Nail Mark Ministries

www.nailmark.org is up and running

2008-05-07T09:59:00.003-04:00

Hello all! As of today www.nailmark.org is online. There is still a lot of work to do, it's not real pretty yet and the most of it is under construction still, however, from this point on this blog will now be found there. When it's all said and done there will be not only the blog at www.nailmark.org but also articles about theology and apologetics, chat forums for you to dialogue with other's about various topics related to theology and apologetics, there will be debate's and podcasts for you to download, there will be a store with various item's and resources for you to purchase and there will be Bible Study notes for you to use for your own personal study of God's word.

So for future blog posts go to www.nailmark.org and check back there often to watch as the site develops and grows into a valuable resource.

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

New Blog for FSBC of JC

2008-05-03T21:10:00.003-04:00

What's up? I have created a blog for the new youth group. The name of our group is now THE B.O.M.B. SQUAD. you can check out the youth group's blog at www.fsbcbombsquad.blogspot.com.

Serving the King,

Jacob Allee

Update

2008-04-30T15:39:00.002-04:00

My family and I will be moving to Junction City, KS on the 17th of may and I will be jumping right in to my pastoral role as I will be preaching God's word the next day. The senior pastor, Nathan Butler, will be gone my first weekend there because his oldest son is graduating from college that Sunday. Feel free to check out my new church's web site: www.fsbcjc.org. The site is new and not finished, however, there is a fair amount to look at there.

I will be developing a blog for the student ministry at FSBC and will have that up and going soon. I intend to let the students vote on a name for the student ministry, so that is still to be determined.

On other fronts, the www.nailmark.org site is still under development, we have made some progress but it will still be a while. My developer is quite talented but also quite busy as he is a graduating senior in High School this year. I will keep you posted as the site develops.

I have sold several copies of the Baptism Debate and have plenty more available. Again the cost is 10 dollars which includes shipping for orders here in the United States. Just contact me via email at jacob@nailmark.org and I will give you the information you need to order a copy for yourself or your church.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

Great News!

2008-04-28T13:46:00.002-04:00

Well, I am officially a youth pastor once again! I went to Junction City, KS over the weekend and candidated for the position at First Southern Baptist Church and the church has called me to be their Youth Pastor!

I'm quite excited about the opportunity, I really like the Pastor a lot as well as all of those who I had the opportunity of meeting. There is a good group of core students that I will be starting with and they are great kids, I look forward to really getting to know them.

I will be starting there in about three weeks. Thanks to all who have been praying for us as we have been searching for a position in which to serve!

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

FBC Ulysses

2008-04-13T23:29:00.003-04:00

I will be doing a presentation on the defense of the Trinity and Deity of Christ this coming Sunday morning at First Baptist Church in Ulysses, KS. If you are anywhere around Ulysses Kansas I would invite you to come and join us that morning. The service starts at 10:45 am. The address is: 220 N Simpson St, Ulysses KS. 67880 and the church's number is (620) 356-2722 if you need to ask for directions. Of course you can just enter in the address at maps.yahoo.com.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

Ben Stein, Making Christian Friends and Darwinian Enemies

2008-04-11T14:04:00.004-04:00

I just came across something that really took me by surprise. I had no idea about this project until today, but apparently Ben Stein is coming out with a movie that will hit theatre's nation wide April 18 called "Expelled." This movie is about the fact that schools around the world have almost unanimously "expelled" the notion of intelligent design. The movie is meant to put this debate in the public spotlight and present the case for intelligent design as, at the very least, a reasonable theory that deserves as much attention as evolution.

There are many brilliant scientist's around the world, Christian and non Christian, that believe intelligent design is true, highly probable, or at least a viable theory that should be considered next to or over evolution.

I don't know much more about the movie really other than it has gained endorsements from people like James Dobson, Chuck Colson, the lead singer of the newsboys, and a whole bunch of other big "names" in the Christian community.

I'm looking forward to seeing it. I hope it does a good job of presenting the case for intelligent design so that it will show unbelievers that there is ample evidence that points towards a creator over random chance + time.

Anyway, here is a link if you want to look at more information about the movie (and I guess curriculum to buy for your church that coordinates with the movie). I don't necessarily endorse the movie or the curriculum for that matter, seeing as how I just found out about it, but this movie should at least push an important discussion into the public spot light.

http://www.getexpelled.com/

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

Debate Now Available on DVD

2008-04-08T15:48:00.003-04:00

Hello all,

I just wanted to let everyone know that the debate that took place a while back at Tabor College between myself and Mr. Garret Boyer is now available on DVD. The cost to receive a copy is $10.00 which includes shipping to anywhere in the US. If you are outside the US I will have to check on shipping cost's to your area and get back with you.

For those who might not remember, the debate was over the topic of "Is Baptism a Necessary Condition for Salvation?" Garret Boyer is a member of the Church of Christ and contended for the position that it is indeed a requirement for salvation. I of course took the traditional protestant/Baptist view that it is not, rather it is By faith alone we are saved. The debate is just a bit under 2 hours long.

If you are interested in receiving a copy of the debate please contact me by email at jacob@nailmark.org, and I will work out the details with you as far as shipping address and payment options. Hopefully after the new site is finished being constructed this will be a much simpler process with the store that will be built into the site.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

New Logo

2008-04-03T17:00:00.001-04:00

If you go to www.nailmark.org you can now see the new logo. I'd love your feed back on it. Work is continuing on the site as a whole and there will be more to look at soon.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

Update

2008-03-31T20:51:00.002-04:00

Work has officially begun on the new web site. I have purchased the rights to the domain name www.nailmark.org. There's nothing there yet but a sign that says the web site is under construction. My developer thinks that he should have at least the shell of the web site done by the end of the week. All email in concern of the apologetics ministry should now be directed to jacob@nailmark.org. I will continue to keep you updated as things develop and let you all know when there is something to look at.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

New Web Site to Begin Construction

2008-03-30T17:24:00.002-04:00

I just talked to the individual who will be putting together the new web site for me and we will begin construction tomorrow. I'm not certain how long it will take or what the web address will be just yet, but I am very excited about the prospects of what I'll be able to do with this site in comparison to the limits of my current site's.

We will be changing the name from Reformation In Progress to Nail Mark Ministries as I feel the new name will reflect more closely the main goal of the ministry, pointing people towards the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

I'll be sure to let you know as soon as the new site is up and running.

Sola Deo Gloria,

Jacob Allee

God is Not Passive

2008-03-27T15:39:00.002-04:00

Something that is often heard in church's, whether by preaching or even in the hymn's and modern praise songs is that "Jesus is patiently waiting." Meaning that God has done all that He can do and now it is just up to you.

Now maybe it's just me, but that makes my skin crawl. The presentation of the almighty maker of Heaven and Earth, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I AM, the Word become flesh, as completely helpless, inept and unable to do anything more... now He is just patiently waiting, beckoning the sinner to come home.

Here's my question, is this how the Bible presents God's role in salvation....the patient waiter?

No. God is not passive, God is the God who saves to the fullest! God is the God who knocks people off horses and claims them as His own (Acts 9). God is the God who anoints shepherd boys and makes them kings (1 Samuel 16) God is the God who overthrows armies by the smashing of clay jars and blowing of horns (Judges 7). But is he waiting patiently...hoping that you will accept Him? I don't think so.

God is not passive and He is not impotent. God has from the foundation of the world chosen those whom He will save. Ephesians 1:4-6 tells us:

"4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved."

and verse 11

"In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will"

This is the God who works all things according to the counsel of his will. The God who does whatever He wants with the inhabitants of the earth (Daniel 4:35).

Certainly the Bible describes God as patient (2 Peter 3:9) but this is not patient as in waiting to see if we will come or not, but rather patient to fulfill His promise. God is patiently working out the counsel of His will among the people of this world.

Yes it's true that God is patient....but He is not waiting, He is fulfilling! So let's throw this bad theology out the door and on it's ear that says, Jesus has done all that He can do and He wants you to come to Him but it's just up to you, but he really hopes you will...blah, blah, blah. Instead let us recognize that God is a God who is Sovereign and saves to the fullest. If He wants you, he's gonna get you....and there is nowhere you can hide.

Jesus put it this way:

"All that the Father gives to me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out." (John 6:37)

God is not passive.

Sola Deo Gloria!

- Jacob Allee

Ministry Update

2008-03-17T16:29:00.003-04:00

Hello friends!

I'm excited to tell you that there are some things going on! I am still seeking full time employment as an associate pastor, but in the mean while my wife and I have talked it over and I am going to scale back my hours at the job I'm at now and see if we can't make something really happen with this ministry.

So here are some things that are going to be happening with the ministry of Reformation In Progress....

1. We are considering a name change.

My desire as an apologist is to equip the body of Christ with what they need to affirm their faith and defend it against competing worldviews and religions. I unashamedly hold to the doctrines of grace, but I still wish to partner with churches who are not 5 point Calvinist's. The name Reformation In Progress I'm afraid scares some people away before they even give the ministry a second look. So, though I'm certainly not going to change my convictions or teachings, I though a name change would at least help me get into churches that disagree with Calvinism so that I can partner with them in teaching things like defending the trinity, witnessing to Mormon's, etc.

So here is the name I've been considering most strongly: Nail Mark Ministries. Why? Because of what Thomas says in John 20:25.

" But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."

The heart beat of this ministry is to give people what they need through plain reason, Scripture and other evidence, to be able to fall down before Jesus' feet and proclaim "My Lord and my God!" just as Thomas did.

Feel free to leave your thoughts about the idea for this name.

2. We are going to be building a new web site.

I am hiring a very computer savvy individual to build the ministry a new site. Once completed we will have a lot more flexibility with what we can do online as a ministry. The blog will be on the same web site as all the articles and resources that are now on www.reformationapologetics.com. There will no longer be a need for two separate sites. We will eventually have an online store. You will be able to download Mp3's and there will be a forum for apologetic and theological discussions. And more. My hope is that when it is all done it will function very similarly to www.aomin.org.

3. As soon as possible we are going to become an officially non-profit organization.

This will allow donations to the ministry to be tax deductible.

4. I will be actively pursuing opportunities to speak in churches about how to defend the Christian faith.

I have done some work in this area already, but I will be coming up with some materials so that I can lead training workshops in churches that will walk people through Scripture, relevant history and evidence so that they can become prepared to give a reason for the hope that is within them.

None of this of course will happen over night, but I am excited as I am going to be turning more of my attention back to this ministry as I wait for God to take me and my family wherever He wants us to go.

I appreciate your prayers, idea's and suggestions as we continue to work towards the above mentioned plans and goals. We need to raise some money (hopefully by speaking at a few churches in the near future) in order to pay for the expenses that come along with setting up a non-profit status, so be praying for that as well.

I will be blogging more regularly starting this next week I think! Can you feel the excitement? Yeah buddy!

Serving Christ our Lord,

Jacob Allee

Prayer Request

2008-02-25T14:56:00.004-05:00

Hello all,

I apologize about the lack of posting lately I have been working an evening job to support my family at the moment and free time goes to spending time with them. I have a prayer request however. I am actively seeking a position as a Student Pastor. Will you please pray that God will lead my family and I to a great church where we can serve using our gifts and where I can make enough money to continue my educational goals. I thank you for taking the time to pray for me and my family.

I've had some great idea's for posts and hopefully soon I'll be able to devote some time to them.

God bless you all!

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

James White, Very Kindly, (Set to Classical Music Even), Rips the Guts Out of Catholic Answers Apologist Steve Ray's Argument

2008-01-17T02:05:00.000-05:00

This is why I love Dr. James White! Steve Ray, a Roman Catholic apologist, is claiming that the church has always upheld the apocrypha as Scripture with exception to the anomaly of one scholar by the name Jerome. Does this hold true? See for your self.

Wow.

2008-01-15T14:48:00.001-05:00

This has probably been the longest gap I've ever had in my blogging. I apologize to those who are regular readers here. Between the Christmas and all the other holiday stuff, as well as two hob interviews, one in Kentucky and the other in southern Indiana, I have just hardly even been home let alone found time to blog.

A real praise however is that after a lot of bouncing around and changing our minds about what we ought to do and where we should go, my wife and I have finally decided that Louisville, KY at Boyce College is the place for me (Boyce is the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's undergraduate school.)

I spent a semester at Tabor College and it just didn't set well with me. I was having a tough time dealing with the liberal, and utterly Arminian theology that is buzzing around that school. (Not trying to imply that liberal and arminian is hand in hand, there was just both there at Tabor.) Theistic evolution, alegorizing the first 11 chapters of Genesis, etc.

But my wife and I have now both seen and toured the campus of Southern / Boyce and feel very certain that this is where God wants me to get my education. I've loved that school for a long while now, but I wasn't sure if that was what God had for me just because it was what I wanted. But now, Susan and I are both convinced there is nowhere else in the world I ought to go. I plan to start their in either the summer or fall semester.

I will be majoring in Christian Worldview and Apologetics! How wonderful is that! As far as I can tell Boyce College is the only fully accredited, 4 year undergraduate school that offers a degree in Christian apologetics. I couldn't be more excited given that my ministry here at Reformation is centered upon apologetics and theology. And of course this school is by far the most reformed of all the SBC school's. Not every professor is a five point Calvinist, but they all are at least moderate Calvinist's because they have to teach the Abstract of Principles that the School was founded upon which ensures their belief of Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Perseverance of the Saints. And many of the prof's hold to Limited atonement and irresistible grace, but other's don't.

Nonetheless, I couldn't be more excited to be in this environment of conservative, Biblical, Christ centered learning. I ask for your prayers as I seek a place to work while in school. Boyce College doesn't accept Stafford Loans so I must pay for school as I go, along with usual living expenses. I also am praying for a job that will allow for plenty of time with my family.

I have had two interviews at two different churches, both were interested in me however I did not feel that either of them was the place I ougth to serve. So I'm waiting on the Lord to open the right door. I thank you for your prayers when you think of me!

I will endeavor to get back to posting regularly again soon. God Bless!!!

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

1 Peter 3 and the issue of Baptism

2007-12-01T13:17:00.000-05:00

Finally I have some time to work on posting about key verses and passages used in the baptism debate. Now begins our series on difficult passages regarding baptism and how to refute claims that various groups make about water baptism being necessary for salvation.

Today we will start with a commonly used passage found in 1 Peter 3:21. Baptismal regeneration advocates love this passage for obvious reasons. Admittedly, if you just casually read the verse without allowing the context to speak to it's meaning, it sounds like it is saying that baptism is necessary for salvation. Church of Christ, Roman Catholics and other groups who champion baptismal regeneration have made this one of their hallmark passages to make their argument along with Acts 2:38, John 3:5, and Mark 16:16. We will go through each of these passages and show how they can be understood, consistently interpreted, in context, with what Scripture teaches about salvation by faith alone.

Let's go right on ahead and jump into our first passage, in it's surrounding context.

1 Peter 3:20-22

"20because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him."

Now clearly verse 21 is the focus of baptismal regeneration proponents, however the context of the passage is crucial to a proper interpretation of the verse, especially that which immediately precedes verse 21 in verse 20. What is brought into the context of this passage is the familiar story of Noah and the ark. We are told that by the "ark" God brought 8 people "safely through water." Immediately after we are told "baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you."

Now a pertinent question to ask here at this point is, "what is it that baptism corresponds to?" Is it the water, or is it the ark?" The context tells us that it was the ark that brought Noah and his family safely through the water, it is the ark that saved Noah and his family, certainly it is not the water that saved them.

So the first important thing to understand in this passage is that baptism corresponds not to the water, but to the ark that Noah and his family entered.

Secondly, and equally important, we want to direct our attention to what the Scripture says next. "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

This is very important to note because it's a clarification that Peter gave to us about what he means by what he has just said. It is not that baptism saves a person in the sense that it actually cleanses a person from something, rather, it is saves as "an appeal to God for a good conscience." Baptism is a work that expresses faith, it is a way of gaining "a good conscience" before God.

This is exactly the type of thing that James 2 talks about in verses 14-26.

"14What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith, but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

18But someone will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"—and he was called a friend of God. 24You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead."

Christian good works are not something that justifies a sinner, rather they justify a sinner's faith. It is faith and faith alone that saves, but as James eloquently points out if a person says that they have faith but they do not have works, can "that faith" save them? The point being that genuine faith produces good works and obedience to Christ's commands. Good works are an assurance of genuine, saving, faith.

Baptism is a perfect example of this, and this is the same principle that Peter is using in 1 Peter 3:21, it saves not in the sense of justifying or cleansing from sin, but rather as a work that justifies our faith, gives us a good conscience before God, an assurance of salvation by obedience to God's command to be baptized. Genuine faith produces good works, obedience to Christ.

This is very clearly what Noah himself did by believing God's word about the coming flood and building and boarding the ark. Look at what Hebrews 11 tells us about Noah's salvation.

Hebrews 11:7

"By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith."

As is clearly stated by this verse in Hebrews 11, it was not the work of building the ark that made Noah righteous before God, but it was his faith that God counted as righteousness, this faith was demonstrated by believing God's warning and constructing the ark. Baptism corresponds not to the flood waters, but to the ark that Noah built because of his faith in God, and Noah was saved by that faith.

"Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ."

I think that in this case, as is probably always the case, when we allow the context of Scripture to inform our interpretation and draw from relevant texts from the whole of Scripture that speak to the one we are studying, much clarity is brought to our study. And in case there be any confusion about who really matters in our salvation, we are told this appeal to God for a good conscience is rooted not in the work of baptism but the resurrected Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

I hope this study is helpful to everyone. Stay tuned for more studies of passages that are used to try and teach baptismal regeneration.

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

Sorry for the delay

2007-11-25T22:02:00.000-05:00

I've been so busy, as many of you have I'm sure, with Thanksgiving and I have three major papers due over the next two weeks, I haven't been posting the follow up stuff to the debate. I'll try and get to it very soon, because I think it's worth while. Hopefully I can deal with at least one or two baptism passages over the next week or so.

Also, I'm going to get back to doing a verse by verse study over at "To Die Is Gain". I'm trying to decide whether I should pick up where I left off or start a different book. It's been so long since I was doing the 1 Corinthians study I feel like I'd be starting cold in the middle of it.

Let me know what you think, and feel free to suggest a book for the study if you think I ought to start a different one than 1 Corinthians.

I'll try and get back to frequent posts soon.

Serving Christ,

Jacob

After the Debate

2007-11-12T18:54:00.000-05:00

Well the debate came, and just like that, it went. Thankfully it went well, for me anyway. Garret Boyer did a commendable job considering that he has not really had any experience in public speaking or debate. However, that said, his argument was pretty simple and ammounted to the usual Church of Christ argument.

The verses that were used as his main argument were:

Acts 2:38 (shocking I know)

1 Peter 3:20-21 (even more shocking, I know)

Surprisingly he made a rather large argument based upon Acts 8:26-40 this is the story of Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch. Mr. Boyer's major point was that Philip was concerned with being baptized immediately after hearing the gospel, and that God did not take Philip away from there until after he had baptized the Eunuch. This supposedly is a narrative example of baptismal regeneration.

Well, there are some serious problems with that interpretation, and he used a similar argument for the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:25-34 and basically argues that because we see baptism occur after almost every passage in Acts where people accept the gospel that this points to the need for baptism to finish the process of salvation.

Of course it could simply mean that in the apostolic era there wasn't any confusion about the importance of baptism as an expression of the salvation one had through faith in Christ, and everyone who believed in Christ was eager to follow Him in obedience to baptism.

Anyway, I'm going to do a series of posts dealing with the issues surrounding this debate, debunking passages that are often pointed to by baptismal regeneration proponents such as the Church of Christ.

The debate was recorded, if you'd like an audio CD you can contact me via email, jacob@reformationapologetics.com. Just give me your address and I'll send it your way. All I'm asking for $5 to cover the cost of the CD's and shipping. If you live outside the US we'll discuss the difference in shipping.

I'll work on making it available for download in Mp3 format as well.

Serving Christ,

Jacob

Purpose of Apologetics

2007-11-09T11:16:00.001-05:00

As I look forward to tomorrow's debate over the issue "Is baptism a necessary condition for salvation." I've given some thought yet once again about the purpose of apologetics. That is, why is apologetics important and what purpose does it serve. It is my personal conviction that apologetics has (at the very least) three major and crucial functions within the church.

1. Defending the Faith: Obvious I know. But let us never forget that the word apologetics comes from the Greek phrase "pros apologian" which literally means "toward a defense." Apologetics is the area of ministry that stands as a shield for the church. I think this is a major reason why I am so passionate about apologetics. With all of the wolves that are trying to snag the sheep, apologists play the role of a shepherd in a universal sense. I do not mean this in any way to downplay the more central role that pastors play as shepherds to local congregations, I honor that role as supremely important and it is an official office given by Scripture where "apologist" is not.

But nonetheless, apologist's practice the art of refuting false doctrine and clarifying Biblical doctrine. The work of an apologist is to silence "false prophets" and point towards the truth of Jesus Christ as found in the Scripture. Apologetics is an academic ministry, a fight on the front line of Christian doctrine, saying "thus says the word of God" and telling false teachers "you stand condemned by Scripture." I love apologetics because it is a noble profession of holding the line.

2. Building up the Body: Another purpose of apologetics that is closely related with the first purpose, the other side of that coin perhaps, is encouraging Christians to know what the Bible teaches and have confidence in solid Christian doctrine. While apologetics is the art of defending the faith, the best way to defend the faith is to equip the church with the truth so that each believer can themselves call a spade a spade. Apologetics keeps out false doctrine away from the church and solidifies Biblical doctrine within the church.

3. Evangelism: A good apologist always has, in addition to the first 2 points, this third one in mind. A desire to see the lost saved. Whether it be the false teachers we refute, the people who follow them, or the people who are neutral but by hearing the truth compared to falsehood are drawn by God's Spirit to know Christ Jesus. Yes apologetics is also a way of proclaiming the gospel. One cannot help while clarifying the gospel message to also proclaim it and pray that God draws His elect to Himself.

As I engage in this debate tomorrow, I hope I accomplish in the name and power of Christ and the authority of Scripture, all three of those purposes. I appreciate your prayers for the debate tomorrow.

In Him

-Jacob

Baptism Debate Saturday

2007-11-06T18:41:00.000-05:00

Well, it's the week of the big debate! I'm excited for this opportunity to share the truth of God about baptism and what it is for (and what it is not for). It's a real privilege to defend what Scripture teaches especially given an issue that centers around the genuine gospel of Christ verses a perversion of the gospel.

I met today with Garret Boyer, whom I'm debating, and Dr. Richard Kyle (the moderator) and we discussed the final details of the debate. We scaled the time back a bit so it wouldn't run as long. Unfortunately people don't always want to listen to a full 2 1/2 hours of theological debate, so it's now closer to only 2 hours.

Mr. Boyer is a sharp guy, I look forward to hearing how he decides to approach the debate and which passages he hones in on. I of course expect Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:20-21, John 3:5, and a few others to be used, but nonetheless it will be interesting to see how well and in what way he presents them.

He has my respect for being willing to debate this issue in an environment that is by far predominantly against the view of baptismal regeneration. Hillsboro is a predominantly Mennonite area (Mennonite Brethren, General Conference Mennonite, Alderman Mennonite). Tabor college where I'm at currently is a Mennonite Brethren School and this is where the debate is going to be held.

Some Mennonite's do not practice full immersion for baptism and some do, but none (insofar as I know) hold to baptismal regeneration and all of them, I believe, hold to believers baptism as a sign of salvation. So Mr. Boyer is the one holding the unpopular opinion here which I would think would make it even a bit harder (something like when James White is on the radio in Salt Lake City, Utah). So he does have my respect in being willing to stand up for his conviction even though it is wrong and extremely dangerous to ones soul.

