Translate

Monday, August 31, 2009

Islam, Submission With No Peace Pt. 1

Biblical truth is challenged like never before. Although this is highly disputed, many speculate that the fastest growing religion in the world today is Islam. With over an estimated 1 billion adherents statistics are that by year 2025 over 30 % of the world's population will be Islamic or under Islamic rule and that Islam will eclipse Christianity as the world's largest religion at some point between now, then or shortly thereafter.[Barrett & Johnson's estimated in an article in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research that the number of Muslims would grow from 1.22 billion in the year 2000 to 1.89 billion by 2025...Author Samuel Huntington predicts that "Muslims in the world will continue to increase dramatically, amounting to 20 percent of the world's population about the turn of the [21st] century, surpassing the number of Christians some years later..."]

Does Islam have an answer that is unknown to Christianity? Is Islam, especially that practiced within traditional Islamic countries somehow superior or more satisfying than the teachings of Christianity?

In the next couple of posts, we will look at what Islam teaches and contrast that to the bible and the biblical record. We are quickly approaching the 9th month which is the most holy time of year for the Muslim called Ramadan. So this information, especially at this time, promises to be an intriguing and eyeopening mini-series. For those observing or relating with someone who observes Muslim and Islamic tradition, I hope that you will better understand some of the traditions and possible worldview that many believers of Islam share. Let's begin:

What Is Islam and Where Did It Come From?

It was in the 9th month of approximately 610 AD, when a man known as the prophet Muhammad (c. 570-632), (assured by his wife Khadijeh that he was a prophet and an apostle (Rasoul)) received a special revelation and words from who he believed was the angel Gabriel. These words came to him while he was in a trance or a trance like state or condition. The words he received were recited and written, thus Quran means "recitation" The words were written down by those who heard him or were present when these episodes occurred. In fact here was the message from the angel:

Read more!

Friday, August 28, 2009

Earnestly Contend For The Faith

This post was updated 10/5/2009
1 Pet. 3:15~"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:"

New Bethel Ministries isn't the average duck. That ministry happens to have a Minister that places a strong emphasis on the ministry of apologetics. Being able to give a reasonable answer to them that ask is among one of the more important duties and obligations of the modern church, however it is also one of the most overlooked functions within the local church.

What many Pastors are not aware of, is that every member, including children, should be prepared to defend and answer their faith. While many of us teach bible stories in cute cartoons with little emphasis on historical settings or actual evidences for faith, the world seeks to dupe our children and members of the real substance of scripture, through theories such as evolution, documentary hypothesis, form criticism, and philosophical beliefs such as relativism, cognitive psychology other post modern ideas. All of these things are merely attempts to seduce the mind and reduce biblical truths to myths with no real substance or extension in time and space. Unfortunately, many of our members are not able to know the difference or adequately demonstrate the historicity of the biblical record. Many attending church regularly can't point to the vast amount of evidences that exist both for God, the historical Jesus or Christianity in general.

So far as the future of the church is concerned, facts are that too many of our youth are leaving the church and never coming back because they have never learned the essential truths of the historic Christian faith, and or never experienced the life changing power of God for themselves. According to America's Research Group which surveyed evangelical believers ages 20-29, only 55% of that group attended services regularly during high school years, but by college only 11% attended church regularly. In other words there was a 44% decline in church attendance as these young adults got older. In a study of youth between 18-23 years of age less than one half of one percent of Christian youth held a biblical worldview. A biblical world view is described by Barna as the following:
1- Believing that absolute moral truth exists;
2- Believing that the Bible is completely accurate in all of the principles
Principles:
A- Satan is considered to be a real being or force, not merely symbolic;
B- a person cannot earn their way into Heaven by trying to be good or do good works;
C- Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; and
D- God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the world who still rules the universe today.

According to Parchment & Pen.com 65 to 94 % of high school students stop attending church after graduating. They go on to say that leaving church is many times the first visible step in one’s pilgrimage away from Christ. According to The Barna Group many of those that leave the church (to tune of 20 million per year) depart discovering what is called a more universal revolutionary approach to serving God not defined by any particular church group.

Why? Sometimes it's due to plain old hurt and mishandling of the people of God that has taken place in many churches. Then there is secularism, religious pluralism and ecclecticism that has taken center stage convincing many that there are multiple paths to salvation pronouncing that Jesus is simply "a way" to the Father or peace with God and the universe. Politically, it's "en vogue" to place all religious ideas on the table, taking only the best virtues from all and creating a new world religion where everyone is accepted and where only a "positive" message is enjoined.

2 Tim. 4:3-4 ~"3-For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4-And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

President Barack Obama is an expert at this type of tactic, placing all religious faiths on the same plateau and calling all faiths "great" simply because of the ability to lead and draw masses. What is effective for politicians is not effective for ministers seking to serve the Lord and uphold truth. I don't believe that God's preachers can be in political office, there is far too much compromise of essential truths necessary to lead politically. Nevertheless, being able to give a reasonable answer for the Christian hope has never been more important in history.

This is why I recommend the following conferences this year for all leaders who want to take more of an active role in preparing their entire church for 21st century ministry:
The Apologetics Institute 2009 Nov. 13th and 14th 2009 New Life Christian Ctr. Smithsville, Rhode Island. $79 registration for the entire conference.
Featured Speakers: Dr. Chuck Colson, Dr. Ravi Zacharias, Dr. Patrick Smith, Dr. Os Guiness

The National Apologetics Conference, Nov. 13th and 14th 2009, Hickory Grove Baptist Church, Charlotte, NC. Various registration amounts for various parts of the conference.
Featured Speakers: Dr. Hank Hanegraaf, Dr. Michael Brown, Dr. William Lane Craig, Dr. Dinesh D'Souza, Dr. Gary Habermas

The Evangelical Philosophical Society's 7the Annual Apologetics Conference,  Nov. 19-21 New Orleans, LA. New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary 3939 Gentilly Blvd New Orleans, LA 70126 Prices begin at $20 per individual top out at $30. Special rates and discounts for groups.
Featured Speakers: Dr. J.P. Moreland, Dr. Timothy McGrew, Dr. Michael Murray, Dr. Greg Koukel, Dr. Paul Copan, Dr. Gary Habermas, Dr. Patrick Smith and many more.
The bad news is that two of these conferences are on the same date. The good news is that resources will be made available so that you won't miss the topics that are of most importance to you and your ministry even if you can attend neither. It's my desire that you'll continue to be strengthened in your faith knowing that there is just NONE like Jesus!

Blessed!

Read more!

Monday, August 24, 2009

Former COGIC Pastor Now A Catholic Deacon


"It was never about going to heaven or knowing the Lord. Those things were accomplished while I was in the Pentecostal church. It was simply coming into the fullness of the Christian faith."~ Deacon Alex Jones, St. Suzanne/Our Lady Gate of Heaven Catholic Community former Pastor Of Maranatha Christian Church Detroit Michigan.

A friend presented a DVD for my review called "No Price Too High, A Dinner With Alex Jones". The DVD centered around a former COGIC Pastor (Alex Jones) turned independent, and eventually turned Catholic. This particular DVD was a conversation over dinner in which there were questions and answers about why he and most of his church changed from a decidedly Protestant/Pentecostal belief system to the world's oldest and largest Christian Church, the Roman Catholic Church.

Deacon Jones' story was especially interesting to me personally because our church, at one time, held services in a Catholic church. It was at that time that we gained the opportunity to meet some of our fellow Catholic believers and established a relationship with many new Catholic friends. I also took the time to study many Catholic beliefs, practices and dogmas and drew my own conclusions as to what the church actually represented. In addition Alex Jones was a former COGIC Pastor which is very interesting in light of COGIC's current dealings and political situations.

This blog post is not about bashing or exposing Alex Jones. There is nothing to bash or expose in my opinion. However, this post is about drawing a sharp and distinguished contrast between Roman Catholic authority, theology and dogma and the rest of Christianity.

Read more!

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Sin, Mistakes & Jesus

Heb. 4:15-16 ~ "15-For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16-Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need."

