Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Posts Tagged ‘Open Theism’

Does Proverb 16:4 Prove Sublapsarianism?

Posted by Job on February 15, 2012

For several years, I have considered myself to be a so-called “5 point Calvinist” (though Particular Baptist is more accurate), yet one who rejects what I understood to be sublapsarianism (often called double predestination, or hyper-Calvinism). My reason for so is not because of any belief that adhering to double predestination makes God cruel or otherwise unrighteous – for my acceptance of limited (or more accurately, particular) atonement precludes this thinking – but rather 2 Peter 3:9, which reads “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” and also Matthew 25:41, which tells that the lake of fire was prepared for the devil and his angels. (More on this later.)

Therefore, I rejected the claims of some, such as the estimable Gotquestions.org, who claims that belief in limited atonement requires a belief in sublapsarianism. Instead, I felt that both limited atonement and infralapsarianism were Biblical, that Theodore Beza and  fellow travelers exceeded the evidence of the Bible in articulating sublapsarianism. That is, until – when going to a fast food restaurant to get a bite to eat (bad decision; it made my belly bitter, so to speak!) – I happened to listen to a bit of the Janet Mefferd radio show. Ms. Mefferd’s show frustrates me, as I find it to be a curious mix of religious right politics (which I detest) and very bold, principled theologians! It happens that this particular day, a particular theologian that she was discoursing with (and neither she nor he saw fit to reveal his name!) was discussing the nature of God’s divine love (in contrast with carnal emotionalism that is now taken by the fallen world to mean love) and in the process mentioned Proverb 16:4 and Romans 9:21-23.

First Romans 9:21-23. “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory”? But Paul was merely asking a rhetorical question, as he is known to do from time to time such is in 2 Corinthians 11:23, right? Except that Proverb 16:4 reads “The LORD hath made all [things] for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” And that text appears in a passage that begins with “The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, [is] from the LORD” in verse 1! My problem: I do not use the Proverbs as a source of theology I guess!

And Spurgeon.org gave 1 Peter 2:8 and Jude 4 for more information on the topic. (Note: Spurgeon.org, a 5 point site, corrects some of the faulty assumptions in Gotquestions.org, a 4 point site. Those texts read, respectively “And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, [even to them] which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed” and “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” There it is, explicitly laid out. Where perhaps I can get a “pass” for not allowing texts from Proverbs to influence my theology to any great degree (then again I guess I cannot, because I allow Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon and Psalms to do so greatly), the meaning and application of the other texts simply flew past me. 1 Peter 2:8, I simply read the appointment of the wicked in that text apart from the appointment – the election! – of the righteous in 1 Peter 2:9-10.  “But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.” Jude 1:4 … I just flat out missed the meaning of “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation.” But in light of those, how can the case for sublapsarianism be denied?

That gets me back to my reason for doing so: 2 Peter 3:9 and Matthew 25:41. Here is my problem – which I have just now realized – for many years I believed that “The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance for the hell was everlasting fire [was] prepared (as in only originally intended) for the devil and his angels” was a Bible text. Why? Because I have heard PLENTY of sermons where those two textual fragments were juxtaposed, so I erroneously believed them to form one text. It is only now that I for the first time know that they are portions of separate texts that are several books apart. And when evaluating these fragments individually, and in context, the problem is resolved. Matthew 25:41 reads “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”, and in it our Lord Jesus Christ is merely describing the final status of the wicked, with “prepared for the devil and his angels” as a descriptive clause. There is no way to assert from the context, either there or from the entirety of scripture, that the lake of fire was originally created only for demons, and that God adjusted His original plan to send men there too after the fall (and after an attempt at universal salvation failed?)! That exceeds even “predestined foreknowledge” Wesleyanism and fully into the camp of open theism, meaning that God was forced to react and adjust to circumstances that He had no knowledge of or control over. ‘Tis heresy that denies God’s omnipotence and omniscience!

2 Peter 3:9 is much simpler. Its context was people doubting the return of Jesus Christ because it had not happened yet: see “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation” of verses 3 and 4 of this same chapter. This text DOES NOT MEAN that God was attempting to save everybody, for being God and by definition omnipotent, God would not have TRIED to save everyone and FAILED. Had God TRIED to save everyone, THEN EVERYONE WOULD BE SAVED. Or had it been God’s WILL to save everyone, THEN EVERYONE WOULD BE SAVED. A fundamental, nonnegotiable fact of Biblical revelation is that God’s will shall come to pass! Otherwise, there is no point in even so much as saying the Lord’s Prayer! Faith would be pointless, because everything would be reduced to chance. Maybe God can come through for us this time, maybe He can’t! That would reduce religion to being a mere lottery, and it would confirm the false doctrines of the evolutionists and big bang theorists, who have created an entire religious, ideological, and pseudo-scientific system on the idea that chance, random uncaused events, is the creator and sustainer of all things!

Instead, Peter was informing the church that the reason why Jesus Christ had not yet returned was so that all of the elect, everyone predestined to salvation, would be saved! (Consider another problem with the alternative interpretation: if the return of Jesus Christ was delayed because God does not want anyone to go to the lake of fire, then why not begin human history with the atonement, instead of allowing many thousands of years to pass first? Also, no matter how long Jesus Christ’s return is coming, people are still going to the lake of fire, a fact that we know from the Bible! So, God would be delaying the return of Jesus Christ because of something that He already knows to be a failed hope! To put it another way, God is withholding the return of Jesus Christ to restore creation as a consequence of His own failure to save it! Again, a heretical, blasphemous thought that no Christian should have on his mind!) Peter is not an innovator in tying the return of Jesus Christ to the completion of God’s plan to convert sinners into saints. In the Olivet discourse, Jesus Christ stated that the end of time will not come until the gospel is preached to all nations (Mark 13:10, Matthew 24:24). Paul stated that the endtimes will not come until the Gentile mission is complete (Romans 11:25-26).

So, now that I know what the Bible actually says instead of what I believed it to say, I have no problems with accepting the doctrine of sublapsarianism. Further, allow me to say that knowing more about God and His plan to save His people should make you more willing to repent of your sins and believe in Jesus Christ instead of less, for you will know that your salvation and eternal fate is not your own doing or responsibility, but has been planned for you by an omniscient, omnipotent God who cannot fail! If you have not done so already, do so today!

