Sources:

Dr. Phil Stringer, “Was John Calvin a Calvinist?” Grace Leadership Conference, 2011, Quentin Road Bible Baptist Church, Lake Zurich, IL.

Kent Kelly, “Inside the Tulip,” Southern Pines, NC, 1986.

Calvin’s Commentaries and Calvin’s “Institutes.”

Introduction:

In recent years, there has been a growing trend in Christianity for people to claim that John Calvin, the founder of modern Calvinism, did not really believe or teach what is being taught by Calvinists today. Many want to hold Calvin up as some sort of an iconic figure of the Protestant Reformation while, at the same time, they wish to distance themselves from the radical unbiblical teachings attributed to Calvin. They claim that the Five Points of Calvinism, known by the acronym “TULIP,” were actually invented by the Synod of Dort, over fifty years after Calvin’s death, having little or nothing to do with what Calvin actually taught. Some even want to go so far as to claim that Calvin really taught a Free Grace gospel. Startling!

Who are these people, mentioned above?

1. “New” Calvinists. This group generally holds to the modern five points of Calvinism but stands against “double predestination,” sometimes referred to as, “hypercalvinism,” the teaching that God predestined some for heaven and some for hell (neither can do anything to change that fate). They claim that Calvin did not teach double predestination.
2. “Moderate” Calvinists. They hold to only one to four of the five points of Calvinism. Most from this category would object to “limited atonement,” (the “L” of TULIP) the Calvinist false, unbiblical teaching that Christ died only for the elect. Some “moderate” Calvinists also deny that their concept of Calvinism teaches Lordship “Salvation.” Some also deny that Calvin taught Lordship “Salvation.”
3. Free Grace believers. Now, this is astonishing! But, yes, there are actually some who hold to the Free Grace Gospel of the Bible who think that John Calvin was, in reality, a Free Grace theologian! “He has just gotten a bad rap,” they say. How naïve is this! I submit that those who make this claim have read only short isolated clips of what Calvin wrote. Folks such as this love to answer Calvinists by saying, “Well, even Calvin himself didn’t believe what you teach.” Frankly, it is an impossible stretch to demonstrate that Calvin taught Free Grace theology. His standard pattern of writing throughout his commentaries is, when confronted with a Bible text that unmistakably declares that Christ died for the sins of ALL the world and, further, when the Bible explains the Gospel message of God’s Free Grace salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, Calvin initially states what the text says plainly (Free Grace); HOWEVER, he quickly filters the text through his preconceived skewed theological construct, restating, contradicting and denying what the text of the Bible clearly declares. This theological filter appears to have originated from his background of being a Roman Catholic Priest and, for a time, a humanist. He also held the teachings of Augustine in the highest regard.

Was Calvin simply a moderate or limited Calvinist, a Free Grace Gospel teacher who has been misquoted, or, in reality, a strong Calvinist or Hyper-Calvinist? Let’s look at some quotations from Calvin and see what he really said.

From Calvin’s Commentaries
1. John 6:33 KJV: “For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.” Calvin’s response: “This passage teaches that the whole world is dead to God, except so far as Christ quickens it, because life will be found nowhere else than in him.” NOTE: Calvin’s comment here affirms four of the five points of Calvinism (T, U, L, I) and denies that God gave his Son to the whole world (while God’s gift of salvation through belief in his Son is offered to the whole world, sadly, many will reject his gift—Matt. 23:37).
2. John 3:16 KJV: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Calvin’s response: Calvin begins by acknowledging the clear meaning of the verse, but then quickly reverses his position: Calvin: “Let us remember, on the other hand, that while life is promised universally to all who believe in Christ, still faith is not common to all. For Christ is made known and held out to the view of all, but the elect alone are they whose eyes God opens, that they may seek him by faith.” Additionally, Calvin said, “We must not assume that ‘the world’ means every single individual human being, ‘world’ refers to those who have the capacity and ability to believe.” NOTE: Calvin affirms in this statement, unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace (U, L and I of the Calvinist acronym TULIP). Dr. Phil Stringer relates further that Calvin repeatedly says throughout his Commentaries that “all,” or, “the world” mean, to him, all kinds of human beings, some out of each class or race of people, or ranks of life, not every human being. Calvin, thereby, attempts to dodge the clear straightforward meaning of “all” or “all the world,” in Scripture, as meaning EVERYONE. As Dr. Stringer put it so aptly, “Even a child can understand that all means ALL.”
3. Matthew 23:37 KJV: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Calvin’s response: “Again, when the sophists seize on this passage, to prove free will, and to set aside the secret predestination of God, the answer is easy. God wills to gather all men, say they; and therefore all are at liberty to come, and their will does not depend on the election of God. I reply: The will of God, which is here mentioned, must be judged from the result. For since by his word he calls all men indiscriminately to salvation, and since the end of preaching is, that all should betake themselves to his guardianship and protection, it may justly be said that he wills to gather all to himself. It is not, therefore, the secret purpose of God, but his will, which is manifested by the nature of the word, that is here described; for, undoubtedly, whomsoever he efficaciously wills to gather, he inwardly draws by his Spirit, and does not merely invite by the outward voice of man.” NOTE: Calvin holds to the classic Calvinist denial of free will while affirming the Calvinist U, L and I.
4. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV: “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Calvin’s response: once again, Calvin makes an initial affirmation of what the verse plainly states, but he quickly denies his affirmation with the following statement, “But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel. For God there stretches forth his hand without a difference to all, but lays hold only of those, to lead them to himself, whom he has chosen before the foundation of the world.” Comment: Calvin clearly twists the clear meaning of the text, pushing his notion of limited atonement.
5. 1 John 2:2 KJV: “And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” Calvin’s response: “Here a question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. . . . It seems to me that the Apostle is to be understood as speaking only of all those who believe, whether Jews or Gentiles, over the whole world. Then under the word all or whole, he does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world.” Once again, Calvin denies the simple straightforward message of 1 John 2:2, while pushing his own theological platform of limited atonement.
6. James 2:17 KJV: “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” Calvin remarks, “He [James] says that faith is dead, being by itself, that is, when destitute of good works. We hence conclude that it is indeed no faith, for when dead, it does not properly retain the name.” James 2:18 KJV: “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works; shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” Calvin’s response: “Shew me by works thy faith; for since it is not an idle thing, it must necessarily be proved by works. The meaning then is, Unless thy faith brings forth fruits, I deny that thou hast any faith. This verse is a key to the meaning of James: faith is to be proved by works; then faith properly justifies and saves, and works prove its genuineness.” COMMENT: Calvin makes the standard error of Lordship “Salvation” teachers in misinterpreting James. James’ epistle clearly speaks to believers about the quality of their faith, NOT the reality of faith. Calvin unmistakably declares the Calvinist teaching of perseverance, the “P” of the Calvinist TULIP. Calvinist perseverance is nothing other than the false teaching of Lordship “Salvation.” For a detailed look at this subject, see Dr. Tom Cucuzza’s outstanding book, “Secure Forever! God’s Promise or Our Perseverance,” St. Cloud, MN: Xulon Press, 2008 (see the link on the right column of Expreacherman.com).
7. Finally, if there were any doubt left in anyone’s mind about where Calvin stood on what is known today as, “Calvinism,” look at this main title in Calvin’s “Institutes” section dealing with the subject of predestination. The title itself leaves no doubt on Calvin’s position: “Of the Eternal Election by Which God has Predestined Some to Salvation and Others Predestination in Hell.” This title and statement of his position, declares Calvin to be, not only a Calvinist, but a HYPERCALVINIST!

