Tag: salvation

Book Plunge: Beyond The Salvation Wars Chapter 3 Part 1

What do we have right and wrong about the Gospel? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

In an earlier post, Bates said these were the parts of the gospel:

The gospel is that Jesus the king

1. preexisted as God the Son,

2. was sent by the Father as promised,

3. took on human flesh in fulfillment of God’s promises to David,

4. died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,

5. was buried,

6. was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,

7. appeared to many witnesses,

8. is enthroned at the right hand of God as the ruling Christ,

9. has sent the Holy Spirit to his people to effect his rule

10. will come again as final judge to rule.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 734-747). Kindle Edition.

He then asks these rhetorical questions with answers:

Is there anything among the gospel’s ten events with which a Catholic, Orthodox, or major Protestant denomination— past or present— would disagree? No. Is there anything here that Bible-oriented Protestant pastoral leaders who write on salvation would fail to affirm as true— folks like John Piper, R. C. Sproul, John MacArthur, and Paul Washer? No. Would the pope, metropolitans of the Orthodox Church, or the archbishop of Canterbury disagree with the truthfulness of any of these events? No. Are there any Lutheran, Reformed, or Anglican doctrinal confessions that would fall afoul of these ten? No.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Location 925). Kindle Edition.

And then goes on to say that while there are some minor streams and rogues that would deny some of these that:

All these streams identify any such rogues as deviant— even heretical— precisely because these ten events are agreed-upon truths within all major Christian bodies.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 928-929). Kindle Edition.

As I said, this book mainly will focus on the Protestant and Catholic divide, but let’s look at this for now. I recently had someone considering Mormonism who was telling me that Christians cannot agree on the gospel. I brought up this work which includes these points. These are not disputed by any of the groups.

I then got asked the question if baptism saved. Now here’s something to consider. I do not think so, but I have Catholic friends who would not for a moment doubt my Christianity because of that. Do I think it’s important to be baptized? Yes. Do I think that if you know the need and are not doing so without a good reason you are being disobedient to an extent? Yes. (For instance, if you have a severe physical condition that could make baptism difficult, that would be understandable. For me, it took a long time because of an intense fear of water like that, but when I saw the importance of it, I still did it.)

So tomorrow, I will devote a post to what Bates has to say about Catholicism. I do not consider myself an expert in that field, so I will be relying on what he has to say about it. Yes my Catholic friends, there will be a section on what he has to say about Protestants getting the gospel wrong also.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: Beyond The Salvation Wars Chapter 2 Part 2

What is the gospel? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Okay. So if we’re going to critique Catholicism and Protestantism, we need to be sure we’re on the same page. So what is the gospel? Bates lists ten parts of the gospel.

The gospel is that Jesus the king

1. preexisted as God the Son,

2. was sent by the Father as promised,

3. took on human flesh in fulfillment of God’s promises to David,

4. died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,

5. was buried,

6. was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,

7. appeared to many witnesses,

8. is enthroned at the right hand of God as the ruling Christ,

9. has sent the Holy Spirit to his people to effect his rule

10. will come again as final judge to rule.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 734-747). Kindle Edition.

Some people will look over this thinking something seems to be missing that we normally speak of.

There is nothing here about justification or forgiveness in any way. Does Bates not care about those? Of course, he does, but he says they are not in the gospel message itself. Those are truths that exist BECAUSE of the gospel message. Because the gospel is true, forgiveness is available. Because the gospel is true, you can be justified.

This would be the same for the news about the Caesars. Good news, a new Caesar is on the throne! That was enough. That was the news that was good. What he would do would be a result of the good news that he was on the throne. For some, it would be good news. For others who opposed him, not so much.

So how do you respond to a king? This gets us into what faith is. As one ignorant atheist I saw say today speaking about Christians:

They call their beliefs ‘faith’ because, well, there’s not one single shred of evidence. Not one. Otherwise it would be called FACT.

Of course, atheists say this without one single shred of evidence that this is what was meant in the biblical world and do not see the irony. Now they could go out and get a Lexicon and look up the word pistis and see what it means. Nah. That requires too much work.

So what does Bates say?