Anyway, it should be a fun time (yes, I think debating is fun.) I appreciate your prayers as I finish up my preparation for the debate Saturday and as I attempt to communicate God's truth in a way that brings Him glory and hopefully convicts sinners of their need to trust in Christ Jesus alone for salvation. If you live anywhere in the area of Hillsboro I'd love to see you this Saturday at 2pm in the Tabor College Chapel.

Sola Fide,

Jacob

Who Really Benefits From The Health & Wealth Gospel?

2007-11-06T13:45:00.001-05:00

"Eddie Long and Benny Hinn are among six televangelists whose ministries are being investigated by a Senate panel. The other four are led by Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Creflo Dollar and Kenneth Copeland" says an article found on AOL news.

Regardless of what the findings are of this panel the list of "who's who" in the Charismatic televangelists have obviously drawn attention because of their lavish living. From million dollar mansions to private jets, expensive cars, etc., it would seem the only one who truly benefits from the charismatic "Health & Wealth" are the underhanded Scripture abusing preachers that we so often see on TV. I doubt seriously that the list should really stop with these 6.

Here's the link to the news article:

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/senate-probes-televangelists-finances/20071106091309990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

As Christians if we really want the "abundant life" that Scripture promises, let's not pursue spiritual handouts from God, let's pursue holiness.

-Jacob

What Must I Do To Be Saved: Calvinist View

2007-11-01T09:38:00.000-05:00

As a class assignment for my History Of Christianity class, I have the privilege tomorrow of answering the question "what must I do to be saved?" from the Calvinist point of view. The following is the approach that I'll be giving, it's very condensed and there's much more to say about the issue, much more Scripture that could be given, and I only deal with the first 2 doctrines of the 5 points of Calvinism here. But it's going to be an initial introduction to Calvinism for most of the people that I will be talking to tomorrow. Here it is.

A man once asked the apostle Paul "What must I do to be saved?" His reply was simple and straightforward, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved." (Acts 16:30-31)

The message of Scripture is clear from cover to cover that it is faith that justifies a sinner before God.

Romans 1:17 tells us that "The righteous shall live by faith."

Romans 3:26 tells us that God is "just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

An Old Testament example is found in Genesis 15:6 where speaking of Abraham it says "And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness."

Many, many more examples could be given like these that tell us God saves men by their faith in Him. Faith in the Lord Jesus is the only condition for salvation that Scripture gives for salvation. Most Protestants agree with such a statement (though not all), so what separates the Calvinist in his doctrine? The Calvinist believes that while one must place their faith in Christ for salvation, because of sin that entered the world in Genesis 3, people have become so depraved by sin that it is impossible for man to have genuine faith in Christ.

Look at Romans 1:18-32 for an overview of the effect sin has had on mankind.

"18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

24Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."

And also in Romans 3:10-18,

"10as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;11no one understands;no one seeks for God.12All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;no one does good,not even one."13 "Their throat is an open grave;they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips."14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;16in their paths are ruin and misery,17and the way of peace they have not known."18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

The dilemma of mankind is that we are so darkened in our hearts and minds because of sin that we are unable to know or find God, nor do we even desire to seek Him. As the Scripture says, "no one seeks for God." If God were simply to have offered Christ as He did and then left it up to man to choose Jesus Christ as their savior, all of us would be going to Hell, because people are enslaved to sin, inherently opposed to God and the things of God as long as they are apart from Christ.

About this Romans 8:7-8 tells us "7For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8Those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

The context of this verse is clear, all who are apart from Christ are in the flesh, opposed to God. So I ask you, is mankind’s will truly free as we think of free will? No it is not. The will of man is enslaved to sin. People on their own free will as we call it would never choose God because of sin.
Now it is true that man does that which he most wants to do, there is no doubt. When we sin there is no one forcing us to sin, we did it because it was our strongest desire at that time. But the question is, where did that desire come from? It came from our sinful nature that mankind inherited at the fall. So we are not free as we think of free, we simply do that which we most want to do and it appears to be a free action, but our will is bound to sin as unbelievers.

Therefore I’ll say it again, man cannot, will not, and does not want to choose Christ. If God were to let man do that what in his so called "free will" he most wanted to do then all would choose to live in their sin and all would die and go to Hell.

Therefore if any are to be saved it depends not on the free choice of man, because man’s choice is not truly free, but rather on the free choice of God to save those whom He chooses.

Ephesians 2:8-9 tells us "8For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Salvation from God is a gift that He freely gives. He grants sinners His grace and the gift of faith so that they may believe. It is a misnomer that man has faith to give, rather God supplies the faith with which to believe. God chooses those whom He desires to show His mercy to and He gives them saving faith.

Look with me at Romans 9:6-24.

6But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named." 8This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9For this is what the promise said:

"About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son." 10And not only so, but
also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

14What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. 19You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?

Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?"

Before either Jacob or Esau had done anything that could be called "good or bad" God chose Jacob and placed His love and favor upon him but Esau received God’s "hate" as it is said, he did not receive God’s favor rather His condemnation. Paul expects people to react against this and say it is not fair. This is where Paul says that God is the potter and we are the clay and He can make out of the same lump of clay whatever He as the potter wishes, that is His right as the Creator. He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy. And if God chooses to harden someone’s heart and use them as an example of His power as He did Pharaoh, He can do that to.
It’s helpful to remember that what all people deserve because of their rebellion against God is death and Hell, therefore the fact that God chooses to intervene in the life of a sinner who by nature hates God, is a pure and wonderful act of grace and mercy on God’s part.

So then in the midst of this conversation about salvation we see the Scripture says in 9:16 "So then it depends not on human will or exertion,
but on God, who has mercy."

Scripture emphasizes time and again that God chooses us and not the other way around. Look at Ephesians 1:3-6

"3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved."

The only hope mankind has for salvation is the grace and mercy of Christ to intervene on our behalf, because otherwise we will do just what we want, live in sin, and we’ll get just what we deserve, we’ll go to Hell. If you are a believer you should praise God that He had mercy on you and gave you faith to trust Him with.

This covers briefly only the first 2 doctrines of the 5 that make up the 5 points of Calvinism (A.K.A. the doctrines of Grace) if you desire to have a fuller explanation of these 2 (Total Depravity and Unconditional Election) and the last three not mentioned here (Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints) you can go to www.reformationapologetics.com, on "Biblical Christianity" and then click on "The Doctrines of Grace."

-Jacob Allee

The 95 Thesis, by Martin Luther

2007-10-30T21:50:00.000-05:00

Have you ever read the document that started the protestant reformation? On October 31st 1517 a man by the name of Martin Luther nailed 95 propositions for discussion to the Wittenburg Door. It was a common practice to nail letters to this door to spark debate and conversation. Luther had grown tired of the abuses going on in regards to selling indulgences and wanted to bring attention to the problem. The funny thing is, Luther thought that what he was doing would please the pope because Luther at the time still held the pope and the Roman Catholic Church in high esteem and simply sought to reform some of its practices. Luther believed that the pope would be glad that someone would draw attention to the practices that took glory away from God. Little did Luther know when he nailed the 95 thesis to that door that this would be the beginning of the Protestant reformation and lead to his excommunication.It's quite interesting to see how Luther's theology changes from when he wrote the 95 thesis to the time he wrote "The Bondage of the Will." Luther like all Christians who seek after God's heart continued to grow in his knowledge of the word of God. Luther became a Scripture quoting, highly theological weapon that would call people back to the word of God and away from the traditions of men. It's clear when reading the 95 thesis that at the time he wrote it Luther still held much love for the roman church and the pope in his heart. It would not be long until his eyes were opened to just how deep the corruption in the church had gone. Luther would take a stand on God's word along with others like him that the world still feels today. Scripture Alone, Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Christ Alone, to the Glory of God Alone.Here is what started the Reformation:

1. When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said "Repent", He called for the entire life of believers to be one of penitence.

2. The word cannot be properly understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, i.e. confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

3. Yet its meaning is not restricted to penitence in one's heart; for such penitence is null unless it produces outward signs in various mortifications of the flesh.

4. As long as hatred of self abides (i.e. true inward penitence) the penalty of sin abides, viz., until we enter the kingdom of heaven.

5. The Pope has neither the will nor the power to remit any penalties beyond those imposed either at his own discretion or by canon law.

6. The Pope himself cannot remit guilt, but only declare and confirm that it has been remitted by God; or, at most, he can remit it in cases reserved to his discretion. Except for these cases,the guilt remains untouched.

7. God never remits guilt to anyone without, at the same time, making humbly submissive to the priest, His representative.

8. The penitential canons apply only to men who are still alive, and, according to the canons themselves, none applies to the dead.

9. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit, acting in the person of the Pope, manifests grace to us, by the fact that the papal regulations always cease to apply at death, or in any hard case.

10. It is a wrongful act, due to ignorance, when priests retain the canonical penalties on the dead in purgatory.

11. When canonical penalties were changed and made to apply to purgatory, surely it would seem that tares were sown while the bishops were asleep.

12. In former days, the canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution was pronounced; and were intended to be tests of true contrition.

13. Death puts and end to all the claims of the Church; even the dying are already dead to the canon laws, and are no longer bound by them.

14. Defective piety or love in a dying person is necessarily accompanied by great fear, which is greatest where the piety or love is least.

15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, whatever else might be said, to constitute the pain of purgatory, since it approaches very closely to the horror of despair.

16. There seems to be the same difference between hell, purgatory, and heaven as between despair, uncertainty, and assurance.

17. Of a truth, the pains of souls in purgatory ought to be abated, and charity ought to be proportionately increased.

18. Moreover, it does not seem proved, on any grounds of reason or Scripture, that these souls are outside the state of merit, or unable to grow in grace.

19. Nor does it seem proved to be always the case that they are certain and assured of salvation, even if we are very certain ourselves.

20. Therefore the Pope, in speaking of the plenary remission of all penalties, does not mean "all" in the strict sense, but only those imposed by himself.

21. Hence those who preach indulgences are in error when they say that a man is absolved and saved from every penalty by the Pope's indulgences;

22. Indeed, he cannot remit to souls in purgatory any penalty which canon law declares should be suffered in the present life.

23. If plenary remission could be granted to anyone at all, it would be only in the cases of the most perfect, i.e. to very few.

24. It must therefore be the case that the major part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of relief from penalty.

25. The same power as the Pope exercises in general over purgatory is exercised in particular by every single bishop in his bishopric and priest in his parish.

26. The Pope does excellently when he grants remission to the souls in purgatory on account of intercessions made on their behalf, and not by the power of the keys (which he cannot exercise for them).

27. There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.

28. It is certainly possible that when the money clinks in the bottom of the chest avarice and greed increase; but when the church offers intercession, all depends in the will of God.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed in view of what is said of St. Severinus and St. Pascal? (Note: Paschal I, Pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful).

30. No one is sure if the reality of his own contrition, much less of receiving plenary forgiveness.

31. One who _bona fide_ buys indulgence is a rare as a _bona fide_ penitent man, i.e. very rare indeed.

32. All those who believe themselves certain of their own salvation by means if letters of indulgence, will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

33. We should be most carefully on our guard against those who say that the papal indulgences are an inestimable divine gift, and that a man is reconciled to God by them.

34. For the grace conveyed by these indulgences relates simply to the penalties of the sacramental "satisfactions" decreed merely by man.

35. It is not in accordance with Christian doctrines to preach and teach that those who buy off souls, or purchase confessional licenses, have no need to repent of their own sins.

36. Any Christian whatsoever, who is truly repentant, enjoys plenary remission from penalty and guilt, and this is given him without letters of indulgence.

37. Any true Christian whatsoever, living or dead, participates in all the benefits of Christ and the Church; and this participation is granted to him by God without letters of indulgence.

38. Yet the Pope's remission and dispensation are in no way to be despised, form as already said, they proclaim the divine remission.

39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, to extol to the people the great bounty contained in the indulgences, while, at the same time, praising contrition as a virtue.

40. A truly contrite sinner seeks out, and loves to pay, the penalties of his sins; whereas the very multitude of indulgences dulls men's consciences, and tends to make them hate the penalties.

41. Papal indulgences should only be preached with caution, lest people gain a wrong understanding, and think that they are preferable to other good works: those of love.

42. Christians should be taught that the Pope does not at all intend that the purchase of indulgences should be understood as at all comparable with the works of mercy.

43. Christians should be taught that one who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does a better action than if he purchases indulgences.

44. Because, by works of love, love grows and a man becomes a better man; whereas, by indulgences, he does not become a better man, but only escapes certain penalties.

45. Christians should be taught that he who sees a needy person, but passes him by although he gives money for indulgences, gains no benefit from the Pope's pardon, but only incurs the wrath of God.

46. Christians should be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they are bound to retain what is only necessary for the upkeep of their home, and should in no way squander it on indulgences.

47. Christians should be taught that they purchase indulgences voluntarily, and are not under obligation to do so.

48. Christians should be taught that, in granting indulgences, the Pope has more need, and more desire, for devout prayer on his own behalf than for ready money.

49. Christians should be taught that the Pope's indulgences are useful only if one does not rely on them, but most harmful if one loses the fear of God through them.

50. Christians should be taught that, if the Pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of the sheep.

51. Christians should be taught that the Pope would be willing, as he ought if necessity should arise, to sell the church of St. Peter, and give, too, his own money to many of those whom the pardon-merchants conjure money.

52. It is vain to rely on salvation by letters if indulgence, even if the commissary, or indeed the Pope himself, were to pledge his own soul for their validity.

53. Those are enemies of Christ and the Pope who forbid the word of God to be preached at all in some churches, in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

54. The word of God suffers injury if, in the same sermon, an equal or longer time is devoted to indulgences than to that word.

55. The Pope cannot help taking the view that if indulgences (very small matters) are celebrated by one bell, one pageant, or one ceremony, the gospel (a very great matter) should be preached to the accompaniment of a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The treasures of the church, out of which the Pope dispenses indulgences, are not sufficiently spoken of or known among the people of Christ.

57. That these treasures are note temporal are clear from the fact that many of the merchants do not grant them freely, but only collect them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, because, even apart from the Pope, these merits are always working grace in the inner man, and working the cross, death, and hell in the outer man.

59. St. Laurence said that the poor were the treasures of the church, but he used the term in accordance with the custom of his own time.

60. We do not speak rashly in saying that the treasures of the church are the keys of the church, and are bestowed by the merits of Christ.

61. For it is clear that the power of the Pope suffices, by itself, for the remission of penalties and reserved cases.

62. The true treasure of the church is the Holy gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. It is right to regard this treasure as most odious, for it makes the first to be the last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is most acceptable, for it makes the last to be the first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets which, in former times, they used to fish for men of wealth.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are the nets to-day which they use to fish for men of wealth.

67. The indulgences, which the merchants extol as the greatest of favors, are seen to be, in fact, a favorite means for money-getting.

68. Nevertheless, they are not to be compared with the grace of God and the compassion shown in the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates, in duty bound, must receive the commissaries of the papal indulgences with all reverence;

70. But they are under a much greater obligation to watch closely and attend carefully lest these men preach their own fancies instead of what the Pope commissioned.

71. Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences.

72. On the other hand, let him be blessed who is on his guard against the wantonness and license of the pardon-merchant's words.

73. In the same way, the Pope rightly excommunicates those who make any plans to the detriment of the trade in indulgences.

74. It is much more in keeping eith his views to excommunicate those who use the pretext of indulgences to plot anything to the detriment of holy love and truth.

75. It is foolish to think that papal indulgences have so much power that they can absolve a man even if he has done the impossible and violated the mother of God.

76. We assert the contrary, and say that the Pope's pardons are not able to remove the least venial of sins as far as their guilt is concerned.

77. When it is said that not even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could grant a greater grace, it is blasphemy against St. Peter and the Pope.

78. We assert the contrary, and say that he, and any Pope whatever, possesses greater graces, viz., the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as is declared in I Corinthians 12 [:28].

79. It is blasphemy to say that the insignia of the cross with the papal arms are of equal value to the cross on which Christ died.

80. The bishops, curates, and theologians, who permit assertions of that kind to be made to the people without let or hindrance, will have to answer for it.

81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult for learned men to guard the respect due to the Pope against false accusations, or at least from the keen criticisms of the laity;

82. They ask, e.g.: Why does not the Pope liberate everyone from purgatory for the sake of love (a most holy thing) and because of the supreme necessity of their souls? This would be morally the best of all reasons. Meanwhile he redeems innumerable souls for money, a most perishable thing, with which to build St. Peter's church, a very minor purpose.

83. Again: Why should funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continue to be said? And why does not the Pope repay, or permit to be repaid, the benefactions instituted for these purposes, since it is wrong to pray for those souls who are now redeemed?

84. Again: Surely this is a new sort of compassion, on the part of God and the Pope, when an impious man, an enemy of God, is allowed to pay money to redeem a devout soul, a friend of God; while yet that devout and beloved soul is not allowed to be redeemed without payment, for love's sake, and just because of its need of redemption.

85. Again: Why are the penitential canon laws, which in fact, if not in practice, have long been obsolete and dead in themselves,-why are they, to-day, still used in imposing fines in money, through the granting of indulgences, as if all the penitential canons were fully operative?

86. Again: since the Pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?

87. Again: What does the Pope remit or dispense to people who, by their perfect penitence, have a right to plenary remission or dispensation?

88. Again: Surely a greater good could be done to the church if the Pope were to bestow these remissions and dispensations, not once, as now, but a hundred times a day, for the benefit of any believer whatever.

89. What the Pope seeks by indulgences is not money, but rather the salvation of souls; why then does he not suspend the letters and indulgences formerly conceded, and still as efficacious as ever?

90. These questions are serious matters of conscience to the laity. To suppress them by force alone, and not to refute them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the Pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christian people unhappy.

91. If therefore, indulgences were preached in accordance with the spirit and mind of the Pope, all these difficulties would be easily overcome, and indeed, cease to exist.

92. Away, then, with those prophets who say to Christ's people, "Peace, peace," where in there is no peace.

93. Hail, hail to all those prophets who say to Christ's people, "The cross, the cross," where there is no cross.

94. Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells;

95. And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.

October 31, 1517

Source: Dillenberger, John. Martin Luther: A Selection From His Writings. Garden City: Doubleday, 1961.

Distinguishing Mark of a True Believer

2007-10-25T14:45:00.000-04:00

Over at Erik Raymond's blog, Irish Calvinist, he posted just a short devotional thought. I appreciated it and so I though I'd offer the link here.

http://www.irishcalvinist.com/?p=1019

God bless,

Jacob

Baptism Debate Developing Details

2007-10-19T13:20:00.000-04:00

Garret Boyer and I spoke yesterday for a couple of hours. During that time we worked out some details for the debate, and then we had some friendly conversation about the subject matter of baptism (and a bit off track we also talked about election, human will, limited atonement and eternal security). All in all it was a helpful conversation for me to gain a better idea of where Mr. Boyer will be coming from. I'm equally certain it was beneficial for him.

The date of the debate is officially set for November 10, 2007 at 2:00 pm. The question that is under debate will be: "Is baptism a necessary condition for salvation?"

Garret Boyer is a part of the Church of Christ and will be defending the position that baptism is a necessary condition for salvation.

Jacob Allee (me) is a reformed Southern Baptist and will be refuting baptism as a necessary condition for salvation and affirming that faith alone is necessary for salvation.

This is the format we will be following:

20 min. opening statement -Garret Boyer

20 min. opening statement -Jacob Allee

10 min. rebuttal -Garret Boyer

10 min. rebuttal -Jacob Allee

2nd 10 min. rebuttal -Garret Boyer

2nd 10 min. rebuttal -Jacob Allee

(Short break)

15 min. cross-examination -Garret Boyer (asks Q's)

15 min. cross-examination -Jacob Allee (asks Q's)

20 min. closing statements -Garret Boyer

20 min. closing statements -Jacob Allee

Audience questions.

For those who might be able to attend, I would plan on being there until about 5 pm. I would love for everyone who can be there to be there. Mr. Boyer is an intelligent individual who is sure to put a good argument on the table, the debate is sure to be a good one. I hope to see you there!

I'm trying to make arrangements for both audio and visual recordings of the debate so I can make them available as a resource from Reformation In Progress for those who are unable to attend.

God Bless!!!!!!!

-Jacob

Dramatic Change to Reformation In Progress Home Site

2007-10-11T20:20:00.000-04:00

WWW.REFORMATIONAPOLOGETICS.COM

LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!

-JACOB

Caricatures of Calvinism

2007-10-10T11:24:00.000-04:00

One thing that strikes me as interesting when non Calvinists talk about Calvinism is how rarely they represent what we actually believe as Calvinists. I had a prof in one of my classes a while back explain what Calvinists believe about election (at least this is what he thinks).

"It's like God is in a boat and there are people drowning all around Him and He chooses to save a few of them and let the rest of them drowned."

I didn't keep my mouth shut at that point.... I know imagine that. What a horrid straw man of what the reformed faith actually believes about God's free choice to save. Think with me for a moment about what this example above leaves out of the equation.

Mankind has profaned, rejected and blasphemed God. They are not innocent people drowning, they are people intentionally breathing in the water because it is what they want to do. God didn't throw them in the water, they gave God the proverbial "finger" as they jumped off the boat, cursing Him all the way down to the water. Each of them deserves to drowned and the last thing they deserve is for God in the boat to pull their worthless souls out of the water.

I take horrid offense to an example of election that makes God a divine bully. It is purely the graciousness of God that anyone receives salvation since no one deserves anything but death and Hell.

Another caricature I hear all to often is that election means that even if you live your whole life believing in and loving Jesus, serving Him and sharing Him with others, if you're not elect your going to hell. As if you could truly do those things if you weren't regenerate. This is clearly false because the Scripture teaches that our works are proof of our justification, this is what James 2 talks about.

It would be nice for just once if someone wanted to take issue with what Calvinism believes that they would actually take issue with what Calvinism believes. It seems to me that building straw men arguments against Calvinism is about all that the Arminian position can effectively offer, because the real deal is so entrenched in Scripture it's inarguable.

These caricatures have been very effective, I'll admit, in keeping people from accepting the doctrines of grace because they have been taught that what Calvinist's believe is unscriptural, and the pictures that they paint like the ones above, are unscriptural.

So come on people, you want to argue Calvinism, argue Calvinism.

-Jacob

My First Debate is in the Works!

2007-10-07T16:42:00.000-04:00

Well it looks like I'm going to have the opportunity for my first live, moderated debate. My opponent will be Garret Boyer, a sophomore at Tabor College. We don't have an exact thesis for the debate yet, but basically the debate will be over the issue of whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation. Mr. Boyer will take the affirmative and I will of course take the negative.

I'm excited for this opportunity to defend the gospel of Christ in a public, acedemic setting. This issue is an old debate amongst various denominations of protestants and Roman Catholics. I'm glad to stand for the gospel of Jesus Christ and declare that salvation is by God's grace through faith alone.

There are still a lot of details to be worked out like when and where, finding a moderator, agreeing on the format of the debate and so on. I appreciate your prayers as I begin to study the issue in depth and prepare for this defense of the gospel.

I'll inform you of the details as they come together.

God Bless,

Jacob

Ephesians 2:8-9

Remember that John MacArthur Clip on Yoga?

2007-10-01T10:46:00.000-04:00

A while back I posted a clip on John MacArthur's response to "Christian Yoga." The other "pastor" that was featured in that clip.... here is the "Church" that he "pastors." Just click on the link and be afraid... be very afraid.

http://ateam.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/2/8/2719683.html

I found this link at www.barrydean.wordpress.com. Barry has some good stuff on his blog.

-Jacob

Mark Driscoll Sums Up Reformed Theology

2007-10-01T10:41:00.000-04:00

"People suck, and God saves us from ourselves."