Follow The Three Step Salvation Plan

Advertisements

Posted in Bible, Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

Human Free Will Versus God’s Decree? 2 Chronicles 10:15 Endorses The Latter

Posted by Job on February 15, 2012

Background: despite being given everything imaginable by God and then some – including God personally visiting him twice – Solomon ceased living by faith and trusting in God, and instead began to put his faith in things of this world, including idolatry. Solomon chose to marry pagan women, for instance, because it was the common political practice of the day for kings to form treaties. If a king wished to form an economic, military or political alliance with another kingdom or tribe, you would marry a female relative – usually the daughter – of the king that he was conducting the business of state with. So, instead of trusting God to provide peace and prosperity for his people, Solomon chose political maneuvering. Solomon added to that faithless behavior by worshiping the devils of his pagan wives. Why? It is simple enough to presume that his desire to please his wives was no different from that of Adam when he chose to eat the forbidden fruit given to him by his wife Eve. One can extend that with the political mess that Solomon had gotten himself into by marrying these women in the first place: as these women were dedicated to the false deities of their own land, Solomon had to worship their gods to keep them happy. Otherwise, word would have certainly gotten back to the fathers – rival kings! – of these women that Solomon was mistreating their daughters, and there goes the peace treaty! The resulting situation: it would have been better for Solomon to have never used marriage for the purpose of political alliances at all than to do so and anger the daughter of a rival king or warlord! Such a king would ask “Why marry my daughter at all if you are going to mistreat her by refusing to worship her god?” Realize that no good answer exists to that question! One must consider the polytheistic pagan mindset of the era – in contrast to Yahwist monotheism – where adding another god to the list that you were worshiping was easier than buying a new pair of shoelaces. So, if Solomon worshiped the god of some of his wives (i.e. his Hebrew wives) and not others, from the flawed perspective of the pagan women that he married, there was no reason for him to do so other than not only preferring some of his wives over the rest, but going out of his way to do so in order to humiliate and spitefully mistreat her! And the children of the ill-favored wife of the king have an uncertain future … just an impossible situation that Solomon got himself into. Which, of course, is the case with all sinful disobedience to God’s command!

In any case, God punished Solomon for his sin by decreeing that rule of 9 of the 11 tribes and their territory (remember, the Levites were a special case) would be stripped from his lineage, and the house of David would be left with rule over only a small portion of the kingdom, which turned out to be the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. (Evidence that this was God’s doing: because of the enmity between the house of David of Judah and the house of Saul of Benjamin over the throne – a bloody conflict that continued until at least after the crowning of Solomon – the tribe of Benjamin SHOULD HAVE joined the rebellion, and used the opportunity to have one  of its members become king of the 9 tribes that broke away from the house of David based on a claim to the throne on Saul being the rightful, legitimate king, and the rebellion against Rehoboam being proof that David was a fraud and usurper. Instead, the tribe of Benjamin alone joined the tribe of Judah to form the southern kingdom despite the house of Saul having contested the house of David over the throne a mere few decades prior, and when casting their lot with the other 9 tribes and then going to war with the 1 remaining tribe seeming to be a rather good way of getting the monarchy – and rule over all 12 tribes – back to the tribe of Benjamin! How wonderful and amazing is God able to reveal His power and His mighty workings!)

The situation: early in the reign of Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, a challenge to the reign of the young king – likely provoked by Jeroboam – arises. The twelve tribes have a choice: continue with the leadership anointed by God, or rebel. Nine tribes – Zebulun, Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Manasseh, Ephraim, Reuben and Gad – make a free will decision to reject membership in the earthly, visible, typological manifestation of God’s kingdom (God’s covenant nation Israel as ruled by the house of David, with Jerusalem as its capital and worship taking place in the temple which held the ark of the covenant) in favor of apostasy. Make no mistake: in rejecting the kingdom of David, these tribes chose apostasy. Jeroboam, the leader of the breakaway group, set up a rival religious system in Bethel. (Consider that as the Jerusalem temple and its religion pointed to Jesus Christ, Jeroboam’s system – which involved an altar with two golden calves similar to the calves of Baal made by Aaron at the demand of the rebellious children of Israel at Sinai! – was similarly anti-Christ.) The northern kingdom continued in this false worship – as well as with a line of evil, pagan kings – up until their destruction and scattering by the Assyrians in 722 BC. Yes, the southern kingdom, Judah, was taken by Babylon, but God suffered a remnant to return to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple. No such provision for restoration was made concerning the northern 10 tribes, who remained estranged from the true religion until the gospel of Jesus Christ came to the Samaritans from the Messianic Jewish evangelists as recorded in Acts 8 (a missionary enterprise prefigured by Jesus Christ Himself in His dialogue with the Samaritan woman in John 4:4-42).

Evidence that the northern kingdom committed apostasy came from their own lips. 2 Chronicles 10:16 reads “And when all Israel saw that the king would not hearken unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to your tents, O Israel: and now, David, see to thine own house. So all Israel went to their tents.” Now who does the Bible reveal as the Son of David (and David is the son of Jesse)? Jesus Christ. The people who took part in the Jeroboam rebellion removed themselves from the Davidic inheritance – from the blessings of Jesus Christ of whom David was a prefigure and a type – with their own words. How similar was this act to that of the Jews, who embraced the destruction of Jerusalem, temple, and nation and end of the Jewish age in 70 A.D. when they cried “His Blood be upon us and our children!” in Matthew 27:25 concerning Jesus Christ when Pontius Pilate attempted to release Christ? And note when the rebels stated: we will return to our tends, so David see to your own house. In essence, these were backsliders proclaiming that they were returning to the world and its ways – spiritually returning to Sodom and Egypt – and telling the believers to get on with their on church business of worshiping and serving God.

Now, it might have seemed that the Jews of the time of Jesus Christ made a free will decision to reject Jesus Christ, but Jesus Christ Himself stated that their rejection of Him had to be done in order so that the scriptures could be fulfilled, and God’s decree as represented by the scriptures would come to pass. Well, the same is true of the forerunners of the Samaritans in the time of Rehoboam. It appeared that they made a free will decision to reject the Davidic monarchy – and again the Davidic monarchy was the earthly typological prefiguring of the rule of Jesus Christ – to instead follow the anti-Christological figure of Jeroboam. But the Bible itself tells us: things were not as they appear. When Rehoboam decided to go to war against the rebellious tribes to bring them back under the rule of the house of David, God spoke these words through Shemaiah the prophet in 2 Chronicles 11:2-4, which reads “But the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying, Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren: return every man to his house: for this thing is done of Me. And they obeyed the words of the LORD, and returned from going against Jeroboam.”

So make no mistake: the tribes that became the northern kingdom did not make a free will decision to reject Jesus Christ (through the proxy of rejecting the Davidic monarchy which in that time represented Christ … please make note that in our time there is no earthly institution that represents Jesus Christ, but rather the church is IN CHRIST and is the Body of Christ). Why? Because they had no power, no prerogative, no ability to make such a decision. In other words, they could not make a free will decision because their wills were not free. Instead, their apostasy only happened because God decreed it. This is what the Bible explicitly, specifically said. It was not a case – as the Arminians and similar claim – of predestined foreknowledge through which an omniscient omnipotent God “learns” of future events and reacts to them (the heresy of open theism embraced by the likes of Greg Boyd and Clark Pinnock as the result of taking Wesleyan free will soteriology to its logical conclusion). God did not “see” the rebellion of the northern tribes and adjust His salvation-historical plan accordingly. Instead, God DECREED the rebellion of the northern tribes because it was part of His salvation-historical plan that was set in place before the foundation of the world (Jhn 17:241Cr 2:7Eph 1:42Ti 1:91Pe 1:20).