The royal context makes it highly probable that pistis, traditionally translated as “faith,” is better understood as fidelity, loyalty, or allegiance here. (And this is true for all the occurrences of pistis in Rom. 1: 1– 3: 26.) 16 That is, Paul is emphasizing not mental trust in Jesus’s ability to effect forgiveness, but rather external behavior—“ the obedience characterized by fidelity”: embodied, allegiant obedience to a king.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 820-823). Kindle Edition.

Which would entail if you are showing allegiance to King Jesus, that will include seeking forgiveness for what you have done. This will also then entail political action. It requires a changed life. Hence, the debate about faith vs. works becomes moot. If you are allegiant to Jesus as King, then good works WILL follow. Those works aren’t done so you will be allegiant, but because you are allegiant already.

We’ll continue on to chapter three next time.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: Beyond the Salvation Wars Chapter 1

What is the battle going on? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I want to thank Dr. Matthew Bates for sending me a copy of his latest book in electronic format. He and I have had a good relationship since my podcasting days and I consider him a friend. When he has a new book coming out, he contacts me and several others and I always make sure to help him out.

Something I really like about Bates is how easy he is to read and also how needed he is. He writes about doctrines that the popular audience needs to hear and he also writes about them in a way that they can understand. He is an excellent scholar, but he speaks on the popular level. As one in PhD work myself now, it is one of my goals to make sure I never get so academically inclined that I leave the average person behind.

Anyway, his latest book comes out today is Beyond the Salvation Wars. In it, he talks about issues between Catholics and Protestants on the nature of the gospel and the doctrine of salvation. Much of what is said about Catholics could apply to Orthodox Christians, but for many of us in America at least, the former two groups are the most prominent. This is not a criticism. It’s just the way the situation is.

He starts off this first chapter taking us back 500 years in time to the killing of Ulrich Zwingli. This is something I suspect most Catholics today would look back on and not see as a good move. What is interesting for us today is how the two accounts we have of his death go.

The Catholic one talks about the praise given to God for delivering the wicked men into their hands so he could die at their hands. The Protestant one talks about how he looked to God alone and rejected the aid of a priest. It talks about how Zwingli was told to call on the Mother of God and the saints, but Zwingli rejects any help but Christ.

Today, we find all of this strange. I meet regularly with several Catholics on a Zoom call to discuss Aquinas. We get along fine. We know we disagree, and it’s cool. We would never think of excluding one another from salvation and especially never taking up arms and going to war against one another.

So why did they?

For them, this was all about salvation and these people were keeping people from salvation. Catholics and Protestants both thought the other side was doing that. In that case, some of them did think it was acceptable to stop people using violent force if necessary to ensure the eternal salvation of souls. We don’t agree today for the most part, but we can see that for them, it made sense.

As Bates says:

We nod our heads “yes” on Sunday

morning: Jesus is indeed worthy. But we have more pressing concerns: Can you believe what Khloé Kardashian just posted on Instagram? Can Patrick Mahomes orchestrate another comeback win? What’s on Netflix tonight? We declare our passion for the gospel but then wear out our couch cushions. Meanwhile, Catholics and Protestants of the sixteenth century were willing to die for a correct understanding of salvation.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 193-196). Kindle Edition.

And this is Protestants and Catholics both.

Bates then goes on to list reasons for hope in unity eventually and then says:

Protestants cannot responsibly say that Catholics believe an individual is justified by good works instead of God’s grace, for they certainly believe no such thing. Grace is required all along the way by both Catholics and Protestants. Grace, however, is configured differently by each.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 319-320). Kindle Edition.

What is good to see about this is a book of critique like this from a Protestant perspective, would likely list all the things the author thinks the Catholics get wrong. Bates does list those, but he lists the mistakes of those of us who are Protestants as well. He then lists one major problem seeing as a lot of debates hinge on justification and sanctification.

(“ faith/ fidelity”) to the king from the ground up. The individualized distinction between justification and sanctification within classic Protestantism is false. That is, the division between a person’s justification and sanctification has an insufficient scriptural warrant and obscures how Scripture actually describes the salvation process.

Matthew W. Bates. Beyond the Salvation Wars (Kindle Locations 432-434). Kindle Edition.

No. He won’t leave that hanging. He will defend it throughout the book. Bates wants us to be clear on what the gospel is and why it matters. It is only when we know what we are talking about that we can reach unity.