Reblogged from Believing IN Christ Jesus through ALL things:

The Early Church Before Augustine on Free Will and Original Sin by Winkie Pratney

Winkie Pratney lectures on Augustinianism, Pelagianism, and the Early Church regarding free will and original sin. What did early Christianity, or the early Christians, believe on these issues? Is Calvinism really historic Christianity as Calvinists claim?

Augustine and his Doctrine of Original Sin by Winkie Pratney

Winkie Pratney lectures on Augustine’s doctrine of original sin. Is sin ethical or metaphysical? Is sin a choice or a substance? Why do babies grow up to be sinners?

Beyond Augustine Documentary – Did Augustine Corrupt the Church with Gnostic Doctrine by Jesse Morrell

Beyond Augustine is a church history and theological documentary that examines the free will debate in light of the Early Church and the Gnostics. Did Augustine corrupt the church with Manichean or Gnostic doctrine? Is Calvinism or Reformed Theology really orthodox and historic Christianity, as Calvinists claim? Or are the Calvinists and Augustinians the spiritual descendants of the Gnostics and Manicheans? Were the Pelagians really the heretics in their free will debate with Augustine? These are the type of controversial questions Jesse Morrell examines in this documentary.

2-4-2013 Pastor Baxter + Romans Study 12 audio

Romans Chapter 8

All saints will be resurrected and glorified.  Who can accuse God’s elect?  No one or no thing can bring a charge against the saints if God is for us.  If this is the case who can separate the saints from God including one’s self?  Once saved, always saved?  There is no sin that cannot be covered by the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

In my ministry as a pastor, I have seen people’s faith wax and wane. I know of one young man, for example, who gave his heart to Jesus, became actively involved in church, and even participated in summer-long missions projects, only to reject Christianity in his college years. I could multiply stories like his, but I think you get the point. You also probably know people who at one point in their lives professed faith in Christ but now do not. Their faith, which once waxed, has now waned to the point of nonexistence.

Are such people saved? Charles Stanley thinks they may be. In his book, Eternal Security, he writes, “The Bible clearly teaches that God’s love for His people is of such magnitude that even those who walk away from the faith have not the slightest chance of slipping from His hand.” Also, “Even if a believer for all purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy.”[1] For Charles Stanley, faith in Christ for salvation is a one-time event: “Once saved, always saved”—even, evidently, if you renounce Christ.

In light of our studies of 1 John, I hope you see what is wrong with Charles Stanley’s reasoning. Remember the context of this letter. Former members of the church had embraced heresy and seceded from the church, attempting to drag others along with them. If Charles Stanley is right, those people—whom John refers to as “antichrists” in 2:18—are still saved, as long as they gave their hearts to Jesus sometime prior to their heresy and secessionism. Once saved, always saved, regardless of whether you currently have faith.

Notice how different from Charles Stanley’s position is John’s position as he states it in 1 John 2:24-25:

See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is what he promised us—even eternal life.

Here faith is not a one-time event, it is an ongoing commitment to Jesus Christ. It is something that “remains in you,” and if it does, “you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.” The result of all this remaining is “eternal life.” Faith abides.

Now, before anyone sends me nasty emails because I have criticized Charles Stanley or the doctrine of eternal security, let me point something out. Abiding faith is consistent with both traditional Calvinism and traditional Arminianism. Like Charles Stanley, traditional Calvinism also teaches “Once saved, always saved.” Unlike Charles Stanley, however, traditional Calvinism teaches that backsliding or apostasy from the faith is proof that a person was never saved in the first place. Why? Because true faith abides. Unlike either Charles Stanley or traditional Calvinism, traditional Arminianism denies “Once saved, always saved.” Like traditional Calvinism, however, traditional Arminianism teaches that faith abides. If a person enters eternal life, it is because of an abiding faith in Jesus Christ, who graciously gives us eternal life.

So, either way, keep the faith!

Beyond Augustine is a church history and theological documentary that examines the free will debate in light of the Early Church and the Gnostics.

Did Augustine corrupt the church with Manichean or Gnostic doctrine?

Is Calvinism or Reformed Theology really orthodox and historic Christianity, as Calvinists claim? Or are the Calvinists and Augustinians the spiritual descendants of the Gnostics and Manicheans?

These are the type of controversial questions Jesse Morrell examines in this documentary.

HOW YOU CAN HELP SUPPORT THE MORRELL FAMILY

The Morrell family serves as full time missionaries to the United States.