Regarding this incident, the marginal notes for 2 Chronicles 10:5 the Geneva Bible state “God’s will imposeth such a necessity to the second causes, that nothing can be done but according to the same, and yet man’s will worketh as of itself, so that it cannot be excused in doing that it is God’s ordinance.” Now that marginal note refers to how the rash actions of King Rehoboam that provoked the northern tribes to rebel was caused by God (KJV translates nĕcibbah ‘elohiym more literally as “for the cause was of God” where the Geneva Bible makes the more interpretative “it was the ordinance of God”). Still: the action and the reaction were the result of God’s provident operation behind the scenes. It is impossible for the will of man to resist the will of God! Yet, as the Geneva Bible study notes tell us, as man’s will follows its own sinful nature unless God acts to withhold man from behaving according to his totally depraved original sin condition, God’s decree is no excuse for evil acts done by man. As Paul tells us in Romans 1:20, concerning our evil deeds, we are without excuse.

A natural impulse is to charge God with unfairness for decreeing such things, and then punishing man for his actions that are associated with the decree. But as God reminded Isaiah in verse 55:9, For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. In other words, God cannot be tried, judged and convicted as evil according to man’s limited – and fallen – notions of right and wrong. For example, God is not obligated to save all mankind, or even to try. (Though the “or even to try” is misleading: for as God is omnipotent, were He to attempt to save all mankind, He would most certainly to succeed. Otherwise, He would not be omnipotent, and therefore by definition He would not be God in accordance with how God is revealed in the Holy Scriptures.) Instead, it is only by God’s grace that ANY are saved. And it is God’s prerogative to grant grace to whomever He chooses, and to withhold that same grace from whoever He chooses. Romans 9:13-23 reads “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory.”

Yes, this most certainly applies to salvation. Man certainly has his responsibility, to make an affirmative choice using his will to repent of his sins and believe in Jesus Christ upon being confronted with the fact of the gospel. But make no mistake: a man only fulfills this responsibility concerning his personal salvation through the exercise of his will in this fashion if it concurs with God’s eternal decree to save him! God only frees the will of those that He plans to save, and the sole purpose of this liberty is to choose Jesus Christ and thereby become born again and in Jesus Christ. Hence, the liberation of the will as provided by God to the elect is not to do whatever one pleases, but instead it is liberation from original sin, the grips of Satan that has deceived the whole world, and the spiritual deadness that results. Evidence of this: not everyone gets to make a choice. The vast majority of people to walk the face of this earth have never heard of God or His gospel, let alone had a chance to make a free will choice to accept or reject God. Instead, many – but not everyone – are called through the hearing of the gospel, but only the few that are chosen by God become saved from their sins and born again as a result.

Hence in truth there is no free will but only God’s decree except inasmuch as God uses man’s will to accomplish His decree. So then, is there any way to tell to whom the mystery of salvation has been divinely granted? The answer: we only know as a result of who truly responds to the gospel by faith. Faith is not an emotional reaction or an intellectual response, but instead is gift given by God the Holy Spirit to those that God intends to save. Though we are not saved by works, evidence of God-given faith is obedience to the commandments of God as recorded in the Holy Scriptures (John 14:15). This is what is meant by the text “make your calling and election sure) of 2 Peter 1:10. If you have not already, make your calling and election sure by:

Following The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in Bible, Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Colossians 1:15 How Jesus Christ Is Firstborn Of Creation

Posted by Job on October 7, 2009

Arians, Ebionites, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, theological liberals, and othe pseudo-Christian cults have long used Colossians 1:15 to deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, claiming that the notion was contrived long after the apostolic period through the syncretization of Christianity with Greco-Roman polytheism. What gives these hard-hearted people (who are in much need of prayer that God would open their hearts so that they would receive in it the true gospel) the opportunity is the text “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.” Such people use that text to deny Jesus Christ’s pre-existence and divinity, claiming that it proves that Jesus Christ was the first thing that God created i.e. the chief angel. They deal with such passages as the Johannine prologue by stating that it only means that Jesus Christ existed before the creation of the world, the natural universe, or that God created Jesus Christ and then Jesus Christ created everything else. Another angle is the assertion that takes more seriously the gospel of John (and other places that identify Jesus Christ as the Word of God) is that Jesus Christ’s creation occurred the first time that God spoke or thought, or at the very least the first time that God spoke or thought with respect to creative activity. Truthfully, the doctrine of “the eternal generation of the Son”, while considered orthodox, comes very dangerously close to semi-Arianism when taken to its logical conclusion, so those who espouse this doctrine erect logically artificial and arbitrary barriers in order to keep from being counted as heretics. The only difference is that semi-Arianism (Jesus Christ was created the first time God spoke) views Jesus Christ with respect to ontological, philosophical or logical time (while realizing that actual time is a part of creation and thus does not exist in eternity) where “the eternal generation of the Son” denies, ignores or refuses to deal with ontology. You may ask “why should a Christian deal with abstract concepts like ontology anyway?” Well, that is a question that must be answered by the people who adhere to and preach “the eternal generation of the Son” doctrine, which really has no reason for existing beyond philosophy, as it has virtually no practical implications on orthodoxy or orthopraxy (right thinking and right living). If you are going to adhere to and preach a doctrine – especially one that is in and of itself not a core doctrine of the faith but still has real implications for other core doctrines of the faith (as “the eternal generation of God the Son” does for Trinity) – you had better be prepared to deal with what the doctrine implies and leads to. In any event, both semi-Arianism (Jesus Christ originated when God first thought or spoke) and “the eternal generation of the Son” (Jesus Christ exists as God speaks and does so without being a function of time in any way) pose problems for the nature of existence itself, which is that something can only exist if it exists as a unity. This is borne out in Genesis 2:7 and Ecclesiastes 3:21, which make clear that a man cannot and does not exist unless there is a unity of body and spirit. By the same token, God does not exist without a unity of the Father, the Word and the Spirit. If the Word or the Spirit or the Father require creation or generation, that negates the Unity without which God does not exists, and thus violates Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.” Also, as scripture also declares God to be unchanging, God does not create or generate new parts to Himself, so what would be created or generated would necessarily be either a creature (Arianism/Jehovah’s Witnesses) or another god (what “eternal generation of the Son” would possibly lead to if its ontological implications were acknowledged and dealt with rather than simply shoved into “eternity” and ignored).

So, regarding “eternal generation of the Son”, the position should be that the Son is not generated but like the Father and the Spirit simply is and has always been, and this is what the meaning of the Name of God I AM THAT I AM (Exodus 3:14) refers to. Further, it is something that is not only true with respect to time (keep in mind the Arian/Jehovah’s Witness argument, which deals with the problems posed by Jesus Christ’s being a creature by simply saying that it is true by being before Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1-18) or timelessness (“eternal generation of the Son”) but ontologically as well. (Truthfully, since the ancient near eastern mindset that produced the Bible did not include ontology, which is a western construct, then God referring to Himself as I AM THAT I AM  of Exodus 3:14 is true spiritually. Where the western mindset has reduced spiritual truth to being merely allegorical, moral, ethical or abstract, the Biblical mindset recognizes spiritual truth as being as explicit, valid and relevant as is 2+2=4 or the law of gravity, or moreover that 2+2 is only always equal to 4 or the law of gravity is only always consistent because of the spiritual truth that is behind it, defines it, and sustains it, and that spiritual truth is none other than Jesus Christ. And yes, the fact that it was most definitely Jesus Christ who appeared to Moses as the flame that did not burn the bush and used the Name I AM THAT I AM with reference to Himself is not only relevant, but would necessarily preclude Arianism/Jehovah’s Witnesses or “eternal generation of the Son”, for had those been so Jesus Christ would have had to say “I am the first that was created” or “I am he who is generated.”)