As I continue in the series I've subtitled "Atheism's Greatest Hits" It's my intent to present arguments and the resolution to those arguments so that Saints who are unfamiliar with these subjects won't be blindsided with attempts to undermine the Christian faith. We'll continue in this series by addressing and answering the question Did Jesus Make A Mistake?
We will deal with biblical inerrancy in a future post to refute the current demonically inspired lies regarding the reliability of the biblical texts themselves. For this writing I would like the critic to assume that what has been documented by biblical authors is fully accurate as written as I only wish to deal with the specific point of Sin, Mistakes & Jesus Words.

A Humanly Fallible Jesus?
Apostate Professor Of New Testament Studies at UNC Chapel Hill, Dr. Bart D. Ehrman, asserts in his book Misquoting Jesus that his faith and belief was wrecked when he realized that Jesus made a critical mistake in reconciling Mark 2:26 with 1 Sam. 21:1-6, by claiming that David and his men ate the showbread "when Abiathar was the high priest." He goes on to claim that scripture records that when the event took place Ahimelech (Abiathar’s father) was actually the high priest. Therefore either Mark was wrong in his recounting or Jesus was wrong in reciting the passage. Either way, according to him, somebody was wrong.

Another popular criticism extends from the use of the term "this generation" in Mt. 24:34 ~ "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." The critic asserts that this passage is referring to the Great Tribulation and Judgement (Parousia) of the end times which would occur within a 40 year time frame. Further the critic asserts that there was a further promise of impending judgement upon Caiphas (Israel) in Mark 14:61-62 ~"61-But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? 62-And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."

The assertion is that since the world yet exists Jesus was wrong about the impending judgement of the world and therefore made a mistake or certainly no less than mis-spoke and is simply a failed doomsday prophet as a result.

Read more!

Friday, August 14, 2009

Where Are The Prophets Now?

2 Thess. 2:10-13~"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11-And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12-That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

The nation's recession continues with high unemployment, record foreclosures, and an astounding national debt that has just exceeded $11.8 Trillion and is expected to surpass $12.1 Trillion by as early as October 2009. According to current studies Medicare will be insolvent by year 2017. Then President Barack Obama is insistently pushing for more govermental control of the healthcare of the nation's citizens. In light of this the over 45 Million individuals who receive Social Security/Medicaid are at risk that they will totally loose whatever benefits they are receiving within their lifetimes. So far as retirement benefits for those with 20 or more years left until retirement age, my advice is that you/we create another source of wealth for yourselves that will meet future needs because under current numbers there won't be enough tax base or resource to provide post retirement benefits for us at all. On top of all that, what we know as dollars, may be worthless in a short period of time due to rampant debt and global insecurity.

What Is This?

Knowledge of these things is not a fear tactic, it's a reality check. One needs not peer into the spirit realm to see and know the reality of many of these things. For the church and to the believer we have an assurance that God will provide and that we will be sustained:

Phil. 4:19~"But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus."

The foundation of the true believer is secure and steadfast in Christ Jesus as he is the Rock upon which our hope, faith and trust is built.

Mt. 16:18~"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Unfortunately, there is another agenda that has seduced many in the church and continues to be a problem. It's the "snakeoil" salesmen that promises the miracle cure for whatever ails. Remember, from the secular point of view it's called control the masses. It begins in 2 parts:

1- Control the money (as the Federal Reserve CARTEL does) and
2- Control the mind, wellbeing and placement of the people by mass appropriation

We'll address the secular aspects of this more specifically in an upcoming post, but what makes all of this especially traggic is that the post modern church has seemingly, deliberately mimmicked many of the same techniques that scular society employs when it comes to the seduction of the minds of the people.

Let's Look Back

Many of us remember that 2007 was supposed to be the "Year Of Supernatural Release" or "The Year Of Freedom" associated with the number 7 and the year of jubiilee.(???) Then 2008 was the "Year Of New Beginnings" (one year after the 7, which somehow completed a cycle, and then at eight we start all over again...???) There were prophecies that went out all around the country and everything was "Howdy-Howdy!" If the ministry wasn't "grand" it was insignificant. If the bank account wasn't "deep", you weren't living up to your "God potential"

Similar to the materialistic teaching and "pimp daddy" preaching of the late Rev."You Can't Loose With The Stuff I Use"Ike, the messages then were as they are now: prosperity, sow, gift, seed, plant, harvest (in order to sow, gift, seed, plant and harvest again). The prophets were receiving all time high PROFITS. Many with personal jets "for the work of the ministry", starting banks, proclaiming a business for every one in the prayer line, a multimillion dollar venture for every adherent that would "sow a seed to meet the need", a new multimilliondollar home for all, a new luxry vehicle (Esc'y-Esc'y), a special "money anointing" for those who needed cash and supernatural "debt cancellation plan" for all them that would only, believe and "speak it into existence". Times were grand! Hopes were high. Notes were signed. Debts were piled up.

In his 2004 booklet "How To Be Rich And Have Everything You Ever Wanted" defrocked and resurged false prophet Robert Tilton stated that his message "declaring the 7 decrees of abundantly more" was "one of the most important messages that I have ever been sent by God to deliver." You mean Mr. Tilton placed this message on the same plane as the message of the cross? If it was one of the most important certainly it's up there, and especially since he preaches nothing else on his infomercial but propserity, we can safely say that this message is probably one of his ONLY messages therefore being at least equal to the cross in his mind.

In his letter attached to the book Charlatan Tilton says:

"...Jesus is going to cause what you give to be given back to you and MORE. You must plan a seed to receive a harvest. Plant a seed of $30 or $60 or even $100. Or pay a tithe and believe god to fulfill His word of riches and wealth to be in your house (Ps. 112:3). And believe as King David did in Ps. 118 when he prayed, "Oh God, SEND NOW PROSPERITY!"

Twisted context and scriptural manipulation is what we see most abundantly in the life of false teachers like Tilton. Not to mention the personal committments gone awry.

Then Reality Does Set In

Now some years later many of those that gave significant dollars and resources remain unfulfilled. Many of those prophesied up businesses either never materialized or went bankrupt. Homes have been forclosed upon, and cars have been reposessed. Some were even waiting by the mailbox for that "supernatural check" to cancel the debts after sowing their seeds, but only more bills came. Then others who were waiting for their healings slipped further into their medical conditions some paying the penalty by waiting too long to receive adequate medical care and therefore costing their lives.

These circumstances are sad and happen to many of us, and some of them are nothing to be ashamed about in and of themselves. But then others could have been prevented by listening to sound council instead of listening to wolves in sheeps clothing. It should be no surprise that a sinner can prophesy and sound good:

1 Sam. 18:7-12~"7-And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands. 8-And Saul was very wroth, and the saying displeased him; and he said, They have ascribed unto David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands: and what can he have more but the kingdom? 9-And Saul eyed David from that day and forward. 10-And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as at other times: and there was a javelin in Saul’s hand. 11-And Saul cast the javelin; for he said, I will smite David even to the wall with it. And David avoided out of his presence twice. 12-And Saul was afraid of David, because the LORD was with him, and was departed from Saul."

Even Saul with jealously, hatred and murder in his heart was bound and overwhelmed by an "evil spirit" to prophesy.

Even at yet another time Saul and his men werre overcome and prophesied even as they sought to kill David.

1 Sam. 19:19-24~"19-And it was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah. 20-And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied. 21-And when it was told Saul, he sent other messengers, and they prophesied likewise. And Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they prophesied also. 22-Then went he also to Ramah, and came to a great well that is in Sechu: and he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, they be at Naioth in Ramah. 23-And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah: and the Spirit of God was upon him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah. 24-And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?"

We should note that the "gift" is not the only consideration that should be had. The quality of the word of God and the lifestyle and integrity of the vessel should be the greatest considerations. Now many will say that "prophecy" doesn't exist as a modern gift or if it does exist it doesn't men to foretell it only means to forthtell. I don't want to necessarily open that can of worms in this post but the critic (the cessationist)is hardpressed to set forth a truely biblical hermenutic that would support either of those propositions especially since the New Testament church was specifically engaged in this gift even during the post-apostollic period.

More specifically for this post, what we should ask is this: Where has the prophet been since all of this trouble has arisen and why didn't the prophet have a word warning us that we'd be in this condition?