Paypal: Click Here

Physical Mail:

Jesse & Krista Morrell

P.O. Box 1527

Lindale TX, 75771

Special thanks in advance to our supporters.

THE BATTLE IS ON! We couldn’t do all of this without you!

Visit Our Website: Click Here

]]> http://quiavideruntoculi.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/gods-grace-is-free-but-not-cheap/ Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:43:04 +0000 quiavideruntoculi http://quiavideruntoculi.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/gods-grace-is-free-but-not-cheap/

John Calvin: Heresiarch

It is curious to note that among those Protestants – Baptists and Calvinists especially – most keen on emphasising the absolute and inviolable omnipotence and sovereignty of God, there exists a remarkable tendency to downplay the efficacy of God’s salvific grace. How do I mean? In two ways: first, in the Calvinistic perversion of predestination, to assert that Christ’s sacrifice was not, properly speaking, made for the salvation of all (since that would have been overdoing it), but only really made for the salvation of the elect, and second in the doctrine ‘One Saved Always Saved’, which explains how it does not matter that people (Baptists) can’t seem to help sinning after Baptism, because God’s grace is just *so* sufficient (but unable to save them from sin!). Certainly, God’s grace is very great: but it is not cheap, and to cheapen it in this way is to minimise it, and to open a Pandora’s box (or, more accurately, a gateway to Hell).

Consider: if salvation comes so very cheaply – by praying ‘the sinner’s prayer’ and making an ‘altar call’ – and can’t be lost, why bother

Charles C. Spurgeon: Calvinist-Baptist Heretic

going to the effort of preaching the gospel at all? God will know and save his own, infallibly, and there’s an end to it – we can all, if we don’t fancy the effort, go home. We don’t need to give people encouragement or instruction; we don’t need to bother with getting the finer points of our theology ship-shape; we don’t need to build churches or monasteries or schools; we don’t need to strive against the flesh, since, hey, the Spirit’s bound to conquer in the end (and there won’t even be any nasty Romish purgatory to worry about, because Christ’s sacrifice was, you’ve guessed it, just *so* sufficient). In short, we don’t need to live as servants of the Truth: we can choose to, but we don’t need to. We’ll only lose out, the Baptists inform us, in the apportioning of prizes in heaven, not on heaven itself. In short, Christ’s sacrifice is so amazing, it not only liberates us from sin, but it liberates us from the need to be Christian! (?) Itching ears spring to mind.

But the effects of the doctrine don’t end there: worse than this, consider that if ‘such a great salvation’ cannot even really save us from sin, how can we possibly hope to convert people, even if we decide we can be bothered to? If we have to invoke Once Saved Always Saved all the time to explain how rubbish/useless we are at staying out of sin after baptism, aren’t we just admitting defeat, and the victory of the Devil? Aren’t we just admitting that Christ has not in fact saved us, that we are in fact still squarely on the road to Hell, and that our profession is false? It looks an awful lot like it from where I’m sitting.

Here is the thing: Grace is freely offered to all, but salvation will cost you your life (Lk. 17:33). A high price, to be sure, but a price incomparably worth paying. And make no mistake, if you backslide and do not repent, you will be damned. Quid dicit Scriptura?

“It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.”

(2 Pet. 2:21).

Get that? It will be worse for us than for those who have never known the way of righteousness (i.e. the unrighteous heathen, who are certainly damned). Strong tobacco. This is why St Paul can talk about working out his salvation ”with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12). If the whole point of Once Saved Always Saved is to secure us in the infallible inevitability of our salvation, come what may, how are we to account for salvation like this? Not a comfortable, secure, ‘nothing can separate me from God, not even myself’ kind of salvation; a terrible, awful, miraculous, wonderful, glorious salvation, which propels us to a high vocation and an awful responsibility. I ask: on account of what was St Paul afraid and atremble? The Church answers: on account of the acute knowledge that his salvation depended on his response (faith) to God’s grace, and that it was very possible that he could fail in this. It has been well said that powerlessness does not terrify us: what truly terrifies us is the suspicion that might be all-powerful. Salvation proceeds from God, but God leaves the gift of salvation in our hands.

What we do with it is our shout: choose wisely. Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Enter J.D. Greear’s new book, Stop Asking Jesus into Your Heart: How to know for sure you are saved.

Some of the doubt-ridden souls I have met over the years were saddled with inadequate teaching about salvation and discipleship. A few were (mis)led to register a profession of faith without actually having been born again. I have heard pulpiteers who seemed not to realize their emotional harangues were creating doubt in the minds of genuine, but sensitive believers. I’ve had the pleasure of helping a number of doubting souls realize either the reality of their sincere faith in Jesus or their need to truly trust him as Lord.

I also have had the pleasure of reading J.D.’s excellent new book and find it completely in harmony with the teaching I received as a Southern Baptist youngster and some of the best Southern Baptist pastoral counseling I have heard over the years.

If you know anything about the ongoing “discussion” in Southern Baptist life about Reformed theology, you will be interested to know that the book’s foreword was written by Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and one of the decidedly not-Reformed leaders in Southern Baptist life. Like Dr. Patterson says in his foreword, I will say that “while I might disagree with some interpretations here or there, I found this book thoroughly biblical.” I’m sure there are enough argumentative souls in Southern Baptist life who will take J.D. to task over their points of disagreement, as certainly as I am confident that J.D. is more than capable of holding his own in the debate. The fact is, most of the fiery darts that will be launched in his direction will fall harmlessly to the side because the criticisms are anticipated and answered in the book. In this case, as always, it’s a great idea to actually read the book before you critique it.

I was delighted to see how J.D. explains the nature of belief and salvation, especially when he notes that repentance is both a personal choice and a work of God’s Spirit. His very insightful observation — that assurance of salvation is based on a present posture of repentance and belief in the finished work of Christ — opens the door to helping doubting souls diagnose where exactly they stand in relationship with Christ. Two of his later chapters — on the evidence a person has believed and what to do when you continue to doubt — mean the book will continue to be helpful to the once-doubting soul after the initial issue has been resolved.