Next time, we’ll look at the second chapter to see what he has to say about the gospel.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Pauline Paradox — Chapter 3

What makes Paul hard to understand? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

No Christian should say Paul is easy to understand. Our own Scripture in 2 Peter says that Paul writes many things that are hard to understand. It would be foolish to think we can do so easily. (Kind of like internet atheists do thinking they can just read the Bible and not bother studying it and know everything about it.)

119 Ministries at least agrees that Paul is hard to understand, but they think different things are hard to understand.

For instance, many Christians believe Paul taught that God’s Law has changed. However, it is impossible to come to that conclusion if you’ve read what the Old Testament says about the Law: “I will not violate my covenant or alter the word that went forth from my lips” (Psalm 89:34). Surely God himself cannot be wrong, so that means the traditional understanding of Paul must be revisited. Many also believe that Paul called the Law of God bondage (Galatians 5:1). But the front of the book says that the Law of God brings liberty (Psalm 119:44-45).

119 Ministries. The Pauline Paradox: What Did Paul Teach About the Law of God? (p. 29). 119 Ministries. Kindle Edition.

But as we say in an earlier post, the Law has changed. Note also that the Psalm never says the Law is unchanged. It says the covenant is, and yet even in Jeremiah and Hebrews we see talk of a new covenant. There is some degree of change going on.

As for Psalm 119, why should this be a problem? There is always freedom in following the path of God. Yet at the same time, when God gives the new path in Christ, one is to follow that path and not the old.

119 Ministries also goes on to talk about the tension that is often presented in Paul:

Are you feeling the tension between the traditional interpretation of Paul and what he actually lived and taught? There’s more: Paul says that he serves the Law of God (Romans 7:25). Why serve a Law that is supposedly ended or made void? Paul called the Law “holy and righteous and good” (Romans 7:12). He said he “delights” in the law of God (Romans 7:22). He taught that the Holy Spirit leads to obedience to God’s Law while the carnal nature of man is opposed to God’s Law (Romans 8:3-8). And this is only in Romans!

119 Ministries. The Pauline Paradox: What Did Paul Teach About the Law of God? (p. 31). 119 Ministries. Kindle Edition.

Yet Romans 7 is a notoriously difficult passage to deal with and 119 Ministries gives no indication that they understand that. My contention is that Romans 7 is not Paul being autobiographical. We see no hint of him struggling in Philippians 3 to follow the law and no one doubts that is autobiographical. Also, Paul says that once he was alive apart from the Law, but when could an orthodox Jew like Paul say he was ever not only apart from the law, but apart from it and alive?

No. A better understanding is that this is speaking as Adam, who was referred to back in Romans 5. In this, once the law came to life for him, he was filled with a desire for coveting, which was seen as the sin in the garden, desiring wisdom for oneself apart from God. Had he kept the law, it would have meant life for him.

As for the verses from Romans 8, here they are in the Complete Jewish Bible.

For what the Torah could not do by itself, because it lacked the power to make the old nature cooperate, God did by sending his own Son as a human being with a nature like our own sinful one [but without sin]. God did this in order to deal with sin, and in so doing he executed the punishment against sin in human nature, 4 so that the just requirement of the Torah might be fulfilled in us who do not run our lives according to what our old nature wants but according to what the Spirit wants. 5 For those who identify with their old nature set their minds on the things of the old nature, but those who identify with the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 Having one’s mind controlled by the old nature is death, but having one’s mind controlled by the Spirit is life and shalom. 7 For the mind controlled by the old nature is hostile to God, because it does not submit itself to God’s Torah — indeed, it cannot. 8 Thus, those who identify with their old nature cannot please God.

Notice that Paul says the Torah could not by itself bring righteousness. The idea in these passages goes along with the Law written on the heart in Romans 2. Because of the Spirit, we can keep the Law of God in the sense that we were meant to. Again, this is something 119 Ministries never addresses. Are we meant to offer sacrifices, for instance?

Unfortunately, 119 Ministries doesn’t really look at the best resources and ironically, in a chapter about misunderstanding Paul, demonstrate that they do indeed misunderstand Paul.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: The Pauline Paradox Chapter 1

How do we start this one? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Give credit where credit is due. This book starts with an excellent opening.