The Sermon On The Mount

2007-09-30T22:36:00.000-04:00

I read through the Sermon on the Mount the other day and just found it refreshing to my soul. Thought I'd post it here and encourage you to take the time to read it all the way through and reflect on the greatest sermon ever given.

Matthew 5-7 (English Standard Version)

Matthew 5

1Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down, his disciples came to him.

2And he opened his mouth and taught them, saying:
3 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4"Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
5"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
6"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
7"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
8"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
9"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
10"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 "Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

13"You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.

14 "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

21 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' 22But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. 23 So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison. 26Truly, I say to you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

27 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

31 "It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.' 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

33"Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.' 34But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. 37Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from evil.

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Matthew 6

1"Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.
2 "Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

5"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

7"And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. 9 Pray then like this: "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. 10 Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.11 Give us this day our daily bread, 12and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.13And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, 15 but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

16"And when you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 17But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, 18that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

19 "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

22 "The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light, 23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

24 "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.

25 "Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26 Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? 28And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, 29yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' 32For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. 33But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

34 "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

Matthew 7

1 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

6"Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.

7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened. 9Or which one of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? 11If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

12"So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

13"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.

21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'

24 "Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it."
The Authority of Jesus 28And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at his teaching, 29 for he was teaching them as one who had authority, and not as their scribes.

Over at the Founders blog

2007-09-29T17:46:00.000-04:00

Here is a link to an article about Mark Driscoll at Mars Hill church in Seattle WA. This article is on the Founders blog by Tom Ascol who is the president of Founders Ministries which you can check out at www.founders.org.

For those who don't know, the Founders Ministries is a Southern Baptist ministry that adheres to the doctrines of grace and represents the Southern Baptist churches who are faithful to the doctrine that the founding Southern Baptist "fathers", so to speak, who were reformed in their perspective of the gospel and baptist in their adherence to believers baptism, laid out in the beginning of the SBC.

A cool ministry that I appreciate very much. Anyway, now that I'm off subject, here is the link I was telling you about in regard to Mark Driscoll. Driscoll reminds me a bit of Martin Luther. A bit of a bad boy, with a sometimes foul mouth, quick to repent, and solid in doctrine. If you've never heard him, you should listen to his preaching sometime. I don't always agree with him, but I respect what he is doing there in Seattle and the influence that he has in that culture.

http://www.founders.org/blog/2007/09/ct-on-mark-driscoll.html

-Jacob

Rough Draft of My Book Is Finally Finished!

2007-09-22T21:14:00.001-04:00

It's been what seems like forever but I finally have my rough draft finished for my book. I've gone through several different names for the book. First I was calling it "It's Not My Fault I'm A Christian" then I changed it slightly to "It's Not Your Fault That You're A Christian." However after some reflection, I decided to drop the cute title and play on words and go with (at least for now) "Calling Protestants Back to Protestant theology."

The rough draft is 23,989 words, which will equal about a 100 page book I believe. I may very well continue to ponder the title and change it once again, but this title at least captures the purpose of me writing the book. My desire is to challenge protestant Christians to return to the theology (reformed theology) that made them protestants to begin with.

No matter what denomination people are a part of, their roots take them back the reformation and the theology of the reformers. It is this theology that is the most consistent and biblical view of the gospel as summed up by the doctrines of grace.

I'm going to see if I can get a couple of different people to read it and help me revise and edit it, and then I'll hopefully have it ready to submit to publishers very soon thereafter. If nothing else I've learned of some pretty affordable self publishing options that I might go with if I can't get my book picked up by by publishing house (a difficult thing to do for an unpublished author the first time).

I'll keep you informed as things develop!

In Him -Jacob

The Perfect Bible for the Average American "Christian"!

2007-09-21T20:36:00.000-04:00

I wonder if Rick Warren and Joel Osteen teamed up with Apple for this one?

-Jacob

Idolatry...Alive and Well!

2007-09-21T11:08:00.000-04:00

Kathy Griffen while accepting her Emmy for her show "Life on the D List."

As compassionate as we are to be towards sinners and share the gospel of Christ with all who don't deserve grace, just as we ourselves do not deserve grace, there is still something that I think we should look forward to about God's justice.

One day every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

I would sincerely hate to be Kathy Griffen or one of the other millions of people like her who mock Jesus and give their worship to the idol of self appreciation or any other idol for that matter.

I think it's fair for Christians to feel two polar extremes when it comes to sinners.

1. We should feel love and compassion for them because we too are sinners just as worthy of destruction whom God has shown love and grace to.

2. We should also look forward to God's triumphant victory over sin and evil (that which He has already won on the cross, but we look to the total fulfillment of in the last days) when Christ returns and everything is put in subjection to Him and everyone will know that He is God.

As much as I long for Kathy Griffin's salvation, I too long for God's hand silencing the arrogant, boastful fools who have replaced the immortal God, the Creator of all things, and worshiped the creature, namely themselves, in His place.

Grace and Mercy are wonderful things... but so is God's justice. Is this not what Romans 9 speaks of? Is not God equally glorified by showing his mercy on His people as He is glorified by making an example out of Pharaoh?

It may seem a dichotomy to some, but I think Christians should love God's justice towards sinners as much as His grace towards sinners. I believe it is biblical to do so.

So may God save and show mercy on Kathy Griffen or may He justly condemn her for her hardened heart, regardless, to God be the Glory forever and ever AMEN!

-Jacob

Christian Yoga? John MacArthur Says No...I agree.

2007-09-13T20:59:00.000-04:00

Saw this video at Reformed Geek, had to put it here. Amen Dr, MacArthur... Amen.

By the way, if you haven't ever checked out Reformed Geek, you should. It's one of my favorite blogs that I read on a regular basis.

-Jacob

"Free Will": The Ultimate Christian Myth?

2007-09-13T17:03:00.000-04:00

Ask almost anyone, especially in America, whether or not mans will is free and most likely they will tell you "yes, of course." This is no less true, and perhaps even more true, when it comes to the majority of Christian "evangelicals." Let me pause a moment to ask you this same question. Is the human will "free?" Some Christians seem to think that this belief in human "free will" is crucial to the gospel message. The reformed position (that which I hold to) would argue quite the opposite.

Good questions to ask at the beginning of this discussion might be, "Where does the belief in human free will come from?" And "Is it in accordance with Biblical teaching?"

To answer these questions up front I would say:

1.) This belief stems from apparent truth rather than actual truth.

and,

2.) Depending on what you mean by "free will" it may or may not be Biblical.

Let me start with question one and give a little more depth to my simplistic answer. People tend to believe in free will because it appears to be true. For instance, if you are hungry, you decide whether or not you are going to go to Applebees or Pizza Hut. It's your decision... right! It certainly seems so. If you are faced with a decision between doing what is moral and what is sinful, it's up to you, right?

In some sense, this is absolutely true. I think we are Scripturally safe in saying that we as human beings are not forced to do anything against our will. We do that which we most want to do. However, does this necessarily mean that our will is truly free?

As Christians we must submit to the teaching of Scripture. So what does the Bible have to say about the issue of mans will?

While we do not have a specific discourse, persay, on the issue of human will in the Bible, that is not to say that the Bible doesn't reveal the state of the human will.

Consider with me if you will Pharaoh, king of Egypt in the exodus account. I've been reading this account recently once again and something I find interesting is the "hardening" of Pharaoh's heart. Sometimes it very clearly says that "God hardened Pharaoh's heart" and other times it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. How should we understand this?

I suggest that we should understand this to mean that Pharaoh, a sinful man who did not fear God, did that which he most wanted to do. He hardened his heart. We could, as many theologians foolishly try and do, simply leave it at that. But what then does it mean when it says that God hardened Pharaohs heart? It's nonsense to say that God hardened Pharaoh's heart because Pharaoh chose to have a hardened heart. This is especially nonsense in light of the following passage:

Exodus 9:16-17

"But for this purpose I have raised you up, to show you my power, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth. 17 You are still exalting yourself against my people and will not let them go."

God says that He raised Pharaoh up for the purpose of showing His power, so that His name would be proclaimed in all the earth, and yet God says that Pharaoh is exalting himself against God's people. So we see that God made Pharaoh for the purpose of making an example of him and yet He doesn't have to force Pharaoh to do evil, He does it of his own desire. But clearly it is the will of God that Pharaoh's heart be hardened, and it is God who initiates this hardening, not the other way around.

Romans 9:18 adds to this discussion "So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills." It is God's choice to harden hearts and to show mercy.

So though Pharaoh did that which he most desired to do, could he have done anything else? No, he couldn't have because he was doing what the LORD willed him to do, although God did not have to force Pharaoh. Interesting, is it not? And lest we think this is an isolated case, here is another prime example: Judas Iscariot.

Have you ever thought to yourself, "What if Judas hadn't betrayed Jesus?" What a thought. If he had not done so Christ would not have died on our behalf becoming sin for us on the cross and propitiating our sins. We'd be in some trouble to say the least. But could Judas have not betrayed Jesus? No, he had to.

As Jesus said in John 17:12 in His high priestly prayer for his disciples "While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled."

Judas had to do what he did for the Scriptures to be fulfilled. Consider Acts 2:23 in Peters sermon at Pentecost when he says "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men." Clearly the plan of God was for Jesus to be crucified, but it was done by the hands of lawless men doing lawless deeds. They were not compulsed by God, they did as they desired to do, yet according to God's "definite plan", according to the will of God.

Some will surely say, "Perhaps God does this with certain people, but not all." Can this be true? Look at Ephesians 1:11.

"In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will."

It seems that the Scripture teaches that God "works all things according to the counsel of His will." This is pretty inclusive I would say. When you put this together with verses like Daniel 4:35,

"all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, "What have you done?"

And Proverbs 16:33

"The lot is cast into the lap,but its every decision is from the LORD."

There are many more verses we could look at that carry similar idea's about God's total sovereignty over all creation and yes even the will of man. It is clear that mans will is subject to God's will, and yet in practice we see only what we desire to do, giving the appearance of "free will."

There is more to consider on this subject as well concerning issues such as being enslaved to sin. When Romans 3:10-12 says "10as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; 11no one understands; no one seeks for God.12All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." Can we really say that our will is free when we are so in bondage to sin that we cannot even "seek for God" or do "good" in the sight of God?

Then the other side of the coin is that even when we become Christians, we become slaves to Christ. The Spirit of God comes into our life and influences (to say the least) what we do. And as Paul speaks of, even then we struggle between our old nature that we have died to in Christ and our new nature that we have received by the Spirit of God through faith in Christ.

Romans 7:15-20,

"15For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me."

So it seems that our will is not so free after all. In fact it seems that our will is subject ultimately to God's will, and below that it is subject to the effects of sin for both non Christians and Christians fighting their old nature.

Clearly if God allowed true "free will" and allowed us always to do that which we would do on our own, no one would ever choose Christ and be saved because all have sinned (Rom 3:23) and due to that sin "no one seeks for God" (Rom 3:10-12).

It would seem that the belief in human free will is indeed a great Christian myth based on a faulty understanding of the things we perceive and the decisions we make appearing to be freely made. There is much more that could be said on this subject, but it is clear that the human will is not free, at least not in the sense that most people mean when they use such terminology.

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

Calvinism...heresy?

2007-09-08T12:21:00.000-04:00

A follow up to the last video.... even funnier.

2007-09-08T10:51:00.000-04:00

Ergun Caner, Tom Acol, James White.... funny

2007-09-08T10:49:00.001-04:00

Someone edited this video together. It made me laugh.

Romans 9... the terror of Arminian's.

James White Cross Examinating George Bryson

2007-09-08T10:27:00.000-04:00

No doubt about it. James White is the best apologist around. I love how he forces people to show that they don't know what they are talking about. George Bryson clearly shows here, he does not know what he is talking about.

Answer the question that is asked George!

This is the cross examination portion of a debate over the issues of Calvinism. Specifically Dr. White holds Bryson to the question ragarding John 6:37 and 44. There is no way to answer that question accurately unless you give the Calivinist answer.

-Jacob

John Piper: The Gospel With Little to No Contextualization

2007-09-08T00:48:00.001-04:00

I saw this clip over at www.irishcalvinist.com and I had to put it here. I love Dr. Piper.... hand motions and all.

-Jacob

Some Good Thoughts on the Issue of Sin's Origin

2007-09-08T00:29:00.000-04:00

The following article is by Steve Cornell on the topic of the origin and nature of sin.

http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/09/06/where-did-sin-come-from-what-should-we-think-about-sin/

-Jacob

A Simple Reminder

2007-09-07T14:21:00.000-04:00

Isaiah 40:8

"The grass withers, the flower fades,but the word of our God will stand forever."

A while back my wife and I were driving through the countryside of Kansas, something there is plenty of around here. As we were driving down the country road we both saw the same thing and had the same thought.

There on the side of the road was an abandoned house. Run down to say the least. There was a whole in the roof, most of the paint had pealed off and the house was surely structurally unsound.

The thought that seemed to smack Susan and I both was that this house may have at one time been someones dream house. You could imagine what the house looked like when it was built. You could imagine perhaps a young couple with dreams and aspirations about their life together perhaps having children one day.

I know my wife and I have often thought how nice it would be to own a nice home, a new car perhaps. But what seeing this house did for us was put life into perspective. What lasts forever? Nothing in this world lasts forever. God, His word, Salvation by His grace, these things last forever. Houses do not, cars do not.

I'm reminded of James 4:13-17

"13Come now, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit"— 14yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. 15Instead you ought to say, "If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that." 16As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. 17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin."

We make our plans, we have our dreams and we set out to achieve them. This in itself is not bad, but we can be arrogant in our attitude about it. So many times I know that I make plans and don't consult God. I do things all the time that I think are for God, but I don't ask Him if it's ok.

I suppose my main point is simply this: Be careful how you build. I'm speaking to myself as much as I am you. Dreams and aspirations are great, and often God given. But let us always have the attitude of "if the Lord wills" and everything for His glory.

There are very few things that we do in this life that hold eternal impact. The things that we tend to focus on as important (the material things) they all fade, vanish, and crumble.

Let us remember as Christians that our kingdom is not of this world. We are not home here. This earth and all of creation will one day be destroyed by fire (2 Peter 3:7). So let us be ambitious and have dreams and aspirations, but let us always say "if the Lord wills."

Most importantly, let our dreams and aspirations be focused on those things that are eternal. Growing close to God through His word and prayer, sharing Christ with the lost. Let us focus not on the perishable but the imperishable. What a good and simple reminder an old abandoned house is. There are things that matter during this life and there are things that don't.

Let's focus on what matter's.

1 Peter 1:3-5

3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

-Jacob

Does Jesus Teach Pacifism?

2007-08-31T13:56:00.000-04:00

I found this article to be interesting, and answered some questions that I've pondered on in the past. Perhaps it will be informative and helpful to you as well.

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2463/John_Piper

-Jacob

Paul Washer on "Decisional Regeneration"

2007-08-30T20:48:00.000-04:00

This link will take you to a post over at the Reformed Geek blog. It's worth the few minutes to go there and listen to what Paul Washer has to say on the issue.

http://www.reformedgeek.com/2007/08/28/washer-on-decisional-regeneration/#comment-557

-Jacob

YOU CAN'T TELL ME MY EXPERIENCE WAS WRONG!!!

2007-08-18T10:07:00.000-04:00

One of the most common objections I receive from Charismatic Christians when speaking about what tongues is and isn't according to the Bible, is that they have "experienced" a private prayer language, so I cannot tell them that it is wrong and unbiblical because they have "experienced it."

This brings us to the question of ultimate authority. What is the Christians ultimate authority? Is my ultimate authority God and His word, or is my ultimate authority my personal experience? I would think that any real Christian would be ashamed to say "my personal experience is my ultimate authority."

However, even though you'd be hard pressed to find someone willing to admit this, many people act as thought their experience was their final authority. They judge and interpret the Scripture based off of what they've experienced rather than let Scripture judge whether or not their experience is valid.

Such presuppositions lead to false conclusions about what Scripture is or isn't teaching. This is not simply a charismatic issue actually. Many Christians are guilty of doing this regardless of their ecclesiastical background. I'll use the example of Alcohol.

Many Christians consider drinking alcohol a sin, period. Therefore whenever Jesus is said to drink wine, they conclude that it is merely grape juice. This may sound ridiculous to some people, but I know people do it. Their personal convictions regarding alcohol are so strong that they allow their own experience or view point to be the final authority. The truth is that Scripture condemns drunkenness, but not drinking alcohol altogether.

We could list many examples of how Christians can be guilty of letting their own experiences and convictions be their final authority, the point is clear however, we cannot allow this to be so.

Charismatic Christianity has placed such a heavy emphasis on the "experiential" side of things, that the objective word of God is often shuffled to the back. The Bible is very clear about what the gift of tongues is and isn't. But even if you want to contend for a private prayer language, you must do so on the basis of Scripture, if you cannot then you do not have a leg on which to stand.

I've no doubt whatsoever that people have "experienced" powerful, emotional things in their prayer life and worship services. Nonetheless, all experiences should still be subjected to God's word. Should an angel appear to you and tell you to follow another gospel, it may be a real experience, but it stands condemned by God's word according to Galatians 1.

That is an extreme example of course, but should not things like being "slain in the Spirit" and "speaking in a private prayer language" undergo the same Biblical test, regardless of the fact that one may have experienced something. There are many experiences in life that are real but not of God.

So which do you choose to rely on when deciding if something is true and valid to practice as a Christian? Your subjective experience, or God's objective truth?

-Jacob

Where'd All The Calvinists Come From?

2007-08-16T21:13:00.000-04:00

The following is a link to a 10 part series by Mark Dever called "Where'd All The Calvinists Come From". I've only read the first two articles so far myself, but I've found them interesting and will be reading the remaining eight. Let me know what you think.

http://blog.togetherforthegospel.org/2007/08/monday-morning-.html#comments

-Jacob

The Church Has No Business Judging Unbelievers

2007-08-14T22:29:00.000-04:00

1 Corinthians 5:12

"For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?

Yesterday I ran into a situation that broke my heart. As I am going back to school, I have picked up a job working part time at Radio Shack here in Hillsboro. I see lot's of people throughout the day and rarely (to be honest) do I give much serious thought to the condition of their souls. But I met someone yesterday that I believe God used to shake me up in that regard.

A young woman came into the store to take care of some business and as she was paying for the item she purchased she handed me a large sum of $1 bills. She commented that she "gets a lot of those where she works." Thinking little of the comment I casually said "Oh, are you a waitress?" Her response caught me off guard. She said that "you could call it something like that."

Long story short, she was a stripper at a bar in a nearby town. She immediately asked me if I was going to judge her for what she did. About that time I seemed to have a lot of things running through my mind. How do you respond to that?

I told her that I myself am a Christian, and I do disagree with such things, however I didn't judge her as a person. She seemed shocked. I think that above all she expected a "Christian" to pronounce judgement on her. I told her that I too am a sinner, as we all are. I intended to go into sharing the gospel with her, however, about that time a flood of customers came through the door and it didn't seem like I could do that right then, perhaps I should have regardless.

She thanked me for not judging her. She told me that she knew what she was doing was wrong, but it paid for school and her kids. By this time though I could tell she was convicted. She said "I do believe in God and all that, I know He'll forgive me."

I thanked her for coming in, but I was screaming on the inside "don't leave, I need to tell you about Jesus Christ", but I had customers asking me questions. She left the store and I helped the other customers.

After the store cleared out, I was very upset. I prayed to God that He would bring her the gospel and grant her faith and repentance in Christ. I was just so struck by the fact that all she expected from me as a Christian was to pour out judgement on her, condemn her as a sinner and write her off. But the truth is, I was heartbroken for her. She was so lost in her sin. Worse still, she held out hope that God would simply forgive her because she believed He was real.

The church is often times guilty of two extremes. One extreme was that which she expected from me, to react in a condemning fashion and call her a wretched sinner. So many churches are caught up in being self righteous that they have no love or compassion for people such as this girl. They would rather condemn her, judge her as if they were God, and send her away.

The second extreme that the church tends to be guilty of is looking past her sins and simply accepting her because she "believes in God" yet shows no sign of repentance. These kinds of churches equally condemn people to Hell by their lack of concern for genuine righteousness through genuine faith in Christ.

The truth is, the church needs to be busy not judging "outsiders" or unbelievers, and yet not busy overlooking their need for genuine repentance either. The church must be able to look a lost person in the eye and tell them, "I don't judge you. I'm no better than you. I myself am a wretched sinner. However I want to warn you, because I care about you, that you are in danger of judgement. Not from me or any human being, but from a perfect and holy God."

We must find the ability to love sinners, no matter how despicable their sin. We must be willing to share the truth about the need for repentance and faith in Christ regardless of whether it might offend them. The church has no business judging unbelievers, but it is the business of the church to warn unbelievers of God's wrath towards sin and the forgiveness that rests in Christ alone.

I am still anguished that I didn't get to share the truth with this woman about the danger she was in, but I can only entrust her to God now. I do thank God however for this incident. It was reminder for me that I need to be more conscious of the state of people's souls. I am around people who need Christ every day, and everyday I let those people leave my presence without sharing Christ. I realize that there are time where it is not conducive to share the gospel, I'd be a liar if I said to you that I would never let this happen again and that I would share the gospel with every person I meet from now on that I think might need the Lord. I know I will continue to fail time and again. But I thank God for a wake up call. I need to be more broken for the lost, compassionate toward sinful people.

We as the church must always remember that saying "but for the grace of God, there go I." I'm no less sinful than that woman, I've just been granted God's grace. I pray that she will one day know Jesus too. I pray that God will continue to make me more concerned for the lost that are around me. Though I may not always share the gospel when I ought, I pray that I will fail to do so less and less.

-Jacob

What the heck is a "private prayer language?"

2007-08-03T17:51:00.000-04:00

The following article should not be considered a personal attack upon Christians of the Charismatic persuasion. Rather it should be viewed as a challenge to my brother's and sister's in Christ to make certain that their theology is in line with God's perfect and infallible word. Whenever belief contradicts Scripture, it is our Christian responsibility to yield to Scripture and adapt our beliefs to it's truth.

If you know anything of the Charismatic movement you've probably heard the term "private prayer language" before. The question that you might have is, what the heck is a "private prayer language?" Well, that's a good question, and it makes sense that you would be confused by such phraseology. After all the Bible doesn't use that language, nor does it even describe something that we could refer to as a "private prayer language." So what is the deal with this issue? Where did it come from? And what should be our response as Christians who believe that the Bible is the only infallible source of truth for guiding our lives in Spiritual matters?

To start off, let's discuss what in the world this is even supposed to mean. I know from personal experience, as a former charismatic myself, what people mean when they say "God has given me a private prayer language." From the charismatic viewpoint this means that God has given them the spiritual gift of tongues that is spoken of throughout the New Testament, with a particular emphasis in 1 Corinthians chapters 12;13 and 14. I would like to note here that the word that is translated "tongues(s)" is the Greek word "glossa." The word glossa could equally be translated as "language(s)" and I wish that it would be in more translations so that the mysteriousness of the word "tongues" would perhaps fade a bit. But none the less, either way it is translated, it refers to the same thing, a language. The question that we run into here is this: "what kind of language is referred to by the Greek word glossa?"

Going back yet once again to the Charismatic viewpoint and their understanding of the gift known as tongues, there is a notable amount of disagreement even within the ranks of the Charismatic movement as to how the gift functions today and what it is for.

Some Charismatics believe it only to be in the form of a private prayer language. By this they mean that it is some sort of God given language that only God Himself understands. Often times it is believed that everyone who receives such a "prayer language" it is indeed there own and no one else has one like it. The purpose of this "gift" has varying explanations depending on whom you might ask in the Charismatic movement.

1. Some say that it is a language that is meant to hide your prayers from the devil that God alone can understand so Satan does not try and hinder your prayers.