J.D.’s new book is very personal in tone and eminently readable, in spite of the fact the author has one of those “Piled Higher Deeper” degrees. It’s an instructive read for believers searching for answers to their questions about salvation, belief, and repentance. It will be a helpful ministry to individuals wrestling with doubt about their relationship with Christ.

And it ought to be required reading for those compulsive souls who obsessively read blogs and passionately “debate” issues in the comm boxes. There’s never a lack of opinions. It’s really nice when they are informed.

Learn more about the book on Amazon.com by clicking here.
Read an excerpt on jdgreear.com.
Read a review by Brad Sarian and a related article by J.D. on ctlibrary.com.

Lets first understand what the word means. Salvation means “right standing with God” in the bible. It is a current state of being for those who have believed, confessed Christ in their life. Once this happens you are given two things. One access to the Father through his son and two all your pass transgression whipped away (ae:old life) so that you are a new creation in him with a fresh start. The strangest and yet most problematic issue in most churches today is that somehow the concept of salvation has been twisted to fit people who don’t want to change and think they can have eternal life the easy way. Much like the rich man Jesus spoke to. Thinking they can gain salvation on their terms instead of God’s term. Proof of this was found when I was reading a article about a baptist minister who accused of being a false teacher because he taught his people that they must turn from their sins and live a holy life and not continue to be in sin as they once were. Now there may be more to it than this but the focus of proof they used to accuse this man was that he was not telling his people that once they were saved that they could continue to do whatever they wanted and go to heaven. The gospel isn’t a joke people. Like Christ said if you love me, then you will keep my commandments (John 14:15). Only those who are serious about their walk of faith will get the reward in the end. Living Faith(faith that follows corresponding action) is what saves us not dead faith. And dead faith is faith without corresponding action(James 2:14,26). Therefore who confesses Christ should live for him and if you live for him you must love him and if you love him then you would not disobey his commandments. Now granted one can slip up and that is what forgiveness and confession is for. But those that practice sin is not of Christ(1john 3:6). And to continue in your sins means that you practice them and therefore aren’t of him. So it’s not Christ and do whatever you want. It’s Christ and live for him and push for holiness everyday. Or as Paul says “I have to workout my salvation(Philip 2:12)… my responsibility, Christ has done his part by given us a fresh start and freedom of our old sins giving us a clean slate but what you do with that is up to you. It’s a everyday progress that takes our life to do. And only those that continue to follow his rules AND finished the race will gain entry(2 Tim 2:5).

I am responding to Petillo’s blog, currently located here:
http://lcf1689.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-five-biblical-solas-of-reformation.html

The Five Biblical Solas of the Reformation

In order to be a true Christian one must believe the five solas of the reformation; that is, sola scriptura, sola fide, sola gratia, solo Christus and Sola Deo Gloria.  Is anyone ready to lay down their life for these divine truths because they honestly love them before God and man?

sw: We are to love nothing before God!  So I would urge anyone reading this to NOT lay down their life based upon this reason.

  Do you strongly believe these doctrinal truths?  

sw: No, because while some of them have some truth to them, others are actually contrary to Scripture, namely “sola scriptura” and “sola fide.”

Are they divine truth to you and from His holy and written Word?

sw: No, for the same reason cited above.

SOLA 1 – SOLA SCRIPTURA

Sola Scriptura refers to the Bible as the sole God-inspired, infallible and inerrant written Word of God; however, we acknowledge that the Bible did not fall out of heaven or was not literally written with the hand of God; that is, it is God-breathed or the all-sufficient Word of God.  It is sufficient enough for life, faith and morals. 

sw: Being “sufficient” cannot be equated to being “sola.”  This is the fatal flaw of most, if not all, who claim this doctrine.  They take references of sufficiency and equate that to sola.

Here are some Scriptures that teach the infallibility of the Word of God:

2 Timothy 3:15-17 NIV
 ¹⁵ and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. ¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, ¹⁷ so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

sw: This is the primary scriptural citation sola scriptura adherents refer to – and as I noted previously, this passage does NOT speak to a “sola” nature, only a “sufficient” nature.  The concept of “sola” is imported or imputed into this verse through eisegetical arguments – such as we’re responding to now.  Yes, all Scripture is God-breathed and (and here’s the key) USEFUL for teaching, etc. so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work, but this passage does NOT say that Scripture is the ONLY (or “sola”) source ability to thoroughly equip someone.  James White likes (or liked, not sure if he’s still using this bad argument) making an analogy to his bike shop being able to thoroughly equip him to ride his bicycle.  The point that argument overlooks is that there’s any number of equally able bike shops which could “thoroughly equip” him!

John 10:35 KJV
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

sw:  The context of this verse is Jesus challenging the Jews because they were about to stone Him because He refers to Himself as God’s Son.  Jesus cites Scripture stating, “ye are gods” (Psalms 82:6), and that passage from Psalms says that we are “all sons of the Most High.”  So yes, while He does say “Scripture cannot be broken,” what He’s NOT saying is Scripture is the sole (or sola) source for the Christian.  Again, this verse does NOT support sola scriptura!

John 17:17 KJV
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

sw: Sounds good, and IS good, His word IS truth!  Again, this does not say that ONLY His word is truth!  This is NOT supportive of sola scriptura!  Petillo has (as has all others before him) missed the mark in this feeble attempt to defend sola scriptura.

Sola Fide refers to faith alone; that is, it is the sole instrument for how someone is declared justified by faith alone; that is, faith is the alone instrument for being right before God.  In Reformed theology, there is no “faith plus good works” but faith alone but a faith alone is never alone because it is a working faith.  

sw:  The fact of the matter is that the ONLY place in Scripture where the words “faith” and “alone” are used together in Scripture is in James 2:24 which is blatantly a statement DENYING and of course that verse is:  “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (NASB, emphasis added).  When Scripture itself explicitly states “not by faith alone,” how does one justify (no pun intended) a doctrine based upon faith alone?

sw: Another thing we see here is Petillo using the double-speak we have seen others use.  I’ve already prepared a fuller response on this double-speak as used by others, so I won’t belabor it too much in this response (see the link) – suffice it to say that saying “faith alone, but not a faith which is alone” is double-speak.  If a saving/working faith is never alone, then faith alone (aka sola fide) is a lie.

