Half Way Across The Bridge

I'm about half way through listening to all the messages from the Building Bridges Conference.

For the most part, I'm liking what I'm hearing. Naturally, I'm biased so I think the Calvinists are making the better case, but I also think the "non-Calvinists" [for some reason they eschew being called Arminians!] have put forth some good stuff too -with a couple of notable exceptions.

Those exceptions include Dr. Malcom Yarnell's somewhat venemous rant entitled "Calvinism: A Cause for Concern". The other low point for the non-Calvinists was Ken Keathley's presentation. In an attempt to give Southern Baptists an alternative to Arminianism and both the Infralapsarian and Supralapsarian versions of Calvinism, Keathley pitches the philosophical theories of a 16th Century Jesuit theologian named Luis de Molina. (a.k.a Molinism).

Yarnell almost caused me to have an aneurysm when he took a hard left turn down the road toward Absurdityville with the "Calvin burned Servetus" story. Folks, maybe I'm being too harsh, but when somebody decides to torch that straw man, it takes all the strength I can muster just to continue listening!

As far as Keathley goes, his presentation had a much better tone than Yarnell, but I don't believe I heard Keathley even read a single verse of Scripture to try and prop up his Jesuit doctrine. Perhaps that sort of thing works for the nobles within SBC academia, but for us Calvinistic serfs, we might have been a whole lot more impressed had there been just a wee bit of exegesis of Scripture!

Thus far, the highlight of the non-Calvinist side had to be Dr. Charles Lawless and his message debunking the stereotypes of SBC non-Calvinists. I really believe Dr. Lawless is a good man. I had the pleasure of meeting and hearing him preach at our church earlier this year. If all non-Calvinists in the SBC were like him, I believe the SBC would be heading in the right direction.

Overall I think this conference was a positive for the Southern Baptist Convention. The fact is, Calvinism is on the rise within many denominations. With that growth, I believe there will be a need for many more conferences just like Building Bridges. Again, if you're in the SBC or curious about the Calvinism vs. "non-Calvinism" debate, listening to these messages will be worth your time -and I reckon that includes Yarnell and Keathley's stuff too...


(Image: Sterling Bridge from wikipedia)

Building Bridges: Southern Baptists and Calvinism

Many of you are probably aware of the Nov. 26-28 Building Bridges conference held at the Lifeway Ridgecrest Conference Center in North Carolina. This was a historic meeting that discussed Calvinism and it's role in the Southern Baptist Convention. From the accounts I have read, this meeting was a huge success.

All the messages are freely available here and I really hope that folks on both sides of the theological divide will take time to listen to the sermons. I've saved the messages to my computer and I'm listening through them now. So far both sides have (for the most part) presented their case maturely and with a spirit of Christian charity.

Soli Deo Gloria!

If Election is True, Why Evangelize?

This segment of the Amazing Grace DVD addresses the question that most people ask when first exposed to the Biblical doctrine of Sovereign Election:

God's Sovereignty vs. Libertarian Free Will

Another clip from the Amazing Grace DVD. This time dealing with the topic of God's sovereignty and human freedom. The quality is not the best, but it is well worth watching... Ideas have consequences. And when man's freewill is elevated above God's sovereignty, it only leads to problems: theologically as well as socially!

Perseverance: Not a License to Sin!

Another helpful clip from the Amazing Grace DVD.



Hopefully you will see that true Calvinists are not teaching the modern version of "Once Saved Always Saved" -that a Christian is free to live like the devil and have hope of Heaven. It's also worth noting the similarities of the Arminian and Roman Catholic teachings on this issue.

Atonement: Payment or Possibility?

A helpful video segment on a very controversial topic:



From the video Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism

Pierced for Our Transgressions

New Book on the Atonement Now Available from Monergism Books! At a great price too!

Was Anyone Saved at The Cross?

James R. White says yes...

Romans 9...

Dr. James R. White exegetes Romans Chapter 9.

(47 minutes: Plays in Windows Media Player)

I, Robot?

Soon after shifting into the Calvinist camp, one of the first arguments I encountered against my theology was "Calvinism makes man into a robot."

At first glance, this argument sounds logical; for if God has predestined every single detail of everything that happens in Creation (up to and including who is saved), how then can humanity be anything but bunch of robots?