So if the witness of scripture is to be internally consistent, how can Colossians 1:15 be true? How can Jesus Christ be the firstborn of every creature? The common way is to use the actual definition of firstborn, which is “first in rank” and use it in reference to Jesus Christ’s authority, dominion and rule as creation’s King. It refers to Jesus Christ as Ruler of the universe par excellence. According to this definition, the original firstborn of creation then was Adam. Thus, this is certainly not because Adam was the first thing created (because Adam was created on the 6th day, and thus temporally was actually the LAST thing created!) but because God gave Adam dominion over the earth. Adam forfeited this dominion and firstborn status, and this dominion transferred to Satan. However, Satan was only a usurper. He held the dominion but never the firstborn status, and even his dominion was illegitimately and temporarily possessed just as the pagan Athaliah was illegitimately ruler of Judah for a time (for 6 years, with 6 being the number of a man, how’s that for numerology!) before being replaced by a legitimate rightful monarch that was a son of David. Consider the typology. Athaliah: type. Satan: antitype. Joash: type. Jesus Christ: anti-type. Jesus Christ was the second Adam who not only took on the dominion legitimately but also the firstborn status that Satan could never have even by theft.

Now God gave Adam dominion, the status of firstborn, so that Adam could serve God and in this way God would be glorified through Adam’s service. Adam, of course, was disobedient and utterly failed to fulfill the purpose of his creation – mankind’s creation – which was to serve and glorify God. However, Jesus Christ did so. By way of the incarnation, Jesus Christ became fully man. Born under the law to God’s elect people Israel, Jesus Christ fulfilled the law with His perfect life, living in perfect obedience to God the Father, and fulfilling the purpose of mankind’s creation and also mankind’s destiny, which was and is to glorify God through perfect service forever. So, Adam was the firstborn of creation that failed and died. Jesus Christ is the firstborn of creation that succeeded, was resurrected from the dead and is alive forevermore, and therefore is the Head of all redeemed mankind who will fulfill the purposes mankind’s creation – to serve and glorify God – through Jesus Christ by being Jesus Christ’s own Body. This perfect eternal service is impossible for us to achieve on our own – as Adam proved – but is attainable only by being in Jesus Christ, and our being joined to the firstborn of creation. Where Adam failed to be the progenitor or head of a nation, a people, a race of perfect eternal servants (or even to be this perfect eternal servant himself) Jesus Christ succeeded and is the Head of the church, the bride, the body of Christ.

Now Jesus Christ only succeeded in fulfilling Adam’s original purpose and therefore becoming the true firstborn of creation because unlike Adam, He is fully God. However, Jesus Christ was only fit to fulfill Adam’s purpose, to become the second Adam, by being fully human just as was Adam. Christians can be rightfully accused of refusing to deal with the true nature and implications of Jesus Christ’s humanity because of our desire not to sin and become heretics. Of course, Jesus Christ is the eternal and self-existing God, part of the Triune Godhead. However, this same Jesus Christ was incarnated into A CREATED HUMAN BODY! Jesus Christ’s human body was born of a created woman’s created seed just as was you and I. The ovum in Mary was not eternal, but was created along with Mary, and as such Jesus Christ had a created human body just as do you or I. This body was not simply some animatronic shell, cover or mask for the true divine Person pulling the levers under the covers, which incidentally is a form of the docetism heresy. That implies that Jesus Christ was a fake human who only seemed real. But we know from Romans, Hebrews, Genesis 3:15, and elsewhere that Jesus Christ was a fully thoroughly 100% real human who experienced physical and mental growth, hunger, pain, thirst, agony, isolation, frustration, rejection, temptation and even natural death just like the rest of the human race. That is why He is able to be our priest, His identification with us. However, many of us take the scriptures that refer to Jesus Christ’s identification with us to be more of an association, an affiliation, something less than real. This thinking falls short of the truth of Biblical revelation, and is based on the modern western meaning of “identify with”, which implies merely allegiance or advocacy. For instance, it is possible for a wealthy person to “identify with” the poor through feelings of compassion, works of charity, even political and social advocacy. But unless that person literally gives all his money away and renounces any connections or privileges that he has (i.e. a title or family heritage that he may use to recover at least some of his wealth and status) he will never actually be poor. Jesus Christ did not identify with humanity in that sense, a false and ultimately superficial sense.

Instead, Jesus Christ identified with humanity in the true sense by becoming one of us! Now humans cannot in any way become God in any sense. But in the greatest miracle that ever was or will be, Jesus Christ DID become a human in every sense! And make no mistake, do not be deceived: humans are part of creation. So even though Jesus Christ is God who pre-exists creation, accomplished creation, and in every way transcends creation, when Jesus Christ was incarnated into human flesh, HE BECAME A PART OF CREATION! Now do not be offended or deceived. First off, being God and also not being born of Adam’s seed but rather being the Word of God born of a virgin by the Holy Ghost, Jesus Christ had no part in the sin and corruption that creation fell into, and it no part in Him. After all, please recall that creation was originally sinless, a fact proven by God calling it “good”, and God has never at any time called anything sinful or evil “good” except that which God justified by graciously imputing His own righteousness to it (as is the case of sinners). Second, this is not to be confused with such liberal heretical abominations as “process theology” or “death of God theology” which at times holds that God completely surrendered His divine nature. Instead, Jesus Christ became part of creation through His incarnation (becoming fully human) while never at any time ceasing to transcend creation because of His divinity (self-existing and eternal). You can call it the “hypostatic union” if you absolutely must (I do not and have even been accused of adhering to the Nestorianism heresy because of it), but that does not alter the facts.  The result is that through His becoming part of creation, Jesus Christ is given the role of both priest/intercessor/savior for creation (the part of which is elect and will be redeemed) and the judge of creation (the part which is not and will not and whose fate is destruction).

This should cause us to read Colossians 1:15 in a new way. We either read “image of the invisible God, firstborn of creation” devotionally, or we view those as two facts that while true are separate. Instead, Colossians 1:15 is a unity. It describes the incarnation! Man is made in the image of God. Jesus Christ became a man. Jesus Christ became not just any man, but the second Adam. As the first Adam was – until the fall – the firstborn of creation, Jesus Christ by virtue of His incarnation, life, ministry, atoning and substitutionary death on the cross and resurrection not only became the second Adam, but did so in a way that far transcends and exceeded the first Adam! So, not only did Jesus Christ fulfill the original intent of humanity (and by extension of creation, for man is part of creation and creation was accomplished to please and glorify God) but Jesus Christ fulfilled the original intent of mankind and creation in a way BETTER and MORE PLEASING to God the Father than we ever could have ourselves, even if we were to somehow live perfect lives! Again, even if somehow we were to live perfect sinless lives, we would never fulfill the purpose of humanity better or give more honor and glory to God the Father than did Jesus Christ! And not only did Jesus Christ fulfill the purpose of humanity to the glory of God the Father as God the Father’s Suffering Servant, but He did it FOR US as OUR SERVANTS! It is often said that Jesus Christ died for us on the cross, but He also LIVED FOR US BEFORE GOING TO THE CROSS! As a result, Christians receive the benefits of Jesus Christ’s life, death and resurrection!