SOLA 2 – SOLA FIDE

Justification by faith alone is a declaration by God in legal terms where a sinner is declared righteous on the basis of Christ alone; that is, it is a once-and-for all declaration by God and in justification we are not “made” right with God but declared right with God through Jesus His Son. 

sw:  Here Petillo has actually changed topics from sola fide to solo christus, which is a truism if properly taught and understood and once saved, always saved (OSAS), which is a false teaching!  Solo christus is discussed later, so I’ll wait on that one, but OSAS is yet another fatal flaw in Protestant thinking which I will address now.  Ironically those who adhere to OSAS look to St. Paul’s writings to find, what they think, is support for the teaching but in the context of all that St. Paul wrote one would have to reject OSAS if they are reading him objectively.  Why do I say that?  Simply put, St. Paul puts forth the possibility of he himself losing salvation!  Yes, he teaches that he must continue to discipline himself so that even after preaching the Gospel to others, that he himself would not be disqualified or cast out from the prize (1 Cor. 9:27).  From the same context he teaches that we must all run as to win the prize (1 Cor. 9:24) to not be complacent.

Here are some Scripture references to help us understand sola fide:

Romans 4 KJV

4 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?  ² For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. ³ For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.  ⁴ Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.  ⁵ But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.  ⁶ Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,  ⁷ Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered  ⁸ Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

sw:  Interestingly, Protestants like Petillo like to use this passage from Romans 4 where it speaks of Abraham’s faith – but in the greater context of the whole of Scripture we cannot ignore James 2:24 which also speaks of Abraham’s faith AND explicitly states that Abraham was “justified by works and not by faith alone.”

Ephesians 2 KJV
⁴ But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, ⁵ Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)  ⁶ And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:  ⁷ That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.  ⁸ For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  ⁹ Not of works, lest any man should boast.  ¹⁰ For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

 sw:  Another mistake folks like Petillo makes is to take St. Paul out of context, as he has done above.  The “works” which St. Paul speaks against here is “works of the law,” and specifically in this context he is speaking about circumcision (see verses 11-18).  Yes, the context makes it clear that St. Paul is saying that one does not absolutely need to follow “the Law” of circumcision – this is not a denial of the need for works to accompany faith in order for that faith to be a saving faith.

Titus 3:5 KJV

⁵ Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

sw: Again, if we look to context, specifically verse 9, we see the “law” is part of what is being spoken of in this context.  If we look at verse 8 we see that the context is actually encouraging the faithful to good works!

SOLA 3 – SOLA GRATIA

Sola Gratia teaches that grace is unmerited favor or a free grace through the unified merit of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  It means that God comes to save the poor sinner; that is, God takes the initiative to save a lost sinner and gives him a new heart and a new unified merit of Christ alone through the spiritual application of the Holy Spirit.

sw: Properly understood, sola gratia is truth!  We have done nothing and can do nothing to merit God’s Grace – it is something He freely gave to the world (John 3:16) but even that gift requires something of us in order to receive it – we must believe in Him – which leads us to Petillo’s next point. 

Sola Gratia is a denial of synergism; that is, the soul remains passive and there can be no cooperation with God and man until the sinner is spiritual quickened unto eternal life or life everlasting because there is no good in the flesh of men.  It is His unified imputed or account merit that is the centrality of the Gospel; that is, it alone is all-sufficient not the personal merits of the saints.  There is a merit that is not a merit that merits hell; however, there is no merit that merits heaven.

sw: This is where Protestants like Petillo go totally off-track.  Scripture clearly states that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son – and here’s the synergism – that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.  It almost seems that in their desire to fight anything “Catholic” they are willing to overlook such an obvious truth.  To deny that there has to be cooperation with God is devoid of the truth of Scripture.  Sure, we don’t merit His Grace, but those who do nothing will not experience it.  At the very minimum we must believe in Him as our Lord and Savior.

SOLA 4 – SOLO CHRISTUS

Solo Christus refers to the saving and unified merit of Christ alone in His active and passive obedience; that is, His active obedience is His sinless life that He used to earn heaven for us because we could not merit heaven ourselves, and second, is His passive obedience where He bore the sins of His people in His body upon the tree where He took all our filth, sin, defilement and total rebellion and idolatry at the Cross so we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

sw: Again, there IS truth in solo Christus.  It IS Jesus Christ who merits our salvation, not us.  We don’t “earn” Heaven, but it is also not merely a passive hearing of His Word which saves us – for we must also be doers of His Word.

“for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.”  Romans 2:13“But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves.” James 1:22

sw: Now to the verses Petillo puts forth:

Galatians 2 KJV
¹⁶ Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
¹⁷ But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
¹⁸ For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
¹⁹ For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
²⁰ I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
²¹ I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain 

sw: Make note of the context again – it is “works of the Law” which do not justify!  True faith or saving faith is not an alone faith.  If you believe in Jesus Christ, you DO what is commanded in His Word.

Romans 3 KJV
²¹ But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
²² Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
²³ For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
²⁴ Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
²⁵ Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
²⁶ To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

sw: Again, “works of the Law” is the context!

Romans 4 KJV

4 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

² For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
³ For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
⁴ Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
⁵ But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

sw:  In order for Petillo’s thesis to be true here we’d have to say this is a direct conflict with James 2.  Since I do not believe in Scripture contradicting itself, and I do not believe Petillo does either, then we must believe Petillo is misrepresenting the context of Scripture here, especially when the EXACT SAME EXAMPLE is used in James 2 to show that it was “by works a man is justified, and NOT BY FAITH ALONE.”

SOLA 5 – SOLA DEO GLORIA

Sola Deo Gloria teaches that all glory goes to God alone;

sw:  Catholics believe it this too!  But let us continue…

that is, all of spiritual salvation goes to God alone. 

sw:  Agreed!

That is, He is the object of our worship that gets the most glory. 

sw:  Agreed!