2. Some refer to Romans 8:26 where it says "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words." They then say that the gift of tongues that God has given them is the Spirit of God speaking through them in ways that they do not themselves understand, and this is what happens when they do not best know how to pray.

3. Other's say that it is to "build up your Spirit" or I've even heard "build up your spirit man." Generally referring to some sort of self edification, a spiritual Pick-me-up. I've heard 1 Corinthians 14:4 used as a defense for this view where it says "4The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church."

And then there are those that have other variations on those 3 things or mix and match.

There are even some within the Charismatic realm (though certainly not all) who claim that if you do not have the gift of tongues then you are not truly a believer because they see the gift of tongues as synonymous with having God's Spirit and being saved.

Finally, most charismatics that I have talked to believe in a secondary "filling of the Holy Spirit." These charismatics are those who do not believe that you must speak in tongues to be saved, rather they often just believe that those who do not speak in tongues "are lacking the fullness of God's Spirit." Generally this is what they refer to as being baptized in the Holy Spirit.

(At Reformation In Progress we deny that there is a secondary experience after salvation where "more" of the power of God's Spirit is received. We will deal with this in a different article.)

Sticking to the issue of "private prayer languages" however, is there actually Biblical support for such a doctrine or practice? I believe the answer is a firm "no."

I think it will be helpful for us to examine what the Bible clearly says about the gift of glossa, otherwise known as "tongues" or "languages." To start, let's look at the first mention of this gift in the Bible.

Acts 2:1-21

"1When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7And they were amazed and astonished, saying, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God." 12And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, "What does this mean?" 13But others mocking said, "They are filled with new wine."

Things to notice about this passage.

1. It was Pentecost, a Jewish festival where every devout Jew that had any way of getting to Jerusalem would be there. (1 Cor. 2:1,5)

2. There were men from "every nation under heaven" and therefore many different languages represented at the festival. When the gift of "tongues was given to the Christians they began to speak in languages that, as Galileans, they would not usually know. (1 Cor. 2:5-11)

3. Although the languages were foreign to those speaking them, they were known languages and understood by the people from foreign countries. (1 Cor. 2:8)

If we were to read on in chapter 2, we would find that Peter goes on to tell the people about gaining salvation in Jesus Christ. The miraculous gift of tongues (languages) validated that God was behind what the apostle Peter had to say, and it was because the people recognized that the power of God was on the Peter and the other followers of Christ that they repented of their sins and believed.

Now mind you, this is the very first example of this miraculous gift recorded in Scripture. It is very clear here what this gift given at Pentecost was for. The followers of Christ were telling the people from every nation "the mighty works of God" in their own languages (1 Cor. 2:11). This as Peter explains is an outpouring of God's Spirit (1 Cor. 2:17-21) and it validated the gospel message that Peter preached, as a result unbelieving Jews placed their trust in Christ.

In fact interestingly enough, every time the gift of glossa (tongues/languages) is used in the book of acts it is used to validate the gospel message in some way. As we have just seen, originally the gift was used to communicate the "mighty works of God" in the languages of those who had come from foreign countries, as a result the gospel message was validated by this sign and people believed the message was of God.

In Acts 10:44-48 we see that the gift on tongues is given to gentiles who receive the Spirit of God when they believe the gospel, validating the gospel message as for both Jews and gentiles alike.

Now as we move to 1 Corinthians we see in chapters 12, 13 and 14 a discussion on spiritual gifts. Let's start at the beginning and move our way forward.

1 Corinthians 12:1-11

"1Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be uninformed. 2You know that when you were pagans you were led astray to mute idols, however you were led. 3Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus is accursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except in the Holy Spirit.

4Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills."

As Paul start the discussion of Spiritual gifts, I think there are several important things to note.

1. Paul is dealing with the Corinthian church which is not a healthy nor spiritually mature church. The church was seriously divided into factions and were not focused in Christ (1 Cor. 1:10-17). Paul refers to Christians in Corinth as acting like "people of the flesh, as infants in Christ" (1 C0r. 3:1).

2. The very reason that Paul is writing this letter to the church in Corinth is to deal with their spiritual immaturity and sinfulness. the church at Corinth was all to accepting of the practices of the world that were not meant to be mingled with Christ's church. The tone of the letter is disciplinary and corrective all the way through, this does not change when Paul enters the topic of Spiritual gifts. The Corinthians were practicing some things in regard to spiritual gifts, particularly that of glossa (tongues) that were wrong.

Now as we address the above Scripture in 1 Corinthians 12:1-11, I believe that the purpose statement or thesis perhaps for the usage of any God given gift is found in verse 7.

"To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good."

If more people would just take this simple, straightforward verse into consideration perhaps this would help settle the matter of whether "private prayer languages" were supported by Scripture or not. I ask you this, can speaking in a supposed language that no human being on earth can make any sense of possibly be "for the common good?" No indeed it cannot.

In the same chapter, just preceding verses 1-11 we see that Paul continues this "purpose statement" and gives some depth to the idea of Spiritual gifts being for the common good of the church.

1 Corinthians 12:12-26

"12For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

14For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
21The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." 22On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, 24which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, 25that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together."

In the above passage Paul uses a brilliant God breathed illustration of the church being likened to a human body. Each Christian is compared to a different part of the body, each are given a different but complimentary function. Just as a human body would not function at 100% of it's capacity if it were missing an eye, or foot, or fingers. Likewise each member of the body of Christ is given a spiritual gift and all of the different gifts are needed to operate in harmony for the church to bring the most glory to God. Regardless if one gift by human estimation seems more prominent or important, every gift that God gives is complimentary and depends upon the others. The gifts given by the spirit are meant to edify and encourage the rest of the church. A gift that is not functioning in such a way that it is supporting and harmonizing with other gifts is no gift of God at all because it breaks away from the purpose of spiritual gifts.

Hopefully at this point we are beginning to see the problem with the very idea of a "private prayer language." The problem is that the very nature of such a practice is counter to what Scripture says a Spiritual gift is and how it should function.

In regard to anyone who would hold the extreme position that only those who speak in tongues are believers, the next passage in chapter 12 clearly denies such a view to Be God's truth.

1 Corinthians 12:27-31

"27Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. 29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way."

Clearly the Spirit gifts His people in different ways and the language of this passage implies an emphatic "No" after every open ended question. "Do all speak in tongues?" No. Nor were all believers ever meant to have any one gift.

Now as we reach chapter 13 we start to reach the place where people who hold to the charismatic practice and view of "private prayer languages" often draw their theology. Let's take a look at the next passage that follows immediately after the last.

1 Corinthians 13:1-13

"1If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant 5or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. 7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things."

The apostle Paul begins here to engage in some hyperbole. The point that the apostle is making is that regardless of what one is capable of doing, if the motivation is not love, it is of no spiritual benefit to them. To emphasize His point, Paul uses exaggerated language. If he Paul speaks in the tongues/languages of men (an actual gift of the Spirit) or even if He was so incredibly gifted as to speak in the tongues/languages of angels (something we see no example of in Scripture) if he does not do these in love for the church, it is nothing, worhtless.

Likewise if Paul has prophetic powers (which he does as this very letter is recognized as "theopneustos" or "God breathed" Scripture) or if Paul knew everything that there was to know (Paul of course is not omniscient) or if he had a faith that could literally uproot mountains (which of course is an exaggeration) regardless if the motivation behind such things is not love of others then it is of no benefit. The purpose of Spiritual gifts is the encouragement and edification of the church for "the common good."

When Paul speak of the tongues of angels, He does not say that this is something that could actually happen, he merely points out that even if He were so gifted if it were not used in a way that would be selfless love, benefiting the church, then it is no good. I remind you here that this is a corrective letter, the Corinthians were full of pride and loved to boast in their own spirituality, this is the attitude that Paul deals with in the first 3 chapters of this letter. It's likely that the Corinthians were boasting in their gifts and not using them in love for the encouragement of the body of Christ. It is, furthermore, likely that the immature Christians were even boasting that God had endowed them with abilities beyond what was a reality.

Regardless of what was going on, Paul reminds them that all gifts are to be used in love and for the common good of the body of Christ. Something that the Corinthians were surely guilty of not doing as those who were acting as "people of the flesh. as infants in Christ" (1 Cor. 3:1).

Let's move on to the next passage 1 Cor. 13:8-13

"8Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love."

I don't want to spend much time upon this issue now, but it is reasonable to at least mention here that there is a good argument for the gift of glossa as a gift among several that is no longer given. It is amongst what are commonly referred to as the sign gifts such as tongues, prophecy, miracles, healing, etc. The argument centers on this passage where it says that "prophecies they will pass away; as for tongues they will cease..." I think that this is a credible argument, however this is not the issue at hand. We are trying to ascertain what the gift of tongues truly is Biblically speaking, and what it is not. Whether it is a gift for today is for another conversation. But the point is made yet once again that love never ends and is the greatest importance of all.

Let's venture on to the next passage, 1 Corinthians 14:1-5.

"1Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. 2For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 3On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. 4The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. 5Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up."

Now, once again, this is a place where a lot of Charismatics grasp their theology about tongues. They will say to me "You see, it says that they are speaking to God and men cannot understand. Private prayer language, right there!" However, let's put this in context. We see that Paul goes on to say that "the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation." Now this fits the purpose statement of Spiritual gifts, being used for the common good. Paul then counters that thought with what the Corinthians were doing with this gift of glossa, or at least what they were supposedly doing. Paul says that the one who speaks in a tongue "builds up Himself" rather than building up the church. This is counter to the purpose of Spiritual gifts.

This being the case, what the Corinthians were practicing and calling the gift of tongues, was either not the genuine gift, (claiming to speak an unknown, perhaps, angelic language), or it was genuine that they were speaking in real, human languages, but with no one around who knew the language (which is why they were speaking "not to men but to God" because God knows all languages). Regardless, this was really just one more way to boast in themselves as they have been doing with other things like claiming superiority to others based on whom they calimed to follow (1 Cor. 1:11-17). Paul is not commending the Corinthians on their practice of tongues in the way that they are practicing it, in fact He is condemning it because their motivation is selfish, prideful and boasing in themselves. They were in effect, showing off, saying "Look what I can do!" Spiritual gifts are for the upbuilding and encouragement of the Church, they should never be used for ones own self alone.

Let's continue in chapter 14:6-12.

"6Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? 7If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? 8And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? 9So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. 10There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, 11but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. 12So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church."

This needs little commentary, but, does it sound like to you that Paul thinks people should speak in unknown mysterious languages? Will it build up the church? No. Gifts are to be used for "the common good." A private prayer language cannot do that.

1 Corinthians 14:13-19

"13Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. 16Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. 18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue."

Paul thanks God that He speaks in tongues more than any of them. No one is denying that tongues is, or at the very least was a real gift of the Spirit, but Paul used it in the proper method. As a missionary Paul traveled all over the world and God enabled him to speak in languages he would not otherwise know as sign that gave creedence to his message of the gospel of Christ as being from God. But in a setting where Paul was with brothers in Christ, it would be foolish to speak in a tongue that they did not know. If you do not know what a person is saying, you cannot be encouraged in the Lord, and vice-versa.

1 Corinthians 14:20-25

"20Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. 21 In the Law it is written, "By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord." 22Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. 23If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds? 24But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you."

This once again indicates the purpose of the genuine gift of glossa (tongues/languages). The gift was meant to be a sign for unbelievers, just like in Acts 2. God used Galileans who spoke one language to speak to people who were foreign to them in their languages, some believed some didn't. But the purpose of the gift was clear there in Acts 2 and now it is reemphasized here. The gift is not for personal upbuilding, rather it is evangelistic in nature, a sign for unbelievers.

This passage also speaks against the usage of tongues in a worship gathering where all are speaking at once and no one understands. Paul says that people will think the Corinthians "are out of your minds." But prophecy, speaking intelligible words about Christ and His gospel, this causes people to worship God and recognize His presence in the church.

1 Corinthians 14:26-32

"26What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. 27If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. 28But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. 29Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, 32and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets."

Her Paul discusses having order and reverence in worship Once again it is stressed that whatever is done, should be done for the building up of others, for the common good. In regard to tongues there are several things made clear.

1. There should only be 1 or 2 or 3 people at most speaking in tongues in the service.

2. Each should take a turn, it should not be done all at the same time.

3. There should be an interpreter, if there is not they should keep it to themselves and the Lord.

4. The very fact that an interpreter is mentioned points to the fact that tongues should be an intelligible language that someone on earth should know.

This certainly chastizes the practice of many charismatic churches when the multitude speaks in "tongues" all at once. There is nothing but confusion in such a practice and as the Scripture says "God is not a God of confusion but of peace."

Now to deal with that "stray" verse in Romans 8:26-27 that is often used as a justification for tongues as a "private prayer language."

The Scripture says:

"26Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."

Let's consider what the Scripture actually teaches here.

1. The Spirit of God helps us in our weakness.

2. We don't always know how we should pray, or what best to pray for.

3. Because God knows us better thatn we know ourselves and all the details of our lives, He actually intercedes on our behalf "with groanings to deep for words."

4. The Spirit intercedes for us as Christians according to the will of God.

Here is the question. Is the gift of tongues referred to? No. Does it say that the Spirit interceding for His people makes sounds through those people? No. It is a leap and an illogical assumption to tie the gift of tongues to this passage. Indeed it comes from the presupposition that a "private prayer language" exists and then looks through the Bible to try and find Scripture that supports the presupposition. This is a fallacy of Bible interpretation. Context is everything and the gift of tongues is not mentioned.

We have now systematically looked at the issue of tongues. Let's summarize out findings.

1. The gift of tongues (as is true with all gifts of the Spirit) is meant for the building up of others, for the common good of God's church.

2. The gift of tongues is a sign that validates the gospel message.

3. It is evangelistic in nature.

4. It is actual known, human languages.

5. It should only be used when there is someone to interpret it.

6. Not all believers are meant to speak in tongues.

It is my conviction based off of this kind of study that the gift of tongues was meant as a way of communicating the gospel of Christ and validating the gospel message as from God and proving that the gospel was for all people including the gentiles.

If tongues were for today, it would not be as a "private prayer language." There is no Scriptural support for such a practice. It would be for the communicating of the gospel message in a foreign language one did not typically speak in.

Upcoming Posts:

You Can't Tell Me My Experience Was Wrong

Is the Gift of Glossa for Today?

Serving Christ,

Jacob Allee

Let's Start Preaching Again!

2007-08-03T00:30:00.000-04:00

Great exhortation for pastors to preach the word faithfully.

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2356/Jim_Elliff

Check out the New Reformation In Progress logo:

2007-07-30T21:47:00.000-04:00

Above you'll see our new logo, designed by the very talented Jeremy Pelton. Thanks Jeremy!

What does everyone think?

-Jacob

I've always heard horror stories about asian prisons, but I had no idea.....

2007-07-28T10:23:00.000-04:00

Paste this into your browser:

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/id/1285143104

Defending the Deity of Christ

2007-07-23T12:24:00.000-04:00

I'm involved in an e-mail discussion with an individual who I won't name since I don't have his permission, regarding whether or not Jesus is YHWH the God of the Bible or merely the Son of YHWH and human man designated as the Messiah, but not God. The individual gave me a link to an article that was Written by Dan Mages called "Trinity and Christology in Light of Modern Scholarship." The individual whom I am interacting with via e-mail said that this represents His view. I read the article and I will give you a link to do the same. I then wrote the following to the unnamed individual as my response to the assertion that the Bible teaches Jesus to be a human son of YHWH that is Israel's savior, but not God in flesh. If you have the time, read both Mages article and my response carefully and study the Scripture yourself to see what indeed the Bible teaches.

Here is the link to Mages article:

http://divinetruth.homestead.com/Jesus_relation_to_YHWH.pdf

And here is my response:

Dear Friend,

I apologize that my letter to you was put off for so long. It has been quite a week getting moved into a new home and starting a new job with the anticipation of attending school once again this next month. But at last I have internet set up again and I have found time to take a seat in front of my laptop to write a response to you.

I took the time to read the article that you pointed me to by your friend Dan Mages. While I found the article interesting, I also found it to be seriously flawed and guilty of committing logical fallacies. We will talk more about that later.

In our brief exchange previously we discussed a few issues that you wished for us to take up. One was the issue of whether or not Jesus is "most certainly Yahweh." I of course contend that He is and you contend that He is merely the Son of Yahweh but is not indeed God Himself. So let’s go ahead and start our exchange on that point. The following reasons are why I believe that Jesus is indeed Yahweh, the God of the Bible.

1. The Scripture Clearly Refers to Jesus as God.

John 1: 1-3;14

"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made."

"14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Interestingly enough there is a clear distinction made here. The Word was with God, which tells us of more than one person, but also the Word was God. Note that the Scripture does not say that the Word "was a God" it says that the Word "was God." So the word is both distinct in some way from God in order to be "with God" and yet the Word is also that same God.

Verse 14 clarifies any confusion one might have about who "the Word" is. He is Jesus. God become man taking on Human flesh. Jesus was with God in the beginning and was God from the beginning.

John 20:27-29

"27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." 28Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" 29Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Note that Thomas not only calls Jesus "Lord" but also "God."

Colossians 1:15,19

"15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation."

And

"19For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,"

Hebrews 1:3,8

"3He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,"

and the father speaking of the Son says,

"8But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. '

The Father himself refers to Jesus as "God"!

2. Jesus is Called the Creator, A Title that Alone Belongs to Yahweh.

John 1:1-3

"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made."

Colossians 1:15-17

"15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together."

Hebrews 1:10-12, the Father says to the Son,

"10And, "You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;11they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, 12like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end."

All of this and yet clearly we are told in Genesis 1 during the creation account that "In the
beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. 1:1) From your position, the God who created Heaven and earth could only be Yahweh whom you say is the Father alone and not the son, but the Scripture clearly attributes the work of creation to the Son. As we have seen the Son is referred to as God, and is now credited with the work of creation which God does in Genesis 1. I think the Scripture has already painted a very clear picture about whether or not Jesus is indeed Yahweh, the God of the Bible. But there is more to see, let us look.

3. The Problem of Worship.

One thing that you and I agree on is that Judaism and Christianity are strictly monotheistic.
That is to say they worship only one God. Faithful Jews would recite the following several times a day:

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." (Deut. 6:4)

Also when the Lord Jesus rebukes Satan when Satan offers Him everything He sees in exchange for Jesus’ worship of him, the Lord says:

" Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'" (Mt. 4:10)

So clearly in Both the Jewish faith and the Christian faith that’s foundation is in Judaism, there is but one God, and only He is to be worshiped. If this is the case and Jesus is not Yahweh as you contend then why is it that Jesus is worhiped, readily receives worship, and is commanded to be worshiped in Scripture?

Matthew 2:1-2,11

"1Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, 2saying, "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him."

And,

"11And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and
myrrh."

Matthew 14:33

"33And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God."

Matthew 28:8-9, 17

"8So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9And behold, Jesus met them and said, "Greetings!" And they came up and
took hold of his feet and worshiped him."

"17And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted."

Luke 24:52

"52And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,"

Hebrews 1:6

‘6And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God’s angels worship him."

Revelation 14:6-7

"6Then I saw another angel flying directly overhead, with an eternal gospel to proclaim to
those who dwell on earth, to every nation and tribe and language and people. 7And he said with a loud voice, "Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come, and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water." (Remember who we were told the Creator was?)

Revelation 5:13-14, Jesus receives worship along with the Father.

"13And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!" 14And the four living creatures said, "Amen!" and the elders fell down and worshiped."

So one of a few things has just happened here. 1. A bunch of Jews blasphemed God and gave worship to another. 2. The Bible is fallible and inconsistent. 3. God changed His mind about worshipping only Him. 4. Jesus was a sinner who sought to take worship away from God.

OR

Jesus is Yahweh in the flesh and there is no problem with what has taken place in these passages.

It’s noteworthy that Angel’s rebuke people for trying to worship them: Rev. 19:10, 22:8-9.

Peter rebukes people for trying to worship him: Acts 10:25-26.

Paul and Barnabas stop people from worshiping them: Acts 14:11-15.

King Herod dies because he receives worship that is due to God alone: Acts 12:22-23.

And yet Jesus, whom you say is not God but only the God’s son, receives worship and welcomes it, what a conundrum unless Jesus actually is Yahweh as much as the Father is.

4. The Problem of Preexistence.

Some of the verses we are going to look at, I have already mentioned here, but there is another side to them that I believe is worth mentioning. The other side is the fact that they teach Jesus existed before He came to earth.

Philippians 2:5-8

"5Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."

John 1:1

"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John 8:57-59

"57So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?"
58Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." 59So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple."

Not only does Jesus clearly say that He existed before Abraham, but also He clearly asserts Himself to be the Great I AM of the Bible. YHWH.

The issue of Jesus being said to preexist before becoming a man is another real problem for the position that denies His deity. Those who deny Jesus as Yahweh must decide whether Jesus is another God like the Mormons claim, perhaps an angel like the Jehovah’s Witness claim, or that He is just a man who happened to preexist. Although no man has ever been called God and the Creator of all things beside Jesus.

5. Jesus demonstrates God’s Attributes:

Jesus shows His omniscience:

Jesus knows the thoughts of man: Mt. 9:4; 12:25; Luke 5:22; 11:17.

Jesus shows His omnipotence:

By Walking on Water: Mt. 14:22-33

By Raising the Dead: Lk. 7:11-17; Jn. 5:21; 11:43-44

Cursing the fig tree: Mt. 21:18-19

Calming storms: Lk. 8:22-25

And need I remind yet once again that Jesus is attributed the work of Creation?

6. The Old Testament Alludes to the Trinity:

In Genesis 1 we see that the Spirit of God hovers over the face of the water’s (Gen. 1:2) showing a distinction between God’s Spirit and the Father. Also we se that is says:

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...." (Gen. 1:26a)

God, singular, said "Let us", plural. Well who is He speaking to? Angels? Are we made after the likeness of God and angels? Is He speaking to preexistent human beings? Are we made after the likeness of God and man? No that wouldn’t work would it? Perhaps there is more to God than one might think. And that is exactly what the Scripture goes on to reveal as Scripture begins to unfold and more is revealed by God’s Prophet’s and Apostle’s.

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." (Deut. 6:4)

Interestingly enough, the monotheistic Shema that is foundational to the Jewish and Christian faith, alludes to the trinity. Lord is the Hebrew word "Adonai" and God is the Hebrew word "Elohim". Elohim is actually a plural word for God, and yet it is used in this monotheistic statement.

7. Closing Thoughts:

I have some serious disagreements with the article your friend wrote, as you can tell. And here are a few more problems I have with his logic and argumentation.

First of all the title of the article throws out serious red flags. "Trinity and Christology in Light of Modern Scholarship." That kind of phraseology always makes me cringe. Whenever someone says, "yeah, you know that thing that faithful Christians have believed for 2,000 years? Well in light of modern scholarship, I’ve found that all of those theologians are wrong. Not to mention the people only a generation or two removed from the time Christ actually walked the earth."

Honestly, the assertion that Mages makes in his opening statements that there is "much confusion" surrounding "the question of how Jesus is related to YHWH, the God of Israel" is ridiculous. In fact the majority of denominations and even the Roman Catholic Church who I otherwise disagree with on much, have clearly defined in their doctrinal statements that Jesus is YHWH, part of the trinity. Mages makes it sound like there is a massive split in Christendom about whether Jesus is God or not. This couldn’t be further from the truth. This has always been a foundational truth of Christianity, taught from New Testament times until now.

It is a big red hearing to act as if nothing was ever said about Jesus being God until the 3rd Century when Athanasius was battling it out with Arius about whether or not Jesus was of the same or similar essence to the Father. That fight came about because Arius, a wolf in sheep clothing, was challenging what had been taught since Christ came to earth. As we have seen the New Testament clearly calls Jesus God, presents Him as Creator, gives Him worship and commands that He be worshiped as God, demonstrates His God attributes, Etc. And such teaching continued from the 1st century until now.