By our very experience in life, we can see that we do make choices. That is, we make real choices that result in real consequences. Yet, somehow in a way that I do not understand, all of our choices are made freely, and yet, preordained by God before the foundation of the world.

To demonstrate this how God's decree and men's choice work together, I ask you to consider the following example from Acts 27:

During Paul's voyage to Rome by Sea, the ship encountered a terrible storm. During the storm Paul tells the sailors that an angel visited him by night and told him that no one would perish, yet the ship would be lost. Later on, some of the sailors decide to escape on a small boat, but Paul tells the Centurion and the soldiers "unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved." The soldiers decide to heed Paul's warning and cut the ropes to the small boat and abandon their escape plan. Later the ship wrecks and all 276 souls survive just as the angel foretold.

In this narrative we can get a glimpse of how the choices of men and God's sovereign decree work hand in hand. Paul knows that no lives will be lost because the angel of the Lord told him so, yet, Paul takes action when he sees the men act in a way that will lead to disaster.

Every person on the ship was making choices -of their own volition- concerning everything they were doing. Every choice they made had a potential outcome; yet out of all the possible outcomes, of all the choices that were being made by every person, the final outcome was, in fact, that which God revealed to Paul.

Concerning this passage, the great Baptist theologian John Gill has written:

"[T]his teaches us that the end and means, in the decrees of God, are not to be separated; nor is any end to be expected without the use of means; and means are as peremptorily fixed, and are as absolutely necessary, and must as certainly be accomplished, as the end."

As Gill has stated, God decrees the end and the means to bring about the appointed end. There's not one choice we will ever make, nor action that we will ever undertake that will fall outside of God's providential control. God's control includes actions good and evil alike.

As a matter of fact, the most heinous act in history -the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ- was the totally the fault of wicked men, and yet, predestined by God to take place! (see Acts 2: 22-23) Though men intended to murder Jesus out of the evil in their hearts, God planned Christ's death to redeem His people from their sin.

Even in spite of the example I have given from Acts 27, some will protest that God simply foresaw the outcome of Paul's situation. Likewise, they will also say that God simply foresees who will choose to be saved and who will not -and that He predestines everything accordingly. Many will do this with the intention of "getting God off the hook" for not choosing to save every human being.

Dr. Wayne Grudem explains why the idea of the predestination based on foreknowledge is incorrect:

"The idea that God's predestination of some to believe is based on foreknowledge of their faith encounters still another problem: upon reflection, this system turns out to give no real freedom to man either. For if God can look into the future and see that person A will come to faith in Christ, and that person B will not come to faith in Christ, then those facts are already fixed, they are already determined.

If we assume that God's knowledge of the future is true (which it must be), then it is absolutely certain that person A will believe and person B will not. There is no way that their lives could turn out any differently than this. Therefore it is fair to say that their destinies are still determined, for they could not be otherwise. But by what are these destinies determined? If they are determined by God himself, then we no longer have election based ultimately on foreknowledge of faith, but rather on God's sovereign will. But if these destinies are not determined by God, then who or what determines them?

Certainly no Christian would say that there is some powerful being other than God controlling people's destinies. Therefore it seems that the only other possible solution is to say they are determined by some impersonal force, some kind of fate, operative in the universe, making things turn out as they do. But what kind of benefit is this? We have then sacrificed election in love by a personal God for a kind of determinism by an impersonal force and God is no longer to be given the ultimate credit for our salvation." (From Grudem's Systematic Theology Ch. 32)


Are we really robots? No... The Apostle Paul said we are clay -and the Potter has the right to do with the clay as He sees fit!

You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" But 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?" 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? (Romans 9:19-21 ESV)

Soli Deo Gloria!

Photo from Wikipedia.

It Depends Not on Human Will

Once upon a time, I was researching some theological issues that were on my mind. In particular I was interested in Freewill. So I typed the word "freewill" (and other variations) into my Bible software to search and see what the Bible taught about the subject. Several hits came up and I read them all in context.

Do you know what I found?

