How Limited Is The Atonement?

NB:  WHETHER YOU BELIEVE CHRIST DIED FOR ALL THE SINS OF MANKIND WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION, OR JUST FOR THE SHEEP, EITHER WAY ONE LIMITS THE ATONEMENT (EITHER IN EXTENT OF OUTREACH OR EXTENT OF EFFICACY).

Actually, those who believe in unlimited atonement are either universalists or believe in an atonement that only makes possible the salvation of all but actually saves no one for certain--that is a real limitation. In a so-called limited atonement, it actually accomplishes something--the salvation of the elect ("it is finished"). In 1 John 2:2 we see that Christ is the "atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not ours only but those of the whole world."

The problem lies in the definition of "world." The Greek word kosmos has several meanings. It doesn't always refer to everyone without exception. Sometimes it refers to everyone without distinction. In other words, all kinds of people can get saved, not all people. The word can mean creation or the universe and the way to test this is to plug the word into the sentence and see if it makes sense. John uses the word in John 3 several times and every time the word creation makes sense whereas believers or every person doesn't make sense.

We have to be careful so we don't prove that God saves everyone. The atonement was infinite in value and only avails for the believer, otherwise, everyone would be saved. What they say is "sufficient for all, efficient for some." God sent His Son into the universe because He so loved the universe.

In 1 John 2:2 what He did for us He did for the cosmos. He did the same thing for the cosmos. Now we just have to figure out what He did. In many translations, the word propitiation isn't used because it is above the reading level of the readers. They use the word atonement instead. Martin Luther used the word reconciliation. You see how the translators like to do your thinking for you. If Christ redeemed us He also redeemed the world or creation. Well in a way He did. Another way of looking at this verse is to see that there is one way of salvation, for the Jew as well as for the Gentile--Christ is the way of salvation, not for the Jews only but for the whole world. The main argument for the limited atonement is that Christ suffered once for the "sheep" and for His "friends" and not for the lost. "The good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep." "No love has a man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends."

Also, there is the law of double jeopardy which says that if Christ suffered for your sins, how can God make you pay for them in hell. The whole question is whether Christ died for Hitler's sins or not, and if he has to pay his debt in hell on top of that. Some Arminians say that Christ died for all sinners and it's their fault if they don't accept the "free gift of eternal life." But doesn't God know ahead of time who will believe and didn't Christ only pray for the believers in the high priestly prayer of John 17?

The answer is that God offers salvation to everyone through the general call of the gospel but only the elect will hear. But all that God calls get justified (cf. Rom. 8:30). "The elect obtained unto it and the rest were hardened"m (Rom. 11:7).  "As many as were appointed to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48).  The gospel is for "all whom the Lord our God will call" (Acts 2:39).  We don't know who the elect are so we have to preach to everyone and we preach the gospel because we are commanded to, not because we know who will be saved. The Scriptures say that "no one can resist His will" (Rom. 9:19). NB:  We are not saved by our theory of the atonement, period.   Soli Deo Gloria!

Can Man Be Born Again?

Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born again to see the kingdom of God. He rejoined, "How can an old man reenter his mother's womb and be born again?" The question is not whether one has the permission to be born again but the ability. It is from the word for "power" in the Latin Vulgate whereas in English "can" often implies permission. Martin Luther also translated it "Wie kann ein Mensch geboren werden,..." German is similar to English but kann means ability while darf means permission and the two are not to be confused. This refers to total depravity, the T of TULIP.

God isn't out to reform your life but to give you a full life. "No man can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (John 6:44). We are helpless and totally dependent on God's grace to save us--we are at His mercy, He is the Master of our fate and Captain of our soul. Jesus said, "Apart from Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5).

We had no say in our first birth and we were born again by God's miracle also. Did you cooperate in your birth or were you just a victim so to speak?  (It was the counter-reformation Council of Trent in 1546 that declared that if you don't believe you cooperated with God of your own free will you are anathema.)   We have no indigenous power or inherent ability to reform ourselves or transform our nature or to make ourselves suitable for salvation--God is the potter and we are the clay. Notice that Jesus used the passive voice meaning that we are acted upon and we don't do anything ourselves--we become born again through the power of the Holy Spirit. We are regenerated by the power of the Holy Spirit and adopted into God's family as brethren of Christ.   Soli Deo Gloria!