We indeed praise Him and glorify Him because He chose to save; that is, He is glorified in the eternal preservation of the saints and He is glorified in the eternal destruction of the damned.  He is glorified unto holiness by eternal mercy and He is glorified unto sin by His eternal justice.

sw:  God is not glorified in the damned.  God’s justice is demonstrated and His glory is in the mercy He shows to those whom He has saved FROM damnation.  

Psalm 29:1 KJV
Give unto the LORD, O ye mighty, give unto the LORD glory and strength. 
Psalm 29:2 KJV
Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
 Psalm 64:10 KJV
The righteous shall be glad in the LORD, and shall trust in him; and all the upright in heart shall glory.

sw:  These are nice passages, but none of them proclaim SOLA deo gloria!   Yes, we give unto the Lord, unto His mightiness, glory and strength, and while it IS theologically sound to only give glory in the highest to God, the passages Petillo cites here do not proclaim “sola.”

May we learn these sacred and divine truths!  May we plan to live a godly and holy new year!  We must mediate on these divine truths and by His Spirit apply it to our lives!

sw:  Those things which Petillo has professed which are truths should be learned and help us to lead godly and holy lives – those things we have identified as falsehoods must be utterly rejected and denied by all faithful Christians.  

sw:  The “Five Solas” are mostly fictions invented by protesting rebels who LEFT the One, True Church and desperately sought to establish a new foundation, a new authority and most definitely a “different gospel” from that which was preached by their forefathers – and which we are explicitly warned against:

I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel.  Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.   But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.  As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.  Galations 1:6-9

But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted, and fall from the simplicity that is in Christ.  For if he that cometh preacheth another Christ, whom we have not preached; or if you receive another Spirit, whom you have not received; or another gospel which you have not received; you might well bear with him.  For I suppose that I have done nothing less than the great apostles  2 Corinthians 11:3-5

sw:  In this passage, St. Paul, while warning against a false gospel also fears that those to whom he has preached may, like Eve, be led astray by the Serpent.  He that cometh, be it 1500 some years later, preaching another Christ, whom they did not preach, or another Spirit, etc. is to be avoided, rejected and anathema.  If “OSAS” were a truth, a true gospel, then why would St. Paul fear his followers would be able to be led astray?  Heed St. Paul’s warning, my friends!  Flee the false Christ of Calvinism!  Embrace the One, True Christ who did indeed build His One, True Church – and didn’t wait until the 16th century to do so!  Come home to that One, True Church – that we might be one, just as the Son and the Father are One.

That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.  John 17:21

In JMJ,
Scott<<<

None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. Romans 3:10-11

This is a favorite scripture of Calvinists, and is used almost exclusively to defend their “Total Depravity” doctrine. Using this as a proof-text, Calvinists say, “See! There is no one who has the ability to seek after God! There is no one who will, of himself, turn to God or believe in him!” What they fail to take into consideration is the fact that this is quoted from a psalm – Psalm 14. Now for those who may not know it, the Psalms are poems not instructional lectures. That is, they use creative phrases, word pictures and all sorts of rhetorical devices to present their information in an interesting way. Let me provide an example from another famous Psalm that should not be taken literally, but understood as using rhetoric to make a theological point.

The Lord says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” Psalm 110:1

This is a Messianic Psalm, speaking of Christ’s reign with the Father “at the Father’s right hand.” This became a favorite phrase for New Testament writers, as it illustrated the extent of the exaltation of Christ. He couldn’t go any higher!

Many assume this verse presents a literal reality – that Christ is seated upon a throne in heaven that is placed to the right of the throne of God, something like this picture to the right. (I feel kinda bad for the Holy Spirit in this picture – He apparently doesn’t get a throne, and He apparently is a bird).

But isn’t God a Spirit (John 4:24), and isn’t He omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:24)? So how far did Jesus have to travel before He got to the “right hand” of God? Furthermore, are we to take the second part of the verse literally? Are we to assume that Jesus is actually up in heaven with his feet propped up on the backs of his enemies? We all understand intuitively that this verse is representing a theological reality in poetic terms. So what is the theological message? That Jesus Christ is highly exalted and utterly victorious! Amen!

Let’s look at a couple of Jesus’ own statements that use rhetorical devices.

If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away… Matthew 5:29

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God. Matthew 19:24

If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26

In all of these verses Jesus is using a very common figure of speech - hyperbole. Hyperbole is exaggeration in order to emphasize a point. We use hyperbole all the time in our daily lives: “It’s raining cats and dogs out there!” “You scared me to death!” “I’m starving!”

Now if exaggeration/hyperbole is a normal part of everyday speech for us, isn’t it reasonable to assume it was also a common form of speech for people in the first century? Obviously from these, and other statements by Jesus (and others in the Bible), we can easily see that it was. Jesus didn’t not want people to pluck out their eyes. Jesus wasn’t saying that rich people could never be saved (cf. Barnabas). Jesus was not telling us to literally hate our parents and siblings. All of these statements are exaggerations to make a point. “Pluck out your eye,” was a way of saying “Personal holiness ought to be worth any sacrifice.” The statement “easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle” was a way of saying that those who trust in their riches will have a difficult time transferring that trust to God. And “hating father and mother” was a way of saying that Jesus needs to be the supreme love in our lives, far above even our familial love.

So what’s my point in all of this? The verse above, quoted from Psalm 14 was hyperbole. “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.” Are we really supposed to believe that there is literally not a single righteous person on the earth? Are we to believe in all of human history there has never been a person who sought after God or desired Him? The Calvinist insists we must, otherwise their theology falls flat. I would say that reason and scripture together prove this notion – that no one has ever sought God – is patently false. Countless Jews under the Old Testament sought and loved God. “Yeah, but they were the elect!” the Calvinist will say. Well, there were also many Gentiles, known widely as “God-fearers” and “God-worshipers” who chose to leave their false religions and gods to worship the one true God. Such were the Ethiopian eunuch whom Philip found reading scripture in his chariot and the Roman Centurion to whom Peter was sent by a vision. These were Gentiles, non-elect individuals, who sought God.