I found lots of verses in the Bible where the word "freewill" was used. Almost everyone of those references were about "freewill offerings." I also found a single passage in Ezra 7 where king
Artaxerxes made a decree that "all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem..." (v:13 KJV)

Do you know what I did not find?

I did not find one didactic passage of Scripture in which a Prophet, The Lord Jesus, or an Apostle laid out any doctrine about God giving man an autonomous freewill that is immune to the influence of the Fall of Adam, in which man could therefore freely choose to accept or reject Jesus.

Let me restate that for clarity: I did not find one place in the Bible were anybody taught about God giving man a "freewill to accept Him or reject Him," nor did I find anything in the Bible about God having to "respect man's freewill choice" as I have heard proclaimed by many modern Evangelicals. The fact is, there's no such teaching in Scripture.

The popular Christian doctrine of "freewill" is a phantom doctrine. It's amazing to me how some Evangelicals place so much doctrinal emphasis on "freewill" when there's not one didactic passage in all the Bible they can point to in support of their theories about it! Please bear in mind that I made this discovery not by reading something a Calvinist wrote, but while I was a Semi-Pelagian!

With my denial of the popular conception of Freewill, am I then saying man is an automaton? To answer that, I shall quote the great Puritan scholar John Owen:

"We grant man, in the substance of all his actions, as much power, liberty, and freedom as a mere created creature is capable of. We grant him to be free in his choice from all outward coaction, or inward necessity, to work according to election and deliberation, spontaneously embracing what seemeth good unto him. Now, call this power free-will if you, or what you please, so you make it not supreme, independent, and boundless, we are not at all troubled." -A Display of Arminianism Ch. 7

We have a liberty to make choices, but those choices will always be dictated by our nature and will never escape God's Providence. If, as the Bible clearly teaches in Romans 6, lost men are slaves unto sin, how then can he have a "freewill" to choose to be saved? Slaves are not free! Those who are slaves to sin must be freed in order to become servants of Christ!

Most Christians will proclaim that salvation is of the Lord. They will affirm that God is to get all the credit. However, almost always, they will qualify that by saying something like "but God has given each human a freewill to choose or reject Him."

What does the Bible say about man's will in relation to being saved? I will provide two very clear statements:

He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:11-13 ESV)

Here John shows us that people are Born Again not because of their bloodline, nor because of their own will, but by the will of God!

In Romans 9, when Paul is discussing why God chose and loved Jacob and yet rejected and hated Esau, Paul says this:

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:14-16 ESV)

Note that last sentence! Paul clearly states that "it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy"!!

We see from these two passages that God is in total control of salvation. God, by the preaching of the Gospel and power of the Holy Spirit, brings dead sinners to life through regeneration thus liberating their fallen, sinful, rebellious will so that they may then freely choose to repent and follow Christ! In this way it is God alone who receives all the praise and glory for the salvation of a sinner.

It is solely because Christ is the author and finisher of our faith that Paul can say:

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

(It must also be noted that it's not just Reformed theologians who believe man's will is not autonomous. There are many branches of science in which the existence of freewill is debated.)

Soli Deo Gloria!

Augustine on Foreknowledge and Predestination

For 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. Romans 8:29 ESV

Often we hear that when Paul says God "foreknew" those whom He predestined, it meant that God simply knew that in the future some would choose to follow Christ and then predestined them accordingly.

Aurelius Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.), in his On the Gift of Perseverance, saw things quite differently. The extensive quote below comes from chapter 47 of his treatise:

"These gifts, therefore, of God, which are given to the elect who are called according to God’s purpose, among which gifts is both the beginning of belief and perseverance in the faith to the termination of this life, as I have proved by such a concurrent testimony of reasons and authorities,--these gifts of God, I say, if there is no such predestination as I am maintaining, are not foreknown by God. But they are foreknown. This, therefore, is the predestination which I maintain. [XVIII.] Consequently sometimes the same predestination is signified also under the name of foreknowledge; as says the apostle, “God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew.” [Rom. xi. 2] Here, when he says, “He foreknew,” the sense is not rightly understood except as “He predestinated,” as is shown by the context of the passage itself.