Mages asserts that there would be much confusion and riotous response against the message of Jesus being God. Has he read the New Testament? They try and stone Jesus when He tells them "Before Abraham was, I AM." (Jn. 8:58) The Apostles message was constantly ignored, got them beaten and stoned and all but one of them (John) eventually killed.

Not only were their logical fallacies in the arguments made but also it seemed more as though Mages was arguing against polytheism rather than the doctrine of the trinity. This leads me to wonder if Mages, or perhaps you yourself understand the Trinitarian position. In no way shape or form is the Trinitarian position suggesting that Jesus is a different God than the Father, we believe that the Bible teaches them to be the same God, yet different persons. 1 being shared by three persons.

Therefore Mages whole section entitled "Follow the Pronouns" is quite irrelevant to this discussion. If you were speaking to someone who believed that Jesus was a separate God from the Father, that would be different, but we who hold to the doctrine of the trinity do not in any way shape or form believe that. God may speak of Himself in personal pronouns all day long and that doesn’t contradict the Trinitarian view of God.

The teaching of the Bible is clear, Jesus is YHWH. I pray that you will study further, be convicted by the Spirit of God and repent and believe in the Biblical Jesus.

In Christ,

-Jacob Allee

"There are plenty of 'other' Bible churches around here"

2007-07-22T14:56:00.000-04:00

I had quite the experience today. As my regular readers know, my family has moved just recently to central Kansas in a town called Hillsboro. As this is quite a drive from where we were living in western Kansas, we are looking for a new church home.

It's our desire that we find a good church that is Elder led and expositional in it's teaching style. Today was the first Sunday since we moved here that we have had the chance to look for a church, we chose a Bible Church to visit in a near by town and decided to check it out.

We went, of course, and the service was alright. All traditional hymns, which is ok although I perfer a mix of modern worship and hymns both, but not a big deal really. The pastor had a decent sermon and all that, and several people we talked to were very welcoming and friendly. By the end of the service I was pretty well decided that I'd be willing to visit again and we'd see if it was a fit for us as time went on.

However, that's when something changed my mind. An older gentlemen in the church came over to me and in no so subtle of a style he proceeded to tell my wife and I that there are "other" Bible churches that we shoould check out. I found this kind of odd that someone would tell us that when we were visiting their church. But as the conversation continued it became obvious that he was telling us that we wern't welcome their and should look elsewhere. To be honest I was speechless. (A first time I assure you)

I was so taken back that someone would be so forward as to tell us that. I'm not even entirely sure why, but I can only assume it is because I have earrings. Nevermind the fact that I was wearing a suit and tie. I was, and am, pretty upset by this. I don't think He represents the church as a whole, but I also don't think that my wife and I will be going back there and I intend on letting the Pastor know why tomorrow when I give him a call.

I share this mainly to vent, but also to ask, what should be the grounds for one believer (Supposedly anyway) telling another believer that they cannot fellowship in the same building with them? I guaruntee you, it's not a guy having earrings. Only unrepentant sin is a disqualification for fellowship and that is after a series of church discipline (1 Cor. 5; Mt. 18:15-17).

People such as this are what you might call "cancer" to what appeared to be an otherwise healthy church. And in my opinion this is a great example of why church discipline is necessary, because people like this gentleman are destructive to the body of Christ.

In Him

-Jacob

We Made It.

2007-07-16T18:26:00.000-04:00

Well, we made it. My family and I have moved into our new place in Hillsboro KS. I appreciate those of you who have been praying for us. Our house sold this last week (God's perfect timing). I start my new job at Radio Shack on Wednesday and begin school in a little over a month. That said, there are still a lot of new and upcoming things headed my family's way. Your prayers are still appreciated for our future and our financial situation as we will be on a much tighter budget now.

In Him,

-Jacob Allee

What does the word "day" mean in Genesis?

2007-07-07T16:51:00.000-04:00

As an apologist, one of my great pleasures is to get to answer questions from my brother's and sister's in Christ as well as unbelievers. One brother had the following question and I thought it was worth posting here with a reply. This is a subject that I feel needs to be given more attention by Christians.

My brother in Christ,

In response to your question:

"Explain to me the word day in Genesis, does it mean day or something else?"

This is a great question! I assume that you specifically have Genesis 1 in mind when you raise this question. If you have some other passage from Genesis in mind, do let me know.

As you are probably aware there are several different views on the subject of the creation account amidst those who are Christians. One view is that we should take Genesis 1 and 2 quite literally. That is to say that God created the earth and all that we know to exist in 6 literal days and rested on the seventh day. He made man out of the dust of the ground and Eve from the rib of Adam, etc.

Another view (that seems to be growing in popularity) is that the creation account in Genesis 1 & 2 is speaking figuratively and/or metaphorically. Under this line of thinking there is a large range of ideas about what Genesis 1 & 2 is really teaching and how we should interpret it. I won’t go into large detail about this as it does not specifically pertain to your question. However it is this second category where the question pertaining to the word "day" comes up. In the non-literal camp of the creation account, the majority of those who call themselves Christians believe that the earth is truly millions of years old as "modern science" boasts it to be. The problem that this creates for them is that if the earth is truly million’s of years old then the Genesis account cannot be taken literally. If God actually created the universe in the course of a week then the earth could only possibly be anywhere from 6,000 to 9,000 years old depending on who you ask. But agreeably it couldn’t be in the millions.

It is because of this that the question regarding the word "day" has come up in Christian circles. Let me tell you here and now where I stand, and then I shall tell you why.
I believe that Scripture very clearly teaches that God made the earth and all it’s inhabitants and the stars in the sky, etc, in 6 literal, 24 hour days. So in short, yes the word "day" in Genesis 1 actually means "day."

While I have great respect for Wayne Grudem and some others who hold to a non-literal view of the creation account, I must strongly disagree and dare I say "refute" their teaching on this subject.

The Hebrew word that is translated "day" here in Genesis 1 is "yom." Now let me tell you that it is indeed true that the word "yom" does not necessarily have to be translated "day." It can also refer to an undetermined amount of time. This is true with many words in Hebrew and Greek, they can have different meanings depending on the context. But indeed context is everything. Let’s take a look at the Scripture.

Genesis 1:3-5

"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day."

Now let me just ask you, what does it sound like to you? I mean take the Hebrew word "yom" which can mean "day" or a undetermined period of time. Put it in context, what make sense to you? You see basically the non-literal camp tries to force the creation account to be an undetermined amount of time. That way they can say that each "day" is really a long period of time. An "age of time" if you will. This then allows each "day" that is referred to in Genesis to possibly be millions of years. This is how some Christians try an compromise with "modern science." They still credit God as the creator but they just claim that He took a very long time in doing so, and therefore they harmonize their view of the Bible with science.

Many people point to the Scripture verse that says "For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night." Psalm 90:4. They try and make the point that God can refer to creating something in a day and have it really be a thousand years because it is all the same to Him.

This, however, is a terrible argument. The above verse tells us how a thousand years seems to God, it does not imply that God doesn’t know the difference. God breathed out this Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17) in Genesis 1 & 2 just like the rest of the Bible and when He inspired the text He did so in a simple and straightforward way. There is surely a lot that God chose not to describe about the Creation account, it is after all a very short account when you think of the vastness of creation. But what God did say, He said clearly.

The context of Genesis 1 makes it ever so clear that God referred to days as we know them. "There was evening and there was morning, the first day." Would it make sense to insert "There was evening and there was morning, the first million years."? Or the "first undetermined time period?" It’s rather absurd to even talk about it.

In Exodus 20 when God gave the Ten Commandments, look what He says in regard to the Sabbath!

Exodus 20:8-11

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

You see that even when God speaks to His people directly, giving them the 10 commandments, he refers to the creation account in a literal fashion. The very reason why the Jews took the Sabbath laws so seriously as to stone the person in their midst who ignored the law is because they took God for what He said. They did their work in 6 days and rested on the seventh because that is what God Himself did. Had you asked Moses what day meant (The one who probably wrote Genesis) he would have told you... "a day."

Indeed this is how "day" (yom) has always been understood by orthodox Jews, by believing Christians up until just recently. There has never been this question until very recent history. This should lead us to ask, "Why should we have any reason to understand it differently now?" My personal answer is, we don’t. But let’s be honest, the reason the question about the word "day" has come about is because to many Christians feel the need to try and make what the Bible teaches line up with modern Science. This I believe is extremely dangerous.

In fact it is due to this need to harmonize the Bible and science that we now have what is called "theistic evolution" as a theory some "Christians", if you can call them that, now hold to. The idea of course being that God guided/created the process of evolution. This view is completely incompatible with Scripture hands down. However it is this kind of thing that comes up when we start to "fictionalize" the creation account and insist that we cannot interpret it in a literal fashion. The very idea that we should change our interpretation of Scripture based off of what Modern science teaches is foolish. In fact I think it is such human wisdom that we are warned against in 1 Corinthians 1-2.

The brightest minds once thought the earth was the center of the universe, and they thought that the world was flat, all these things that were once modern science were found weighed and wanting eventually. True science always agree’s with the Bible. That is why there will never be found a "missing link" that conclusively proves evolution.

One other thing to keep in mind when discussing the creation account and how old the earth is, etc. God made Adam with an appearance of age. It’s clear that Adam must have been made a full grown man for him to "know" his wife. He certainly did not start out as a zygote, or embryo. In turn then, it makes just as much sense that the earth, plants, animals and everything else would also have an appearance of age. This would mean that when scientist measure the layers of the earth and guesstimate it’s age, they might be right if it weren’t for the fact that God made the earth to have such an appearance to begin with. Not to mention the possibilities of a world wide flood and what that might do to the physical appearance of the earth and it’s layers.

There is certainly a lot more we could discuss on this issue, and I do recommend that you read the differing views that are out there. But you must ask yourself a couple of questions.

1. What does the Scripture seem to clearly and plainly say? God is not trying to be tricky in what He says to us.

2. Does the narrative context of Genesis suggest that we should look at the creation account as metaphorical or as poetic rather that literal?

3. How have followers of the living God always understood this word "day" (yom) and is there any good reason to understand it differently now?

4. Would anyone understand the creation account to mean an undetermined amount of time if it weren’t for "modern Science?"

5. Should our interpretation of Scripture be conditional on human wisdom, especially that human wisdom that has not been proven?

It’s clear to me that the non-literal view of Genesis 1&2 comes from a foolish need to compromise with worldly wisdom. Where does this compromise stop? Should we take Genesis 3 non-literally also? Perhaps sin isn’t as serious as the Bible seems to say. Perhaps Christ has not raised from the dead and Hid crucifixion was metaphorical and symbolic as the "Jesus Seminar" claims. No the Bible is straightforward and means what it says. Though there are certainly places where there is Hebrew poetry like Psalms, and there are times where authors use hyperbole, and exaggerate, and use figurative and comparative language, we must be consistent in our interpretation of Scripture. We must always let the context define our interpretation, and we must always interpret the Bible by the Bible rather than by "modern science."
What does day mean in Genesis? It means day.

In Him,

Jacob Allee

10 Ways To Grow a Church Without God

2007-07-03T15:31:00.000-04:00

The following article is written by Pastor Ray Baumann. It's a good reminder that you can build a big church using the wisdom of the world, but it'd be better to be a congregation of 40 people rather than 40,000 if it means the difference between pleasing God or not.

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2226/Ray_Baumann

I've been gone...

2007-07-02T14:25:00.000-04:00

Hello,

I was gone all week at youth camp in Salina Kansas. I may be back now, but I wouldn't expect it to seem like it if I were you. I'm moving a week from Saturday and have a lot of loose ends to tie up. After I move it may be a little while until I have Internet set up, so I don't really know when I'll get back to regular blogging.

Please pray for me that our house will sell this week!!!

God bless.

-Jacob

Christian Rock On-line

2007-06-20T12:32:00.000-04:00

Our local Christian radio station here in S.W. Kansas has done a "Rock-Show" on Saturday nights for a couple of years now. They play the latest in Christian Rock (Pillar, Red, Kutless, etc.) as well as some classics's from D.C. Talk, Third Day, Newsboys, Audio Adrenaline and those kind of bands.

They now have an online rock show 24/7 if anyone likes Christian Rock and wants to check it out here it is:

www.therockshowonline.com

-Jacob

God is Neat, Let's Eat!

2007-06-19T11:12:00.000-04:00

The following is a link to an article written by Ray Baumann about our attitude regarding prayer before meals. He has some very good points that I know I stand guilty of doing. How about you?

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2168/Ray_Baumann

-Jacob

Updates on www.reformationapologetics.com

2007-06-18T16:43:00.000-04:00

Hello. I'm going to be working hard these next several weeks to get the www.reformationapologetics.com web site moving forward. My wife and I will be moving in about one month and it make take a while in that transition before I'll have internet again, so I'm trying to make some good progress before that time. I appreciate your prayers for the move, I have found a job, but I still need to get our house here sold very soon.

I have updated the apologetics site and added a "Christian Presuppositions" page and linked to it a sub page on the "Existence of God" and "The Bible as God's Word." The "Existence of God" page has an article already on that page and is going to be undergoing further construction. The page for "The Bible as God's Word" is still under construction and doesn't yet have an article posted.

If you haven't seen the page on "Leadership" under "Biblical Christianity" that page has been updated recently too. Let me know what you think!

In Him

-Jacob

Hello all

2007-06-13T11:32:00.000-04:00

If you are not normally a reader of my other blog, To Die Is Gain, then I would suggest that you would check it out for the exposition of chapter 5 in 1 Corinthians. Largely it deals with the issue of church discipline and it is a serious and important subject that more Christians should be aware of. To often sin is allowed to run free in our churches just like it would in the world, but Scripture has something to say about that....it's not to be tolerated.

Also, on another note, I've been pretty overwhelmed lately trying to get ready to move. My wife and I are trying to sell our house and it hasn't been looking good. I would appreciate your prayers. It's a very busy and stressful time in our lives right now. So thank you to those who pray for us.

-Jacob

Huckabee Was Right on Creation Question

2007-06-13T11:23:00.000-04:00

The following is an article written by Janet Folger in regard to Creationism versus evolution. Worth the read.

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/2148/Janet_L_Folger

Biblical Church Leadership

2007-06-07T15:47:00.000-04:00

The following is a link to an article written by Steve Cornell on the issue of leadership in the Church. Very worth the read if you are interested in God's opinion about how the local church ought to be governed.

http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/04/11/church-leadership-an-overview/

-Jacob

Well...

2007-06-05T16:13:00.001-04:00

I said maybe Monday...Sorry. I'm swamped right now, I'll get to my next post whenever I can. Check out the apologetics site though, I've gotten some work done there and I changed the look, you'll have to let me know what you think.

www.reformationapologetics.com

-Jacob

Maybe Monday...

2007-05-31T17:06:00.000-04:00

Sorry I didn't get the chance today to post on the issue of universalism. It gets busy when you are trying to prepare a sermon.... and hang out with the youth guys now that they are out of school for the summer.... and trying to manage the blog..... and work on my book..... and work on the apologetics site. It's not like I have anything to do.

Ha! Sorry, I'll try and get to that issue on Monday. I think I'll incorporate into that post several things that separate Biblical Christianity from the majority of world religions. For instance, the world religions are often very universalistic, that is to say, most people if not everyone goes to Heaven (Sure there are exceptions like Islam). As well as Biblical Christianity is the lone religion that teaches salvation through faith alone and not by works (I can't think of any other religion that doesn't build some sort of a works system in their somehow.) And then the old standby, monotheism. There are few religions that are strictly monotheistic (again, I know Islam is and obviously Judaism.)

Well, it'll be fun, when I get to it.

-Jacob

Jesus Smacks Down Universalism

2007-05-30T14:55:00.000-04:00

The following passage is for all who think that everyone, or for that matter, even the majority of people will go to Heaven when they die.

Matthew 7:13-14

13"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."

More on this subject tomorrow.

-Jacob

"I feel led.... God Told Me...."

2007-05-29T11:01:00.001-04:00

One of those issues that has gotten under my skin for a long time is the issue that I call the "God told me" syndrome. People who suffer from this problem often experience symptoms such as, but not limited to:

Weak theology
Self justification of sin
Gratification of the flesh
A rejection of Sola Scriptura and the Sufficiency of Scripture

I myself, a former charismatic, have suffered from this condition. Yes it's true, there was a time when I would often say things like, "God told me..." or "God led me to do this" or "I think God is leading me to..." I would use these catch phrases to justify something I wanted to do. I sometimes genuinely convinced myself that God had really said something to me, but Got frustrated when it did not happen. I've had other experiences where friends would tell me that God told them something. I had a girlfriend in High school break up with me because God told her to. I had a friend that told me God told him that I shouldn't get married to the person who is now my wife of almost 4 years (whom I love and God has blessed our marriage). I couldn't figure out why God would tell my friend that, and not me. Maybe I wasn't listening, or maybe I was right that my friend just wasn't happy with the relationship I had with my fiance' that moved to quick for most people. (I asked Susan to marry me one day less than a month after meeting her.) So I have been guilty of this disease and I have suffered from the symptoms of others as well. But let me ask you this, when can we actually say that God told us something?

I submit to you that the only time we can confidently say "God told me..." is when we can follow it up with something like "...In John chapter 10..." After all, the only way we can know for sure the will of God is through his word. 2 Timothy 3 :17 tells us that Scripture makes the man of God "...competent, equipped for every good work."

Therefore when we come to a difficult decision or we are needing some guidance on any given issue, where should we turn? Do we stop and listen to that inner voice? No. We go to the Scripture that is sufficient to make us competent, and equipped for every good work.

When a person says that God told them something, my response is always, "What did God sound like? I mean if you heard from God, tell me what He sounds like, I'm eager to know!" Of course, that's not what they meant. They did not hear the audible voice of God. So then they might say, "Well, I feel God leading me to do this." Then of course I can't help but ask, "Really? How does it feel when God leads you?" About that time they are tired of my questions.

But here is the point, what do people mean when they say "God told me..." or "God is leading me..."? How does God do this to them? They just feel it in their heart? But Jeremiah 17:9 says,

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?"

The problem here is that we are sinners. We have been seriously marred by sin. And even if you are a new creation in Christ, the Scripture tells us that we will struggle to defeat the flesh (our sinful old nature) for the rest of our earthly existence. So can we trust our feelings? Absolutely not. Our feeling are subjective. Think, right now as you are reading this, how many ungodly thoughts and feeling have you had this month, this week, today? If you're honest you will say, "I've had a whole lot." I know I have. Why? Because I'm a jacked up sinner in need of God's grace every moment I draw another breath.

So when I have a decision that needs made, or I need guidance, what do I need to do? I need to pray and go to the word of God. It is a dangerous thing that is being taught that people should merely pray, ask God for answers and sit quietly and listen for his voice. That is not how God tells us He operates. Who knows what you might here? You might hear your own desires saying "Yeah, do this" or perhaps a demon might speak to you and you think it's God! How do you know? What does God sound like?

I'm certainly this is where someone will say to me, "But the book of James tells us that 'if anyone of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given to him.'" (James 1:5) Well, yes it does. But it says wisdom and not knowledge. Wisdom, biblically speaking, is the application of knowledge. So Scripture is not saying, if you don't know something, ask God to tell you, rather, if you know the truth but don't know how to apply it, ask God for wisdom in how to do so.

How then do we let God lead us? Obviously it is something we want to do. We must let God take control. Take Ephesians 5:17-21 for instance:

"17Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. 18And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with all your heart, 20giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ."

Being filled with the Spirit is contrasted with being filled with too much wine. Wine controls in a negative way when a person become drunk, but the Spirit controls in a good way when people immerse themselves in Him. We are to give ourselves to the worship of God, the study of the Scripture, the fellowship of other believers, and other things that we are told bring glory to God. This is how we give control to the Spirit and let Him lead us, by doing what He tells us to do, being obedient to the word of God.

When Jesus talks about the coming of the Holy Spirit he tells His disciples that the Spirit will teach them all things and bring to remembrance the things that Jesus taught. This is how God speaks to us today also. As we worship God, pray to Him for guidance and wisdom, and seek Him in the Scriptures, the Spirit will bring to remembrance the things God has told us, in His word.

When we make decision about buying a home or a car, God might remind us about the parable of the talents and being a good steward with the money He gives us. We pray and think and then make a decision that we believe most honors the Lord with what He has given us. This doesn't make our decision inerrant, but it's a much better approach then just doing what we want and saying "God told me." The same is true for any circumstance. Dating for instance. Should I date this person or not. Well the Bible tells us to be evenly yoked, is she a Christian? Does she hold my conviction about the Bible and things that matter to God? Seek the word of God in Scripture, pray about it and make the decision that you think honors God.

Scripture alone is our authority that equips us for every good work. Trust God's word, not inner voices and urges, you do not know who those voices belong to.

Hebrews 1:1-2

"1Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world."

We have the word of Christ in written form. You need seek nothing else for answers. Ask God for wisdom as you read His truth that is already revealed.

Here is a link on this same issue that I appreciated by Pastor Steve Cornell:
http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/05/26/do-inner-promptings-reveal-gods-will/

In Him -Jacob

After Centuries of Confusion the Truth... is Still Being Attacked!

2007-05-24T14:39:00.000-04:00

We've probably all seen by now the massive campaign that the Mormon church has been waging via the TV commercials. Their tagline is "After centuries of confusion the truth has been restored." I've got to hand it to them from the standpoint of their marketing and enthusiasm. Of course the only problem is that they are preaching another gospel. This is exactly what we are warned about in Galatians 1:8-9,

"8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."

Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormon church), claimed that an angel did appear to him. And if Joseph Smith had been a Bible believing Christian, and this were to have actually happened (which is more than questionable), he would have known to reject the message of this angel. Eventually Joseph Smith would found a religion that would exalt men to gods and lower God to man.

Christians need to be very aware about what Mormon's believe and its incompatibility with Scripture. Here is a ----> "link" <---- that should make anyone who knows and loves the gospel of Christ shudder. In this link you will see a video of a person talking about how unfair and unloving it would be for God to send to Hell people who have not heard about Jesus, and people who have done "good things" (Rom 3:10-12) but are not Christians.

Hello! What about the fact that the Bible says we are all sinners and deserve HELL! (Romans 1-3) It's not unfair that people go to Hell! It's unfair that God had to die in the place of sinners because we rebelled against Him! But how wonderful is His grace that He would do it anyway! You must repent of your sin and trust in Christ alone for salvation! If you do not, you go to Hell, and you deserve to. I deserve to, and I praise God that I'm notgetting what I deserve because Christ has saved me! There is only one way to Heaven (John 14:6, Eph. 2:8-9). But this is just a small part of the dangerous message that is being preached by the Mormon church.

It is because of cult groups like this that deceive people and pull them away from the true Jesus and His gospel that I am an apologist. This is why I am creating a new "site" that will be a resource for defending the Biblical Christian faith. But since my site has a long way to go, I suggest that you check out "Alpha and Omega Ministries" and James White's book's, "Is the Mormon My Brother" and "Letters to a Mormon Elder" for more information on the Latter Day Saints.

Know what you believe and why. Don't be silent about the truth! If you don't share Christ with your neighbor, someone else might share a pseudo Christ with them instead.

-Jacob

The 95 Thesis

2007-05-23T14:06:00.000-04:00

Have you ever read the document that started the protestant reformation? On October 31st 1517 a man by the name of Martin Luther nailed 95 propositions for discussion to the Wittenburg Door. It was a common practice to nail letters to this door to spark debate and conversation. Luther had grown tired of the abuses going on in regards to selling indulgences and wanted to bring attention to the problem. The funny thing is, Luther thought that what he was doing would please the pope because Luther at the time still held the pope and the Roman Catholic Church in high esteem and simply sought to reform some of its practices. Luther believed that the pope would be glad that someone would draw attention to the practices that took glory away from God. Little did Luther know when he nailed the 95 thesis to that door that this would be the beginning of the Protestant reformation and lead to his excommunication.