So what is Psalm 14, and consequently Romans 3, trying to say? That sin is rampant and wide-spread, and that everyone needs God. In fact, if we will be honest with the context of Romans 3, we will find that Paul’s ultimate argument is that Jews and Gentiles are equally in need of God’s salvation. In fact, the verse immediately preceding Paul’s quotation of Psalm 14 is this:

What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin…  Romans 3:9

Sorry Calvinists, Romans 3 and Psalm 14 are using hyperbole to illustrate that every person needs salvation because every person is sinful, not that man is unable to seek God or to respond to the Gospel message. Once again, taking the simple, obvious meaning of the text thwarts your doctrine.

Once a person is saved are they always saved? When people come to know Christ as their Savior, they are brought into a relationship with God that guarantees their salvation as eternally secure. Numerous passages of Scripture declare this fact.

(a) Romans 8:30 declares, “And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.” This verse tells us that from the moment God chooses us, it is as if we are glorified in His presence in heaven. There is nothing that can prevent a believer from one day being glorified because God has already purposed it in heaven. Once a person is justified, his salvation is guaranteed – he is as secure as if he is already glorified in heaven.

(b) Paul asks two crucial questions in Romans 8:33-34 ”Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died more than that, who was raised to life – is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.” Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? No one will, because Christ is our advocate. Who will condemn us? No one will, because Christ, the One who died for us, is the one who condemns. We have both the advocate and judge as our Savior.

(c) Believers are born again (regenerated) when they believe (John 3:3; Titus 3:5). For a Christian to lose his salvation, he would have to be un-regenerated. The Bible gives no evidence that the new birth can be taken away.

(d) The Holy Spirit indwells all believers (John 14:17; Romans 8:9) and baptizes all believers into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). For a believer to become unsaved, he would have to be “un-indwelt” and detached from the Body of Christ.

(e) John 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will “have eternal life.” If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never “eternal” at all. Hence if you lose your salvation, the promises of eternal life in the Bible would be in error.

(f) For the most conclusive argument, Scripture says it best itself, “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39). Remember the same God who saved you is the same God who will keep you. Once we are saved we are always saved. Our salvation is most definitely eternally secure!

Francis Chan, author of best-selling book, “Crazy Love,” and David Platt, author of the book “Radical,” haved teamed up to form a new movement called, “Multiply.”

On the face of this undertaking, the motivation may seem harmless, perhaps even noble—to motivate, to encourage, to enable people to make disciples. But we must analyze this situation more deeply by asking a couple of pertinent questions:

What happened to the gospel? The Bible declares that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-9; John 3:16-18; Acts 16:30-31). Why is it that this new “movement” pushes discipleship but not salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone?

Make disciples of whom or of what theology? A disciple is simply a “follower.” But whom or what are people being asked to follow? Buddhists have their disciples (followers); so do Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. Promoters of Lordship “Salvation” have their disciples too.

As I read through some of the materials on the “Multiplymovement.com” website, it became quickly obvious that the “discipleship” principle being promoted was the standard radical Lordship “salvation” agenda which David Platt and Francis Chan have pushed for years through their radical LS books, videos, sermons and articles.

Here are a few excerpts from the Multiplymovement.com website:

From Part I, # 1, page 1, “What is a Disciple?”:

“It’s impossible to be a disciple or a follower of someone and not end up like that person. . . . Yet somehow many have come to believe that a person can be a ‘Christian’ without being like Christ. A ‘follower’ who doesn’t follow. How does that make any sense? Many people in the church have decided to take on the name of Christ and nothing else. This would be like Jesus walking up to those first disciples and saying, ‘Hey, would you guys mind identifying yourselves with Me in some way? Don’t worry, I don’t actually care if you do anything I do or change your lifestyle at all. I’m just looking for people who are willing to say they believe in Me and call themselves Christians.”

Comment: Standard Lordship Faith caricature of Free Grace theology.

From Part I, # 2, page 2, “How Do I Become a Disciple?”:

“The word repent means ‘to turn.’ It has the idea of changing direction and heading the opposite way. It involves action. . . . Jesus says we need to repent. This implies that we all need to turn from the way we are currently thinking and living.”

Comment: Standard Lordship Faith “salvation” message of “turning from one’s sins” and performing some kind of action in order to be saved. For LSers, believing in Christ alone by grace alone through faith alone is not meritorious enough, i.e., it is not sufficient to save a person from his sins.

From Part I, # 3, page 3, “The Lord of Grace”:

“Salvation is all about the grace of God.”

Comment: Great! Why don’t you believe it?

Continuing from page 3, “But keep in mind that while this is simple, it’s not easy. Faith in Jesus Christ means believing that He is Lord (according to Rom. 10:9). Have you ever thought about what Lord means? We sometimes think of it as another name for God, but it’s actually a title. It refers to a master, owner, or a person who is in a position of authority. So take a minute to think this through: Do you really believe that Jesus is your master? Do you believe that He is your owner—that you actually belong to Him? . . . The problem is, many in the church want to ‘confess that Jesus is Lord,’ yet they don’t believe that He is their master.”

Comment: Again, this is the standard Lordship Faith misapplication of Jesus Christ as “Lord.” Yes, Jesus Christ is Lord God of Creation, Lord God of Redemption, Lord God of the Universe, Lord God of ALL; He is Lord, in spite of any puny declaration that one can make. We do not make Jesus “Lord.” He IS Lord!

From Part I, #5, page 4, “Count the Cost”:

“As you work your way through this material, you will be challenged to consider what it means to be a follower of Jesus. . . . But before you set out to teach other people to be disciples of Jesus, you need to examine your heart and make sure that you are a disciple. Read the following words from Jesus slowly and carefully. Understand that Jesus is speaking these words to you. Think about what Jesus is saying and how it should affect the way you approach this material and your relationship with Him. After you have read this section, use the questions below to help you count the cost of following Jesus (quotation given from Luke 14: 25-33).”