Fact: every pastor, theologian, and Bible teacher on the planet holds on to doctrinal error to some degree. An honest teacher will readily admit the possibility they are in error on some things. It’s foolish to think that we, or anyone else, has everything figured out or has all of the answers.

119 Ministries. The Pauline Paradox: What Did Paul Teach About the Law of God? (p. 7). 119 Ministries. Kindle Edition.

Indeed. We all do. I would like to think everything I teach here is correct, but I am sure it isn’t. While I would like to always be right, I would hate it if you think I am always right and don’t need to check up on what I say. Something I have learned in the PhD program here is the importance of teachability. My professors would agree with my natural intellect, but I think they also admire that I am willing to go to them for advice despite that. There is always something to learn.

Salvation is received by faith in Yeshua (Ephesians 2:8). We are not saved by anything we do. Our works cannot and never will have any causal relationship with our status as saved sons and daughters of God. However, though no causal relationship exists, works and salvation do correlate. The Bible is very clear on this (James 2:14-26). Works do not save us, but a true saving faith will produce works. We strive to be honest, give to the poor, etc., because of our salvation, not for our salvation. The same holds true for every commandment of God. Keeping God’s commandments is evidence that we have faith in God—that we believe his Word and follow it. Again, obedience to God’s commandments is the evidence of our saving faith, not the cause of it. It is correlational, not causal.

119 Ministries. The Pauline Paradox: What Did Paul Teach About the Law of God? (pp. 7-8). 119 Ministries. Kindle Edition.

This is again an excellent point. I would hope that 119 Ministries would not see what they teach as an essential. For instance, if you do not observe the Sabbath on Saturday or if you are a man, get circumcised if you are not, then you are not a Christian. I am of the persuasion that if you are a Christian and want to follow the Law, suppose for instance being a Messianic Jew and having a deep respect for the tradition, then have at it. As soon as you make it necessary for salvation, we have a problem.

Everyone that has the Holy Spirit dwelling within them should always be in the process of learning. Everyone is both a teacher and a student in some capacity. The only thing we can do—and certainly should do—is to test others and ourselves to the Word of God. We should love being corrected. Correction humbles us and helps us to know our Father in greater depth. Those are both wonderful things.

119 Ministries. The Pauline Paradox: What Did Paul Teach About the Law of God? (p. 9). 119 Ministries. Kindle Edition.

Again, another great statement. This is also why I ask people what was the last book they read they disagreed with. If you just read what you agree with and stay in your echo chamber, you will not do much learning.

Not too much further along, they quote Mark 7 in saying:

He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’

You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

Interesting in a book about the Law and what Jesus taught about it, they left out the following verses:

Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.”

After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

But that being said, their point is that the Pharisees were very wrong in their doctrine and that nullifying what Moses wrote is a very bad thing. Of course, I presented some questions about this in yesterday’s post. This assumes that when Jesus rises from the dead, the Mosaic covenant is still in play. I contend that the destruction of the temple in 70 AD shows that that covenant has been replaced with a new one where the sign of the covenant is not the Law, but faith in Christ.

That being said, there is not too much disagreeable in this part of the book. We’ll see if that holds up as we go on through the book.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Does The Gospel Have A Point?

Why should you bother being saved? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday, I wrote about how if learning is to be effective, students need to see the point of what they are learning. Somehow, the material must engage them. When that happens, I contend not only will they learn, but they will decide to strive to learn on their own.

Now let’s transition that to the gospel. Our goal with the gospel is to make disciples, but often we make converts instead. Unfortunately, the way that people do gospel presentations is often terrible.

Imagine a 25 year-old guy in apparently good health walking down the street and a Christian comes up to him to engage him. What is the question that is going to be asked that’s supposed to really make them think? It’s the same every time.

“If you were to die today, do you know if you would go to Heaven?”

Of course, to be fair, at least the evangelists are following this from the example in the book of Acts when the apostles went out and asked this question to….

Hang on.

No one in Scripture ever asked this question.

Not only that, but this was a culture that didn’t have health-care and scientific advancements in the field like we do. They were more familiar with death. They saw death on a regular basis.

And yet, this question never seemed to come up.