For he was speaking of the remnant of the Jews which were saved, while the rest perished. For above he had said that the prophet had declared to Israel, “All day long I have stretched forth my hands to an unbelieving and a gainsaying people.” [Rom. x. 21 et seq.] And as if it were answered, What, then, has become of the promises of God to Israel? he added in continuation, “I say, then, has God cast away His people? God forbid! for I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.” Then he added the words which I am now treating: “God hath not cast away His people whom He foreknew.”

And in order to show that the remnant had been left by God’s grace, not by any merits of their works, he went on to add, “Know ye not what the Scripture saith in Elias, in what way he maketh intercession with God against Israel?” [Rom. xi. 4 et seq.] and the rest. “But what,” says he, “saith the answer of God unto him? `I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee before Baal.’” [Rom. xi. 5] For He says not, “There are left to me,” or “They have reserved themselves to me,” but, “I have reserved to myself.” “Even so, then, at this present time also there is made a remnant by the election of grace. And if of grace, then it is no more by works; otherwise grace is no more grace.”

And connecting this with what I have above quoted, “What then?” [Rom. xi. 7] and in answer to this inquiry, he says, “Israel hath not obtained that which he was seeking for, but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.” Therefore, in the election, and in this remnant which were made so by the election of grace, he wished to be understood the people which God did not reject, because He foreknew them. This is that election by which He elected those, whom He willed, in Christ before the foundation of the world, that they should be holy and without spot in His sight, in love, predestinating them unto the adoption of sons.

No one, therefore, who understands these things is permitted to doubt that, when the apostle says, “God hath not cast away His people whom He foreknew,” He intended to signify predestination. For He foreknew the remnant which He should make so according to the election of grace. That is, therefore, He predestinated them; for without doubt He foreknew if He predestinated; but to have predestinated is to have foreknown that which He should do."

Soli Deo Gloria!

Picture from Wikipedia.

Great Deal on Owen Book!

I recently found a website that carries John Owen's A Display of Arminianism at a great price (and I ordered a copy right away)!

The first chapter of this book was quoted in the appendix of another book I have in my library. Having read just that chapter alone, I can tell you this: They sure don't make Calvinists like him anymore!!

You may read or preview this classic work online at this website!

More on Owen: http://www.johnowen.org/

What is There to Fear for the Calvinist?

Some Christians believe that the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance will lead to sinful living because a Calvinist "has nothing to fear."

That's not true...

R.L. Dabney explains:

"In conclusion, we believe that all the supposed licentious results of the doctrine of perseverance result from misapprehension; and that its true tendencies are eminently encouraging and sanctifying. (a.) How can the intelligent Bible Christian be encouraged to sin, by a doctrine which assures him of a perseverance in holiness, if he is a true believer? (b.) So far as a rational self–love is a proper motive for a sanctified mind, this doctrine leaves it in full force; because when the Arminian would be led by a backsliding, to fear he had fallen from grace, the Calvinist would be led, just as much to fear he never had had any grace; a fear much more wholesome and searching than the erring Arminian’s.

For this alarmed Calvinist would see, that, while he had been flattering himself he was advancing heavenward he was, in fact, all the time in the high road to hell; and so now, if he would not be damned, he must make a new beginning, and lay better foundations than his old ones (not like the alarmed Arminian, merely set about repairing the same old ones). (c.) Certainty of success, condition on honest efforts, is the very best stimulus to active exertion. Witness the skillful general encouraging his army. (d.) Last: Such a gift of redemption as the Calvinist represents is far nobler and more gracious’ and hence elicits more love and gratitude, which are the noblest motives, the strongest and best.

Just so far as the Calvinist is enabled scripturally to hope that he is now born again, he is, to that extent, entitled to hope that his triumph is sure; that death and hell are disarmed, and that his heaven is awaiting his efforts. To him who knows the weakness of the human heart, and the power of our spiritual enemies, the Arminian’s adoption, beset by the constant liability to fall, would bring little consolation indeed. It is love and confidence, not selfish fear, which most effectually stimulates Christian effort. Let the student see how St. Paul puts this in (1 Cor. 15:58)."

From Systematic Theology, by R.L. Dabney. Ch 26.

Will Christ Know You?