Principles Of Witnessing

Jesus was the witness par excellence and we can learn from Him, the prototype evangelist, who never made a mistake. As obedience to the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20 we are all ambassadors for Christ bearing the "ministry of reconciliation." They said: "We implore you, on behalf of Christ be reconciled to God" (cf. 2 Cor. 5:20); "Always be prepared to give an answer..." (1 Pet. 3:15); "...Do the work of an evangelist" (2 Tim. 4:5). This isn't just a job for the cleric, but for all the body of Christ, the layman too, to work together--the whole church. If you have no desire to win others to Christ seriously doubt your relationship with Christ because that is what we are here for. Pray earnestly for a burden--like John Knox, who said, "Give me Scotland or I die." We should all pray, "Give me converts or I die." In conclusion, we must first seek from God a burden for souls--he that wins souls must first weep for souls, someone has said. That's a good attitude.

He didn't always get the catch when he "fished." There was different bait to catch different fish; e.g., the intellectual Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman at the well, the rich young ruler, the Greeks, etc., were all dealt with in different manners; Christ "tailored" or designed his message individually. I don't believe in machine-gun evangelism that uses the same bait with everyone, like telling everyone to repent or else! The point is that you will always "win" when you witness, regardless of whether the person receives Christ or not; we don't witness to put feathers in our cap but out of obedience. One plants, another waters, and another reaps, but God gives the increase (cf. 1 Cor. 3:7). Only God can convert someone, so don't try to do the Holy Spirit's job of convicting someone of their sin, if you know what I mean. Jesus looked for quality, not quantity and did everything He could to discourage insincere followers.

One must develop a witness or testimony; wait for God to open the door and then make a beeline for the gospel. Bring the conversation to a head and challenge them. The person should be asked, if he has been presented the gospel, is, "Is there any reason you cannot receive Christ right now?" "...Now is the time of God's favor, now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor. 6:2). This will force him to a decision and give the Holy Spirit something to work on.

Also, one must not rely upon one's wits or cleverness, but on the Word of God--it is the Word that is the "seed" and what God promises to use (cf. Isa. 55:10-11--"My Word will not come back void"). Our faith does not rest on the "wisdom of men," but on the Word of God, "which effectually works" in us who believe (cf. 1 Thess. 2:13). Indeed, "...the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing" (1 Cor. 1:18).

Yes, we are in a win-win situation, and the only way we can lose is if we keep our testimony--that which cannot be refuted--to ourselves. "They overcame him by the blood of the lamb and the word of their testimony..." (Rev. 12:11). God only requires us to witness or testify to what we know and have experienced and been faithful in that. Remember, the blind man said, "One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!" (no one could argue, John 9:25). We don't have to know all the answers to witness either--we can get back to them and tell them we can get the answer. One doesn't need all the answers to become a Christian either, but just recognizing that the preponderance of the evidence points in that direction and to take a leap of faith in the right direction.

The right attitude is expressed in Acts 4:20: "For we cannot help speaking of what we have seen and heard." Amen! The power of testimony--our very own story. As the psalmist says, "Let the redeemed of the Lord say so!" We should all pray as David did in Psalm 51:15, "O Lord open my lips and my mouth will declare your praise." Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Faith A Gift?

Is faith a gift or a work? "Who makes you to differ? What do you have that you didn't receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7). Are we not clay in the hands of the potter? "For it has been granted unto you...to believe..." (Phil. 1:29). Jesus is the "author and finisher of our faith;" hence He originated it. Let us live according to "the faith God has distributed to each [of us]..." (Rom. 12:3).

Romanists believe it is a meritorious work because they believe in merit plus grace and not sola gratia or grace alone as the reformers championed. "This is the work of God [not our work] that you believe in Him whom He has sent" (John 6:29). "For by grace are you saved through faith, and that, not of yourselves, it is the gift of God [antecedent is faith as the gift], lest anyone should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9). If faith were a work then we would be saved by works.

Faith is not our salvation and faith is not reckoned as righteousness but unto righteousness (cf. Rom. 4:3 translation of dia meaning unto). Faith is the instrumental cause of salvation and we don't put faith in faith but in God. God opened the door of faith to the Gentiles in Acts 14:27 and He opened Lydia's heart to believe in Acts 16:14. It might be interpreted as God quickening faith within us.