Now let’s go back to this 25 year-old guy who I am going to assume is not a Christian. He can be polite and listen, but this question will not engage him. Why? Because he’s thinking “I’m in good health. I work out. I eat right. I have no serious conditions. I’m likely to live a good and long life and will probably die in my 80’s or 90’s.

So you’re pretty much asking him about something that is likely to happen about sixty years from now.

It would be like asking him “Do you have enough money to retire right now?”

Well, quite likely no, but he’s working towards that and he’s confident that when he gets to that age he will be ready.

What else is going on in this man’s life?

Odds are, he’s thinking about his job, drinking with friends, having sex with his girlfriend or wanting to have a girlfriend to have sex with, watching some pornography, watching a football game with the guys on the weekend, etc.

What’s our evangelism strategy implicitly?

“Hi. I’d like you to consider devoting your life on this one brief conversation to something that is going to take away all the things in your life that you enjoy right now, but it will really pay off when you die about sixty years down the road.”

I can’t imagine why young people don’t jump on this message.

“But, Nick! The message is important! People have to do this! People have to know Jesus! People have to get saved!”

Agree entirely. The problem is, the person you’re talking to does not. You’re acting like he already embraces your position. If he agreed that it was as important as you think it is, he would already do it.

If we all did the matters that were important, our nation would be a lot healthier, most of us would listen to our parents a lot more, etc. No. We need something that gets us engaged in the matter.

I go walking every day now and I even walk around the Post Office on the days that I work. Why? Because I have an app where I earn points for walking and when I earn enough points, I cash them in and I get credit for the Nintendo Eshop so I can get some games that I really enjoy. Did I know I need to walk regularly and exercise before then? Yes. I do it now because there is a present incentive. I usually get in 10,000 steps a day at least. Generally, with other bonuses in the app, i get $10 every month to use.

Think about what you will do if you’re trying to impress a member of the opposite sex. You can do things you would not have done before just because there is an incentive. If a man becomes a father, he is more likely to have a better work ethic because there is an incentive. Consequently, a marriage dies down when it seems like there is less incentive to be devoted to the union.

So in talking to the guy again, we need to show him why he should become a Christian not just for the future, but for now. How does it benefit him?

“But Jesus never talked that way!”

He didn’t? Go look here. These are all times in the Gospels when Jesus spoke of a reward for those who are obedient to the Gospel. If you are talking about Heaven anyway, you are already using rewards to appeal to someone.

So one of my first starts would be to point to the reality of the gospel, meaning we have to talk about sin. People need to know that they’re truly lost. They need to know that they really need forgiveness.

Then we need to show them the reality of the resurrection. We need to show them that new life begins now. The gospel should never be seen as the antithesis of joy. We should be people of joy.

That would also include pointing out the meaninglessness of what people are engaging in. They’re only getting something temporary that won’t fill them overall. You can have sex with a different girl every week, but you’re just being an addict and women are your drug. You don’t really love them and they don’t really love you.

By contrast, Christians serve the God of sex and marriage and we should be in the forefront in those areas. Christians should have the best marriages of all and they should have the most passionate sex lives of all in those marriages. We should give the world something that they will be jealous of. After all, Paul wanted the Jews to be jealous of the Gentiles.

Sadly, we Christians are more known by what we denounce than by what we celebrate. We are described as puritan, which is false since the puritans were never the stick-in-the-mud types that we have in mind. They really were a joyous people and they wanted to make sure their marriages were fulfilling.

We should not be anti-intellectual at all. Lewis was the one who asked what it would be like if whenever anyone wanted to learn something in the academic world, the best mind in that area was a Christian. What if scientists were known as the best Christians? What if the best actors were Christians? What if the best athletes were Christians? What if Christians did the most popular songs, the best movies were written and performed by Christians, the best TV shows were produced by and starred Christians, and Christians produced the best video games?

As I type that I even wonder, “Why aren’t they already?”

This also does not deny Christianity is a hard path to follow, but it is also still a joyous one. We need to show that. If all we offer people is something that is likely to happen decades down the road, we are not going to get serious lifetime commitment from them. If forgiveness is not serious to them, salvation won’t be either.

We can do better.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught Part 9

Is the good news barbaric? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

For people who claim to follow logic and evidence, evangelistic atheists like David Madison sure make emotional appeals. Consider how in this section he starts with talking about John 3:16. For him, it sounds nice at the start, but then it gets to judgment. Naturally, before too long he gets to the cross.