Oooh, Oooh, Oooh, I Know!

1- Many of these persons that we call prophets weren't saved to begin with and certainly had no connection with God to know what was coming. Then secondly, unfortunately, many of the prophets (who were once saved) were seeking PROFITS and adding to the delusion of the people of God.

You see in most prophetic schemes "the blessings don't flow unless you sow"...In other words the money has to come under control of the prophet. This always leads to the security fo the wellbeing of the individuals and eventually the controlling of the actions of the masses. When those two things are combined within a person who is irresponsible and not saved, it is always a dangerour coctail of spiritual intoxication and a seething cauldron of sin waiting to happen.

Seeking PROFITS:

Similar to the hip-hop entertainer who sometimes create multiple personalities to deal with their issues, some prophets are not just one, but two also. In fact, Masterprophet Bishop Mar Elijah Bernard Jordan founder of Zoe (Gk: The god kind of life) Ministries prophesies for a fee. This is what his website says about Bishop Jordan's gift:

"Bishop Jordan is a modern-day prophet whose ministry is absolutely astounding! Like Nostradamus, Bishop Pike, and Edgar Cayce, the accuracy of the gift that operates in Bishop Jordan will astound you! He is known to predict exact names, dates, and times of events both individually and globally! His visual perception is so exact that he is able to give accurate descriptions of locations that are pertinent to the recipient of the prophecy! Bishop Jordan differs from those who can operate with extra-sensory perception, for his calling as a prophet endows him with a degree of authority. As a prophet, he can truly decree a thing and see it established---just like the prophets of the Scriptures! He is not one just to give information, but he is also known to create miracles and circumvent events merely by the power of his speech!"

"merely by the power of his speech" Wow! Why go any place else or to anyone when we can hang around The Masterprophet and he can shape reality for us through his speech? He is the world-speech-bender almost like Naruto.

Bishop Jordan is like "Nostradamus", "Bishop Pike", and "Edgar Cayce". I was familiar with the other two individuals and know that they rendered nothing that was subject to Christ in their works but I wanted to know more about Bishop Pike. He was an American Episcopal Bishop. To commend Pike, he was a desegregationalist, however his spritual practices and doctrines were unbiblical. In fact he was a proponent of what we know know as gay inclusion and also one who was caught up heavily in spiritualism and was even "poltergiested" according to his own accounting. He wrote a book called "The Other Side" in which he documented his expereinces after the drug overdose of his son and he also preformed a seance with his dead son through an apostate preacher named Arthur Ford on television. The Masterprophet is like him? God help us please!!!

There's a second aspect of development of this personality. This is what the website says about Mar Elijah's duties:

"Mar Elijah flows with the wisdom and insight of the prophet Daniel, of whom the Bible says understood all the sciences. In their time and season, Moses and Joseph also understood the prophetic sciences of their day, enabling them to overcome their obstacles. The Neophytes under The Prophetic Order of Mar Elijah are trained not only to hear the voice of God and articulate it accurately, but are taught scientific ways of mind renewal and development using the Word of God and proven technique sciences."

Mar Elijah is like Daniel, he says that he was assigned to raise up 300 "neophytes" before the year 2000 as the "foundation stones", and the gifts he shares with the neophytes (foundation stones) is to teach them ways of "mind renewal and development using the Word of God and proven technique sciences." Just in case you couldn't get through the jargon this is called mind contol.

I thought,"a neophyte"??? This is the definition I find for that:

"A beginner; A novice (recent convert), a new convert or proselyte; A name given by the early Christians, and still given by the Roman Catholics, to those who have recently embraced the Christian faith, and been admitted to baptism, especially those converts from heathenism or Judaism; A plant"

The question is, does a neophyte (one who is a recent convert) really need to be involved in controlling the mind of others? In fact does the ministry at any level need to be involved in mind control techniques? I suppose you can answer those questions for yourselves...Or better yet let the word of God answer it for us:

2 Cor. 4:1-2~"1-Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 2-But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God."

One thing is certain, God is not and will not use these mind control agents, and they render no glory to the Lord through their works.

Then there are others such as West African Prophet Thomas Manton IV who also Traffics Pornography Once again these are real lifes issues and noone is immune to problems, however one wonders is the PROFITIC ministry only a cover for many of these guys or what? Prophet Manton was so influential that leaders of countries were making decisions based on his word and in some cases having people executed. Here's what Bishop Mutthee had to say about seeking to get into this prophetic gift:

"According to Thomas Manton IV’s January 2004 prophecy, the Lord is turning our night into morning. Within days of the prophet prophesying a political leader would die, one suddenly died in a road accident. God has greatly used Prophet Thomas Manton IV in Kenya and many other nations. Things have actually happened as he declared they would! I believe this same prophetic anointing shall flow into you as you go through these prophetic revelations word-by-word!" ~Apostle Pastor Mutthee – Kenya

Then there's probably the grandmomma of them all...Juanita Bynum III. No wait it's only II for now...Act 3 is on the way! According to Gcmwatch.com, Juanita Bynum II is glad for the dollars and praises whosoever gives them even if their lifestyles aren't biblical. In this case she was more than happy to praise homosexuals for their support, calling them children of God, without hinting they they must repent, leave homosexuality and be saved. Juanita yet breathes out her false prophecies on her web radio network and website but don't expect to find insight on how to come out of sin and be free of false prophetic influences. That would be a prophetic violation.

In short there are 2 standards that I am interested in when it comes to the modern day prophet. 1- Are they biblically centered? and 2- Do they live what they teach? and I'll add a third, are they glorifying God or are they glorifying themselves? In short these guidelines should be good guidelines for any servant of God assessing the value of the ministry from which they partake, but especially that of the prophet. The weak and vunerable would do good to stay away from these wolves and those similar to these. They are popping up everywhere, saying promising words collecting money and leaving individuals broke and frustrated. Remember, they only have the power that you give them and their works will be judged.

We'll conclude with the words of the Apostle John regarding this issue:

1 John 4:1~"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."



Blessed!
Read more!

Friday, August 7, 2009

Evil, Who Knows It And How? Pt. 2

This article is continued from Part 1 found HERE.
The Complete article is available at The Dunamis Word 2.

III: Can Them That Are Lost Confidently Know What Evil Really Is?

Everything in the natural world (HIS creation) only has extrinsic value and goodness as declared by God himself. This is called a metaphysical value statement. Extrinsic values are derivative values, therefore intrinsic values preceed extrinsic values. This is the problem with idol worship or any exaltation of "things" above God, as those "things", idols or whatever they may be have no intrinsically good value. Their value is only given and accounted for based on subjective ascriptions of value. This concept should also give additional insight into the writings of Paul in Romans 1:25 when he said:

"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."

The "creature" here represented men and mankind as well as the pleasures of this world. In reference to natural things one does not normally say that there is an "evil" tree or an "evil" rock. Once again, the identification that a tree or rock is not evil in and of itself is an ascription of value to that object. The rock or tree only becomes evil when their use is perverted or corrupted in some manner. For the Christian this is confirmed within the creation when God said this:


Gen. 1:31 ~ "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good"

God declared that everything that he had made was good from the time that he made it. By declaration of God this is an example of the creation being declared extrinsically good. This is called an extrinsic value declaration.

What is unaccounted for by the philosophical crowd is the difference that came into existence after the fall:


Genesis 3:17-19 ~ "17-And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18-Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19-In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

By the exercise of the freewill that God had given to man, the very creation that God had made and called good, had now been cursed. Please note extrinsic value of the creation changed so much that even the creation itself cries to be redeemed as noted by Paul in Romans:

Romans 8:22 ~ "For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now."

Spinoza Unraveled:

In Spinoza's understanding as referenced previously within this article, "evil" would only be applied to something after the consideration of the benefits to which those actions are applied. Corruption of what is good was not a consideration for Spinoza. All was purely based on a persons relationship to what was done. For example, killing, though generally held to be "evil", under certain circumstances may not be "evil" because it may be for self-defense or self preservation. Therefore the concept of klling may not be thoroughly or absolutely evil.