Now how many of you out there are parents? Or take care of elderly or handicapped people? In your role as a parent or caretaker, you do for those under your trust and care what they cannot do for themselves: you earn a living, you provide housing, food and clothes, you pay taxes, and in many cases you literally do the work of dressing, bathing, feeding and monitoring them or you pay for the services of someone else who does. A great part of your life is doing for others what others cannot do for themselves and allowing others to benefit from it. Well, that is the same thing that Jesus Christ did for you, except in a grander and more majestic way on an infinitely greater scale! Your purpose in being created was to glorify God, and not only did Jesus Christ do something for you that you could not do yourself, but He did it better than you could ever do even if you could!

And consider that for a second. This child that you are taking care of as a parent will one day grow up and take care of himself. Your son or daughter might do a better job! As a matter of fact, if you are a good loving parent, you hope that they will for themselves and for their own children! By the same token, what if this person who has suffered a stroke or is paralyzed gets healed by God. They go from being taken care of by you to taking care of themselves, and again a decent moral person would hope that they would receive better care from their own hand than they did from yours. And this is an example of how and why what Jesus Christ did for you is so amazing, so special. Because no matter how much you grow up, no matter how much your body (or mind) gets healed, better or stronger, you will NEVER be able to live a perfect life. You can exist for an eternity and still NEVER be able to do what Jesus Christ did for you by living a perfect life on your behalf, and you CERTAINLY would never be able to use your own perfect existence to justify someone else by imputing your righteousness to them.

But Jesus Christ did all that and more by becoming the image of the invisible God, a man in the image of God who yet is simultaneously is God. And He did not rest or be content with simply being a man in the image of God who also is God, but He also succeeded in living a life that glorified God the Father at all times and in every way. And it is because of this that God glorified His Name above every Name, that God bestowed the status of “firstborn of creation” upon Him! Jesus Christ is God who became part of creation and now sits at creation’s head as its Ruler, King, and Firstborn, and did all of this without violating that which is revealed in scripture which is part of God’s nature, which is that God is unchangeable! That is right, Jesus Christ accomplished creation, became part of creation, and became priest for redeemed creation and judge for that which is not redeemed without His Divine nature being altered or changed in any way. (Incidentally, this is something that liberal theologies – i.e.  process theology and open theism – deny.) Now again, I am not a “hypostatic union” guy, but I do acknowledge that the hypostatic union doctrine does articulate and explain this.

So the core of Colossians 1:15 is that Jesus Christ has full membership in both Deity and creation by way of the incarnation. Jesus Christ did this in obedience to God the Father, but He also did it for you! However, in order to partake of the benefits of Jesus Christ becoming a man so that He could die on the cross for your sins in your place, you must believe that these things are true, and as a result turn away from your sins and submit to Jesus Christ as Your Lord and Savior. If there are any people who do not believe in Jesus Christ as described here, I encourage you to do so right now. If there are any Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, oneness pentecostals, Muslims, Jews, Roman Catholics or anyone else who denies the Deity or true nature of Jesus Christ or His life and work as clearly revealed through scripture, I encourage you to turn away from those and submit yourself to the truth. I do not say “accept the truth” because that implies that you are in some way an entity who has a role in creating, deciding, or being an arbiter of truth. Rest assured, only God is the creator, decider, determiner, arbiter and revealer of truth, so these things are going to be true whether you accept them or not. So, your duty then is to respond by believing them through faith and following through with obedience. That is the way, the only way that you can submit to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and be saved.

For more information follow  The Three Step Salvation Plan.Vodpod videos no longer available.

Posted in Christianity, watchtower tract | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments »

On The Origin Of Sin And Evil

Posted by Job on August 24, 2009

It is a vexing question for Christians: the origin of evil. If God did not create evil, is not the author of evil, and does not tempt with evil, why does evil exist? Where did it come from? And why did God not prevent or destroy it? Why did man (and Satan) fall, and why did God not act to prevent it?

To begin to answer these questions, we must not start with evil and sin. Instead, we must start with holiness. Jesus Christ Himself stated that there is none holy but God in a statement recorded in each of the synoptic gospels: Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, and Luke 18:19. Making this statement of Jesus Christ even more unusual is the context, in which He appeared to be deflecting the statement of the rich young ruler who was assigning this attribute to Him. Jesus Christ did so not to deny His own holiness or His deity, but rather because the rich young ruler did not recognize His deity. The rich young ruler did not approach Jesus Christ with the mind and heart that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, but instead as if he were approaching just another rabbi. So, Jesus Christ told the rich young ruler not to credit any man with having a divine attribute, that is something belonging only to God. So clearly only God is holy.

What, then is holiness? Holiness for the purposes of this exercise is total separation from and lack of sin or evil. Sin and evil, therefore, is that which God is unconditionally separate from and as a result is hated and rejected by God … that which has no portion with God and God has no portion with it. Further, being sovereign, God has the sole right to determine what is sin and what isn’t, including but certainly not limited to defining by His command, including declaring sin to be the breaking of His command. Thus, it is necessary and sufficient to say that Adam fell simply by doing something that God told him not to do. God being Adam’s creator and sovereign had every right to give Adam commands and to punish Adam for not keeping them. Thus, there had to be nothing inherently wrong or evil about eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (i.e. nothing intrinsically wrong with the tree itself that made it sinful to eat) in order for God to convict Adam of sin and thereby condemn him for eating it. Adam’s doing something that God told him not to do was enough in and of itself. And by the mere act of disobeying God, Adam demonstrated that he did not live up to God’s standard of holiness.

This should not surprise anyone. Indeed, it is inevitable. No one can live up to God’s standard of holiness but God. In order to live up to God’s standard of holiness, one has to be eternal, omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. Any entity lacking those qualities will eventually inevitably fall into corruption. This has to happen, this will happen because of the limited nature of created things. For example, consider moral agents. Even in the absence of original sin, a created moral agent will fail to always behave perfectly because of the lack of perfect knowledge – that is omniscience – required to do so. Even if this moral agent were given perfect knowledge – or at the very least the sufficient knowledge required to function in a limited arena – the moral agent would lack the perfect will or desire to use this knowledge in the right way. Not knowing the consequences of one’s actions (and by this I mean the consequences that every single action will have for all time) alone is something that prevents a limited being from being eternally holy, because to be eternally holy by definition means being free of limitation. (I am not stating that the sole cause of the lack of holiness is a lack of knowledge – which teeters on gnosticism – but a lack of knowledge can certainly cause a lack of perfection. Adam possessed all of the knowledge required not to sin, but he still sinned because he was limited in otherwise.)

Again, this is holiness and the absence from evil according to God’s perspective, not according to man’s religious, theological, or philosophical standards. Man cannot even comprehend the holiness of God, and what limited knowledge that we have of these things is due to what God has graciously revealed to us for the purpose of making Himself known to us and drawing us to Him. Thus, the only conclusion is that to create moral agents – man and angels – was to create beings would inevitably sin due to their limited nature and their ability to act on that nature in a way that would fail to live up to God’s standards.