"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. 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?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." (Mat 7:21-23 ESV)

Friend, I don't know about you, but to me this is one of the most ominous passages of Scripture in the Bible! To think that a person might live out their days, believing they are a Christian, only to eventually hear Christ say "I never knew you; depart from me you worker of lawlessness" ought to cause all of us to "be all the more diligent to make [our] calling and election sure"! (2 Pet 1:10 ESV) It matters not to me whether ye be a pastor or a youth group member, the Bible is clear that you should "examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith" (2 Cor 13:5 ESV).

As a Calvinist, some might wonder why I would even bring up such a scary passage of Scripture. I mean, after all, isn't this a proof-text against our understanding of Perseverance? Doesn't this prove that true Christians can be truly saved and later forfeit their Salvation and be cast away at the judgment? No. I don't believe so...

One thing about this passage that I want to call your attention to, is that Jesus says that He will tell the workers of lawlessness "I never knew you." For Christ to say this is very interesting. As God, we know that He actually has perfect knowledge of all sinners and saints that have ever lived, or that will ever live. When Christ tells them that He "never knew" them, the type of knowledge in which He is speaking cannot possibly be the knowledge in which He has from Omniscience, or else Christ would be lying. Therefore, Christ must be speaking in some other sense of the word.

Have a look at John 10: 14-15. Jesus said:

"I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep."

Here we see Christ proclaim that he KNOWS His sheep and that His sheep KNOW Him. The Greek word for "know" in these verses is "ginōsko." Strong's Concordance defines it as "to 'know' (absolutely), in a great variety of applications and with many implications." Our Lord takes things even further when He says that that this mutual knowledge is "just as the Father knows me and I know the Father." This is obviously speaking of a close relationship, and a very intimate realtionship at that.

Those who believe that the "workers of lawlessness" in Matthew 7 were at one time true Christians, now have a problem. When Jesus tells them "I never knew you," the word for "know" is the very same Greek word used in John 10: 14. In addition, the problem is multiplied when we understand that the word for "never" is the Greek word "oudepote" which Strong's defines as meaning "not even at any time, that is, never at all: - neither at any time, never, nothing at any time." In essense, Christ is saying is "Never at any time -never at all- did I know (have a close intimate relationship with) you, depart from me you workers of lawlessness."

If in John 10, Christ says, that He knows His sheep and His sheep know him, I ask now (as I have asked in previous articles): Can Christ lie? Is there duplicity in the Godhead? If these people had ever been a part of Christ's flock, would Christ be able to tell them that He never at any time knew them at all? Obviously not. He would have to say "I once knew you, but now I do not" or "I knew you at one time, but I forgot you."

By examining the Greek words in these passages, we see that the people who Christ will tell to depart are those within the visible church that profess to know Christ, but were never Born Again. Had they been one of His sheep, He would know them on that day. Had they truly known Christ they would have followed Him (John 10:27) and would not have been "workers of lawlessness."

Now, I want to draw your attention to John 10: 27-28, where our Lord says:

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.

As I have noted in a previous article, Christ clearly teaches that a person whom He knows (ginōskō) will follow Him and they will "never perish". The Greek word for "never" in this verse is a bit different from the word used in Matthew 7: 21-23. Here the Greek word is "oo may." Strong's Concordance defines the word as "a double negative strengthening the denial; not at all: - any more, at all, by any (no) means, neither, never, no (at all), in no case (wise), nor ever, not (at all, in any wise)." Here Christ is telling us that it is utterly impossible for one of His sheep to perish.

When we compare Matthew 7: 12-23 to the passages I cited from John 10, we can clearly see that the truly redeemed cannot perish. Those who will be told to depart were never known to Christ in the sense of having a New Covenant relationship with Him. For Christ to tell a single one of His sheep to depart, would be for Him to contradict everything He says in John 10: 27 & 28. It would also contradict what He says in John 6:37, because there he plainly declares "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never [oo may] cast out."

Dear reader, I now ask you: Does Christ know you? Do you know Christ? Will Christ know you on that Day? If so, your life will demonstrate it. You will follow Him; you will obey Him; you will do His Father's will; you will abide in Him! If you are in Him and He is in you, you can be assured that you will never perish. If He knows you today, He will know you then. If you are a pretender; if you are a worker of lawlessness hiding behind your outward show of "good works," you are not fooling Christ and on that day he will surely say unto you "I never knew you, depart from me you worker lawlessness."