It's quite interesting to see how Luther's theology changes from when he wrote the 95 thesis to the time he wrote "The Bondage of the Will." Luther like all Christians who seek after God's heart continued to grow in his knowledge of the word of God. Luther became a Scripture quoting, highly theological weapon that would call people back to the word of God and away from the traditions of men. It's clear when reading the 95 thesis that Luther still held much love for the roman church and the pope in his heart. It would not be long until his eyes were opened to just how deep the corruption in the church had gone. Luther would take a stand on God's word along with others like him that the world still feels today. Scripture Alone, Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Christ Alone, to the Glory of God Alone.

Here is what started the Reformation:

The 95 Thesis

by, Martin Luther

1. When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said "Repent", He called for the entire life of believers to be one of penitence.

2. The word cannot be properly understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, i.e. confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

3. Yet its meaning is not restricted to penitence in one's heart; for such penitence is null unless it produces outward signs in various mortifications of the flesh.

4. As long as hatred of self abides (i.e. true inward penitence) the penalty of sin abides, viz., until we enter the kingdom of heaven.

5. The Pope has neither the will nor the power to remit any penalties beyond those imposed either at his own discretion or by canon law.

6. The Pope himself cannot remit guilt, but only declare and confirm that it has been remitted by God; or, at most, he can remit it in cases reserved to his discretion. Except for these cases,
the guilt remains untouched.

7. God never remits guilt to anyone without, at the same time, making humbly submissive to the priest, His representative.

8. The penitential canons apply only to men who are still alive, and, according to the canons themselves, none applies to the dead.

9. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit, acting in the person of the Pope, manifests grace to us, by the fact that the papal regulations always cease to apply at death, or in any hard case.

10. It is a wrongful act, due to ignorance, when priests retain the canonical penalties on the dead in purgatory.

11. When canonical penalties were changed and made to apply to purgatory, surely it would seem that tares were sown while the bishops were asleep.

12. In former days, the canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution was pronounced; and were intended to be tests of true contrition.

13. Death puts and end to all the claims of the Church; even the dying are already dead to the canon laws, and are no longer bound by them.

14. Defective piety or love in a dying person is necessarily accompanied by great fear, which is greatest where the piety or love is least.

15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, whatever else might be said, to constitute the pain of purgatory, since it approaches very closely to the horror of despair.

16. There seems to be the same difference between hell, purgatory, and heaven as between despair, uncertainty, and assurance.

17. Of a truth, the pains of souls in purgatory ought to be abated, and charity ought to be proportionately increased.

18. Moreover, it does not seem proved, on any grounds of reason or Scripture, that these souls are outside the state of merit, or unable to grow in grace.

19. Nor does it seem proved to be always the case that they are certain and assured of salvation, even if we are very certain ourselves.

20. Therefore the Pope, in speaking of the plenary remission of all penalties, does not mean "all" in the strict sense, but only those imposed by himself.

21. Hence those who preach indulgences are in error when they say that a man is absolved and saved from every penalty by the Pope's indulgences;

22. Indeed, he cannot remit to souls in purgatory any penalty which canon law declares should be suffered in the present life.

23. If plenary remission could be granted to anyone at all, it would be only in the cases of the most perfect, i.e. to very few.

24. It must therefore be the case that the major part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of relief from penalty.

25. The same power as the Pope exercises in general over purgatory is exercised in particular by every single bishop in his bishopric and priest in his parish.

26. The Pope does excellently when he grants remission to the souls in purgatory on account of intercessions made on their behalf, and not by the power of the keys (which he cannot exercise for them).

27. There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.

28. It is certainly possible that when the money clinks in the bottom of the chest avarice and greed increase; but when the church offers intercession, all depends in the will of God.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed in view of what is said of St. Severinus and St. Pascal? (Note: Paschal I, Pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful).

30. No one is sure if the reality of his own contrition, much less of receiving plenary forgiveness.

31. One who _bona fide_ buys indulgence is a rare as a _bona fide_ penitent man, i.e. very rare indeed.

32. All those who believe themselves certain of their own salvation by means if letters of indulgence, will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

33. We should be most carefully on our guard against those who say that the papal indulgences are an inestimable divine gift, and that a man is reconciled to God by them.

34. For the grace conveyed by these indulgences relates simply to the penalties of the sacramental "satisfactions" decreed merely by man.

35. It is not in accordance with Christian doctrines to preach and teach that those who buy off souls, or purchase confessional licenses, have no need to repent of their own sins.36. Any Christian whatsoever, who is truly repentant, enjoys plenary remission from penalty and guilt, and this is given him without letters of indulgence.

37. Any true Christian whatsoever, living or dead, participates in all the benefits of Christ and the Church; and this participation is granted to him by God without letters of indulgence.

38. Yet the Pope's remission and dispensation are in no way to be despised, form as already said, they proclaim the divine remission.

39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, to extol to the people the great bounty contained in the indulgences, while, at the same time, praising contrition as a virtue.

40. A truly contrite sinner seeks out, and loves to pay, the penalties of his sins; whereas the very multitude of indulgences dulls men's consciences, and tends to make them hate the penalties.

41. Papal indulgences should only be preached with caution, lest people gain a wrong understanding, and think that they are preferable to other good works: those of love.42. Christians should be taught that the Pope does not at all intend that the purchase of indulgences should be understood as at all comparable with the works of mercy.

43. Christians should be taught that one who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does a better action than if he purchases indulgences.

44. Because, by works of love, love grows and a man becomes a better man; whereas, by indulgences, he does not become a better man, but only escapes certain penalties.

45. Christians should be taught that he who sees a needy person, but passes him by although he gives money for indulgences, gains no benefit from the Pope's pardon, but only incurs the wrath of God.

46. Christians should be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they are bound to retain what is only necessary for the upkeep of their home, and should in no way squander it on indulgences.

47. Christians should be taught that they purchase indulgences voluntarily, and are not under obligation to do so.

48. Christians should be taught that, in granting indulgences, the Pope has more need, and more desire, for devout prayer on his own behalf than for ready money.

49. Christians should be taught that the Pope's indulgences are useful only if one does not rely on them, but most harmful if one loses the fear of God through them.

50. Christians should be taught that, if the Pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of the sheep.

51. Christians should be taught that the Pope would be willing, as he ought if necessity should arise, to sell the church of St. Peter, and give, too, his own money to many of those whom the pardon-merchants conjure money.

52. It is vain to rely on salvation by letters if indulgence, even if the commissary, or indeed the Pope himself, were to pledge his own soul for their validity.

53. Those are enemies of Christ and the Pope who forbid the word of God to be preached at all in some churches, in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

54. The word of God suffers injury if, in the same sermon, an equal or longer time is devoted to indulgences than to that word.

55. The Pope cannot help taking the view that if indulgences (very small matters) are celebrated by one bell, one pageant, or one ceremony, the gospel (a very great matter) should be preached to the accompaniment of a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The treasures of the church, out of which the Pope dispenses indulgences, are not sufficiently spoken of or known among the people of Christ.

57. That these treasures are note temporal are clear from the fact that many of the merchants do not grant them freely, but only collect them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, because, even apart from the Pope, these merits are always working grace in the inner man, and working the cross, death, and hell in the outer man.

59. St. Laurence said that the poor were the treasures of the church, but he used the term in accordance with the custom of his own time.

60. We do not speak rashly in saying that the treasures of the church are the keys of the church, and are bestowed by the merits of Christ.

61. For it is clear that the power of the Pope suffices, by itself, for the remission of penalties and reserved cases.

62. The true treasure of the church is the Holy gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. It is right to regard this treasure as most odious, for it makes the first to be the last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is most acceptable, for it makes the last to be the first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets which, in former times, they used to fish for men of wealth.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are the nets to-day which they use to fish for men of wealth.

67. The indulgences, which the merchants extol as the greatest of favors, are seen to be, in fact, a favorite means for money-getting.

68. Nevertheless, they are not to be compared with the grace of God and the compassion shown in the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates, in duty bound, must receive the commissaries of the papal indulgences with all reverence;

70. But they are under a much greater obligation to watch closely and attend carefully lest these men preach their own fancies instead of what the Pope commissioned.

71. Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences.

72. On the other hand, let him be blessed who is on his guard against the wantonness and license of the pardon-merchant's words.

73. In the same way, the Pope rightly excommunicates those who make any plans to the detriment of the trade in indulgences.

74. It is much more in keeping eith his views to excommunicate those who use the pretext of indulgences to plot anything to the detriment of holy love and truth.

75. It is foolish to think that papal indulgences have so much power that they can absolve a man even if he has done the impossible and violated the mother of God.

76. We assert the contrary, and say that the Pope's pardons are not able to remove the least venial of sins as far as their guilt is concerned.

77. When it is said that not even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could grant a greater grace, it is blasphemy against St. Peter and the Pope.

78. We assert the contrary, and say that he, and any Pope whatever, possesses greater graces, viz., the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as is declared in I Corinthians 12 [:28].

79. It is blasphemy to say that the insignia of the cross with the papal arms are of equal value to the cross on which Christ died.

80. The bishops, curates, and theologians, who permit assertions of that kind to be made to the people without let or hindrance, will have to answer for it.

81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult for learned men to guard the respect due to the Pope against false accusations, or at least from the keen criticisms of the laity;
82. They ask, e.g.: Why does not the Pope liberate everyone from purgatory for the sake of love (a most holy thing) and because of the supreme necessity of their souls? This would be morally the best of all reasons. Meanwhile he redeems innumerable souls for money, a most perishable thing, with which to build St. Peter's church, a very minor purpose.

83. Again: Why should funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continue to be said? And why does not the Pope repay, or permit to be repaid, the benefactions instituted for these purposes, since it is wrong to pray for those souls who are now redeemed?

84. Again: Surely this is a new sort of compassion, on the part of God and the Pope, when an impious man, an enemy of God, is allowed to pay money to redeem a devout soul, a friend of God; while yet that devout and beloved soul is not allowed to be redeemed without payment, for love's sake, and just because of its need of redemption.

85. Again: Why are the penitential canon laws, which in fact, if not in practice, have long been obsolete and dead in themselves,-why are they, to-day, still used in imposing fines in money, through the granting of indulgences, as if all the penitential canons were fully operative?

86. Again: since the Pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?

87. Again: What does the Pope remit or dispense to people who, by their perfect penitence, have a right to plenary remission or dispensation?

88. Again: Surely a greater good could be done to the church if the Pope were to bestow these remissions and dispensations, not once, as now, but a hundred times a day, for the benefit of any believer whatever.

89. What the Pope seeks by indulgences is not money, but rather the salvation of souls; why then does he not suspend the letters and indulgences formerly conceded, and still as efficacious as ever?

90. These questions are serious matters of conscience to the laity. To suppress them by force alone, and not to refute them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the Pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christian people unhappy.

91. If therefore, indulgences were preached in accordance with the spirit and mind of the Pope, all these difficulties would be easily overcome, and indeed, cease to exist.

92. Away, then, with those prophets who say to Christ's people, "Peace, peace," where in there is no peace.

93. Hail, hail to all those prophets who say to Christ's people, "The cross, the cross," where there is no cross.

94. Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells;

95. And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.

October 31, 1517

Source: Dillenberger, John. Martin Luther: A Selection From His Writings. Garden City: Doubleday, 1961.

Polytheism, Human gods....Mormon Theology

2007-05-23T11:10:00.000-04:00

The following is a link to Alpha and Omega Ministries blog. The artical is written by James White. It's a fairly short read, but it points out some things about LDS beliefs that are clearly incompatible with genuine Christianity. And it certainly shows that Mormons are indeed polytheist's despite what they say.

http://aomin.org/index.php?itemid=1999

-Jacob

Check out the new additions to the site...

2007-05-22T17:04:00.000-04:00

Hello all!

I've made some more additions to the new apologetics site. I would love your feedback and suggestions as well as pointing out any corrections I need to make for spelling and grammar. It is my goal to be fair and accurate in representing other faiths and their positions, so those of you who are Roman Catholic or LDS or anything else, I would love your advice on different theologians and websites I could read to make sure I can give an accurate representation of your view on the site. I don't believe in making "Straw Man" arguments. I want to be fair and honest with other people's positions just as I want them to be fair and honest with mine. "Do unto others..." you know.

Clearly the articles that will eventually be on this site will be a rebuttal against other religious perspectives, but I want the arguments against them to be arguments against what people in those faiths actually believe and not just a caricature of their faith.

I welcome suggestions for further topics that are not yet listed on the site also. As of now I am still just trying to get the shell of the website done, their will be much to come in the way of content later. It will be a slow but hopefully fairly steady process.

http://reformationapologetics.com

Let me hear what you think!

In Him -Jacob

Sorry I have been preoccupied...

2007-05-21T12:23:00.000-04:00

I haven't poste much over the last week because I've been busy with a number of things. One of those things that I've been busy doing is creating a new website for my apologetics ministry. It is still very much under construction and will be for a while, but feel free to check it out as I continue to work on it and if you'd like to leave a comment or make a suggestion, please do so.

Here is the link: www.reformationapologetics.com

The site is going to be a resource for Christian apologetics and theology, a place where believers can come and learn what they need to know to defend the biblical Christian faith against all who would oppose it or hold up a false portrait of it.

It will also contain polemic resources for defending correct doctrine amongst those within the faith. For instance Believers baptism versus infant baptism, etc.

It will take me quite some time to have the site where I want it to be, but it will hopefully eventually be a great resource for many people.

-Jacob

The Blasphemy Challenge, Challenge

2007-05-16T11:59:00.000-04:00

Short video that makes some good points about most people who call themselves atheists, and their arguments.

http://www.worldviewtube.com/video.php/2021/

-Jacob

This web site is surely a bi-product of Joel Osteen's preaching

2007-05-15T11:32:00.000-04:00

Inseret your name where mine is and then place it in your browser. Make sure you keep the dot in between your first and last name.

http://www.jacob.allee.youaremighty.com/

Election and Evangelism

2007-05-14T11:10:00.000-04:00

Acts 13:48-49 says, "48And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. 49And the word of the Lord was spreading throughout the whole region."

This last Saturday I went with my family to the "3 i Show." It's a big exhibition where companies, mostly in agriculture, show off their products. My father-in-law is a farmer, so he wanted to check it out. I'm not sure what all of the "3 I's" are but I think one is implement and maybe another is irrigation. Regardless, there were all kinds of farm equipment such as tractors, combines, you name it. But this show has evolved and they have lots of other things like car dealers, as well as entertainment and things like that. It was kind of neat to look at all the incredibly large machinery (like the $300,000 combines). But God blessed me with an opportunity at the "3 i show" that was better than just looking at monstrous contraptions.

My wife and I were looking at cars that were at the show. They had Toyota, Chevy, and Mazda and maybe a few others. We were just kind of checking it all out for fun and eventually we came to the Mazda tent. A young and eager salesman greeted me and wanted to show me all the cars they had and see what he might help me with. He seemed like a nice guy, making the usual small talk that sales people do when they are trying to sell you a car. Eventually he asked me what I do for a living, and I told him I was a pastor.

Seeing how just dropping the word "pastor" tends to change the subject a bit for many people anyway, I decided to ask him if he was "a follower of the Lord Jesus." His response was "yes." He told me how he had been into drugs and some other problems, but now his life was much better because of Jesus.

I thought to myself "that sounds great" and I was tempted to leave it at that, but I felt the need to press him a little further. I asked him a question that I often use when sharing Christ, even though the question is a little silly because I don't think it will go down quite like this on judgement day, but it makes the point. I asked him, "If God were to ask you why he should let you into Heaven when you die, what would you say?" His response was that he would tell God that he is "a great person." I became very glad I decided to press him further.

I took this young man through just 3 of the 10 commandments. I said that God says you shall not lie and I asked him if he had broken that commandment. He said that he had (I admitted that I had also) and I asked him what that made him. He admitted that it made him a liar. I did the same thing with "Honor your father and mother" and "You shall not steal" and he admitted (as did I) his guilt on all counts. I told him that we could go through more, but there was no need, he got the point.

I asked him again, what would you say to God? He said that he didn't know. You could literally see fear on this mans face. No longer was he able to justify himself in his mind before God. He knew he was guilty and that he was in trouble. I asked him "So if you can't tell God that you are good, what is going to get you into heaven?" He had no idea. (Remember this guy called himself a follower of Jesus.)

I then explained to him that we are all sinners (Rom. 3:23) and that all of us, if left on our own, are doomed to an eternity in Hell. Our works can never be good enough, our righteousness is worthless to God (Isa. 64:6). And then I told him about who Christ is and what He did. I explained that God sent His son Jesus Christ, He lived a sinless life and fulfilled perfectly the law of God that we break all the time, and then He died on the cross for sinners and rose from the dead three days later. I told this man, "If you will repent of your sin, that is turn away from it and put all of your hope and trust in Jesus to save you, He will." We cannot hope in our goodness, but in Christ's.

This guy looked at me and said "I don't believe in chance, you were meant to be here today." I asked him if he was going to place his trust in Christ to save him and he said "yes." I then shared with him the importance of reading the Bible to grow in his relationship with God and encouraged him to find a church that teaches the Bible as God's word. And I have been praying for him everyday since then. I can't read a mans heart, but I really think that we as Christians gained a new brother that day.

I tell you all of this to encourage you. I'm certainly not trying to make you impressed with me, I don't want praise and a pat on the back. It was God who saved this man and gave him faith and repentance (Eph. 2:8-9). But I tell you this to encourage you to do evangelism. The verse I mentioned at the top of this post is a clear indicator that God has appointed people to eternal life. He has done this from the foundations of the world (Eph. 1:4). This should encourage the Christian greatly, because what this means is that when we preach the gospel and share it with friends, family and complete strangers, some will believe. Indeed as many who are "appointed to eternal life" will believe. God has his elect out there in this world, and when we are faithful to proclaim the gospel, when the gospel is proclaimed to the elect God will insert His Spirit into them and give them life and faith and repentance. When the gospel is proclaimed, the elect hear the voice of the good shepherd and they follow Him!

I can be confident that if i faithfully share on a regular basis, some will come. Not because I'm convincing as if I could convince a dead man to live. Rather because God has people whom He has chosen to be saved and they are sprinkled throughout the earth, waiting for the person whom God will use to preach the gospel to them.

Romans 10:14-15

"14But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!"

Be faithful, share the gospel, those appointed will believe.

-Jacob

It's Not Easy to be an Atheist

2007-05-14T11:08:00.000-04:00

The following is a link to an article written by Steve Cornell. Worth the read.

http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/02/23/not-easy-to-be-an-atheist/

-Jacob

Can The Existence of God be Proven?

2007-05-10T10:47:00.000-04:00

Last night I watched on ABC's Nightline as they covered a debate between two Christian evangelists (Ray Comfort and Kirk Cammeron) and two atheists (Brian Sapient and "Kelly"). I was a bit disappointed by the fact that they really showed next to nothing of the debate itself. Perhaps 5 minutes of it total even though the debate was well over an hour or perhaps closer to two hours in length. I intend to see if i can find the debate in its entirety on http://www.wayofthemaster.com/. I suspect it will be there.

However, I saw enough to make a few comments. First of all, it strikes me yet once again, how angry atheist usually are. I don't say this as a blanket statement, but as a general consensus of what I personally have seen and heard when debating with or listening to others debate "atheists." Basically it is my opinion that in 95% of the cases when you run into someone who claims to be an atheist, it comes down to the fact that they don't really not believe there is a God, they simply, openly, loudly, vocally, HATE God.

The report last night showed a time where the audience was allowed to ask questions and, oh my, were there ever some angry atheists. One lady, practically screaming at Ray Comfort, wanted to know how there could be a God because cancer exists. When Comfort started to talk about the problem of suffering, she got infuriated because he said "suffering" rather then "cancer" so he rephrased it for her. Clearly this woman had lost a loved one to cancer, or at least I would assume. Comfort did a good job of explaining why there is "cancer" and "suffering" in the world due to the fallen creation from Genesis 3. Not as though it was a satisfactory answer for this lady.

The two atheist who were actually debating were, to say the least, extremely rude. Scoffing at the two Christians as they shared their views. Basically just being antagonistic, no surprise. These two are the ones who started the movement calling for atheist to "commit blasphemy of the Holy Spirit" by denying Him and say that they aren't afraid. And then posting the recorded video of themselves on an Internet web-site. Not that these people actually have a clue about what blasphemy of the Holy Spirit really is.

From my perspective, what little I got to see last night on "Nightline", the atheist in the debate as well as in the crowd, showed their true colors. There is no sense of respect for others, there is extreme anger against the very notion of God, (which only supports the Bible's position about fallen man, read Roman 1-3) they have to make outlandish claims and reject plain reason to deny even the possibility of God.

That said, I want to offer my critique on the Christian view point that was extended last night. First let me say that I love and appreciate Ray and Kirk. On the whole (from what I saw) they did a descent job. However, here is where I disagree with the position my two brothers in Christ put forward.

Comfort and Cammeron used the famous "proofs" for the existence of God that Thomas Aquinas made famous. Things like the Ontilogical argument (The necessity of a perfect being) and Telelogical argument (if there is a watch, there is a watchmaker, if there is creation, there is a creator) as well as the moral argument (man instictively knows right from wrong, because there is a divine law giver.)

I believe that such arguments have their place. These are often referred to as "Classical Apologetics." If someone say he is a classical apologist, then he probably means that he utilizes these arguments. Here is the problem with these arguments though, they give some logical reasons to believe that there is a God, they make sense, however they don't necessarily prove the God of the Bible. They give some reason to believe in omnipotent being, but they don't single out YAHWEH as that omnipotent being. So these "proofs", on their own, are not enough. Now I will say that Comfort and Cammeron do point to reasons to believe that the God of the Bible is the true God, and they have some good evidential arguments for that too.

But ultimately, here is the real problem. Can anyone "prove the existence of God?" No. I don't think we can. In fact I think only God can prove that He is God directly to someone. The problem is that man is completely tainted by sin. When these "classical proofs" were first being formed, they were largely being formed by Roman Catholic apologists who believed that man could come to a true understanding and knowledge of God by what is revealed in creation. And therefore it was largely believed that God's existence could be proved by plain reason and pointing towards creation and moral arguments such as the ones still used often today. But according to Romans 1:18-23 man is so messed up because of sin they are unable to see what God has plainly put right in front of their faces!

The Scripture says:

"18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles."

According to Scripture if it weren't for sin, everyone would recognize the one true God merely by looking out their window at His creation, but sin has darkened their "foolish hearts." What does that mean? It means that we can give 1,000,000,000,000 and 1 reasons to believe that there is a God and then give that many more to believe that this omnipotent God is the God revealed in the Bible, and they will still not believe. Not because these truths are not self evident, not because they don't make sense, but because they don't make sense to a person who has been totally corrupted by sin in their mind body and soul. Aquinas was wrong. Man cannot come to know God by plain reason. God must shine light on darkened hearts.

The honest truth is, we must hold the Bible to be self evident as proof that God exists and is who He reveals Himself to be in the pages of Scripture. John 10 tells us that Christ's sheep will hear his voice. We preach the word and those whom God chooses to save He gives His Spirit and they follow the voice of the Good Shepherd. But without God's action in the life of a sinner, there is nothing you can say or do that will "prove" to them that God exists. The best apologetic against atheism is to give reason to believe in God and that this God is the one the Bible speaks of and then preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and trust the Holy Spirit to convict sinners and make them new in Christ and give them faith.