Does this make God the creator or author of evil? God forbid. Creation was perfect and sinless when God accomplished it … God declared it to be “very good” in Genesis 1:31. The Hebrew word translated “good”, which is “towb”, does not only mean physically and structurally sound or pleasant (though this is certainly the case) but also morally or ethically good, such as that which Jesus Christ bore witness of to the rich young ruler. So by God calling creation “good”, it meant that creation possessed an original holiness or righteousness. There was not an evil thing present in creation at this time. So what of Satan? Ezekiel 28:15 tells Satan: “Thou [wast] perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.” Similar to “towb”, the Hebrew word “tamilyn”, translated perfect, has moral meanings i.e. sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity, what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact. The word “tamilyn” is also translated as “perfect” when describing the ways of God in such places as Deuteronomy 32:4 and Psalm 18:30. So, iniquity was not created as part of Satan, but rather Satan, by making use of his own moral agency, generated his own iniquity.

And why did Satan use his own moral agency to fall, as well as the other angels who joined him in rebellion? The answer is in 1 Timothy 5:21, which is that Satan and his demons were not elect. Being created in a state of original innocence but unable to attain eternal absolute holiness by virtue of being so limited as a created being, Satan and his demons used their free agency to fall. The angels who did not join Satan in his rebellion were prevented by doing so not by the purity of their own moral agency, for they were subject to the same limitations as Satan. Instead, they did not join Satan only because God prevented them, because God preserved and sustained them with His power. In short, the angels did not fall because they were elect, and they did not elect themselves but rather God elected them.

So is God responsible for the sins of Adam, Satan, and all who followed them by failing to elect them? God forbid. Claiming such a thing would deny the meaning of moral agency. To use a very imperfect illustration: consider parents and their children. Consider the case of parents who do all that they possibly can for their children, including providing loving stable homes, discipline, food and shelter, education, and religious training, yet for all their efforts their children turn out rotten anyway. Are the parents to blame? Of course not. What is more, even in the case of parents who are much less responsible and honorable in the treatment of their children, it is acknowledged by society (and more important it is ackonwledged in the Bible) that the adult children of parents make their own decisions and are responsible for them. So, if parents are not held accountable for the moral decisions of their children, how much less is God responsible for the moral agency of humans and angels? Charging the sin of humans and angels to God is claiming that God was the author of evil for accomplishing creation in the first place, and therefore God was not within His rights to perform creation. Of course, that denies God’s position as sovereign. This is the common human error of allowing God a degree of relative sovereignty. This is the type of sovereignty afforded to human kings or nations, and is necessary because A) human kings and nations have limitations and B) such entities have to coexist with other kings and nations. This is not the case with God, as He has no limitations to His knowledge or power, and He is the Unique God, there are no other gods beside Him, so He does not need to coexist or share His dominion or glory with anyone.

Thus, God had the absolute right to accomplish creation, and being holy the work of His hands (which He does not despise! Job 10:3) creation was sinless and innocent in its original state, with God being solely responsible for its original innocence. The fall of moral agents into sin due to their own actions was their own responsibility, and not in any way blamed on God or chargeable to God in a way that is similar (again in a very limited and imperfect fashion) to how the waywardness of children is not blamed on their righteous parents. (As an example, consider that the prophet Samuel’s children did not walk in his path, a fact that was never blamed on Samuel by scripture. Also, even the fact that the priest Eli’s sons were wicked were not blamed on Eli. Instead, God only charged Eli for failing to attempt to restrain – that is discipline – his evil sons!) So, the issue is God’s knowing that His moral agents – if left to their own devices – would fall. However, there is a great difference between knowing that something will happen and being responsible for it happening. People who claim that God’s knowing that created moral agents would fail is the same as causing moral agents to fail are simply looking for an excuse to accuse God so that they may justify their own sins. Amazingly, certain Christians – responding to an argument that is false and dishonest on its face – attempt to claim that God did not know that His moral agents would fail and simply reacted when they did. Not only does this notion deny God’s omniscience, but it goes further, implying that God would somehow be unaware of the effects of the limitations of man and angels until He saw these limitations in action. This is the (increasingly popular) heresy of open theism.

Some argue that God’s failure to universally prevent His limited creation from corruption as He does with elect angels (and as He will with His elect humans in heaven) makes Him responsible for evil. Again, that is denial of the true meaning of responsibility and moral agency, a position taken by sinful man to justify his own evil. Proof that this position is sinful is that it was the first excuse made by Adam after the fall! When God asked Adam the reason for his sin, Adam replied in Genesis 3:12 “And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” In other words, Adam attempted to claim that God caused or at least tempted him to commit evil by giving him Eve, so therefore God was either responsible or shared in the responsibility by giving him Eve to begin with. God did not so much as dignify Adam’s accusation with a response, and neither should we dignify those who claim that God caused the fall of mankind and angels by not using a policy of universal election. Instead, it is well within the prerogative of a sovereign God to elect and predestine according to his own desires. Those who are not elected do not perish because of God’s being the cause of their evil state, for God made creation in a state of original innocency. Instead, those who are not elected perish because of their own sin. God does not predestine people to wrath. Quite the contrary, and against the error of double predestination advocated by Theodore Beza and similar, it is not God’s will that any should perish (2 Peter 3:9). Instead, what happens is that those whom God does not intervene on their behalf fall into sin of their own accord. As Romans 1:18-32 states, God gives such people up to their own evil, and they are without excuse. Were God to be blamed in any way for not practicing universal election, Romans 1:18-32 would be demonstrably false, and moreover God would have been compelled to respect Adam’s accusation against Him in the Garden of Eden with “You know, you are right. You will go unpunished.” God forbid that this should be so! Instead, rather than charging God with unfairness for not practicing universal election, it is totally, thoroughly the work of wholly unmerited grace from God that any part of creation is saved at all. (Please note: this is not some Pelagian denial of original sin which states that man is condemned not through Adam but instead is condemned upon the commission of the first sin. Incidentally, that is what some forms of hyper-Arminianism and hyper-Wesleyanism holds, but such positions deny the epistle to Romans and similar. Instead, this only explains why the sin of Adam was inevitable, and God’s placing Adam in a perfect environment and giving him only a single command for which he had no reason whatsoever to break is proof of this.)

An imperfect but still workable illustration of this is given by Will Metzger in his book on evangelism Tell The Truth. Suppose that a baker were to make a batch of cookies that for whatever reason were flawed: too much or too little sugar, overcooked, flawed ingredients, etc. Are you to blame for making the cookies in the first place? Of course not, it is your kitchen, you can make whatever you want in it. Are you obligated to save or use all of the cookies? Of course not, they’re your cookies. You made them with your own labor in your own kitchen with your own ingredients. The cookies have no case against you and no say concerning  their fate, and – being the only cook – no one else has any say either. You did nothing wrong in making the cookies, you do nothing wrong by discarding them on account of the cookies being flawed. But what if you decide to keep some of the cookies? If they aren’t sweet enough, you put icing on them. If they are burned, you scrape the bottom and the edges off. How many? Its your decision. Which? Again, your decision. Are you wrong or unfair for keeping only some and not sparing all? Says who? Again, you own these cookies and you get to decide that happens to them, and saving any of a batch of bad cookies shows your patience and willingness to overlook faults as a cook. (As well as being someone who REALLY likes cookies.) Again, claiming that the cook is unrighteous for baking in the first place or for saving some of the cookies but not all would be considered absurd. After all, the chef’s prerogative, right? So why do we deny this same prerogative to God? It is true, humans are more valuable than cookies. But it is equally true that God is more valuable than human chefs! Now of course this illustration is imperfect, for our sins are not due to such things as using flawed ingredients or leaving us in the oven too long; were any such thing the case it would be possible to state that God is the author of evil. Instead, this illustration only explains why God cannot be charged with evil because of performing creation and of not practicing universal election.