How do we know that we know Christ? That's simple. The Apostle John has addressed this question also:

"And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked." (1 John 2:3-6 ESV)

Soli Deo Gloria!

Thoughts on Conditional Security and Predestination

As I am able, I plan to continue pointing to reasons why I believe that a true Saint of God cannot forfeit his/her Salvation. In this article I want to write about a controversial, but Biblical, doctrine known as "Predestination."

The passage I want to look at today is one that I would often skip over -or explain away- back when I was an Arminian. The passage is Romans 8: 29 & 30 (ESV):

29. For 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. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Notice if you will that this passage says "those WHOM [God] foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son." What this passage says is very plain. Some will counter by saying that it means that God used his omniscience (or prescience) to see what was going to happen (what men would choose concerning Christ) and then planned everything accordingly. I used to believe this too, but after thinking about it and studying the Reformed perspective, the Arminian scheme no longer makes sense.

First of all, it says "WHOM He foreknew," not "WHAT He foreknew". Of course God has foreknowledge of all facts past, present, and future; however, this passage is speaking of God foreknowing PEOPLE, not just the facts about people. It speaks of God having a intimate personal knowledge of a person. You will recall that the Bible says Adam "knew" Eve and she conceived. This is the same idea in Romans 8: God had an intimate personal knowledge and relationship with the Elect before the world began (c.f. Eph. 1:4 & 5). For example, look at what God said to Jeremiah:

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." Jeremiah 1:5 (ESV)

Secondly, I would like you to notice the progression of Paul's statement concerning those whom God has foreknown and predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. Theologians have called this the "Golden Chain of Salvation". In this passage we see those whom God predestined (a.k.a. the Elect) would be "called," "justified," and "glorified." Had Paul thought there was a chance of God's Elect forfeiting Eternal Life, he would not been able to write like he did in this passage. Had Paul been an Arminian (pardon the anachronism), the passage would have read much differently.

The "Conditional Security Version" of this passage would read like this:

Those whom God foreknew would choose to be saved he also predestined to the possibility of being conformed to the image of his Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And some of those whom He predestined He also called and some of those whom he tried to call hopefully will choose to be saved so they can be justified, and of those who might be justified, peradventure some of those could be glorified unless they mess it up somehow.

Thirdly, when it comes to Predestination, it doesn't make sense to say that God "looked into the future" to see how men would act and then predestined them accordingly. If that scheme was true, it would make God a mere observer who was bound to predestine (and then create) things based upon that in which He had no ultimate control. If God simply "looked into the future" and saw how things were already predestined to occur, why then would he have to predestine anything?? The notion of "prescient predestination" is illogical, untenable, and an insult to the Sovereignty of God!

Fourthly, the Arminian must admit that even if men are predestined because God looked into the future, then people are already predestined to go to Heaven or to Hell, from the foundation of the world, whether they like it or not! Ultimately, the Arminian (and Open Theist) schemes are simply ways to deny that God is Sovereign determiner of "all things whatsoever come to pass." (See 1689 Baptist Confession Ch 3)

I believe the Arminian view of God (whether they realize it or not) teaches that God leaves salvation up to chance. However, the God of the Bible, by His very nature, cannot leave anything to chance. In fact, Proverbs 16:33 (ESV) tells us that "the lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD"!! As R.C. Sproul says, "chance is not a thing: chance is nothing!" If the eternal destiny of one microbe is left to chance or luck; if one atom in the entire Universe is not under the control of it's Creator, if chance or luck play any part in God's plan of salvation, then God is not Sovereign and our entire belief system is a flimsy house of cards.

The fact is, God already knows who will -and who will not- be saved. Even some Arminians will admit this fact. God can know these things not simply because of His prescience, but because ultimately, it was His choice! He chose whom He chose for His own reasons and for His own Glory. Ephesians 1: 5-6 (ESV) confirms this:

"He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved."

You see, the plan of Salvation is an infallible PLAN of Salvation. God's not sitting up in Heaven wondering how things are going to turn out. Nay my friends, God is in control and things will turn out exactly as He has decreed.