I've heard Ray Comfort say that people need to "pray and listen to the voice of their conscience" to find out what is true. I would definitely have to refute that as a God idea. Our conscience is corrupted by sin as well, it could very easily tell us something untrue. But I do agree that telling a person their need for Christ and telling them to read the Scriptures and ask God to reveal Himself to them is a good thing, but let's leave our subjective conscience out of it. That's what the LDS do after all, and people follow after their false doctrine. It is the word of God that will convict people of their need for Christ alongside the Holy Spirit.

Can anyone prove God? No, not to sinful humanity. But God can and does make Himself known. Jesus calls to His sheep and His sheep hear His voice.

A Neglected and Misunderstood Truth About God

2007-05-09T11:46:00.000-04:00

The following is an article about God's Sovereignty by Steve Cornell. All I can say is Amen.

http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2007/05/07/a-neglected-and-misunderstood-attribute-of-god/

-Jacob

Debate Over the Existence of God

2007-05-09T11:39:00.000-04:00

Tonight on ABC's "Nightline," a news program that starts at 10:35 Central time, there will be a debate broadcasted that was recently recorded between Ray Comfort with his partner Kirk Cammeron versus two atheists by the name of Brian Sapient and "Kelly." The following link is story about one reporter who was actually there for the live debate. The article illustrates the foolishness of the athiestic belief system, the unsubstantiated claims they have to resort to, as well as the lack of morality and values that naturally follows such beliefs.

http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/1972/Patrick_Burwell

God's Sovereignty in Salvation: PART 5

2007-05-08T16:57:00.000-04:00

This post is the fifth in the series of five on God's Sovereignty in Salvation, if you have not been following along, it is important to go to the archives and catch up. Otherwise some of my statements might be taken out of the context of past study. Also, this post was written to fit in the book I'm writing so if I reference a chapter of the book, please disregard.

Now we reach the final doctrine in the doctrines of grace, Perseverance of the Saints. Sometimes this doctrine is referred to as preservation of the saints or eternal security. The basic idea is that once a person is saved, justified in Christ, they will not ever and cannot ever, lose their salvation. A popular phrase that is often used is "once saved, always saved." This is used by many people that don’t even believe in the preceding points such as Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement. Perhaps you are one who believes in "eternal security" but you disagree with the idea of election, or perhaps you do not believe in this idea at all. Maybe you think that salvation can be lost, taken away or rejected.

Hopefully, if you fit into any of those categories, this book has given you a lot to think about. Because if I have "sold you", so to speak, on the idea of Total Depravity, that is mans inability to save himself or even turn to God on his own, and if I have demonstrated that mans only hope is that God unconditionally elects certain individuals to salvation, and that God accomplished salvation for the elect on the cross not just made it possible but actual, and if I have convinced you that God saves all whom He draws to Himself and does not fail, then this last doctrine only makes sense as the last piece of the puzzle. Clearly if man has nothing to do with saving himself, then there is nothing he can do to lose his salvation.

Perseverance of the Saints can be defined in this way:

"Once God has saved an elect sinner He continues to guard their salvation by His power. There is nothing a justified sinner can do to lose their salvation, nor can they walk away from it. A person who is truly born again will continue in faith in Christ, undergoing sanctification, until the day they die and go to be with the Lord and are made perfect in Christ."

As always, let’s go to the Scripture to see where this is indeed in taught by God in His word.

Ephesians 1:13-14

"13In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14who is the guarantee
of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it,
to the praise of his glory."

What a glorious verse of Scripture, one of my favorites. This verse is a wonderfully rich verse when it comes to this doctrine as well as that of salvation by faith alone. The Scripture here teaches that upon the moment when one places their trust in Christ they are "sealed with the promised Holy Spirit." The presence of the Holy Spirit is what causes regeneration in the life of a sinner. Giving a spiritually dead person the life and faith they need for salvation. When the Spirit indwells a person, faith takes place instantaneously. It’s not a matter of which comes first, they are synonymous.

It is at that very moment of faith that the Holy Spirit indwells the new believer and seals them into their salvation. The word "sealed" that is used here carries the idea of kings seal upon a scroll. Often times in New Testament times when a royal person would write a letter, they would use wax to seal the letter so that it would not be opened and they would press their signet ring into the seal so that everyone who saw it would know that this was sealed by the king. No one was allowed to break the seal except the one whom the message was intended for in the first place.

This is the same idea that is used here. When God saves someone from their sin, He seals them with His Holy Spirit. No one can break that seal, it will remain kept for the believer until they "acquire possession" of their salvation when Christ returns. The Scripture says that this seal is a "guarantee." If God gives a guarantee upon something, His word is good enough for me. He promises that the believers salvation is safeguarded by His Spirit in us until the day it is realized and we are glorified and made perfect in Christ with the Father in Heaven.
Where else does Scripture speak of this doctrine? How about 1Peter 1:3-5?

"3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

It surely doesn’t get much plainer than that. First of all, who caused us to be born again? God the Father did, through Jesus Christ His Son. Who is keeping and guarding our inheritance (eternal life in Christ)? God the Father is, through faith, which God supplies. Do you see the trend? How could we who have nothing to do with saving ourselves possibly lose our salvation? It’s not even ours to lose, as if we earned it. God supplies the faith that justifies, God guards our salvation and seals it by His Holy Spirit living in us.

Look also at Romans 8:29-30.

"29For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified."

This verse is sometimes referred to as "the golden chain of redemption." It’s an unbreakable chain, and indeed it is a chain reaction. If the one happens then by necessity the next happens, all the way down the line. Just use simple logic with me as we look at verse 30. What does God do with those whom He predestines? He calls them, doesn’t He? What Does God do with those whom He calls? He justifies them. And those whom he justifies, what happens to them? They are glorified.

Is there anything unclear about this passage? If anyone is ever justified, that is made right and sinless in the sight of God, they are eventually glorified. There is no room in this passage for someone to be justified (saved) for a time and then lose their salvation and go to Hell and not be glorified. It’s just not possible. All who are predestined, elected by God, are justified and upon Christ’s return they will be glorified. It is Scripturally incompatible to say that "so and so used to be a Christian." If they are not a Christian now, they never were. This is so plain. And please do note, that the reason people are glorified in the end is because God, in His Sovereign free-will, made a choice to predestine individuals to be justified in Christ. And Christ accomplished that "actually" and not just "possibly."

How about some more Scripture? John 6:44 says,

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

I’ve already used this verse several times, but I feel the need to do so once more. I talked earlier about how this verse clearly shows that God has to enable man to come to Jesus, we cannot do it on our own because of our depravity. I also used this verse to show that God’s grace is irresistible, and that everyone whom the Father draws comes to Christ. And now I bring it up again to point out that all those whom the Father draws come to Christ, and we know this because Christ raises them up on the last day, which also specifically implies that all who ever come to Christ will endure to the end and be raised to new life. Just a few verse earlier in John chapter 6 verse 39 Jesus also says,

"And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day."

Again, the same idea as above. Whatever is given to Jesus by the father, He does not lose. Jesus always does the will of the Father. God does not fail in His mission to save sinners, whomever God chooses to save, He saves them to the uttermost. We could look at more verses that support this doctrine, however I think that we have looked at plenty of verses for anyone who is going to accept the Scripture for what it clearly teaches. Many will read these verses that are so plain and straightforward and reject them purely because of their opinions and presuppositions. It wont matter to them that this is clearly what Scripture says about these five doctrines, they will reject it because it doesn’t sound fair to them and they don’t like it. But I say to you, don’t be one of them. It’s fine to have hesitations and want to study further about this, but don’t just refuse to even think about something that Scripture so clearly talks about.
Objections to Perseverance of the Saints

One of the most common objections to this doctrine and really to the whole of the teachings of the doctrines of grace, is that it "let’s people off the hook for their sin." Or in other words, because the doctrines of grace are so clear that we are saved by God’s grace alone, through faith alone (which is supplied by God), in Christ alone, that these teachings would allow for people to shirk any responsibility for holiness and live life however they want. After all, if we cannot lose our salvation, we might as well live it up and do whatever we want! Right!? WRONG!

Such a teaching is not compatible with Scripture and therefore is not compatible to these Scriptural teaching of the doctrines of grace. Indeed it is often those who hold to these teachings whom you will see taking the issue of holiness very seriously. Why? Because Scripture clearly teaches that when God saves a sinner, that sinner will become a new creation, with a new nature. And that new creation will act differently then it did while it was still dead in sin. Galatians 5 talks about this difference.

Galatians 5:13-26

"13For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 15But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another. 16But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21envy,
drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another."

The clear teaching of Scripture is that "those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires." In other words, our old nature is dead once we become new in Christ. We can still struggle with sin, but ultimately a born again believers desire will be to please God and they will strive to walk by the Spirit. A true believer will exhibit the fruit of the Spirit more and more as they are sanctified by God’s Spirit. A person who calls themselves a Christian but lives no differently then they did before their supposed conversion to Christ, should be under serious suspicion. Scripture teaches that changed people will act like they have been changed. In Romans 6:1-4 Paul continues this idea that Christians are expected to avoid sin and walk in the Spirit, seeking to please God by their actions.

"1What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."

Again, clearly the expectation of Scripture is that those who are Christians will not be flippant about sin. Sin is the very thing that our Savior Jesus Christ came to die for, it is a serious thing that anyone should knowingly sin and not care about it. In fact a true believer who commits sin and is unrepentant, that is they don’t turn away from that sin and seek forgiveness, will be seriously convicted by the Holy Spirit who lives in Him. In John 16:8-11 Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit and what He will be active in doing in the world when He comes (as He did in Acts 2).

"8And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: 9concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; 10concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; 11concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged."

In the life of a believer the Spirit convicts us concerning righteousness. Therefore a believer in unrepentant sin will be under the conviction of God until that sin is dealt with in repentance. Matthew 6 talks about the narrow road and gate that a believer must walk to find eternal life. The believer doesn’t get to act like the wide road fools on the way to Hell. Believers walk a difficult course. Believers undergo sanctification and are continually being transformed into the likeness of Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 says,

"17Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit."

This teaching is completely compatible with the teachings of the doctrines of grace. A true Christian with true saving faith will have the Spirit of God transforming and convicting them into righteousness. A true Christian will pursue holiness. The doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints does not let people off the hook and encourage sin. This is a biblical doctrine, all who come to Christ have been drawn by the Father and they cannot and will not be lost. But those who come to Christ truly, will truly be changed and concerned with holiness.

In Him -Jacob

For the Sake of the Truth!

2007-05-07T11:48:00.000-04:00

I recently came across this article (http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/1952/Janet_L_Folger) which is about the controversial bill that will give special rights to those who call themselves homosexuals. My undestanding is that the president has already threatened a veto against this bill, as well he should. The bill gives special treatment to one group of people and one alone, homosexuals. I suggest you read the above article.

Basically the gist is that if anyone says something against homosexuals or is negative in anyway, it can be considered a hate crime. For instance, if I were to preach Romans 1:26-27 with any integrity to what the text means, I could be possibly arrested. Why? Because I would tell you that "God calls homosexuality a sin." It's abnormal and contrary to the nature God created and gave to men and women. This is a form of sexual immorality, just as heterosexual sex outside of marriage is a form of sexual immorality, both equally true statements, both equally sinful, one statement would be punishable by law and one would not (if this bill were to be signed into law that is.)

In this bill, republican tried to amend it to include protection for senior citizens, people under the age of 18 and numerous other groups besides just homosexuals, but all of those amendments were voted down. Why? Because of the liberal agenda, and frankly the devils agenda, and natural mans agenda, to suppress the truth. No body is going to jail for calling Christians bigots, but if you call a homosexual a derogatory word, oh boy look out. Even more even if you are as nice as can be about the people who practice homosexuality, but still distinctively point out that their behavior is sinful, you could still be in trouble.

There is a notable shift here in America the past few years, and will become more notable as time goes by. That shift is the loss of first amendment rights for those who worship Christ and believe that He is "the way, the truth, and the life" and the only way to Heaven. The word tolerance applies to everyone else and their beliefs, but not to Christians exclusivity in their message and faith.I've heard of several instances of people being arrested here in the U.S. this past couple of years, simply for sharing there faith on the sidewalks of busy area's. There are lawsuits against pastors who stand for the gospel and the word of God. It's not getting better, it's getting worse. I'm sure I'm not the first to say it, but let me join the chorus of faithful believers "You can arrest me if you want, but I will not stop preaching the word of Christ and His gospel!"

I think we are a ways off still from total persecution as many of our brothers and sisters face around the world today, and I'm no prophet, but I think we will probably start to feel that heat very soon. It could be a good thing though. After all, how many Joel Osteen type preachers would still be around if Christianity were outlawed?

-Jacob

Judged With Greater Strictness

2007-05-03T13:28:00.000-04:00

James 3:1 tells us "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness."

I preached a message last Sunday that dealt largely with the issue of how teachers in the church should be viewed. My text was 1 Corinthians 4:1-5, you can view my notes on my other blog if you'd like: www.4hisword.blogspot.com. The text gave two example of how teachers should be regarded. One was that they should be viewed as servants of Christ and two was that they should be regarded as stewards of the mysteries of God.

Christians teachers are given the responsibility of making the truths of the Scripture known to all. It is their stewardship given to them by their master who is Christ. A steward is a person given responsibility to care for the valuable property of another. In the case of teachers, God bestows a stewardship of His word to them. It is their responsibility to tend to and care for this property and manage it to the gain of their master.

When I think about the fact that I am a teacher of God's word, quite frankly it frightens me a bit. Because I genuinely care about getting it right. I often find myself aprehensive when sitting down to work on my next sermon, sometimes putting it off for longer than I should. I think it is because it really scares me to think about messing it up. I know no one is perfect and we are going to make mistakes, but I really want to honor God, my master, when I preach and teach His word. It's not a responsibility to be taken lightly.

One reason that teachers, stewards of the mysteries (truths) of God, are judged more strictly is because of the emphasis that Scripture gives other Christians about obeying those teachers. Hebrews 13:17 says "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you."

That is part of this stewardship that we teachers receive, keeping watch over the souls of those to whom we teach! I am responsible for what I tell them is truth and what I tell them is false. Christians are to "obey" and "submit" to their leaders. If I say "this is what God's word says, and this is what you should do." Then they are supposed to do it. So I had better not tell them something that is out of line with Scripture because I am responsible for their souls, their spiritual well-being! How scary is that.

This is why in 2 Timothy 2:15 Paul warns the young pastor "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." Because we who teach will be judged with greater strictness than the average Christian. That is why it is so important to study hard, and dig deep and be confident that the truth is in your hand and coming out of your mouth, when you teach the word of God. I will stand before God with greater judgement than many of you who read this post, because you have not aspired to be an overseer (1 Timothy 3:1) a pastor/teacher. But those of you who teach as do I, be careful, study hard, find the truth and make it known.

As much as I would hate to be the false teacher, and heretic on the day of judgement who will be cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, so too I would hate to be the born again teacher who neglected his responsibility to watch over the souls of those to whom he taught and did not work to show himself approved before God.

Teaching is a serious business. If you have a pastor who labours to bring you God's truth and is faithful to the Scripture, listen to Him, submit and obey. God has given him a stewardship over the word and over your soul.

-Jacob

Seeker Sensitive Churches, YUCK!

2007-05-03T11:03:00.000-04:00

The following is an excerpt from this article: http://www.christianworldviewnetwork.com/article.php/1939/Steve_Cornell. It's a short read with a good point.

I have often wondered how a church service for seekers would use the Bible verse that says, “No man seeks after God” (Rom. 3:11). Those considering or involved with “seeker” services should reflect on a distinction made centuries ago by St. Thomas Aquinas. “Aquinas said that we confuse two similar yet different human actions. We see people searching desperately for peace of mind, relief from guilt, meaning, and purpose to their lives, and loving acceptance. We know that ultimately these things can only be found in God. Therefore, we conclude that since people are seeking these things they must be seeking after God. People do not seek God. They seek after the benefits that only God can give them. The sin of fallen man is this: Man seeks the benefits of God while at the same time fleeing from God himself. We are, by nature, fugitives.”

I don't agree with Aquinas on everything, but he sure nailed that on the head.

-Jacob

God's Sovereignty in Salvation: PART 4

2007-05-02T17:15:00.000-04:00

Forgive the references to chapters, I wrote this section as it will appear in my book that I am writing, or at least the first rough draft. Most of the chapters I refer to are part of this series or the series on God's Sovereignty over all things as well as the issue of God's will versus man's will. Enjoy.

Irresistible Grace

We have already seen the clear biblical teaching that people are hopelessly lost in sin and unable to save themselves (Total Depravity), and that they need God to choose them or they have no hope, and God’s choice to save certain sinners is not based upon the sinners own actions (Unconditional Election), and we have seen that Christ specifically laid down His life not for all people, but specifically for the elect, those whom He has chosen to save (Limited Atonement). Now we come to the fourth doctrine in the doctrines of grace, most usually called "Irresistible Grace."

Irresistible Grace can be defined in this way:

"All who the Father draws to Himself will come to Him. When the gospel is presented, an invitation is issued from the Lord for all people to come, but due to the sinful state of man, man is rendered incapable of response. However as for those who are elect, God sends His Spirit to them and changes their heart, breaks the power of sin and reveals to that elect person their need for Christ as Lord and Savior. When the Spirit opens their heart, they respond in faith and by God’s grace the sinner receives salvation. The work of the Spirit irresistibly draws the elect sinner to Christ, making them willing to trust in Him."

To put this simply and bluntly, if God chooses to save someone, He is going to save them, and there is no way the sinner can resist His work in their life. The idea of this once again takes us back to our study of the sovereignty of God as well as our will and whether or not it is truly free.
First of all, remember in our study of God’s sovereignty that we concluded that God is completely in control of all things and therefore he does all things according to the council of His will (Eph. 1:11). In other words, everything that takes place does so because God wills it to be that way. Therefore if it is God’s will that a sinner should come to know Him, that is indeed exactly what will take place, or if God should will to leave a sinner to his condemnation, so that will be "...For who can resist His will?" (Romans 9:19). Everything that happens does so according to the will of God.

As we have already discussed in chapter 3, man’s will is not truly free. Man’s will is enslaved. The will of man is either enslaved to sin and does it’s bidding or enslaved to God and does His. Every man is born into sin and enslaved to sin. We all grow up and sin continually and love to do the sinful things we do. We will never choose God on our own because we are enslaved to sin, and we don’t desire or seek after God (Rom. 3:10-12). Therefore as we discussed in chapter 4 God has to actively save sinners because they will never turn to Him on their own. Hopefully if you’ve read carefully the preceding chapters you will agree that this is the case. The question now is "how does God bring this about?"

The Regeneration of the Holy Spirit

Clearly man will never choose God in the state that he naturally exists, enslaved to sin. Therefore God must change the very nature of man in order to bring about faith in the heart of the sinner. Ephesians 2:8-9 says:

"8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

It is by God’s grace that we are given faith which is the vehicle of salvation. All of which is completely "the gift of God" and in no way anything we can do within ourselves. Salvation is a sovereign act of God where He actually makes us a new creation that is capable of faith. In man’s natural state, he is spiritually dead because of sin. This was primarily the kind of death God warned Adam would take place if he ate of the tree in the midst of the garden. But when Adam and Eve rebelled against God and ate of the fruit which they were commanded not to eat, they died that day, not physically but spiritually. And because of that each person born since then has been born spiritually dead.

In Ezekiel 37:1-10 we are given a wonderful illustration of God taking what is dead and giving it life.

"1The hand of the LORD was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones. 2And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. 3And he said to me, "Son of man, can these bones live?" And I answered, "O Lord GOD, you know." 4Then he said to me, "Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD. 5Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. 6And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the LORD." 7So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone. 8And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them. 9Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live." 10So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army."

While this passage is clearly speaking of the nation of Israel who had largely turned aside from following God, there is nonetheless great significance in this passage as to how God gives life to dead things. We humans are born spiritually as dead as that valley of dried bones. Incapable of doing anything. Only God could make those dry bones come to life. It would be utterly ridiculous to think that those dry bones could make themselves come to life.

A man I admire very much named Dr. James White gives a similar illustration when talking about this issue. He speaks of cadavers (dead bodies) in the morgue and how lifeless they are. You can poke at them, remove their insides, do whatever you want to them and they will not resist. Why? Because they are dead, they cannot resist. This is exactly how man is in the spiritual sense. You can poke and prod people with the gospel, but they will not respond. They wont because they can’t. They are spiritually dead.

Clearly that which is dead is incapable of doing anything, therefore in order for a person to be able to respond to the gospel they must be made alive. Who can make dry bones live? Only God. Look also at Ezekiel 36:26-27,

"26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules."

You see that Scripture teaches that God radically changes man, giving him a new heart, spirit and giving him even His own Spirit. Just as powerfully as God once breathed life into man when He first created him, so God puts life into the spiritually dead. 2 Corinthians 5:17-19 says,

"17Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation"

So then we see that those who are in Christ are only in Christ because God has made them "a new creation." As they were naturally they could not be in Christ because they were spiritually dead, but God literally made them a new person, with a new heart and a new spirit and His own Spirit. It is the Spirit of God that makes man new or "regenerated" as theologians often call it, that enables man to respond in the faith that God gives him. The Spirit frees us from our slavery to sin and makes us able to trust in the gospel of Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:14-18 says,

"14But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. 15Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts. 16But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. 17Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit."

The hearts of man are veiled from the truth of God until the Spirit enters into that persons heart and frees them from the darkness of sin. The Spirit unveils the heart of sinful man to see his need for Jesus Christ to save him. It is the regenerating work of the Spirit that allows man to come to Christ in faith. But can anyone whom the Spirit regenerates refuse to come to Christ? No.

All Who Are Drawn (Regenerated) Will Come

Many have tried to say that the Spirit works in everyone’s life and that the Father draws all people to Himself. They claim that man can merely reject God’s drawing of them to Himself. But is this biblical? I will show that it is not. Look at John 6:44,

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

This verse was already used to demonstrate that man is incapable of coming to God unless he is first drawn by Him. We discussed that aspect chapter 3 on Unconditional Election. But furthermore the verse clearly states that those whom the Father draws, Jesus will raise up on the last day. This makes the correlation that anyone whom God draws, will inevitably be raised up to eternal life. So this verse single handedly defeats the notion that God draws all people, unless that is you believe that all people are going to heaven and you are a universalist. If that is the case I would point out the fact that Jesus talks more about Hell in the gospels than He does Heaven, and there is no Scriptural basis for your view.

John 6:44 leaves nothing open to any sort of conditions to be fulfilled by man. It does not say that "I will raise him up on the last day (if)...." It says that He "will raise him (whom the Father draws) up on the last day." This means, if the Father draws someone they will respond in faith to Christ. John 6:37 says also,

"All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out."

Scripture is very straightforward and clear that God sovereignly decides whom He will save and then does so to the fullest, it is not conditional upon our human will or action. When God’s Spirit comes into the life of a sinner and makes them new, their nature is transformed to the extent that they cannot resist their God given desire to place their trust in Christ. Whereas they were dead in sin and enslaved to do it’s bidding in their old nature, now they have been made new and given a new nature that desires God. The regeneration of God’s Spirit simultaneously causes faith in Christ. The new creature will not, cannot, does not resist coming to Christ when the Father draws him because the veil is lifted and his need for Christ is made clear.

It’s like a deaf and blind man who stands on a train track with a speeding train coming his way. He was born deaf and blind that was his nature and because of it he had no idea of the danger he was in. But what if that blind man was given the sight to see the speeding train and the hearing to hear the whistle blowing it warning, would he stay on the train track? No, how absurd. His nature has been changed and he cannot resist making the move that will result in his salvation from death.

This is the clear teaching of Scripture, man cannot resist the will of God. God makes the elect new creations at the time He draws them and with their new nature they cannot help but respond to the savior.

Can an atheist call something evil?