Thus, it was because of inherent limitations that sin was inevitable for man and angels. And it is only because of the loving grace of our Sovereign Creator God who lacks such limitations (and therefore is in a position and has the ability and prerogative to dispense such grace) that any humans and angels are spared eternal destruction. Praise and glory be to our righteous and loving God for He is worthy to be praised! Honor Him and give Him glory, for His rule is over all and shall last forever!

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Does God Learn? Refuting The Open Theism Heresy

Posted by Job on March 29, 2009

Posted in Christianity, false doctrine, false teaching | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Kim Clement Prophesies That Barack Obama Will Win. Elijah’s List Prophesies That Sarah Palin’s Win. Who Is Right?

Posted by Job on September 19, 2008

Elijah’s list claiming that it is the will of God for Sarah Palin to win:

Recent Rantings from the ‘New Apostles’: The Coming Election and the Angel Named Union

Kim Clement claiming that it is God’s Will for Barack Obama to win:

False Prophet Kim Clement Says President Barack HUSSEIN Obama Will Bring Peace To Middle East

So Pentecostal Word of Faith charismatics, since these are BOTH anointed true prophets of God bringing fresh wine and new oil – or is it fresh oil and new wine – how can they both be right? Well, for one, it is obvious that NONE OF THESE PEOPLE GIVE TWO CENTS ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN OR JOE BIDEN! So maybe Barack Obama will win, ask Joe Biden to step down, and make Sarah Palin his vice president? Or maybe it is that ALL OF THESE PEOPLE ARE LIARS, FRAUDS, AND FALSE PROPHETS THAT ARE GOING TO DO FLOATING BELLYFLOPS INTO THE LAKE OF FIRE?!?!

By the way, both of these “prophecies” seem to strongly hint that Jesus Christ will return in 2012 or thereabouts. Since these people are LIARS, then it is far more likely that Jesus Christ will come back in 2237. Even if the rapture is a correct doctrine, IF YOU FOLLOW THESE LICENTIOUS THIEVES AND LIARS YOU WILL MISS IT! We will be five years into the scenarios depicted in the “Left Behind” movies and these guys will still be making prophecies AND STILL MAKING YOU PAY THEM FOR IT!

Now there is only one theological way – and it is a false theology by the way – that these “prophets” cannot be in conflict: if you believe in the open theism heresy (or apostasy). According to open theism, God’s Will, plan, providence, etc. changes or adapts to accommodate or fit the actions of man. Applying it here, Obama WAS God’s choice to be president according to the conditions of the time, but McCain’s choosing Palin caused (forced?) an adaptation on God’s part. While it is theoretically possible to salvage the doctrine of God’s sovereignty and ultimate control over history with this doctrine in a macro level, it is impossible to maintain that God rules the life of each person with this doctrine. The general direction of a nation and world, especially in an eschatological sense? Yes. Specifics regarding an individual, or perhaps even any number of people? Impossible. But realize: this is merely taking free will Arminian decision Christianity to its logical conclusion! Once you abandon “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” to “free will” in one area, it is impossible not to do so in others. A bigger issue: open theism, especially in matters like these, does harm to the doctrine of God’s being transcendent, meaning His being totally separate from creation, especially space – time. This doctrine makes God’s actions – and therefore God Himself – much more dependent on and a function of time, inching us ever closer to pagan systems. There is also a hint of Roman Catholicism working here. Roman Catholic doctrine actually holds that Mary had the ability to decline being used in the incarnation of Jesus Christ, and had she done so Jesus Christ would have never been born, and either mankind would have never been redeemed, or God would have had to come up with something else! Roman Catholics solve the implications of this by resorting to the Remonstrants’ “predestiny through foreknowledge” notion, which is that God knew in advance that Mary would consent to obeying Him, and took it into account in His plans. Again, logical conclusion of what is a Roman Catholic doctrine. The fact that “predestined foreknowledge” contradicts “open theism”? Ah, who cares. All that matters is that one has to reject Calvinism to support both, and rejecting Reformed doctrines so that man (whether individually or through institutions like the earth and government are ultimately in control on earth, making God the ruler of heaven only) is what it is all about. 

back from my digression, let me go ahead and give you the details of the Elijah List prophecies as given by PJ Miller. I am not making this stuff up. I really couldn’t if I tried. (Although some of the “special revelations” that I used to get back when I was in this movement were close …)

The arrogance and power-seeking false predictive words which come from these people is laughable. But when they start ‘prophesying’ about having authority within secular governments and nations, they shouldn’t be ignored, because the real ‘dark’ power working behind, in, or through these people is seeking to do exactly that. The words below come from dominionists and false teachers, Bob and Bonnie Jones andJeff Jansen

A few quotes and link..

From the launching pad of all that is false on the Internet, The Elijah List:

A New Apostolic Government by 2012

In the last 30 years we’ve seen a restoration of the prophetic – true prophets have been restored to the Church. But now we are about to see a restoration of the apostolic – true apostles are arising. The prophets bring the revelation and the apostles bring the application.

These apostles will be men and women like Joshua – leaders that bring the rest into the Promised Land. These apostles will not be appointed by man, but by God. In fact, many of them will look extremely different from what we would call “apostolic.” This new breed of apostolic order will not fear losing their reputation nor be concerned about what the newspapers are saying…

 

You can’t persecute the anointing and the glory of God or you’ll miss it. These apostles will speak to nations and cause a shift in the natural and the spiritual.Revival will break out and new regions will be changed as the Lord establishes new governmental order. This is not a man thing…this is a God thing!

We will see an entirely new apostolic government in place by 2012.

At this time, we will see the Church being put together and growing into a habitation for the Spirit of God: “…in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit” (Ephesians 2:21-22).

The Coming Election and the Angel Named Union

Right now it is extremely important to pray for the coming election. The winds of change are blowing. We must pray for this Godly Vice President. September is the month that will make the difference – this is the month it begins. Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, starts the night of September 29th.

Right now God is harvesting harvesters for the great harvest. By 2012 we will see a genuine apostolic government in place. From there we will see others come alongside and do what they are called to do.

We are in the middle of one of the greatest changes in history. These next eight years will be full of joy if the Church steps into authority and God’s righteous people are elected. It’s time to begin to bless instead of curse. The mind of Christ will be released to true followers with a fresh vision, new anointing, and plenty of provision.

We are going to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. It’s time to bless the United States and not curse her. Bob Jones heard Kate Smith singing God Bless America. This is the United States of America. We are united by diversity, and the angel over this nation is named “Union” – we are united by diversity and strengthened by union.