Those whom God set his affections upon in eternity past have been Predestined to salvation and will be infallibly Called, Justified, and Glorified; none of the Elect will ever perish! Christ will be the firstborn among many brethren because His Father has ordained it to be so! If we serve a Sovereign God, how can His plan to redeem His people go any way but according to His perfect plan? How can the Good Shepherd lose any of His sheep?

Sol Deo Gloria!

Answering the Reformed Challenge

The Reformed Mafia has been placed under arrest! We have been placed in the dock by J.C. Thibodaux to answer for the crime of preaching the doctrine known as Perseverance of the Saints! (see this also) It's a most interesting case because the evidence that Mr. Thibodaux has brought against the Mafia is not something we have said or written, but rather, his own eisegesis of Matthew 5:27-30, Hebrews 4:9-11, Revelation 22:18-19! He believes these three passages are somehow the death of the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance.

The prosecutor seems to believe he has an air tight case against us. However, the Mafia, acting as their own attorneys, have already began to dismantle the prosecution's evidence and it looks as if the whole case against the Mafia is beginning to crumble (please see the links to their responses below).

I may take some flak from the Prosecution for what I am about to do, but I have decided that I would rather approach this case, not by swinging at his supposed proof-texts, (others in the Mafia are doing a good job of that already), but by showing Mr. Thibodaux a couple things that our Lord said which prove his interpretation of the aforementioned passages cannot be correct. In fact, I intend to show solid proof that a true Christian cannot forfeit the gift of Eternal Life.

Have a look at John 10: 26-30 (ESV) for example. Jesus said:

"But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.”

Did you get that? Did you see what Jesus plainly said? It reads very "Calvinistic", eh? His Sheep hear His voice, they follow Him, they are given Eternal (not temporary) Life, and "they shall NEVER PERISH." Neither can anyone snatch them out of His or His Father's hand!

This passage is crystal clear. TRUE Christians (Christ's sheep) will never perish (underline the word NEVER in your Bible!). Christ, with His own words, totally overthrows any possibility of the the true believer losing his/her Salvation. If no other passage in the Bible said a single solitary thing about the security of the Christian, this one passage alone is enough for us to contend for the doctrine of Perseverance forever and ever.

Not enough? Okay. Look at John 6: 35-40 (ESV):

Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 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. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

There's that word NEVER again!!! If Jesus himself says that all the Father gives to Him will come to Him, and those who come to Him will NEVER be cast out. How can anyone dispute that? Can Christ lie? Can the Good Shepherd lose any of His Sheep? It doesn't appear to me that Jesus believed any such thing! If Mr. Thibodaux's interpretation is correct, then Christ has lied to us in these two passages. However, because Christ never lied, and because there are no contradictions in Scripture -and no duplicity within the Godhead- I have to conclude that the passages Mr. Thibodaux has presented against us cannot possibly support his position. Whatever the passages do teach, it cannot possibly be that a true Christian can forfeit the gift of Eternal life.

Here's my challenge to Mr. Thibodaux. As a former Arminian (who can totally relate to where you are coming from), I would like to purchase and send you either a copy of the book called "Why I am Not An Arminian", or a copy of the Amazing Grace DVD: which ever you chose. All I ask is that you actually read (or watch) it. No strings attached. No reply needed. If your position is truly what the Bible teaches, you have nothing to fear from what I am offering you. Please email me at rhettswhips@yahoo.com if you would like to take me up on the offer.

Mafia Responses to the Challenge:

Gordan: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3,

Josh: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4,

I'll continue to update the responses from the Mafia as they are posted!

I would also like to submit the following resources to those open to studying this controversial topic with an open Bible and an open mind:

• Chapter 26 of R.L. Dabney's Systematic Theology
• Chapter 38 of J.P. Boyce's Abstract of Systematic Theology
• Chapter 17 of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith

Soli Deo Gloria!

John MacArthur, Israel, Calvinism, and Postmillennialism: Part II and III

More evidence that Postmillennialists have not kicked the Jewish people to the curb in regards to Bible prophecy -and unlike Dispensationalists, Postmillennialists do not teach that two-thirds of the Jews will have to be slaughtered before the promises are fulfilled!!