The little trick here deals with the "own temperment" part of Spinoza's statement. This rests upon a persons basis for carrying out the action. Using killing as an example again, under Spinoza's construction, "evil" would not be applied to killing if killing were in line with the killer's own standard of moral justification no matter what suffering results from the action. In fact in war killing is praised as long as the enemy is the one killed. Therefore, the act of killing takes on a relative and subjective position and moral value under certain circumstances.

Another example may include a person who steals out of what they think is necessity for their family to eat. Although thievery is wrong in some cases it may be looked upon as a noble and sincere action to prevent further uncomfort or evil from occurring.

The Christian must admit that these statements seem to be a highly plausible statements and ones that appear to have validity. God who abhors murder also told the children of Israel to possess the land of promise and in many cases kill or destroy all the inhabitants of the land.

Deut. 9:3-4a ~ "3-Understand therefore this day, that the LORD thy God is he which goeth over before thee; as a consuming fire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face: so shalt thou drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the LORD hath said unto thee. 4-Speak not thou in thine heart, after that the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, For my righteousness the LORD hath brought me in to possess this land: "

The critic happily assesses that even God's moral values are subjective and based on his whims or are arbitrary in nature, but is that really the case?
First, God has declared that he is the Lord and he changes not:

Malachi 3:6 ~ "For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

Heb. 13:8 ~ "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."

Being the only uncaused cause, God's steadfastness is clear. God's nature remains the same. God's intents remain the same from all etrnity. What the critic misses is that God has also said that he abhors evil and the sin that man continues to choose. Remember, God had a disdain for sin before sin even existed. Being omniscient he accounted for it before the world was founded as jesus was a "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world". (Rev. 13:8) The people in Caanan were idolotrous and full of all the sins that God said he despises. The elimination of sin, would not have been a violation of God's nature or a subjective value change of God's nature but was fully in accord with the nature of God. Look at what he said in the same verses of scripture regarding Caanan's destruction:

Deut. 9:4b-5 ~"4b-For my righteousness the LORD hath brought me in to possess this land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD doth drive them out from before thee. 5-Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."

God's righteousness cannot be separated from his nature. He has eternally set forth the standard of righteousness and his "temperment" is made known from the beginning. Therefore he is consistent in demanding justice for sins committed and that consistency overrides what men call moral subjectivism.

So the view of the world regarding "evil' is all based on concepts of subjective rationalism and those concepts do not and cannot apply to God as his standards have been set much further than what men have traditionally given him credit for. As you can see, to not have an understanding of the objective nature of the morality of God only leads to blatant absurdities.

Possibility vs. Actualization:

The duality of 'good versus evil' is expressed, in some form or another, by many cultures. Those who believe in the duality theory of evil believe that evil cannot exist without good, nor good without evil, as they are both objective states and opposite ends of the same scale.

In the Christian worldview evil exists as an exercise of the human agency of free-will. This thought is highly effective when one realizes first that freedom is not about having unlimited choices. Freedom is about having the unfettered ability to make a choice. God made man free moral agents and beings via that process he also extended to man the opportunity actualize evil. Therefore, God by creating free moral agents also created the possibility of evil, however man made the actuality of evil by the exercise of his free-will. For God to have created without the ability to do evil would have been manipulation plain and simple and would have destroyed free-will and freedom alltogether.

God could also not have created anything, however that sentiment completely overlooks the fact that what God did create was good and without corruption, therefore God did not create and is not responsible for the actualization of evil in this present world. In short, God certainly created the possibility of evil, however man made evil the actual reality and his choice even effected the echosystem or the natural world in which we live.

Summary:

I propose that evil exists in our world today and that we recognize evil as either corruption or perversion of what is good.

I propose that "evil' cannot be distinguished as 'evil' in an of itself without the light of God through the inner conscience indicating what is good and therefore without corruption.

I believe that all men have been given some sort of illumination of conscience due to the fact that the light has entered into the world from eternity through Jesus.

I propose that since the Holy Spirit is present in the world today to "reprove" the world of sin thereby revealing the moral standards of God to both believer and nonbeliever alike.


It is evident that the world has labeled and branded actions as either "evil" or "good" because of the Holy Spirit's intervention. However, many of those standards have been made to be subjective by sinful man and fail to address the intrinsic nature, value actions or essence of what is being observed.

The atheist has been blinded to the fact that the only way he/she can recognize evil is because of the objective standard of God's good and the recognition of the effect of sin upon what is good and pure.

I propose that since evil does exist, it can only be revealed and known to be evil as a result of God's good, and HIS intervention in the current world, and that Christians are best suited to distinguish it because of the acceptance of the objective moral standards of God.

Blessed!


Read more!

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Evil, Who Knows It And How? Pt. 1

Gen. 3:4-5 ~ "4-And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5-For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

The Atheist Bus Campaign proudly hails that humanity doesn't need to worry because there is" probably no God". The American Humanists claim that we don't need God to be good and that individuals can just "be good for goodness sake". These statements assume that belief in God is nonessential to life and that an individual can discern and know what is good on their own. The problem is that in order to be good one must also know what is bad or evil and be able to distinguish the difference.

The focus of this article is to examine the human epistemology of good and evil. This is better stated as how and on what basis do individuals know what is good or bad. This article will look specifically at the knowledge of "evil" and how evil is discerned both in the life of the Christian and in the life of the unsaved or atheist.

I intend to ask and answer the following questions in this article:

1- What is evil and where does it come from?

2- How does one come to identify what is evil?

3- Can them that are lost confidently know what evil really is?

4- How is the Christian concept of evil superior to the atheistic concept of evil?

I: What Is Evil And Where Does It Come From?

In many philosophical circles, evil is defined as morally objectionable behavior or that which causes harm destruction and/or misfortune. For many, it is said that evil emanates from immorality which is the quality of not being in accord with standards of right. Evil is equivalent to being wicked or possessing iniquity.

Throughout history, it has been thought that unpleasurable things are evil. In fact the Plato's (428-347 B.C.E.) view of evil which was gained from his teacher Socrates (470-399 B.C.E.) he stated that the only reason why the pleasures of food and drink seem to be evil is that they result in pain and deprive us of future pleasures. {Plato Progaras, 353e}

Socrates (in Plato's early work) argued, that which we call evil is merely ignorance and that good is that which everyone desires. Benedict de Spinoza said that the difference between good and evil is merely one of personal inclinations:

"So everyone, by the highest right of Nature, judges what is good and what is evil, considers his own advantage according to his own temperament... ."

If you are careful to notice, the term "evil" is normally used as a descriptive based on concepts of relativistic or subjective thought. In other words "evil" according to most, is only "evil' as it relates to its relative position to an individual, culturally acceptable standards of the community or personal moral assessments. In other words "evil' as it is described in modern society is nothing more than a figment of the imagination.

Philosophically Speaking:

There are generally three types of evil pointed to in most circles:

1- Moral Evil ~ Evil as a result of choice of moral agents

2- Natural Evil ~ Evil that occurs as a result of natural circumstance beyond our control

3- Non moral Evil~ Evil that occurs as a result of accident or neglect.

Augustine To The Rescue:

St. Augustine, in his defense of the faith "On The Morals Of The Manichaens, [5.7]" set forth the concept that evil is not the absence of good, as is commonly taught in philosophical circles, but the corruption of good. His argument is summarized as follows:

1- Corruption is a general definition of evil.

2- Corruption, which is not a substance, does not exist by itself but in what it corrupts.

3- Corruption is only identified when whatever is corrupted by it looses integrity and purity.

4- That which has no integrity or purity cannot be corrupted.

5- Therefore for anything to suffer corruption or perversion implies the presence of integrity, purity and ultimately good.

In the Christian worldview evil is better stated as being the corruption of good or of what has integrity and purity, not the absence of good. In other words evil cannot be identified unless it is set against a standard that is not corrupted to begin with.

In some cases evil is the lack of an appropriate relationship between good things. Example, Boots are good, a persons face can be and is generally good, but a boot on a face is an inappropriate relationship especially when there was nothing done to deserve it.

Evil can also be the lack of something that should be there in relationship between good things. For example, the husband that mistreats his wife or father that abuses his children. He does so because he lack the love that he should have for his spouse and children, while at the same time he may either love someone else or love some other activity that assists him eliminating or lowering his love for his family. The problem is not that there is no love, love exists, but there is a serious lack of love or maybe even hatred for what should be loved.