****

Bonnie Jones’ Dream

In a recent dream, Bonnie Jones was visited by the Lord. In the dream, the Lord came to Bonnie and led her on a journey. The first place the Lord took Bonnie was a massive storehouse filled with organs and body parts. The Lord allowed Bonnie to put her right hand (faith) into this storehouse where she held all different types of organs and limbs. She felt He was teaching her to have the faith “of” God, not faith “in” God.

The Lord continued to escort Bonnie on the journey. The next place was on a bridge and then over railroad tracks. The bridge and the railroad tracks formed a cross, symbolizing “righteousness and justice.”

Next they went to 22nd Street. The Lord was giving her the key of David out of Isaiah 22:22, “Then I will set the key of the house of David on His shoulder, when He opens no one will shut, when He shuts no one will open.” She looked up and in the distance saw Lake Superior. The Lord is about to do something far superior to what we’ve recently witnessed.

Next she was holding a map. The instructions said, “When you come to 9th Street, take a hard right.” When they took a right on 9th Street the dream ended.

Bonnie is from Ohio, so when she woke up she knew where Lake Erie was, but not exactly where the other Great Lakes were. She decided to check the atlas and found where she was in the dream while looking at Lake Superior. She was in the extreme northern point of Wisconsin in an unincorporated village named Cornucopia – which represents an “open portal and the blessings of God.” Looking straight ahead at Lake Superior are the 22 Apostle Islands. Interestingly enough, there are 22 apostles recorded in the New Testament.

True Apostles are Being Released

What Bonnie saw in this visionary encounter with the Lord is parabolic of what God is bringing in this hour. In this season the Lord is restoring true apostles in the earth. As this apostolic government comes into view and is established, the Lord is releasing new keys – governmental keys of Kingdom authority that will be matched by no other generation.

Creative miracles, signs, and wonders will be witnessed in unparalleled ways as the Lord firmly establishes and confirms this new government. It will look nothing like what we’ve witnessed or heard of to date. There will be upheavals and shakings in the earth that will confirm what is happening in the spiritual – the natural proclaiming the spiritual.

What the Lord is about to do is far superior to anything He has done before.

Creative miracles – arms, legs, body parts, and organs will come down from Heaven. There will be no ebb – no end!

Your source is in Heaven, and this Heavenly warehouse is opening. Body parts will be issued to the Body, but there needs to be a government to do this. This will not be about a certain leader or leaders in particular, but an entire Church government and Body that will function in unity.

*recent related posts:

– The Coming Presence Movement

– Unto Us A Child Is Born…. Saints Beware

– Where Will The ‘Third Wave’ Teachings Show up Next?

– Dominionists on the ‘Move’..

– Deception: “look upon thyself”

– The ICA, The Hoax From Hell

– C. Peter Wagner and Dominionism

– The Manifested Sons of God heresy and the New Apostolic Reformation

– Militant Joel’s Army Followers Seek Theocracy

– God to Bob Jones: “AMERICA HAS FORGOTTEN KATE SMITH’S SONG, GOD BLESS AMERICA!” plus..

– The Super-Apostles: New, Improved, and Condemned

– C. Peter Wagner: ‘Super Apostle’?

– Rick Joyner: CHASING THE DELUSION OF POWER AND DOMINION

– The Threshing Floor – “Apostles of Leaven”

Posted in Bible, Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments »

Jesse Duplantis On CBN Promoting New Age Metaphysics

Posted by Job on September 7, 2008

First, please note that CBN strategically placed Jesse Duplantis on their broadcast to serve a political purpose. The Robertsons have billion dollar business interests that greatly benefit whenever a Republican wins the White House. That explains why Robertson got behind Rudy Giuliani early on: he correctly figured that a more liberal candidate was his party’s best chance of holding onto the White House and furthering his businesses. Now that the situation in Iraq has calmed, perhaps the biggest burden that the GOP must carry is economic uncertainty. So, the very negative jobs report that was released on the day of the broadcast plays into the very mood that could result in an Obama presidency that would mean many millions less for the Robertson empire. So right after the story on the jobs report, out they trot Jesse Duplantis with a message that Christians have nothing to fear from a bad economy. A true and Biblical message, right? Not when it is perverted with the false Word of Faith/prosperity doctrine that Duplantis, Robertson, and fellow travelers push like drugs. Duplantis opens by telling people not to have faith in God’s plan for their lives and His ability to bring it to pass with His control of world events and history, but rather to have faith in “their seed.” Later Duplantis says, “Yes, the economy may take a downturn, but I can take the attitude that I will not participate.” That is New Age metaphysical teaching that people can create and conform a new reality around their thoughts, which in truth is nothing but denying and refuse to deal with the hard truths of life – the quickest way for a Christian to lose his faith – and is even a form of self brainwashing that can lead to madness. Strong delusion, indeed! Duplantis closes his politically and financially motivated apostasy lecture with an odd embrace of an unsophisticated form of the open theism heresy advanced by such intellectual leaders of the Pentecostal movement as theologian and megachurch pastor Greg Boyd. Duplantis claims that he had reached the point where he did not have to seek God for guidance, but rather that God had told Duplantis that he could largely do whatever he chose, and that God would bless it and conform His own will and actions around the decisions of Duplantis. If that does not turn man into a god and God into a manservant, then what does? I don’t know whether Duplantis has read Greg Boyd (doubtful because Boyd, who moves in Ivy League circles and similar, thinks very little of the Robertson – Duplantis branch of his movement), but whether he has or hasn’t, this is clear evidence of how so many doctrines of devils are moving through the prosperity/Word of Faith movement. An interesting twist is how these doctrines can be used to manipulate people’s political behavior. I wonder if there are other doctrines promoted by the religious left designed to influence people’s voting patterns for the benefit of a financial and power elite as well. (It would be curious, for instance, if Barack Obama is exploiting it, and if so how and to what degree. While the embrace of Obama by black evangelical and charismatic pastors is certainly disturbing and odd, I do not consider it to be part of what I am speaking of, especially when you consider that Andrew Young, Jesse Jackson, John Lewish, and many other leaders of the religious left initially opposed Obama.) It is a subject that bears looking into. 

In any event, the occasion for Jesse Duplantis’ promotion of his heresy is his new book “Turning Your Dreams Into Reality.” Please note how Duplantis talks so much about dreams and visions while never mentioning anything resembling the actual person or work of Jesus Christ. What difference, then, is there between Duplantis and a New Age teacher like, say, Oprah Winfrey or Eckhart Tolle? When you consider that the son of Paul Crouch left his wife to enter into an unbiblical relationship with a New Age teacher that their corrupt TBN empire promotes (this same TBN where Jesse Duplantis is a major personality), the answer is borne out by the works of these people, including the way that they live their lives. 

Posted in Christianity, false doctrine, false religion, false teaching | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 23 Comments »

The Book of Job and the Sovereignty of God

Posted by Job on November 20, 2007

From Theology.Wordpress.com:

The Book of Job and the Sovereignty of God

Posted in Christianity, Jesus Christ, Moshiach, Ruach Hakadosh, Y'shua Hamashiach, Y'shua Hamashiach Moshiach, Yeshua Hamashiach | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: