact, Luther wrote a book called "The bondage of the will" which is still in print today. In it, Luther discusses the fact that man is enslaved to sin and incapable of generating saving faith within himself. Therefore, something needs to happen that is out of man's control!

This is where God comes into the picture. God saves us because we are incapable of saving ourselves! It is more than mere cooperation between God and man; God alone saves. This is one of the major themes in Dr. White's book. Dr. Geisler presents a man-centered gospel while James White proclaims a God-centered one. Dr. Geisler believes that God didn't actually come to save, but to make salvation only a possibility. Is this what the Bible teaches? Or is God a powerful savior who saves perfectly without fail?

The introduction of the book is primarily devoted to the question, "Why write such a book?" Obviously, Dr. Geisler is highly respected among Christian apologists and scholars, so James White seeks to explain why he wrote this book. One of the foremost reasons is because James White loves the truth. Because Dr. Geisler is on such a high ranking among scholars, he should be held only to the highest standards of scholarship. Unfortunately, Dr. Geisler has failed to represent Calvinism correctly in most of his arguments. Therefore, James White felt the need to respond to "chosen but free." And i'm thankful he did, because the result was an outstanding work of biblical scholarship! But even if you haven't read Dr. Geisler's book, I would still recommend "The Potter's Freedom," as it is a defense of the Reformation and the Doctrines of Grace. In fact, I know of no single book which addresses the subject of Calvinism in such a scholarly, in-depth way than "The Potter's Freedom" does.

***This is the same review that appears on my Amazon.com book review Site

So far the worste (mis)representation of Calvinism i've ever seen

Anyone who knows me knows that I don't get mad or upset when people disagree with me. You can even misrepresent what I believe and i'm not going to be mad. But when you hold a Doctorate of theology and publish your works and speak behind a pulpit of thousands and thousands of people, you had better do your homework. Unfortunately, such wasn't the case with the Southern Baptist preacher Nelson Price in this article.

How someone could hold a Doctorate in theology and publish such a blatenly dishonest critique of Calvinism is beyond me. And not only that, but i've heard Dr. Price preach this from the pulpet in front of thousands at Johnny Hunt's church in Woodstock, GA. But just in case you aren't sure where Price misrepresented Calvinism, i'll quote the specific portion:

A graphic understood by many Baptists regarding predestination is illustrated by this. A mass of people are gathered at a bus stop marked "Planet Earth." Along comes the Celestial Bus marked "Destination Heaven." It pulls up and stops. The driver, who is God, opens the door, and says, "All destined for heaven get on board." A number do. A missionary couple who with zeal have served Christ all their lives start on and God says, "Step aside. You haven't been chosen to ride this bus." A couple of infants start on and God tells them to step aside. Persons who from youth have loved and ministered in Christ..s name are told to step aside. As the bus is about to depart and the door is closing God says to those not on board, "Catch the next bus." "No," they plead, here comes the next bus and it is driven by Satan and marked "Destination Hell."

"Sorry," says God. "I didn't choose to save you. Your love and commitment to Jesus doesn't matter."

This is simply unbelievable. No Calvinist would even begin to suggest that God would refuse to allow someone into heaven who repented and believed. Why? Because those who God has predestine unto salvation will believe and repent without fail, each and every time. Or in other words, only those who are chosen will repent and believe because without the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, no one will ever believe.

*urgent notice* Benny Hinn needs our help. Yes, friends. Benny Hinn is not like the rest of us mortals who buy plane tickets to get us where we need to go. In fact, he has to do it in first class with his own jet, Dove One! So empty your savings accounts and your children's college funds and donate it to Benny Hinn! The destroying....I mean....salvation of thousands...no....million....no no....BILLIONS of souls depends on it!!!

2 Peter 3:9, Arminianism, and Kent Hovind

Although 2 Peter 3:9, Arminianism, and Kent Hovind are all related (Hovind BADLY misrepresented reformed theology many a times), it was a total coincidence that all three ended up in the same blog. First, read 2 Peter 3:9 and find out what you believe about this verse:

"The Lord is not slow about His promises, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to parish but for all to come to repentance."

Does this verse teach that God wants and tries to save every single individual who has ever lived? Ok, figured out what you think it means? Great. Now watch this video:



So what do you think? I think this puts to rest the typical arminian responses such as, "Calvinist like to insert their Calvinism into the text and it doesn't work because they have to redefine words: 'All' doesn't mean 'all' anymore, 'world' doesn't mean 'world' anymore, etc. etc." 2 Peter 3:9 is very clear. It isn't saying that God wants every single individual who ever lived to be saved. The "YOU" in verse 9 is referring to God's elect. But, of course, Arminians will continue to cite 2 Peter 3:9 against Calvinism until the cow's come home. So what are ya gonna do? Well, I will continue to make it my goal to be consistent in my exegesis and not read my traditions into the Scripture. And hopefully others will see that and will seek to be consistent as well.

And what of Kent Hovind? Very few know this about me, but it was Kent Hovind who lighted that "spark" in me that continues to this day. It was that cold day when me and some of my friends drove waaayy down to south GA to watch this guy speak who I had never heard of before. And since that day, I have been persistent in searching out what I believe and why I believe it. It might even be safe to say that if i had never seen Kent Hovind speak, then I would have never felt the need to search out my faith.

While I agreed on a foundational level with Kent Hovind on the issue of Creation and the age of the earth, I probably had more disagreements than agreements. For example, I always disagreed with his stance on the King James being the only Bible that Christians should use. I also disagreed with pretty much all of his "conspiracy theories," such as where he tried to show that Doctors are trying to get more people sick so that they can make more money. So, needless to say, many of his ideas were just plain silly.

But i'm not writing this to simply express my theological disagreements with Kent Hovind. I'm writing this to say that today was a very sad day. This man, who I had looked up to for so long, was sentenced to over 200 years in prison for tax fraud. Unfortunately, I always sensed this was coming, as he was always dealing with some very questionable law suits. But I never knew it was with such a serious matter as this. To sum it up, Kent Hovind felt that he didn't need to pay taxes because:

1) he was not a citizen (totally untrue)
2) he held zero income (totally untrue)
3) he worked for God

There were more reasons, but these stuck out. It turns out that Kent Hovind was just a guy that didn't want to pay his taxes. Hey, I don't like it either, but you gotta pay if you live here!

You can visit Kent Hovind's website here. And you can read the article here.

*please note* I do not say all this just to spread the word for people to hate this man. I've met Kent Hovind several times and he was always gracious and kind to me. He ALWAYS made himself available to anyone who needed guidance theologically, scientifically, or spiritual. If you know you Kent Hovind or didn't know him, let's not just label him as another "fallen evangelist" and cast him into the seventh level of hell. He is a sinner just like you and me. And who knows, he might be innocent? Remember Jim Bakker? It turned out he wasn't a crook after all, which many still accuse him of today. So, let's remember Kent Hovind for what he was; a man who's true passion was for people to come to know the Lord.