I do wonder why Christians aren’t put off by this barbaric feature at the heart of their theology. Does it bother you?

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 66). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

Of course it does, because I know I’m in part responsible. It bothers me that sin is so evil that this is what it takes to redeem humanity. Madison sees it as bothersome, but for the wrong reason.

Another problem with John 3:16 is that it encourages religious arrogance, the assumption that “our religion is the one true religion.” That is, those who don’t believe in Jesus are excluded from the promise of eternal life. This means that the vast majority of humans have missed out on God’s love for the world. Tim Sledge has done the math: A few moments of simple analysis reveal that if we take the words of Jesus seriously, a clear majority of humanity is destined for an eternal address in hell. About 2.1 billion of the world’s 7.5 billion people alive today identify themselves as Christians—about one out of four—which leaves more than 5 billion people headed for hell. When you apply even a remotely similar ratio to previous millennia, according to the Gospels, an all-powerful, all-loving God created a world in which most of the beings made in his image are destined for torture—torture so extreme it would cause instant death in this mortal life.

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (pp. 66-67). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

There’s a lot here.

First, it’s odd to talk about a religion being arrogant for thinking they’re correct, when it’s not arrogant apparently to think that all religious believers are incorrect and the non-believers are. If thinking you are correct means you are arrogant, then everyone is arrogant. The reason you hold to any belief is you think you are correct in holding to it.

Second, I have read Tim Sledge’s book already, though I don’t know why I didn’t write a response to it, and see him as someone who messed up his own life, had affairs, and then lo and behold decided Christianity was false. That doesn’t mean his arguments are wrong, so let’s take a look at his claim. To begin with, most evangelicals don’t hold to Hell being a place of torture. Sledge still has a fundamentalist viewpoint.

Third, we don’t have the numbers on all of history and many of us don’t think that those who never heard are automatically hellbound. You can read here for instance. Sledge would need to actually show the numbers which we don’t have. Besides that, if he wants to take Scripture as the authority on this point, Revelation also tells us about a great crowd no man could number from all over the Earth.

Finally, what does this have to do with if Jesus rose from the dead? If you are unsure about the status of those on the outside, it seems strange to say you yourself will stay on the outside. If Christianity is true, it doesn’t matter if 1 person believes it or 10 billion people believe it.

Madison goes on to look at other New Testament passages on judgment and says:

These verses undermine the assumption that God’s love is the essence of the New Testament. The wrath of God, so prominent in the Old Testament, is right here as well. And anyone who reads the letters of Paul can easily pick up on his certainty that wrath is God’s default emotion.

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (pp. 67-68). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

Odd. I have read Paul’s letters several times and never thought that, but then again, I also do hold to impassibility so I hold that God does not have emotions. Basically, Madison’s argument is again “God is a judge and I don’t like that.”

By the way, these same atheists will complain about the problem of evil and then when God acts as a judge, they complain about that as well.

But no matter if 3:16 and 3:36 are the words of Jesus or simply the words of John, the author, the wrath motif is by no means rare in the teachings of Jesus. So, it’s no exaggeration to assert that his attitude was: Do what I say, or I will hurt you.

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 68). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

Which presumes that man is innocent and God comes and says “Hey! You’re doing great! Now do what I say or suffer!” A better analogy is man is on death row waiting to go to the chair for his last moments and God is the governor who offers Him a pardon in return for loyalty.

He then has something to say about the parable of the sheep and the goats.

And isn’t it too bad that quite a few categories of sinners aren’t included in this list of those who deserve eternal fire? What about slave owners, child abusers, murderers, and rapists? It’s easy for religious doctrine to stumble over itself and get into a hopeless tangle. In John 3:16, we read that those who believe in the son of God win eternal life, but in Matthew 25, “inheriting the kingdom” is based on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and visiting those in prison.

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 70). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

Ah. Because Jesus didn’t give an exhaustive list, there’s a problem. Jesus is speaking to day to day people. Most of his audience would not have engaged in child abuse, murders, rapes, and even owning slaves. They would engage in the activities He did speak about.