II: How Does One Come To Identify Evil?

The Philosophical Dilemma


I point out yet another philosophical dilemma regarding evil. This deals with both the ethical view of evil and the epistemological understanding or awareness of evil. That epistemological understanding of evil simply asks or seeks to find out how one knows or identifies evil.

Views on the nature of evil tend to fall into one of four opposed camps:

Moral absolutism holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source.

Amoralism claims that good and evil are meaningless, as there are no deities, no moral ingredient in nature. Amoralists tend to apply a homo economicus style of making decisions in their lives.

Moral relativism holds that standards of good and evil are only products of local culture, custom, or prejudice.

Moral universalism is the attempt to find a compromise between the absolutist sense of morality, and the relativist view; universalism claims that morality is only flexible to a degree, and that what is truly good or evil can be determined by examining what is commonly considered to be evil amongst all humans.

Value Statements

The view that something is either good or bad of itself is called intrinsicism. Intrinsic values are nonderivative values. In other words something is either good or bad without regard to who or what it is good or bad to or for. There is a problem with intricism. Anything good on its own has nothing to compare itself to. In other words there is no contrast offered by which something that is truly good without respect to whom it's good to can really be assessed as being good. Therefore intrinsic worth is a circular argument in many cases.

This is where it gets interesting. For one to identify evil, one would also have to assign or have assigned a set of values as a contrast to the assessment being made. Those values may be based on subjective or objective means, but there is a value relationship and value assertion nonetheless, otherwise there can be no identification of anything evil or corrupt. Current philosophical understandings of intricism do not address this particular issue and fail to account for initial value judgements and assertions. This is done primarily due to the belief that community in many cases, is responsible for value judgements. This thought is probably one of the worst of all arguments and certainly has shown not to be the case. Why? First, because nearly all cultures, varying as they may be, and in some cases not in touch with either at all, hold to certain standards and values in high esteem that are seemingly universal, such as charity, selflessness, nurturing of others etc. These standards are always held out as being virtuous from culture to culture without having been derived from any particular culture or social setting.

Secondly, value assessments and judgements are made regularly regarding these matters outside of community from culture to culture and third, if one says that good values are learned from family and maternal "passings on", then one is right back where we started asking for the first cause of the value judgement ie: where did your mommas, mommas, momma get that from and then where did they get it from. A trail of infinite regression that leads back to a beginning either way where a standard was set forth.

Fourth, the bible accords that God is the only intrinsically good being. For something to have intrinsic value means that it can be valuable or not, good or bad, without reference to who it is good or bad for, and without reference to the reason it is good or bad. Although this statement for a philosopher is a self-defeating, in our current condition, we can identify good when we identify evil since evil is the corruption of what is good. In the case of God he is self-ascribed as the self-existent one who is good.

Exodus 3:14 ~ "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."

Blessed!

Read more!

Friday, July 31, 2009

Once Declared "Evil To The Core" African Methodists Make A Stand

Thanks largely to the African Methodists of one of the United States largest denominations, the United Methodist Church will maintain the integrity of the scriptures by refusing to extend rights of membership to homosexual couples and individuals seeking such without repenting or turing from their lifestyle.

What was effectively rejected was known as Amendment 1. Under this amendment all one had to do was affirm or establish a relationship with Christ. They would then be "eligible to become professing members in any local church in the connection". The amendment failed to receive two thirds support of the membership in 27 out of the 44 conferences reporting results.

How Did Such Amendment Get On The Table?

According to the United Methodist Church website, A Methodist Pastor refused to receive a homosexual man into membership in 2005, because the proposed member would not repent nor seek to live a different lifestyle. According to the article a report was made to the Bishop and the pastor was placed on a leave of absence.

Later that same year (10/2005), the Judicial Council ruled that United Methodist pastors have authority to decide who becomes a member of a local church and reinstated the pastor. That case triggered appeals to the Judicial Council, but the court declined to reconsider its ruling.

Leading Up To This

The United Methodist Church seems to have been balancing this issue for a number of years in their General Conference's establishment of rules regulations and resolutions. In the 2000 Book of Discipline and 2000 Book of Resolutions the following statements were made:

Section: Inclusiveness Of The Church
"The United Methodist Church is a part of the church universal, which is one Body in Christ. Therefore all persons shall be eligible to attend its worship services, to participate in its programs, and, when they take the appropriate vows, to be admitted into its membership in any local church in the connection."

Section: "Human Sexuality"
Subsection: "The Nurturing Community,"

"Homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth. All persons need the ministry and guidance of the church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. Although we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching, we affirm that God's grace is available to all. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn their lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons."

What could possible have saved this organization was the policy adopted in Aug. 1998 which states the following:

Section: Law Dealing With Clergy
Sub-Section: Unauthorized Conduct
"Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches."

According to the Judicial Council clergy in violation of this rule could be charged with violating the order and discipline of the church. They can be tried in a church court, and penalties upon conviction can include loss of ministerial credentials.

Soulforce, a Christian gay rights activist group headed by apostate theologian Mel White, has previously stated:

"It is as much our moral responsibility not to cooperate with evil as it is to cooperate with good. The United Methodist Church has become evil at its core."

These statements were in response to the United Methodist rejecting gay inclusion by a vote of nearly 2 to 1 in May of 2000. 191 gay activists and one United Methodist Bishop were arrested as a result of the General Conference's vote. The Soulforce website says the following about The United Methodist church:

"The United Methodist Church, with over 10 million members, condemns homosexual persons by calling all sexual activity between people of the same gender as "incompatible with Christian teachings." The denomination also forbids its ministers from performing both marriages and commitmitment ceremonies for same-gender couples. Additionally, United Methodist Church doctrine bans "self-avowed practing homosexuals" from the clergy.

Delusion and Misdirection

One of the greatest delusions of the homosexual agenda is the confusion as found in the writings of Soulforce. To assert that the United Methodist Church "condemns homosexual persons" by not allowing them membership to the church is a LIE and obfuscation of the truth.

The only "person" that would be condemned under the United Method Church rule would be the person who love their SIN more than they love God. The real question is why should homosexual individuals be given preferential treatment in membership? For example in 2004 the United Methodist Church adopted the following regulations regarding REPENTANT pedophiles and their participation within the church:

ADOPTED 2004 READOPTED 2008 (Resolution # 8009)Resolution #355, 2004 Book of Resolutions:

"We encourage the Church to provide a safe environment, counsel, and support for the victim. While we deplore the actions of the abuser, we affirm that person to be in need of God’s redeeming love."

"Welcoming a child sex offender into a congregation must be accompanied by thorough knowledge, careful planning, and long-term monitoring..."A convicted and/or registered sex offender who wishes to be part of a church community should expect to have conditions placed on his or her participation. Indeed, offenders who have been in treatment and are truly committed to living a life free of further abuse will be the first to declare that, in order to accomplish that, they must structure a life that includes on-going treatment, accountability mechanisms, and lack of access to children"
The repentant pedophile is welcomed similar to the repentant homosexual. This is simply an example that issues of sexual immorality of all kinds have been addressed by this church. What is really at question by the dissenters is the word of the Lord against homosexuality. Unfortunately too many believers are not convinced that the bible condemns the practice of homosexuality and have no idea as to how to navigate the scriptures regarding such activities. I have addressed one aspect of that question in my article Homosexuality In The New Testament.

Closing Remarks:

Thank God there are individuals such as Bishop James Stanton of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas, willing to stand against sin as referenced by Gcmwatch.com, it is incumbent upon the church both leaders and its members to stand and continue to stand against evil of all kinds and sorts. Homosexuality is not the ONLY issue facing the 21st century church but it is a major and one that challenges the future morality of the nation and the church. Whether science ever finds a homosexual gene or not, homosexuality is immoral and a practice that should be repented of so that fellowship with Christ and his church can be established. Those who reject the gospel truth against unrighteousness are the ones that are "evil to the core" not the ones who desire to uphold biblical morality.

Blessed!

Read more!

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Salvation: Is The Message Revealed To Those Who Have Never Heard?