Part Two

Part Three

John MacArthur, Israel, and Postmillennialism

An interesting article by Gary DeMar concerning the Postmillennialist view of Israel's future in Prophecy.

(Being a recent convert to Postmillennial eschatology -and a guy who also has a desire to see Jews convert to Christ- I found this article very interesting indeed!)

Proposed SBC Anti-Calvinism Resolution Leaked to Public

The Baptist News Network Press -Savannah, GA.

Anonymous sources have informed The Baptist News Network Press that the recently formed Southern Baptist Counter Reformation Task Force (or "SBCTRF") will introduce an anti-Calvinism resolution during the 2009 Southern Baptist Convention that will be held in Louisville, Kentucky.

Why wait until 2009 in Louisville, KY.?

Our sources tell us that Louisville was picked because of the location of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), and also because it will give the SBCRTF time to gain grassroots level support for their resolution. SBTS is considered by the SBCRTF to be a "training camp for the Calvinist Taliban insurgency." Other sources within the SBCRTF tell us that the passage of this resolution in Louisville will be a significant blow to Calvinists and may perhaps be "the final nail in the coffin of this so-called 'Reformed Resurgence.'"

Below is a transcript of the resolution that was leaked to The Baptist News Network Press earlier today:


The 2009 SBC Anti-Calvinism Resolution

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists should be taught that the initials "J.C." stand for Jesus Christ and not John Calvin; and

WHEREAS, we've all read Dave Hunt's "What Love is This?"; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism stifles evangelism, kills churches, and complicates the doctrine of "Once Saved, Always Saved"; and

WHEREAS, John Calvin was a beret wearing, wine drinking, snail eating, baby baptizing Frenchman; and

WHEREAS, the French are bad for not supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom; and

WHEREAS, John Calvin ruled Geneva like Fidel Castro rules Cuba; and

WHEREAS, John Calvin brutally murdered Michael Servetus, in cold blood, for no apparent reason; and

WHEREAS, whereas the late Jerry Falwell declared "Limited Atonement" a heresy; and

WHEREAS, Billy Graham is not a Calvinist; and

WHEREAS, whereas Calvinists are worse than Muslims; and

WHEREAS, we were "Elected because we selected"; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism produces legalistic resolutions about church membership integrity; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism created opposition to a sensible resolution concerning the total prohibition and eradication of all alcoholic beverages from the face of the planet; and

WHEREAS, Calvinists have been known to fall in the floor -seized in Charismatic type fits of laughter- while reading Dr. Page's "Trouble with the Tulip"; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism leads to attendance of Together for The Gospel conferences which can lead to too close of contact with Charismatics such as C.J. Mahaney; and

WHERAS, Calvinism leads to attendance of Ligonier Conferences which in turn leads to too close of contact with Presbyterians such as R.C. Sproul; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism leads Baptists to doubt Dispensational theology and the Pre-Tribulational Rapture; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism has lead to a drop in Baptism numbers throughout the Southern Baptist Convention; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism has lead to the explosive growth of Reformed blogs where people criticize the great evangelist Charles Grandison Finney; and

WHEREAS, we have not been able to silence Calvinist bloggers; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism makes God the author of sin; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism denies God's chief attribute which is omnibenevolence; and

WHEREAS, Calvinism denies Free Will and makes man into a robot; and

WHEREAS, we know that God gives His Grace to all who deserve it when they simply raise their hand during an altar call; therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that we the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention being assembled in Louisville Kentucky hereby condemn Calvinistic theology as heresy; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the entire Southern Baptist Convention repent of any Calvinistic beliefs held in previous years and then rewrite Convention history as to exclude any references to having believed Calvinistic theology at all; and be it further

RESOLVED, that we urge all Southern Baptist entities to summarily fire any and all pastors or employees who hold to the "Five Points of Calvinism"; and be it further

RESOLVED, that we urge all Southern Baptist entities to conduct background checks, polygraph tests, and wire taps on all future candidates for employment to determine if applicants Calvinists; and be it further

RESOLVED, that all applicants found to be Calvinists should not be considered for employment; and be it finally

RESOLVED, that the Southern Baptist Convention shall auction off the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary to the highest bidding Presbyterian denomination.