As for the difference between John 3:16, an ancient Jewish mindset would not understand believing in YHWH and yet not living in obedience to Him. If you called someone Lord, you lived as Lord. If anything, this could be a way of saying that if you claimed John 3:16 and yet did not live it, then you did not really claim it.

The final objection he brings up in this chapter is about the coming judgment of Matthew 24-25, but since that’s the point of the next chapter, we’ll wait until then.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

 

 

What Does Scripture Mean By You?

Is there a problem with our language? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

What does Scripture mean by you? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

One of the great weaknesses of English can be our limited vocabulary. Consider that we have only oneword for love. A man can say he loves Jesus, his wife, his best friend, football, and pizza. He can be true in saying all of this and still mean something vastly different for each.

Another example is the word “you.” Here in the South, we have tried to correct this with the term, “Y’all.” (English was invented overseas, but we perfected it in the South.) Whatever you think of that term, it does clarify if you mean one person or a group of people.

So consider a passage like Philippians 1:6. In this, we read that He that began a good work in you will carry it to completion jn Christ Jesus. Readers who are more Calvinistic can see this as a statement on soteriology.

“See? When God begins His work in a man, He will bring it to completion. You are eternally secure.” Even those who hold to eternal security without going the way of Calvinism will use this to emphasize that.

However, that’s not what’s going on. This is about the church. The you refers not to an individual, but to the church as a whole. This doesn’t mean Calvinism and/or eternal security are false. It just means that this isn’t the right usage of the passage.

Now let’s go to the other side. In Philippians 2:12-13, we are told to work out your salvation in fear and trembling for it is God that works in you. At this, Arminians think they have a point.

“See? Your salvation isn’t secure. You have to work it all out.”

Unfortunately for them, it’s not the case again. This is the church needing to work out its own salvation. It’s not about individuals. This doesn’t mean Arminianism is true or false. It just means this isn’t the verse.

The problem is our culture is individualistic. We read the text as speaking to us as individuals, and sometimes it does, but we don’t need to assume that for a text. It requires work, but it’s worth it. It’s only looking at the word in the original language and/or careful study of the passage that can help us know what is meant.

Notice also that in all of this, no one viewpoint on soteriology was held to be true or false. I have my own opinions on that debate, but I choose to not enter into it. If anything, I chose this passage because that way I can’t be seen as going after one side and supporting another. I hold that both of them who use these passages use bad argumentation.

Next time you see you in the text, and I mean that individually now, check and see how it is used. Misread the text and you miss what God has for you in it and hold a false view instead.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth.)

A Way Forward

How do we keep going on? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

First off, I want everyone to know we officially have a Patreon. I hope you all will donate. I would rather have several of you donating small amounts honestly than to have a few donating big amounts to help our cause. Please consider a donation.

Now on to a blog.

On Wednesday, like many of you, I was watching the news when I could. I was busy and at times I would get updates on my phone telling me some of what was going on. Overall, I largely kept thinking back to April of 2016.

Mike Licona and I were picking up Craig Evans at the airport for a debate he had with Richard Carrier, the unemployed polyamorous prominent internet blogger who’s banned from SkeptiCon, if you’re wondering who I mean by that name. After we took him to his hotel, we had some time before the debate and so we went to Subway.

While there, Mike asked me my opinion of the political climate of our country. What does it take to change things? My answer was the one I have always given. The church has to be the church. You see, the gospel doesn’t need America to survive, but America needs the gospel to survive.

I remain thoroughly convinced of this. Part of what helped out our founding in this country is Christianity. I have been doing some reading on our history and it’s really fascinating how many preachers had bounties placed on their heads by the bishop.

Think about that. A preacher in a church doing a sermon is the most prominent target in the place and has nowhere else to really go, and yet these preachers got up there and preached. What would they think today knowing our country kills babies in the womb, is treating the idea that men and women are different as a joke, has said that the old definition of marriage is not accurate, has prolific pornography, etc.

Most of our preachers today don’t even touch those topics. Can’t risk someone touching the 501c3 or possibly offending someone and getting a lawsuit. Sure, it’s destroying our society and future generations, but at least we’ll have a nice potluck supper this year.

No. The church has to get up and be the church. It doesn’t matter who is in the White House or who controls Congress or who is on the Supreme Court. If we think the right candidates can heal our country, then we are treating a spiritual problem with a political band-aid. This isn’t to say who we vote for doesn’t matter, but it’s not the cure.