The Argument

The critic levels many accusations at Christianity. One of those accusations is aimed at the effectiveness of the proliferation of the message of salvation. You see Christianity holds that if one is not a Christian, one cannot be made righteous with God and therefore will be worthy of hell. In many circles it is also held that if one does not hear the gospel message one cannot be forgiven for their sins, set free or be righteous. Paul says that the gospel (the message of it) is the power of God unto salvation:

Rom.1:16~ "16-For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."
He further states that hearing the gospel is the way that faith comes into the mind and heart of the believer:

Rom.10:17~"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
Immediately before this statement however he declares and questions rhetorically the process of how belief arises within the heart of a believer:

Rom. 10:13-15 ~ "13-For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14-How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15-And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"
Paul's declaration has given rise to the thoughts that by ONLY the preaching of the Gospel can one be saved and that without IT faith cannot arise within the heart, and where there is no faith, one can not be saved. The writer of Hebrews picked up on this theme:

Heb. 11:6~"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."
The part that we are not addressing in this post is the relationship of faith to salvation. We have discussed and will continue to discuss that in Are Works And Faith Inseparable? This post we are discussing the relationship of hearing the gospel and the message of faith to the community of humanity who may never hear or have never heard that message.

The Current Reality:

Interestingly, by best efforts at estimation, only 2.1 billion persons, approximately 1/3 of the worlds population, is Christian. Before we proceed there are problems with that estimate and additional qualifications that must be made. Religious Tolerance.Org states that some of the problems with estimating how many Christians there are worldwide is as follows:

1- The definition of 'Christian' is not agreed upon by many of the groups involved therefore drawing the line between 'Christian' and those who belong to 'sects' is problematic. [Example: Groups such as Mormons and Jehovah's Witness claim to be Christian's although they are in actuality non-Christian cults.][Religious Tolerance.Org didn't say that part, I did.]

2- No-one can really tell if a person is a Christian at heart, or if they are just paying lip-service to the name.

3- "The percentage of Christians in the world peaked at about 30 % in the 1980s, leveled off, is now declining, and will probably approximate to about 25% of the world's population by 2025. As a result of their extremely high rates of population growth, the proportion of Muslims in the world will continue to increase dramatically, amounting to 20 percent of the world's population about the turn of the century, surpassing the number of Christians some years later, and probably accounting for about 30 percent of the world's population by 2025." ~ Samuel Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations and the remaking of world order," Touchstone Books, (1998)

Christian growth is on the decline and even if it were flat, at the most liberal estimate it still holds that approximately 60% of the worlds population is non-Christian. Those numbers have varied over the years throughout history however, at any given time it could be said that 50% or less of the worlds population were Christian believers.

What Does That Mean?

It means that most of the world is non Christian and according to the most popular definition of salvation will be lost in their sins. The question that arises from this, is what of the eternal disposition of the peoples and individuals who have never heard the gospel? In some cases it could be that certain individuals will never and have never heard the message of the cross and are therefore determined to go to hell.

That concept, as strange as it may sound, is not totally foreign to the church and many believers, especially them that hold belief in Evangelical and Reform Christian Theological circles. In fact this is the assertion of Dr. John Calvin the father of Calvinism regarding this and related issues:

“...(God) does not create everyone in the same condition, but ordains eternal life for some and eternal damnation for others.” (Cited in Alister McGrath, Christian Theology, p. 396)
This is descriptive to what is called the doctrine of Double Predestination (the elect are predestined to be saved while the non-elect are predestined to hell) To be fair many Calvinists do not hold to this ascription as it is stated, however it is a telling backdrop for what many assert regarding the nations and individuals who have never heard the gospel and have never received the message.

Is There Another Understanding?

Thank God, Yes, there is. Without a doubt belief in Jesus is essential for salvation. The word records:

John 14:5-6~"5-Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6-Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
The question is how can and does that belief come to an individual? And can salvation come to an individuals who has never heard the message?

What We Know:

We know that God has spoken to us through Jesus:

Heb. 1:1-2 ~ "1-God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2-Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds"
We also know that that God was in Jesus reconciling the world unto himself and has given the church that same ministry of reconciliation:

2 Cor. 5:19 ~ "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation"
We also know that Jesus will present to himself a "glorious church":

Ephes. 5:26-27~"26-That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27-That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."
We also know that the church is ultimately those who believe and hold fast to their profession of faith through their actions. The church may include many in the earthly or physical church but there is a greater and ever growing gap between those in the "glorious church" and those in the natural or physical church that we see currently.

Teleologically & Cosmologically Speaking:

Atheist Richard Dawkins in his book, "The Blind Watchmaker" summarizes the study of Micro-Biological Science as the study of complicated things that APPEAR to be designed by an intelligent designer or creator. In other words what is obviously apparent in creation, even at a microbiological level displays evidence of a designer. Dr. Dawkins then spends the rest of the book trying to show that observations can be deceiving and in this case incorrect, and that all things, even complicated structures, are simply matters of chance and blind occurrences of natural processes. Never mind in the interim that Dr. Dawkins undermines the value of empirical science, as he is a scientist that can interpret information subjectively and based upon his presuppositions and try to explain away the complexity of design (Teleology). Even in that however his summation does not change the observation that there is order and an apparent design within creation.

The Christian accounts for that design by declaring that God is responsible for it based on the declarations made through the written testimony of history (the Bible)and secondarily many empirical scientific observations. Many of these observations are not however limited to the Western world and biological science laboratories. They are made public and known throughout all creation and to all people to some degree or extent. This observation of nature is called the observation of the cosmos (ie:cosmology)

What does this mean? It means that God can speak to people, and reveal his truth, to individuals and nations, through creation. The awe of the universe is testimony to the glory of God declaring his works as the Psalmist says.

Ps. 19:1-6 ~ "1-The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. 2-Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. 3-There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. 4-Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5-Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6-His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof."
This Psalm gives the declaration that God speaks through what is observable in nature and the human conscience. Through observation individuals can understand that not only do they exist but that God (ie: a creator)exists also. This is not secret but is done for all men to see wherever people can observe and wherever conscience can be exercised. Paul, in the New testament, reverberates this same sentiment and closes the gap even tighter by declaring that people are "without excuse":

Rom. 1:19-20~ "19-Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20-For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"
What About Them That Can't See?

God, yet through the existence of life, speaks so that all whether they can observe physically or not, are able to experience his handywork. Sometimes we feel that the only way God reveals himself is through the senses, however his revelation to man is far greater than the sensory capacity of any individual. This is one way that the blind can come to "see" who Jesus is.

What About Personal Revelation?

One of the most touchy areas in which God reveals himself to individuals is the area of personal revelation.As surprising as it may seem, personal revelation was the method by how Paul and the original Apostles became convinced of the authenticity of Jesus. The case could be made that personal revelation of this sort is only reserved for those who Jesus calls Apostles however it should also be noted that Jesus was also personally revealed to women who were not called or given the title of an Apostle, UND Professor John P. Mier in his work "A Marginal Jew Vol. 3" points out that this is partially due to the fact that there was no equivalent word for a female apostle in the Hebrew or Aramaic language:

Lk. 24:10~"It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles."
Although Paul points to the gospel as the chief vehicle that leads to salvation he himself was not preached to in the traditional sense. He was converted by an experience where Christ was revealed to him on Damascus road:

Acts:9:10-12 ~ "3-And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4-And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5-And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6-And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. 7-And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. 8-And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. 9-And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink"
He recounts his experience later in his epistle to the Galations:

Galations 1:15-20 ~ "15-But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, 16-To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: 17-Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. 18-Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 19-But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother. 20-Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. 21-Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; 22-And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: 23-But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. 24-And they glorified God in me"
Prior To The New Testament

We see this revelation of God toward humankind as far back as Genesis

When Enos was born(Gen. 4:26)men began to call upon the name of the Lord, what was revealed to them that facilitated these actions?

Melchizedek was known as a priest of the most high God (Gen. 14:18)and was even contrasted to Jesus himself within the NT (Heb. 7:1) How did Melchizedek come to know who God was?

Naaman, a Syrian, came to the prophet Elisha on the word of his wife's servant seeking God's deliverance for his incurable leprosy. (2 Kings 5)How did Naaman credit God with such power? Was his seeking simply a matter of convenience or desperation?