Response: This text from Luke is often cited by Lordship Faith advocates to claim that salvation requires a whole array of promises to fulfill, statements of commitment to make, promises of things one must give up (money, lifestyle, etc.), and the carrying out of these promises in order to be worthy of acquiring or maintaining salvation. This is a misuse and a misapplication of a Scripture that has nothing to do with salvation; furthermore, it is a denial of the multitude of Scriptures that declare that salvation is completely a gift of God by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. There are NO STRINGS ATTACHED!

Phil. 1:6 “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.”

Many ignorantly see (and I did too before I learned better) the doctrine of the preservation of the saints (a.k.a. once saved always saved, a bad paraphrase I must say) as a horrible doctrine which enables believers to live licentiously and still believe they are saved. They view this teaching as a license to sin and falsely believe you have salvation. On the contrary though, this doctrine is a strong bulwark against persistent sin and a blessed truth that fights off the condemnation of the devil. How can this be?

When I have fallen into seasons of persistent battles with sin and find myself failing in my strength, there is a horrible guilt that falls upon me, as I struggle to understand why I do what I do despite my understanding of God’s word and love for His name. In fact, the weight can be unbearable, so much so that I feel that God is going to rain wrath down on me at any minute, and has totally (and rightfully so, if it were actually so) forsaken me. This leaving me with feelings of the condemnation my sin deserves.

But why do I persist to cry out to my Lord for mercy and forgiveness when I feel as if my cries are lies? What in those moments of great failure and weakness supplies the strength I need to persist in fighting? It is the knowledge of His word that promises that His love endures forever and that ultimately these seasons will end because He is sustaining me. He delivered me from sin and will not leave when I fall. Is my sin justified in all of this? By no means! It is these very comforts that keep me going and believing that I have been set free from these besetting sins and cannot walk any longer in them, though for how long my intense struggles with my flesh should last I don’t know. The doctrine that God is preserving me doesn’t create in me a desire to persist in my sin because ultimately I’ll be saved (as some would think that it does, for if that’s the case, I ultimately prove myself to be a transgressor, never having truly known the truth), rather it convicts me and gives me hope that: 1) though my flesh still plagues me, it is not who I am to be in Christ and by His sustaining power I will overcome and walk in His freedom, and 2) God will ultimately see me through this because he loved me eternally before I was born and chose me as His own in spite of who I was and am at times completely by His grace, and He will love me through my failures and see me through to the end, making me blameless before Him.

Truly, this all stems from Christ imputed righteousness and completed atonement for His church. If His atonement really did accomplish all that He said it did, then by faith I am made secure that the work He began in me HE will ultimately see it to completion at the day of Christ’s return. This glorious biblical truth empowers us to fight through the sorrows of sin and trust that God loves us and will see us through them, to make us pleasing to Him and sustain us to the end.

1. “Once saved, always saved”.

This is hugely accepted in Churches today and the belief in this automatically limits the growth of a believer. I’ve read tons of pro and con articles about this and compared the many scriptures about whether it’s biblically correct. It seems to me that we as humans, tend to over-complicate things and because of this character flaw, only confuse ourselves more. The scriptures I would use to show someone that our salvation is “conditional” are Matt 12:31-32, Gal 5:19-21 and Rev 3:5.

First, Matt 12:31-32 speaks of the Unforgivable sin. If anyone, believer or not does this, they will not be forgiven. In this world or the next. That’s all I needed to personally know that “once saved always saved” is false.

Secondly, Gal 5:19-21 speaks of workings of the flesh. If we don’t repent if we slip and do any one of these than we will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. It doesn’t say “unless we are already saved”.

Thirdly, Rev 3:5 says that Jesus can blot our names out of the Book of Life. If “once saved always saved” were true then once our names get written in the Book of Life, they couldn’t be removed.

2. The Rapture

This topic seems to be 50/50 split in mainstream Churches today. In speaking with multiple Church leaders and congregates, I have found that the limits that Man have put on God is truly manifested in those that don’t believe in the Rapture. Yes, the word “Rapture” does not appear in the Bible. The simplest way to read it comes from 1 Thes 4:16-17. Once read, there should be no reason why one would not believe in the Rapture.

1 Thes 4:16-17 says that the Lord himself shall descend from the heavens and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then, those who are alive will be caught up(Rapture) with them(the dead in Christ and the Lord) in the clouds and shall remain forever with the Lord. I guess that those who don’t believe this have a hard time grasping the power of God. I’ve heard people say things like, “You mean to tell me that if it happens and there is a airliner full of believers and non-believers and the pilots disappear, that God will let those that are not born-again perish?” According to the Bible the answer is yes, but then again God gave us free-will and everyone on that plane has a chance at eternal salvation through Jesus Christ. It seems that the super-natural acts of God in today’s world doesn’t make sense but to a born-again person who reads and believes with all of their heart and soul there should be no question that the Rapture will happen as described in these verses.

3. Spiritual Gifts

I have spent months questioning Church leaders and Christians on this topic. It rarely gets preached and rarely does it even get mentioned in mainstream Church, other than the miracles of the supernatural that Jesus and the Disciples did. In today’s world though, it is almost non-existent. The best place to educate ourselves on this topic is in 1 Cor 12,13 and 14. Yes, there are three whole chapters devoted to this subject matter.

1 Cor 12,13 and 14

These chapters speak of the existence of various Spiritual Gifts. They tell us the different diversities of the Gifts and the role that these Gifts play in our Churches. Not once does it mention that they cease to exist or that only certain Churches can have them. That seems to be the most common argument about these Gifts today, that they were only used to get the Church started once Jesus ascended up to heaven. Here again we find ourselves limiting God with the absence of these Gifts in our Churches today. It almost seems as if people just are uneducated on this topic even though there are these three chapters that specifically speak about the Spiritual Gifts.

These are just three things I have found that cause divisions in the Churches today. We shouldn’t be afraid to “Strengthen our Churches” by educating and implementing these scriptures in our everyday walk with Christ. I urge anyone who reads this to not be afraid to ask about these three topics and read them continually. See where your Church stands.

Amen.