2007-04-26T16:55:00.000-04:00

We must call atheist's to be consistent with there own proclaimed view. Obviously the meaning of atheist is the concept that there is no God. Frankly it's the "belief" that there is no God, even though they hate that word to be used of their view.

Frequently I have found when speaking to, reading the writings of, or listening to an atheist speak, the most common objections against the idea of GOD is that there is so much evil in the world. Therefore, by their conclusion, there is no God. After all if there really were an omnipotent, omniscient, loving being, then that being would not allow such evil. This is from my experience the most common objection (to the God whom we as Christians worship) that atheist usually give. I'm not saying that they don't object on the basis of other things also. Many atheist claim that science and the Bible conflict in an irresolvable manner. (Of course many scientists find that the Bible and good science always agree.) Regardless of what other objections there are against the idea of GOD, evil is the most common problem in the minds of most who reject the idea of a supreme being.

The ironic thing about this ever common objection to God, is the fact that the very objection defeats itself. To say "There can be no God because there is so much evil" is a ridiculous statement. For if you throw out the idea of God, then by default, you also toss out any real definition of evil. What is evil? Who decides what is evil? Is not evil the opposite of good. Who decides what is good? Do you see the problem?

The Christian appeals to God as the ultimate standard of good. Good is whatever God calls good and evil whatever He calls evil. For God is the creator of all things and who but He could define good and evil. Good is whatever is in accordance to the expressed will of God and evil is anything that opposes it. Because God says "You shall not steal" I know that stealing is evil and not stealing is good. Because God said "You shall not lie" or "Murder" I know that those things are evil and not doing them is Good. Because God said "You shall have no other God's before me" I know to worship Him alone is good, and to worship anything else is bad.

But what right does an atheist have to call something good or evil? By what standard do they call something good or evil? Is it there own subjective opinion? For if I proclaim to be an atheist, and I say "this thing that you have done is pure evil" you should rightly say "according to what, you?" Personal opinions are subjective. My opinion is not any more authoritative then the next person, so if an atheist calls something good or evil, who cares? It's just good or evil from their perspective, that doesn't make it actually so.

Indeed this worldview promotes what I would call evil based on God's truth and His revealed will in the Scripture. For if an atheist sees fit to murder, who is to tell him he is wrong if there is no objective truth about good and evil?

This is where some atheists will object and say, "Well, society defines good and evil. There has to be laws given by society or it would be utter chaos." Fine then. So why is murder wrong by this standard? Because the majority of our society deems it as wrong. But what if the majority shifted? What if all of a sudden 60% of people thought murder was a reasonable action if someone made you angry enough? By the standard given by atheism, this would then have to be called "good."

The problem is obvious. Aside from an omnipotent law-giving God, it's all subjective. An atheist has no right to call the incident at Virginia Tech or 9/11 or anything else for that matter "evil." Because to call something objectively, positively evil, one would have to go to an authoritative source outside of himself. Otherwise it is nothing more than an opinion.

Christians have a God of truth, He is the standard for good and evil. It is because of this that even if the whole world but me believes that murder, homosexuality, stealing, etc., are OK I can say "NO! It is evil because God said so!" I can call mass murder evil (including abortion). I can call stealing evil. Not because of my objective opinion, but because of the revealed will of the creator.

Can an atheist call something evil? Only if they realize it is either just their own opinion and holds no objective truth to it, or if they admit that there is a law-giving God and therefore lose their atheistic status.

What in the World is the Canon?

2007-04-25T17:28:00.000-04:00

Notice the word is canon, not cannon. As one of my professors pointed out to be in my apologetics class, cannon with two consecutive "n's" is the kind that goes boom. However canon spelled with just one "n" in the middle is something else entirely. I've listened to a lot of debates by James White, who is by far my favorite Christian apologist. I've listened to him debate atheist, Romans Catholics, liberal scholars from the Jesus Seminar, and LDS. In many of those debates, in some way shape or form, the issue of the canon comes up.

For those who are not aware of the theological term, let me explain what is meant by a theologian when they say canon. The word "canon" literally means "standard." And when the church discusses issues related to the canon of Scripture they mean which books they consider to be authoritative Scripture. For instance the Protestant's hold that the canonical book of Scripture equal only 66 books in the Old and New Testaments. Roman Catholics add 7 to that list because they include books like 1&2 Macabees, Tobit and other's as part of Scripture. Then you have groups like the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (LDS) who take the protestant canon, but then claim the book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price are also Scripture.

So when you hear the word canon used in theological circles, understand that it refers to the books which are to be considered Scripture. As I mentioned before the word canon means standard. And a big question of the argument for what books are to be included in the list of Scripture is "by what standard does a writing become Scripture?"

I agree with James White in the way he explains what makes a writing part of the canon. In 2 Timothy 3:16-17 we read the following:

"16All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work."

Our focal point for this discussion should center around "All Scripture is breathed out by God." Some translations of course read "All Scripture is inspired by God" but the "God breathed" would be a more literal and accurate translation of the Greek word "Theopneustos." So ultimately the answer to the question by what standard should books be judged to know if they are Scripture is "are they God breathed?" Did God "inspire" the books or not? That is the ultimate standard for the canon of Scripture.

What does this mean? Well obviously, for one, it means that the next logical question is "How do we know if a writing is God breathed?" Which is a great question. But also it means that there is indeed an infallible canon of Scripture. Not just any book can be included in the canon, only those that are God breathed have a place there. There is no room in the canon for any work, no matter how good it might be, even if it is historically accurate, theologically correct, and so on, if it is not God breathed. This is to say, a writing does not belong in the cannon merely because it is true, or merely because it is well liked and or received, but only if indeed God is the divine author.

There is only one true canon of Scripture and God infallibly knows that canon because He is the author. God (of course) knows what He did and did not "breathe out" or "inspire."

But then there is the canon that man has come up with, and obviously as I have already pointed out, different groups have serious disagreements about what belongs in the canon.

All of this to say that there is indeed a right answer, there are indeed books that belong in Scripture and there are those that do not. So who is right? Are the protestants right who claim only 66 books? Are the Roman Catholics right who add 7 more to that list? What about the LDS? Could all of us be wrong? Who first decided on this list of books or that? What does church history say about all of this? How did we get the Old Testament Canon? Was the New Testament canon formed in the same way? Do we have all the books that are God breathed?

The List of questions could go on for miles I'm sure. Hopefully this gets your wheel's turning. I hope to get a chance to start a study on this very issue sometime soon. After I finish the series on God's Sovereignty in Salvation I hope to make this our next adventure. We'll see what happens when I start school in August at Criswell, hopefully I'll find the time to continue to post regularly.

Eventually I'll begin to learn Greek, Hebrew and Latin, wont that add some fun to our talks here! Anyway, we know what the canon is, it is whatever that is God breathed, but how do we know that? I look forward to the study and I encourage you to go to www.aomin.org and download some of James Whites debates and lectures on things like Sola Scriptura and the sufficiency of Scripture. That will clue you in on how I will largely approach this topic.

In Him -Jacob

Like Bible Study?

2007-04-25T17:15:00.000-04:00

Just a note for those who read this blog and may not be aware of my other one, To Die Is Gain is a blog dedicated to the exposition of Scripture. Currently I am going through 1 Corinthians and today I have posted chapter 4:1-5. Basically these are my notes from study for teaching on Wed. nights and Sunday mornings. You can use them for devotional information while reading 1 Corinthians, or as reference when studying a passage of 1 Corinthians. Though granted I believe I could point you to better commentaries than mine. And of course you may feel free to comment there and let me know if you disagree with my interpretation or if you have an illustration that fits, or if you think of another application of the text, etc...

Anyway if you want to check it out go to: www.4hisword.blogspot.com

In Him -Jacob

Jesus Christ, Our Whipping Boy.

2007-04-24T15:45:00.000-04:00

In times past there was a practice of having a "whipping boy." A whipping boy was a servant that would take the place of punishment for a disobedient child. Often times those who were wealthy or of noble blood would have many servants, but this kind of servant had a specific and undesirable purpose. For instance when the son of a noble or wealthy person would get into some sort of trouble serious enough for physical punishment, like being whipped, rather than have the one who deserved to be beaten for their wrong doing actually take the fall, the whipping boy would be put in his place.

This was of course a terrible thing to do. Placing the punishment and shame that one person deserved and placing it upon another. But nonetheless this was something that was often done. After all the crime had to be punished, it could not go left alone. Someone had to pay the price for this wrong doing.

Sounds kind of familiar doesn't it? Well if you are a Bible reading Christian, it should. Even though this is not itself a Bible story, though something that really did happen, Jesus Christ was indeed the whipping boy for sinful man. Yes, taking the punishment for sinners who rightfully deserved death, Jesus took their place, their punishment and their pain.

Romans 3:23-26

"23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

I love the word "Propitiation!" It's not exactly a word that we hear used in every day conversation, but what a word it is! The biblical understanding of the word propitiation means "an appeasement for, and turning away of the wrath of God." When Christ put Himself on the cross for sinners, He turned away the wrath of God's furry against sin for those whom He died. He literally took the place of, substituted for, sinners who deserved death and Hell. Jesus Christ is the "whipping boy" of sinful man.

The entire purpose of a whipping boy, or in Christ's case a propitiatory sacrifice, is to appease and turn away the wrath that one has earned for wrongdoing. When a noble boy stole something, the whipping boy took his place and punishment. After the whipping boy was whipped, the price was paid and the noble boy no longer owed anything because his debt was paid for him. This is the very same truth that is presented in Scripture when we think of the cross of Christ Jesus. Those whom Jesus died for are no longer held to their debt, it has been paid for them.

So what then would it be on the part of he who punishes to whip the whipping boy and the noble boy both? It would be unheard of, the price was already paid! It would be unjust! And yet so many Christians believe this to be true of God. By saying that Jesus died in the place of "ALL" meaning every person, every place, for all time, they assert that God punishes Christ for the sin that He is going to punish others for also. That is not justice.

If Christ is truly a propitiation, a whipping boy, then those whom He died for are free from the wrath of God because Christ paid their fine. God the Father would not be just to place His wrath against every person's sin upon Christ and then punish many of those same people for their sin that Christ already suffered for. Jesus Christ as we are told in Romans 3:25 was "put forward as a propitiation." Jesus died LITERALLY in the place of sinners. So if Jesus died for absolutely everyone, then no one is going to Hell. But we know by Scripture's account that people are going to Hell, and lots of them. So then, it only makes sense that Jesus died not for all people, but for those whom He chose to save. If Christ suffered truly "in the place of" sinners, then those whom He died for are free.

John 8:36

"So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."

If you assert that Christ died in the place of all people, you assert that He failed to satisfactorily satisfy the Fathers wrath, or that God is unjust giving double punishment. But If you believe that Christ died actually in the place of sinners, then you must know that He accomplished His work and died not for all, but for the elect.

No More Limbo? What Does This Mean?

2007-04-23T11:44:00.000-04:00

For centuries now the Roman Catholic Church has taught "unofficially" a doctrine called "Limbo." Limbo being a place where unbaptized infants went if they died in that state. The Romans Catholic Church has always taught that baptism is necessary to wipe away the stain of original sin, and is therefore a prerequisite to salvation. And the logic goes, if an infant dies before baptism then they could not enter Heaven because they still bore the stain of original sin, yet they had not committed any sin themselves because they are incapable as infants of doing so, therefore they can't go to Heaven, but shouldn't go to Hell, so, well....err, I guess they go to Limbo. What is Limbo one might ask? Limbo was taught to be a place of pure happiness and bliss but apart from God's presence.

There are of course many things wrong with this doctrine. The one that stands out first to me is the idea of a place, not mentioned in Scripture, that is a place of eternal bliss apart from the presence of God. Being apart from God's presence is the biblical definition of Hell. I mean I understand that Hell is a place of weeping an gnashing of teeth and eternal burning, the Bible does not so shyly speak of these things as well. But the point is, God is not there, and that is the real punishment of Hell. So Limbo isn't such a good thing as far as Scripture is concerned, again never mind that Scripture never mentions Limbo (or purgatory for that matter).

Another issue is the assumption that an infant needs to be baptized. This of course is a fundamental difference between those who hold to believers baptism as I do and those who believe in infant baptism as Roman Catholics and various protestants do. But even the protestants (true protestants) who hold to infant baptism reject the notion that it is salvific or that it wipes away original sin. I feel quite confident in saying that infants who die are safe in the arms of God and do gain entrance into Heaven. Because whenever we see God's judgement against man it is against his lawless deeds, his actual sin, not the fact that man is born with a sin nature or in the flesh, but judged by his transgressions.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

"9Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? (Who are called unrighteous?) Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (Emphasis mine)

Point being, those who are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom are those who are sinners by their actions and transgression, not those merely born sinful. An infant cannot be sexually immoral, a thief, etc.

Now I will say that as to when a person becomes conscious of their ability to choose right from wrong is hard to decide, and it may be fairly young. Bur it is sinners who need saving, not just those inclined to sin from birth. This is a difficult issue because Scripture doesn't spell it out totally black and white, but the assertion that an infant could not be with God because they were not baptized is foolish, and has no scriptural support.

And finally the problem with this doctrine is the assumption that human being can merit for themselves God's grace through works (Ephesians 2:8-10). A fundamental difference between Roman Catholics and protestants.

All that said, I am happy to hear that recently the Roman Catholic Church has denounced the teaching of Limbo. As well they should since there is no scriptural support for it. In a report from Yahoo News written by Nicole Winfield we read:

"Benedict approved the findings of the International Theological Commission, a Vatican advisory panel, which said it was reassessing traditional teaching on limbo in light of "pressing" pastoral needs — primarily the growing number of abortions and infants born to non-believers who die without being baptized."

And the Rev. Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit who is the commission's secretary-general said:

"We can say we have many reasons to hope that there is salvation for these babies,' the Rev. Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit who is the commission's secretary-general"

I find this very interesting myself. This teaching is one that the Catholic Church taught very widely for a long time. And while it was never (I'm told) part of the churches official doctrine, there have been many who have taught it, and many who have believed it. But now, this commission has found that it is not to be taught, and that there is hope that infants might go to Heaven when they die, and the Pope has agreed with the finding of this commission. So by default the Roman Catholic church has just said that baptism may not be necessary for salvation, at least for infants.

Now obviously, I have stated my position on why infants don't have to place their faith in Christ to go to Heaven. Because they are unable to do, and they have not wilfully sinned against God and do not know right from wrong. And if the Roman Catholics want to agree with that, then that's fine. But I am trying to figure out what this does to their theology. Because my understanding has always been that from their perspective baptism must occur for original sin to be taken away. And if original sin isn't taken away then there is no chance for salvation period. What about the doctrine of purgatory? Do babies have to suffer purgatory if they die without baptism?

It seems to me that the Roman Catholic church keeps taking steps towards universalism. I know this isn't true across the board. I know Catholics who are certainly not universalists, and there are many who are not. But Rome's gospel seems to be ever widening to be more inclusive. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the Roman Catholic Church is doing away with an unbiblical doctrine, but what is the motivation?

I would genuinely love some Roman Catholic feedback on this post. I truly am not trying to stuff words in the mouth of Roman Catholics or the Pope, or anyone else, but I'm sharing my thoughts and perspective on this matter. While I certainly disagree with many things that are taught in the Roman Catholic Church, I think any honest person can admit that this "ruling" if you will, has to have an effect on the way Catholics think about infants that die and salvation in general.

What are your thoughts?

-Jacob

Here are two links to news articles covering this topic:

Yahoo News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070420/ap_on_re_eu/vatican_limbo

National Post: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=367fb6df-eaff-46a2-897b-66eabe94b850&k=31248

Mohler on Partial Birth Abortion Ban

2007-04-19T15:30:00.000-04:00

Dr. Mohler writes about the signifigance of this win for pro-life proponents. Check it out:

http://albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=924

NEW PODCAST!

2007-04-19T15:03:00.000-04:00

A talk on God's sovereignty in the midst of evil. Considering the shooting at Virginia Tech and all of the attention it has gotten in the media, I thought a good podcast would be on the issue of evil, where it comes from and how Christians should think Scripturally about such things. So here it is, I hope it challenges, encourages and strengthens your faith in Christ.

http://reformationinprogress.mypodcast.com/

-Jacob

Praise God!

2007-04-19T11:04:00.000-04:00

I just wanted to shout a quick praise to our God! The decision that partial birth abortion is unconstitutional is a victory for those who believe that all life is sacred! Praise God for His mighty hand and this preservation of life. This is the biggest pro-life victory since Roe vs. Wade. It is of course being challenged, so join with me in prayer that it would not be overturned!

PRAISE THE LORD!!!

-Jacob

Mohler on VT Tragedy

2007-04-18T12:07:00.000-04:00

Albert Mohler addresses evil and God's sovereignty on his radio program. You can listen here:

http://albertmohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2007-04-17

A Quote

2007-04-18T11:00:00.000-04:00

I have no agenda by posting this quote, it just made me laugh when I read it.

Ronald Reagan:

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

A Christians Response to the Virginia Tech Massacre

2007-04-17T15:41:00.000-04:00

As I have listened to the reports flowing in about what took place yesterday at Virginia Tech, I cannot help but hurt for the people who lost friends and family in this tragedy. But I must ask myself, "How as a follower of Christ am I to think about things like this?"

The honest truth is as weird as it may sound, this incident and others like it, affirms my faith In Christ and His word. The common questions when something like this occurs are, "Why?" and "What kind of evil is this?" "How could someone do that?" The ultimate answer is, "Because it fits into the ultimate purpose and plan of God."

Perhaps that answer makes you disgusted at me. "How could you say that! God is a God of Love!" Yes, God is a loving God. But God is a God completely in control of all things too. We are told that God ordained the death of Christ Himself. What was more evil than the murder of the Son of God?

Look at Acts 2:23.

"this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men."

Whose "definite plan" was it that Jesus be crucified? God's. Who receives the blame? Lawless men. Make no mistake, God did not force this young man to murder 32 people and then kill himself. But God did ordain it to be so. God is in control of all things in this world. He has a purpose.

After Jacob (or Israel) dies, in Genesis 50, Joseph's brothers are fearful of him because they are afraid that Joseph will retaliate against them for all the wrong they did him by selling him into slavery. But what is Joseph's response? Genesis 50:20.

"As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today."

Who would have known that by the evil of Joseph's brothers that one day Joseph would be put in a place by God to save the lives of so many people? But God had a purpose in what Joseph's brothers did. God had a purpose in planning the death of His own Son, that He might save those whom He chooses to save.

I look at the Virginia Tech incident and I can say that God is working even in that. God is not impotent. God was not unable to stop that from happening. According to Ephesians 1:11 God "works all things according to the counsel of his will."

I remember listening to John Piper talk about the death of his mother. He described the incident. She was on a bus, I believe on a mission trip, and a truck in front of the bus was carrying lumber. A 2x4 fell from the truck and came through the window of the bus and struck and killed John's mother. John struggled with the grief of losing his mother, like all of us would, but at the end of it all he was able to say something like this: "I would rather serve a God that planned my mothers death like that, rather than God who couldn't stop a single 2x4 from coming through a window."

We do not see what God has planned. But we can know that He is in control and in the midst of this situation. Perhaps God will use this to bring about the salvation of some students seeking for answers. Perhaps it will resolve someones heart to reach out to lost and hurting people who might otherwise do more of the same kind of violence. The truth is, we will probably never know what all God is doing through this, but we can be sure He has it under control and is working it out for His glory, and the good of those who love Him.

I would be remiss if I failed to point out that this affirms may faith in the teaching of Scripture about sin as well. We as people are born inclined and enslaved to sin. If not for the grace of God, who knows what I would be today. I used to be a very angry and somewhat violent person. Romans 1:28-32 nails it on the head about what we as humans are capable of.

28"And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."

It is by God's grace that His Spirit restrains much of the evil, otherwise we would see how bad it could really get. And we must remember in many places in the world, it is worse.

Sinful man, needs a perfect savior. This incident affirms my faith in Christ and His word as being true. And it also serves as a reminder to preach the gospel to a lost and dying world and pray for God to save souls as only He can.

-Jacob

Theology is Practical

2007-04-16T18:30:00.000-04:00

Here at Celebration Baptist where I am pastoring we have had the awesome privilege of bringing in Patrick Abendroth to share the word with us for a couple of days. Pat is the senior pastor of Omaha Bible Church in Omaha, Nebraska. He is also the author of "The Truth About Water Baptism," which you can pick up on www.amazon.com. I have the privilege of knowing Pat via the former senior pastor here at Celebration Baptist.

Pat shared a great message with us last night on the matter of theology being practical and important in the life of the believer. He used Psalm 139 as his text to make this point loud and clear.

Psalm 139 says:

1 "O LORD, you have searched me and known me! 2You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thoughts from afar. 3You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. 4Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether. 5You hem me in, behind and before, and lay your hand upon me. 6Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high; I cannot attain it.

7Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? 8If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! 9If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, 10even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me. 11If I say, "Surely the darkness shall cover me, and the light about me be night," 12even the darkness is not dark to you; the night is bright as the day, for darkness is as light with you.

13For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. 14I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. 15My frame was not hidden from you,when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. 16Your eyes saw my unformed substance;in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them.

17How precious to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! 18If I would count them, they are more than the sand. I awake, and I am still with you.

19Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God! O men of blood, depart from me! 20They speak against you with malicious intent; your enemies take your name in vain! 21Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you? 22I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies.

23Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts! 24And see if there be any grievous way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting!"

I wont sit here and plagiarize Pat's message, but as this text clearly teaches that God is all knowing, all present, and concerned with you and me, you can see the point. It is impossible to say either "I just want theology, but I don't want to apply it" or "I just want to live the way God wants, but don't bog me down with theology."

It's impossible to really believe that God is with us everywhere we go, and that He knows our innermost thoughts all of the time and have that not affect the way we live as believers. Furthermore when the passage tells us that God has every day that we are going to live written before one of them comes to pass, that it is incredible thought that should effect us in our thinking about things like missions.

God is with me always, God knows me personally, and God will decide how long I live and when and how I die. I can walk with God into Iraq and I am safe in His arms because I won't go one day before He wants me to. I can boldly preach the gospel and nothing can stop me until God does.

Theology changes people in a good way, and it is very practical. And as to the other person who wants a set of rules to follow but no theology, they will not please God because they do not know Him!

Anyway, it was a great message. Pat is an awesome speaker and I recommend you listening to him on their church website: www.omahabiblechurch.org. You can listen to Pat's sermons as well as some by Erik Raymond who authors www.Irishcalvinist.com, and there are some great podcast interviews with people like John MacArthur and James White and a sermon or two from D.A. Carson as well.

Theology and doctrine matter, and they are quite applicable to our lives as Christians.

In Him -Jacob

It's Not My Fault That I'm A Christian!!!

2007-04-11T16:40:00.000-04:00

I'm excited to announce to you that I am in the process of writing my first book that I hope to see published. I've toyed with the idea for a long time and have finally decided to take the leap. I have several idea's for books that I would like to write and I have mentioned some of them here before, but I have settled on a topic for my first book, and I have entitled it: "It's not my fault That I'm A Christian!!!"

I'm sure it will come as a shock to everyone, but I have decided to write on the topic of the gospel. It will include much of the material that I have used here dealing with God's sovereignty and His work of Salvation. I intend to expand upon some of the idea's that I have presented here through the various posts. I also plan to include a chapter on how we should view evangelism in the light of the doctrines of grace.

The book will be an apologetic defense of the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and meant to challenge those who believe that we choose Christ and that salvation was made for all men rather than the elect. I hope the book will challenge evangelical Christians to rethink the gospel in the light of Scripture, and challenge unbelievers with who God is and how He saves.

The title of the book indicates the idea that I am not a Christian because I chose Jesus, but because Jesus chose me.

I appreciate your prayers as I undertake this endeavor.

In Him -Jacob