The syrophonecian woman pleaded with Jesus for her daughter's deliverance (Mk. 7:24-30). How did she know the works of God moved through Jesus life until he had power over devils?

The Assyrian capital Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah. How did they recognize and prioritize the warning of God as important?

The argument could be made that all of these individuals heard the message of the Lord and knew of God and his acts before they had their experiences, but that yet does not address the fact that none of these individuals had a special relationship either with to or toward God before these events. In fact most of them were outside the people of "promise" or the chosen of God.

Every Nation That Fears And Works

In Acts 10:35, Peter states that there is an acceptance of God of "every nation that feareth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with him". (There's that word WORKS again)Back to the point...Traditionally, we have understand this to mean that anyone, without regard, can accept the message of Jesus and be saved. The question is however, was there a greater emphasis on this verse even toward those who may have never heard the message but yet received God into their midst?

One thing is for sure, God has the salvation of the world, even those who have never heard the message of the cross under his control. His mission is still the same today as it was back then...In fact here's what he said:

Lk. 19:10~ "For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost."

Questions:

What of them that have never heard...can they be saved too?

Should a person take the attitude of, "If God wants to speak to me, he knows where I am?"

Did Paul place too great of an emphasis on preaching the word, especially since the message wasn't so much as preached to him at his conversion?

Does experience equal or exceed a more cognitive acceptance of the gospel message?

Is there a second standard of salvation for some? If so is that fair?

These are tough questions, can we give some tough answers?

Blessed!

Read more!

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Are Works And Faith Inseparable?

Here Are Some Common Assertions:

"I am saved and I will always be saved no matter what I do."

"Once I am a child of God I will always be a child of God because God doesn’t cast out his children."

"I am one of the elect, I was predestined to be saved therefore I can't miss it no matter what!"

"All I have to do is receive from God, I don't have to do anything else."

These are sentiments that are commonly adorned by Christians in many circles. From these type of thoughts spring the age old debate over whether one can lose their salvation. Then there is another part to the argument, how is one justified, by faith or by works? Because there is so much ground to cover in a topic like this I will look into the possible synergistic relationship between faith and works, and the thought that one is only saved by faith without any works being present. I will try to avoid other non related topics if at all possible. I will try to limit myself to one facet of the question; Can faith and works be separated?

Was There A War Over Justification Between James & Paul?

These are two verses that deal specifically with the same individual:

James 2:21-24~“21-Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22-Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23-And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24-Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

Romans 4:1-3~“1-What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2-For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 3-For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4-Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5-But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness”

What are we to make of this apparent contradiction where James says that Abraham was justified by works and not faith only and Paul says Abraham was justified by faith and not works in accounting Abraham righteous?

First we should note that there was no war between Paul and James over this issue or any other for that matter. Both were dealing with the issue to two different audiences for two entirely different purposes. The critic asserts, that the message be the same no matter what the audience if it’s the truth?

Let’s begin by looking at what these scriptures have in common:

1- They both quote the Old Testament in relationship to the issue: Gen. 15:6~“And he believed the Lord; and he counted to him for righteousness.” James even takes it a little further quoting the last part of 2 Chron. 20:7 when Jehoshaphat called Abraham God’s “friend”.

2- Faith is presented as an essential part of salvation

3- Both scriptures deal with justification and what it means to be justified.

4- They were both written to strengthen the believers in their respective missionary endeavors.

How are these scriptures distinguished from one another?

1- James was writing to Jewish believers primarily prior to 45 AD.

2- Paul was writing primarily to Gentile believers in Rome prior to his visit during his 3rd missionary journey in 68 AD.

3- James was encouraging believers that works accompanied faith and that they were inseparable. The aim was at the personal walk, practical actions and personal works.

4- Paul was writing to his audience to build their defense against Judaizers who required newly converting Christians to accept Jewish “works of the Law” as a method to obtain righteousness.

5- James deals the resultant actions that accompany life changing faith

6- Paul deals with the circumstance of faith at the moment of salvation.

As you can see these men approached the same subject emphasizing different aspects of the same scriptures. What is Justification that is in question?

Justification~In Christian theology, justification is God's act of declaring or making a sinner righteous before God.

For the Gentile believer the message was clear that justification was by faith and they need not be entangled with anyone trying to convince them to exercise the “works of the law” in trying to obtain or solidify their salvation.

For the Jew having already believe in Jesus the message was clear that they were to continue in their good personal works and interactions towards one another. James had made known right before that the law (OT) was insufficient in and of itself because if one offended in one point one was guilty of all. (James 2:10)For James the resultant actions of faith were works whereby individuals were able to identify justification of life and of the spirit. Therefore the believers faith spoke through their actions and good works. For Paul the justification of God was instant and without assistance regardless of anyone’s ability to externally identify the work of God in the life of the believer at that moment. For both men good works in practical living were the accompaniment of such faith and justification. Paul specifically clears up any potential misunderstandings of his position regarding practical holiness and resultant work of sanctification in the life of the believer (see: Rom. 6:1-2) by saying that those who experienced the grace of salvation in Jesus could not live any longer in sin because we were now dead to sin.

Can Faith And Works Be Separated?


The bible speaks of faith in two distinct terms. 1- The daily practice of the believer and 2- the general and overall belief of the believer. One who walks by faith does so because they also have a faith belief. Although there is some intertwining, I am focusing on that practical or daily part of the faith walk.


If faith and works can be separated there are some inescapable consequences. What are they?

I will begin by saying that if faith can be separated from works (what one does because of what they believe) then salvation stands on one leg and that is the leg of either works or faith only. In the western world the idea of salvation through faith is a much more common notion because of the works of reformer Martin Luther. This notion of faith only salvation is termed Sola Fide(Latin: Faith Alone the only means in reference to justification) A scriptural text normally used to validate this doctrine is from the Pauline Epistle of Ephesians:

Ephes. 2:8-9~“8-For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is a gift of God: 9-Not of works, lest any man should boast”

Although there are a host of biblical passages that may set this notion on its ear, the argument most damaging to the Sola Fide position is that if we can truly separate faith from works then what is the real practical effect of faith? In practical terms it should be noted that those who continue to live and exercise faith should have additional responsibility to bear the experience of out faith publicly. Many however approach this in the opposite manner teaching that because there is nothing that one can do to be saved that there is also nothing one can do to become unsaved. A monergistic thesis such as that then reduces works to non essential or adjunct elements within the process of salvation affixing a desired but flexible standard of presentation to the world through the walk of the believer.

The question is then, is what does the gospel teach about the relationship of faith and works?

Clarification Of Works From The “Works Of The Law”

One point that should be clarified right away is that when we see the word “works” in the scripture we often think of things that we can do such as being good, nice, lending a helping hand etc. These are moral interactions and duties that all people that have relationship with Christ or not perform. Their works are commendable and are worthy of noting. I have thoroughly addressed that issue in my previous post on "Works, Do They Have Any Value With God?".

However there is another understanding of works that is essential for every bible reader approaching this subject. That is understanding the difference between personal works and the “Works Of The Law” or of sacrifice to wash away sins. It is at this point that I believe that many individuals get confused. How? We know that the scripture has said that the “works of the law” have been made of noneffect. ie: There is no sacrifice such as those of bulls, goats, sheep, oxen etc. that can be rendered to save souls:

Heb. 10:3-5~“3-But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4-For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. 5-Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6-In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.”

This understanding is especially important because of the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. The mystery in this is that God’s acceptance of Temple sacrifice actually ended in approximately 30- 33 AD when Jesus died upon the cross. Remember what Jesus declared from the cross:

John 19:30~“30-When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

That declaration was the fulfillment of temple sacrifice and the system of the “works of the law”. From that moment on, there was no ceremony that anyone could do to make themselves acceptable with God as it pertained to the remission of sins. The Levitical priesthood and its mission was fulfilled. The mission of remitting sins through the blood of unblemished, first year animals was ended:

Heb. 9:11-14~“11-But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12-Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13-For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14-How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

Within the Pauline Epistles Paul taught from this standpoint concerning the “works of the law” Many times within scripture and the gospels the word “works” signifies this process. In the NT the message is that these types of works cannot bring salvation as the finished work of Christ on the cross is superior and provides the sufficiency of salvation, reconciliation and peace with God.