There’s a story that Billy Graham went to visit Konrad Adenauer who was the chancellor of West Germany shortly after World War II. Adenauer asked Billy Graham if he believed in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Graham was surprised and said that of course he did. (Rumors also have it that he added that he affirmed the virgin birth, which I do affirm.) Adenauer looked out the window at the ruins of Germany and said that apart from the resurrection, He knows of no other hope for mankind.

And that is the hope we need. It is to return to the fact that Jesus by His death and resurrection conquers evil. It is to say that the Kingdoms of this world are not the final say. In Psalm 2, the one enthroned in Heaven laughs at their attempts to undo the reign of His Son. This is not to say we establish a theocracy. I have no wish to see Christianity marry the government like that because men are by nature corrupt.

It is to return to the ethic of Jesus as well and that includes especially the area of sexuality in our culture. Many have said the abstinence movement has failed and in many cases, I agree, but too often we have only given the message of “don’t” and then said everything will be perfect once you marry. I realize most of us don’t really think that, but that is the message that has been heard. We do not have a worldview of sex in our culture today and the rampant chaos on the topic doesn’t show that everyone knows what they’re talking about. It shows the opposite. Hardly anyone does.

It also means love of our neighbor and of ourselves. It means practicing forgiveness. It means keeping our word. It means charity. Instead of waiting around for the government to provide food and medical care, strive to help others yourself. Stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves, which includes the unborn especially.

It has been said that all that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. If you’re a Christian, whatever political side you are on, you realize that our country has problems and we don’t want a future of constant rioting. I had the same thoughts back in the summer and I think I shared them then, but I have decided that one can either live in doom or gloom, which does nothing, or one can take their own stand.

I choose the latter. I hope you will take it with me.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

I Never Knew You

How should we respond to this fearful announcement? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Towards the end of Matthew 7, Jesus tells the crowd that many on that day will point to many signs and wonders that were done in the name of Jesus and He will say to them, “I never knew you.” The only ones who go in will be the ones who do the will of the Father.

First off, before we get to the scary part, let’s consider something about this. How is it that Jesus gets up and speaks to a crowd as if He is the final judge that will tell people what their destiny is in the end? How is it that He speaks of people coming to Him and calling Him Lord? How is it that He speaks of people casting out demons in His name and doing miracles in His name and prophesy in His name?

Either Jesus is severely deluded in this passage, severely wicked, or He is rightfully in the place of God. It’s easy to point to explicit passages on the deity of Christ. I think a lot of these more subtle passages can be far more powerful.

So now let’s get to the concern. A lot of Christians get absolutely terrified. What if I am one of those on that day? What if Jesus tells me I never knew you?

So let’s ask a question.

Why does that scare you?

If your fear is never getting to be in Heaven because you won’t see your loved ones and you will be in Hell forever, then you have a wrong perspective. It doesn’t mean you won’t get in, but I have a fear that many of us want to see Heaven for so many reasons and throw in as an afterthought that God is there, or else we just want to avoid Hell.

If you say though because you want to be with Jesus, then I really don’t think you have to worry. In reality, most Christians I meet concerned about not being saved I have no doubt really are saved. The fact that they ask the question shows that they have a deep concern for Christian matters.

That being said, we should always examine ourselves to see if our behavior is being what it ought to be. Are we truly living a Christian life? Do we need to repent of anything? Are we loving one another as Christ loved us?

Note also that Jesus’s requirements are not seen in what we consider grand achievements. It’s seen in doing the will of the Father in Heaven. What is that will? Love your God and love your neighbor as yourself.

When people ask me what God’s will is for their lives, I always tell them the same thing, because it’s the same for everyone. “Conform you to the likeness of Christ.” “Yeah, but what about who I marry or where I work or what I study in school?” “Do what you will provided your goal is to be conformed to the likeness of Christ.”

Instead of worrying so much about if you are saved or not, which accomplishes nothing, live as Christ would have you live, which you should be doing anyway. When you fall down, repent and seek forgiveness and move on. There is a proper fear to have of God, but remember He prefers to show grace rather than judgment.

And if you think you have grace, show it. Even if you don’t think you have it and fear you don’t, show it anyway.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)