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)

Making sense of calamity by Calvin

Book I chapter 17.1

We must use modesty, not as it were compelling God to render an account, but so revering his hidden judgements as to account his will the best of all reasons. When the sky is overcast with dense clouds, and a violent tempest arises, the darkness which is presented to our eye, and the thunder which strikes our ears, and stupefies all our senses with terror, make us imagine that every thing is thrown into confusion, though in the firmament itself all continues quiet and serene. In the same way, when the tumultuous aspect of human affairs unfits us for judging, we should still hold, that God, in the pure light of his justice and wisdom, keeps all these commotions in due subordination, and conducts them to their proper end. And certainly in this matter many display monstrous infatuation, presuming to subject the works of God to their calculation, and discuss his secret counsels, as well as to pass a precipitate judgement on things unknown, and that with greater license than on the doings of mortal men. What can be more preposterous than to show modesty toward our equals, and choose rather to suspend our judgement than incur the blame of rashness, while we petulantly insult the hidden judgements of God, judgements which it becomes us to look up to and revere.

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

What is presuppositional apologetics?

A lot of people ask me the question, "What is presuppositional apologetics."  While the concept is easy to understand once grasped, it is not always easy to explain.  Thankfully, Brian over at APOLOGETICS 315 has posted a link which provides lectures from the experts themselves.  All of it is free and can be downloaded at iTunes U.

Here's the currently available lectures, though more will be posted as they become available (i'd recommend subscribing!):



• Reformation and Apologetics: Calvin's Presuppositional Apologetic (Lillback)
• Faith and the Intellect (Schaeffer)
• The Role of Worldviews in Apologetic Dialogue (Oliphant)
• What is Presuppositional Apologetics? (Oliphant)
• Why I am a Presuppositionalist (Edgar)
• History and Nature of Apologetics: Faith, Reason and Theism (Van Til)
• Present State of Christian Philosophy (Oliphant)
• Van Tilian Apologetics 1 (Bahnsen)
• Van Tilian Apologetics 2 (Bahnsen)
• Van Tilian Apologetics 3 (Bahnsen)
• Van Tilian Apologetics 4 (Bahnsen)
• Something Much Too Plain to Say (Oliphant)
• Apologetics (Edgar)

Jehovah's Witnesses FAQ's #7: What kind of church do you belong to and what do you believe?

Works of faith and works of law

In a RECENT POST, I addressed an objection using 2 Timothy 1:8-10 in establishing that being declared righteous (a.k.a. justification) can only happen apart from works of any kind. The objection could be phrased something like this;

"Justification certainly happens by faith, but not just faith alone. Works are needed in order to achieve this end. However, the texts which speak of "faith apart from works of the law" is only within the context of the Mosaic Law. That is, it isn't including other types of works, such as works of faith. Therefore, we are still justified by faith and works."

Such objections, though advocated by many, are contradicted by explicit statements in Scripture. And as I came across Titus 3:5 today, I was reminded how the biblical gospel truly thwarts the religions of men; that is, religion that brings works into the salvation equation:

“He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
(Titus 3:5–7)

The apostle Paul is writing these words as a justified believer (Romans 5:1). And in doing so, he claims that his salvation was not on the basis of righteous deeds, but according to mercy. Is there any room in this text for importing "Mosaic law" to the exclusion of "works of faith?"

δικαιοσύνη, “righteousness,” refers either to a Pharisaic obedience to the law (Guthrie, 204; Quinn, 216) or to “upright moral conduct in general” (Kelly, 251, citing 1 Tim 6:11; 2 Tim 2:22; 3:16). The former seems out of context (Knight, Faithful Sayings, 93). It will be balanced by v 7, which summarizes vv 4—6 by saying δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι, “having been justified by his grace,” a totally Pauline thought. Hanson’s ([1983] 191) comment that “Paul would never use dikaiosune in this way” misses the point if Paul is quoting a source, and it is unreasonable to insist that a person cannot quote a source where a word is used differently from the way the person normally uses it. In addition, the thrust of the phrase is fully Pauline, emphasizing the futility of human effort in contrast to the true righteousness from God by faith (v 7; cf. Phil 3:9).

-William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles (WBC 46; Accordance/Thomas Nelson electronic ed. Waco: Word Books, 2000), 448.

Here, Mounce is careful to distinguish between "Mosaic works" and "upright moral conduct in general." However, in doing so, he emphasizes how Paul has the latter in view. That is, there is a principle at work here: salvation is not, in any way, based upon works of any kind. If it were, there would be no reason to bring mercy into the equation. The reason being, as soon as one adds works to salvation, merit becomes part of the basis. But Paul would have none of this. Instead, God will be glorified through His work of "washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit...being justified by His grace."

It truly amazes me how men want to strip God from His glory in having full control of the salvation process. This gift of being justified apart from our good works is such an incredible gift that it boggles my mind as to how men want to add their good works to it. I can only hope and pray that all who read this and hold to a false gospel of works salvation will repent and embrace the pure and unadulterated gospel of mercy and grace.

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.

Salvation apart from works...of the law?