Gal. 3:9-14~“9-So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. 10-For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. 11-But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12-And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13-Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14-That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Personal or Practical Works Of The Believer

With all of that said, it is at this point that many individuals miss the further message. The area of personal actions or “works” are clear in the gospels as being not only a authenticator of salvation, but also something that runs hand in hand along with how one is saved both before God and man. The gospel is clear about such personal actions:

Mt. 5:16~“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”

In this very simple verse from one of the greatest messages that has ever been taught, (The Sermon On The Mount) Jesus used the example of a candle, used to light a home or the city at night, contrasting it to the actions, duties and behaviors of the believer. In this particular verse he is not speaking of "works of the law” but interpersonal works of action whereby the truth is represented. The part to note in this verse is that Jesus said that the works were done for the following reasons:

1- So that men could see.
2- So that the Father (God) would be ultimately glorified

John allows us to see that the light was actually Jesus himself being the life and the “light of men” (Jn. 1:4) In essence the light that we're supposed to let shine is Jesus himself through our lives. If we possess that light, by virtue of that, we also possess Jesus, and by virtue of that, good works were unavoidable consequence, process and part of that relationship in general. The point is that works carry a much closer relationship to salvation than many care to note or have noted in many Christian circles. Yet another scripture often hailed as the Christian Constitution of Faith, drives the point home even more closely:

Rom. 2:1-11~“1-Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2-But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. 3-And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4-Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5-But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6-Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7-To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8-But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9-Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10-But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: 11-For there is no respect of persons with God”

Then there is a response that is necessary and appropriate in the life of the believer in expectation of the righteous appearing of the Lord in the day of Judgement:

1 John 3:3~“And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.”

Of course this purification is in the expectation of Christ’s appearance (Second Return & Subsequent Judgement) and eventual conclusion of all things. Then there is the promise that without personal holiness that the Lord will not be seen in peace:

Heb. 12:14~“Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:”

What may be controversial is that the reward and punishment will have its root in personal actions. Look at this:

Rev. 22: 11-14~“11-He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. 12- And behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 13- I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. 14- Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”

Now many claim that Rev. 22 refers to the judgement of the righteous for reward, and that the judgement for the unrighteous is contained in Revelation 20 1-15 that we dealt with in our previous post “Does the Bible Teach A Literal Hell?” While that hermeneutic may be true, we should note that it is not uncommon for apocalyptic literature to layer themes and use repetition to drive home the meaning of what is being communicated. Either way one cannot avoid the fact that even in the judgement of the unrighteous, individuals will be judged “according to their works” (Rev. 20:12)

What is telling in all of these type of judgements, a faith position is not in question. Only the works or actions of an individuals are called into question and judged.


"The Law" In Galations 5:18-24


18-But if ye are led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19-Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20-Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21-Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22-But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23-Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24-And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts."

Apostle Paul's writing to the Galations begins with an inclusio at verse 18 saying:

"But if ye are led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law"

He then lists 17 works of the flesh and says,"I tell you as I have also told you in times past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." (v.21b) . He then names 9 characteristics that are indicitve of the "fruit of the Spirit" (v.22) and closes his inclusio saying "against such there is no law" (v.23)

Many theologians at this point claim that the "law" referenced is the "restraint" of the OT Law. Many assert that what is being declared is freedom from legalistic bondage of daily living. However the key is in what the chapter is talking about from the beginning. Paul begins Galations 5 talking about the "yoke of bondage". Scholars agree that this a reference to Judaism or the Levitical or ceremonial law for righteousness. It would therefore be inconsistent for Paul to switch to discuss a different aspect of the "law" at the end of chapter 5 without any notice.

With the understanding in mind that Paul is addressing the "works of the law" and Temple ceremonialism, the scripture comes to life explaining that if we are led of the Spirit we are not under the Levitical system any longer. The challenging part is the realization that he is actually saying that our deeds will keep us out of the Kingdom if we allow ourselves to live after the flesh. Nevertheless, Paul declares that what the Spirit produces within the life of the believer is evident and does not violate even the letter or intent of that law which is right relationship with God.

Treatment Of Matthew 25: 31- 46

In my previous post this was one of the most controversial and thought provoking verses:

Mt.25:31-46~ "31-When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32-And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33-And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34-Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35-For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36-Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37-Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38-When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39-Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40-And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41-Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42-For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43-I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44-Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45-Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46-And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."

This verse describes the Son Of Man (the messianic title of Jesus referencing Daniel 7:14) sitting upon the throne of his glory (actions of God) and the King (of hosts). This verse is a clear reference to God in the "Day Of Judgement". In this scenario we see both “goats” and “sheep” They were judged in relationship to actions (works) towards two groups of people

1- “the least of these my brethern”
2- “one of the least of these”

Although I am not convinced that this scripture was limited to the treatment of the apostles in their missionary work and endeavors or solely limited to how one treats Israel, I render what scholar and internet apologist J.P. Holding says about this particular verse and agree with the fact that the concept of judgement within scripture is based upon a vastly different paradigm than it is within Western society :

“Who are the "brethren"? The poor, the sick, as the soft in heart suggest? No

Matthew 12:48~But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

The poor, the sick, and so on is not a group in a one to one identity with those who do God's will. Who are those who do God's will? In the above, it is clearly the disciples of Jesus. Matthew 25:31-46 is all about judgment based on how one treated the disciples of Christ. The passage needs to be read in light of these earlier ones:

Matthew 10:14-15~And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Matthew 10:40-42~He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward. And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.

A disciple traveling to and fro with the word in the ancient world is very likely to be in the condition of those described in 25:31-46 -- sick, poorly clothed, and as Jesus predicts, in prison.

"Well, then, what about the atheist who treats Christians nicely? So he gets to heaven, according to this, right?"

If this passage were taken in strict isolation, and meant to be taken that way, and written in the context of an individualist society like ours, one might have a case for that odd individual getting a golden ticket, but it's not so simple. The parable of the sheep and the goats draws upon a certain paradigm found within Judaism of Jesus' day [Keener, Matthew commentary, 603f], which held that the nations (cf. 25:32) would be judged based upon how they treated Israel (4 Ezra 7:37), and the related concept encouraging repressed minorities that God will judge the world based on their treatment of them. In holding this it was never assumed that this was the sole and exclusive basis for judgment. The specific matter of treatment of Israel was isolated to make a point of its importance in context (and here, the context is the end of the age of the law and the beginning of the age of the Messiah; see here -- when the Gospel message would be brought to the Gentile world as a whole).

Moreover, the identification of Jesus with the disciples draws us even closer to the "faith" position. One's response to the disciple is the same as one's response to Jesus, and in a collectivist society, one would not assist a member of a divergent party in the way described unless one accepted and agreed with their message. As Malina and Rohrbaugh note (Social-Science commentary, 151) this parable draws the classic ancient distinction between "ingroup" and "outgroup". There would be no such thing as a "friendly pagan or atheist" who would have sympathy for the Christian.” ~ Courtesy J.P. Holding Tekton Apologetic Ministries Eblock Vol. 1 No. 4 "Please Excuse This Interruption" Bart. D. Ehrman’s “Jesus Interrupted” Pre-Empted

Summary:

“Works of the law” cannot justify one before God

Practical works are a natural outgrowth of saving faith and cannot truly be separated from saving faith.

Any faith that does not produce good works is unauthentic

Faith alone is specifically for the point of salvation but is ineffectual as a position in continued Christian living where there is no spiritual discipline.

Reward will be based on the works of the believer, not the faith of the believer.

The judgement of the wicked, which could include who some think are believers, will be based on their works, as what they express outwardly should be a natural outgrowth of their inward disposition.

I’ve tried to stay on point and deal with the question.

My Answer:

I do not believe that faith and works can be separated. Although I don’t believe that anyone can do anything to save themselves as Jesus has done that on the cross for all those who receive it. I do believe that where there are no good works, either salvation has been lost or never received. I’m not talking about ebbs and flows within the life of the believer, I’m talking about living out the faith unto God every day in daily practice.

What do you think?

Blessed!

Read more!