Why is this important? 1 John 5:1 says that "Everyone who believes that Christ is the Christ has been born of God [ESV]." That means that regeneration precedes faith--we don't conjure up faith and then get saved. God gives us faith and expects us to use it. It is our faith but it is the gift of God. "Who believed through grace" means that we're enabled by God to believe. 2 Pet. 1:1 says, we have "received a precious faith like theirs." Ergo we are given faith. This doctrine is important so that we don't revert to Romanism and have a merit-based rather than grace based salvation. God wants all the glory (Soli Deo Gloria). To sum up, "Faith comes by hearing and by hearing of the Word of God" (Rom. 10:17).   Soli Deo Gloria!

My Doctrine Of Cognizance

Some evangelical pastors are overly zealous about how people become aware of their salvation and think there must be a dramatic "attestation" experience. This is called "initial evidence validation" and some Pentecostal churches say that only speaking in tongues is the evidence of being baptized in the Spirit. But Scripture says, "We were all baptized by one Spirit into the body..." (1 Cor. 12:13).

Tongues (cf. Isa. 28:11; 1 Cor. 12:10) are not the only evidence of the filling or baptism: One may prophesy, one may feel great peace and freedom or relief, one may get a thirst for the Word and even a great desire or burden to witness boldly. I was one of the only persons in the Bible study that couldn't nail down my conversion date--I guess I forgot how important it would be and by the time I was asked I had forgotten. For instance, if you cannot pinpoint your salvation to the day and even time you probably weren't saved. This is balderdash! You don't have to remember the precise moment that the Holy Spirit took up residence. Beth Moore says most of us don't remember the moment the Holy Spirit took up residence.

Charles Spurgeon has written that not all of us become aware of instantaneously, but some over a period of time. Billy Graham says, "We may not know the time the sun rose but we surely know it is up." 2 Peter 1:19 says that there is a time when "the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts." We may repent one day and commit our lives to Christ another (I can remember when I repented and when I committed myself). We may walk forward to no avail and dedicate our lives or renew them many a time before that real "assurance" sticks. Isa. 32:17 correlates assurance with righteousness ("The work of righteousness shall be peace and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever"). In other words, being righteous leads to producing fruit which gives assurance. "Bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God" (Col. 1:10). Nota bene assurance is not a subjective thing but from the objective Word of God that we rely upon.

Many people think they got saved when they said a sinners prayer. Actually going through the motions or memorizing the dance of the pious don't save--faith does. The devil can raise his hand, walk an aisle, say a prayer, etc. But can the devil produce the fruit of love for the Lord and good deeds the fruit of repentance (Acts 26:20)? That is like the Roman position that grace comes through the action. It is called ex opere operato. For instance, they believe that the actual baptizing of infants washes away original sin and he would go to hell if not baptized. True faith is tested by its fruit and we are all fruit inspectors--ourselves first! It is the Word of God coupled with the testimony of the Holy Spirit that gives assurance. "The Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God" (Rom. 8:16).   Soli Deo Gloria!

The Miraculous Question

For any of the skeptics, I recommend Jack Deere's Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, which delivers a coup de grace to the cessationist viewpoint. God does speak today, especially in the third world where "power evangelism" is taking effect and people witness miracles and by and large don't doubt the supernatural. Argentina has been having such a revival that obese people have been reported to have instantly lost 30 or more pounds! They say that the West brought the knowledge of God and the third world the power of God.    Soli Deo Gloria!

On The Enslaved Will

Martin Luther said that the freedom of the will is a grandiose term and fit only for God. Our wills are enslaved to the old sin nature and inclined to evil. They are biased and prone to evil, not good. Luther said that man has not ceased to be man, but ceased to be good. We are only free in the sense that God doesn't force us to do evil--we do it on our own volition. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, said that we are "free, but not freed." This is not a mind game, but only stressing that we don't have liberty, though we are responsible moral agents. We concur with our evil and no one forces us to do evil, which would be determinism or coercion. We are voluntary slaves to evil. God doesn't force anyone to do something he doesn't want to do. There is no outside force pulling strings.

There are many Bible verses that stress the lack of freedom to respond to Christ on our own without the wooing of the Spirit. "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God who showeth mercy." "Who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. " "The way of man is not in himself."