Is salvation accomplish by faith in Christ alone, or by additional added works? The following Scripture would support the former:

“For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.”
(Romans 3:28 NASB)

However, many would object in suggesting that texts like these are specifically referring to "works of the law." So, they say, we may not be justified by the Mosaic law, but we can be justified by "works of faith" or something along those lines. But does this argument hold water? Consider the following:

“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord or of me His prisoner, but join with me in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity, but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,”
(2 Timothy 1:8–10 NASB)

Interestingly, "works" are not qualified by "law" in this passage. Instead, we have a principle to consider: salvation is not dependent on what we do but on what God does. Whether it be "works of the law" or some other kind of work, salvation is not based upon works of any kind. Also, there is something else that is important to note, and that is the meaning of ἔργα ("works"). BDAG defines it as,

"That which displays itself in activity of any kind, deed, action...of the deeds of humans, exhibiting a consistent moral character, referred to collectively as...κατὰ τὰ ἔργα in accordance w. the deeds (Ps 27:4; 61:13; Pr 24:12; En 100:7; PsSol 2:16) Mt 23:3; Ro 2:6; 2 Ti 1:9; 4:14; Rv 2:23; 20:12f.

-William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 390.

As can be seen, "exhibiting a consistent moral character" is cited with 2 Timothy 1:9, which would provide an interesting paraphrase of ἔργα:

"who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to [exhibiting a consistent moral character], but according to His own purpose and grace."

Certainly, this sheds some interesting light on this text, as well as offering a powerful refutation against any salvation system which adds your works to your justification before God. So, the next time someone objects to your interpretation of Romans 3:28 by expanding justification by faith to include good works, cite 2 Timothy 1:9 and ask them if the works mentioned are strictly works of the Mosaic law.

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.

Who is the author of your faith?

"Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising public shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider Him who has endured such hostility by sinners against Himself, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart." (Hebrews 12:1-2, NASB)

One thing that I have reformed in my theology is my soteriology (the study of salvation). That is, it has drastically turned from a man-centered soteriology to a God-centered soteriology. This may seem confusing to some, so let me explain with a question: who do you give credit to for your salvation? If you are a Christian, you will probably say "God" and rightly so. But since so many of us, myself included, are unintentionally entangled in man's traditions, we may not have as much of a God-centered soteriology as we might think.

When we think about our salvation, it is easy and convenient to think of it in terms of God making the offer and we having the option of responding. That is, God has provided the necessary means to achieve forgiveness of sins through Christ's atoning work as well as justification through imputation of righteousness (see 2 Cor. 5:19, Romans 4:5, etc.), and it us up to us to generate the type of faith necessary to receive these things. But do you ever take a step back and wonder where your faith comes from? Furthermore, have you ever wondered how and why Christians, like the apostle Paul, were able to endure to the end? Is it because Paul was able to muster up enough faith to make it from start to finish? Quite the contrary.

If you read Hebrews 12:1-2, you will notice a very Christ-centered soteriology. Yes, we do the "running" as well as the "enduring," but notice who the source is. Think of it like a car. Do cars do work? Of course they do. But you provide the fuel, to which it would be useless without it. And under no circumstances would a car be able to run without the fuel. You are the source. And as long as you provide the fuel (and repairs), it will run as long as you need it to.

Though no analogy is perfect in illustrating this, I feel that it is sufficient in comparing our dependence on Christ for salvation as well as our endurance. If Christ is the source (or the author) for our faith, then what does this say about us? For me, it certainly puts a damper on the possibility that I was the one who generated what was needed to respond to God's offer of salvation. In addition, it puts a damper on the possibility that I am the one who provides the necessary faith to endure till the end.

This leads me to two conclusions.

1. Christ begins our faith as well as finishes it. The question is, does Christ provide faith that isn't able to endure? If you are the "author and perfecter" of a book, wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude that you have accomplished what you were set out to do? Similarly, if Christ is able to provide my faith, isn't he also able to perfect it all the way to the end?

2. Some people have faith in Christ and many do not. Does Christ provide faith for everyone? If so, then why isn't Christ able to continue to perfect what he set out to accomplish? In light of Hebrews 12:2, Christ can't be the "author" of faith in all cases but only the "perfecter" in some. Its either all or nothing. That is, all of those faiths that Christ "authors" he will also "perfect." This leads to the inevitable conclusion that God has chosen to redeem some rather than all.

Calvinism and Hell

Recently, Justin Brierely of Unbelievable Radio hosted an interaction between Dr. James White and Roger and Faith Forester on the subjects of Calvinism and Hell. James White defended the Calvinist and Eternal Torment positions and the Foresters defended Arminianism and Conditionalism/Annihilationism positions. I think anyone interested in these subjects will find the interactions to be useful.

Listen to the discussion of Calvinism and Predestination HERE

Listen to the discussion of Hell HERE

Also, I highly recommend Justin Brierley's show, as it regularly hosts debates and interactions on some very interesting topics. You can podcast his show HERE

Book Review: "The God Who Justifies" by James White

This is easily the best book on the subject available. In "The God Who Justifies," James White spends hundreds of pages exegeting the key texts which actually deal with the doctrine of Justification. This is in contrast to those who seek to go to texts which don't actually deal with "justification" and try to prove that justification is not by faith alone. I think that in order for those objections to hold any water, then they have to consistently do what James White has done, and exegete the primary passages where justification is discussed.

The first portion of the book provides some historical background behind the word "to justify." That is, the Hebrew Scriptures are examined in order for us to see how the Christian writers applied the term. The next portion of the book goes into great depth in exegeting the key passages in which "justification" is used and applied. I really enjoyed this aspect of the book because rather than seeking to establish a doctrine, White actually derived the doctrine by exegeting the passages from start to finish. And I think this truly separates this book from other attemps that have sought to merely "proof-text" rather than discuss the context of those passages.

If you are looking for an in-depth look at the doctrine of justification, then you must have this book. I can think of no other than deals with this issue at such a highly technical level.

Genesis 22:12 and God's Exhaustive Foreknowledge part 2

Genesis 22:12 and God's Exhaustive Foreknowledge part 1

Does Genesis 18:21 deny God's exhaustive foreknowledge?