The freedom of the will so to speak is a curse, since we are free to do evil. Augustine said that we are non posse non peccare, which means we can only do evil. Luther said the will can only do evil, too.

According to Martin Luther, the will is enslaved to the old sin nature and not free. Augustine of Hippo said that the will is "free but not freed." He wasn't playing mind games but saying that we are responsible agents to God for our choices, but don't have liberty. He doesn't force us to do evil, because we do it on our own initiative. The freedom of the will is a curse because we can only do evil according to Luther. Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace(see John 6:44, 65), and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" (Rom. 9:19).  "It is not of him that willeth ...." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps" (Jer. 10:23).

We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.

This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. The British monk Pelagius and St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo debated it and so did Luther and Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the original doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers.   
Soli Deo Gloria!

Is The Will In Bondage?

According to Martin Luther, the will is enslaved to the old sin nature and not free. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo said that the will is "free but not freed."  He wasn't playing mind games but saying that we are responsible agents to God for our choices, but don't have liberty. He doesn't force us to do evil, because we do it on our own initiative. The freedom of the will is a curse because we can only do evil according to Luther.

Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" "It is not of him that willeth ..." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."

We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.

This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. Pelagius and Augustine debated it and so did Luther and Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the orthodox doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Does Prayer Work?...

"Prayer works," the preacher says, "so come on up and we'll pray for your needs."  (A spiritual vending machine.)   The objection I have is that TM works and yoga works, but we don't try them. Just because something works doesn't mean it is true, that is not the criterion. Lee Strobel says that Christianity works because it is true, it is not true because it works. We should pray, even if we don't feel we are getting from God what we want, as it were, our genie giving us our so-called "felt needs" or wants.

"We pray for the sake of praying," says Steven Brown "not for ulterior motives." I've heard it said that prayer is the goal of prayer!   Someone has wisely said that we should love God even if there were no heaven and fear God even if there were no hell! Well, we should have the desire to commune with God, even if we don't get our way. God is looking for a relationship, not someone just praying for needs.

The paradigm of prayer  (most clearly seen in the so-called Lord's Prayer) should always include the phrase "in Jesus' name" (it is for his sake and will that we really want to pray). Now, some preachers think their prayers are more "effectual" (James. 5:16) than others, but they are not--all Christians are righteous in God's eyes and no believer has a privileged status. Any Christian can pray without giving up and "fervently" to get his will aligned with God's. We don't change God, he changes us. You see, we are all on an equal footing in prayer--that is the beauty--God is no respecter of persons and shows no partiality.

Some say that worry works because 90 percent of what we worry about doesn't happen! Well, with that kind of logic prayer isn't as effective as worry, because I don't think anyone can say that 90 percent of their prayers were answered in the affirmative--if they are, they are not very challenging prayers. God can answer in the affirmative, negative (usually for our own good or He has something better for us)  or tell us to wait. But we should never give up hope unless God clearly says "no" like he did to Paul's thorn in the flesh.

But bear this in mind: God has arranged it so that we can explain away answered prayers if we so desire--he doesn't force us to believe, but faith pleases him. Well, prayer does work, but that is not why we pray!   Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Science Compatible with Faith?

Science was made possible by the discovery of a rational universe, perceived by a rational mind, using rational modus operandi. Induction, deduction, experimentation, measurement, repeatability, theory, and hypothesis make science possible. The Eastern religions don't believe in a rational universe, but in Maya or that the universe is a figment of our imagination or that it isn't really real. It was the Christian worldview of fifteenth-century Europe that really got the scientific method off to its debut. Sir Francis Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method.

All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal, Bacon, Maxwell, et al., were all Christians). In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method.  Every system of thought begins with some presupposition that cannot be proved.

All worldviews require presuppositions and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37, NIV).

Be sure to note that he who believes science conflicts with the Bible understands neither. Einstein said, "Religion without science is blind; science without religion is lame."

NB:  SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE THAT SCIENCE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH OR KNOWLEDGE DON'T REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DOMAINS OUTSIDE THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE SUCH AS ETHICS, HISTORY, AND PHILOSOPHY.  THEY ARE BETTING THE FARM THAT THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH IS SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISM:  BOTH POSITIONS REQUIRE FAITH AND ARE BASED ON SOME PRESUPPOSITION THAT CANNOT BE PROVED.   Soli Deo Gloria!