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!

Let's Compare What?

"For we dare not class ourselves or compare ourselves with those who commend themselves.  But they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise"  (2 Cor. 10:12, NKJV).

Paul advises against us comparing ourselves with each other (2 Cor 10:12)--Jesus is the one to compare ourselves to, e.g., goody-two-shoes Pharisees were proud that they fasted twice a week and could conduct long public prayers, but they were hypocrites. God wants "unfeigned," not perfect faith. It isn't the amount--but the object. We could compare fasting, witnessing, Bible studying, offerings, tithes, alms, or worship, and any other form of piety. To be called pious is not necessarily a compliment.

We all have areas were we need improvement and areas of strength. One cannot assume that because someone prays 1 hour every day he is more righteous or holy than someone that prays six times during the day for ten minutes The Bible merely mentions praying (persistently) without ceasing, not for any specified time. Muslims think they are holy praying five times daily, but that isn't "in the Spirit" as we are commanded to do. Daniel prayed three times a day and it was common for the Jews to pray at 9:00 AM, noon, and at 3:00 PM (the hours of prayer). Martin Luther prayed for three hours each day and if he was busy he prayed more. But many of us are not in his league and we need to set realistic goals. We can emulate others but Christ is the standard of perfection.

Prayer is where it's at (the action). "We should pray as we can not as we can't." "God takes our prayers as seriously as we do." "The goal of prayer is prayer (communion)," not to see what we can get out of God. It's not changing Him, but us! When I was in the Army I was very pious and zealous and would often pray over my lunch hour for an hour, but now I have learned to pray continually (always in an attitude of prayer and ready for it is sensitive to the inner voice). One thing I learned from the Navigators was to pray the Word! Psalms is almost all prayer (the first 72 are the prayers of David). Prayer is so important that it is not to be looked on as merely a duty, but a glorious calling.
   Soli Deo Gloria!

Show Me Your Faith!

We don't need another to-do list. Works are evidence of faith, not a substitute for it. Faith is something we do, no something we have. Paul would say, "Show me your good works by your faith." James would say, "Show me your faith by your good works. The only works we are to do are the ones foreordained for us (cf. Eph. 2:10). Faith has legs; it is a verb and it must be alive and grow, not become stagnate.  "[W]ho gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works" (Tit.2:14, NKJV).

In a works system, you never know how much work is enough. You can never know you are secure in Christ or are saved eternally. Martin Luther always wondered if he had fasted, prayed, gave enough away, etc. to be saved. It is important to realize we are saved by grace alone through faith alone. But not by a faith that is alone (without works). We are not saved by works, but we are not saved without them either.

Faith and works are inseparable. They can be distinguished but not separated. What we need on this earth Christ has the power to change lives from the inside out. In his book Through the Valley of the Kwai,  Ernest Gordon tells the story of POWs in the Malay peninsula that was reduced to subhuman savagery until they find a New Testament and decided to read it-- and found out that the Word of God has the power to change lives, not just inform intellects.  Paul said, "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love..."  (cf. Gal. 5:6).   To some it is just interesting, to others it is life-changing. James says, "I'll show you my faith by my works," while Paul says, "I'll show you my works by my faith." To sum up, we shall know them by their fruits (cf. Matt. 7:16, 20), as Jesus said. 
 Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Morality Relevant?

I realized the importance of morality when a Christian friend of mine was engaging in road rage. He was going to give them a taste of their own medicine, so to speak. Morality is our duty to God, to others and to our self. We all have a conscience and a system or code of conduct--even prisoners have a prison code (don't steal my smokes)! Some believe that we should do to others before they do to you (the Iron Rule), or do to others as they do to you, or before they do unto you!  (Babylonian morals is tit for tat or the Brazen Rule ( or the desire to take vengeance or to get even--which belongs to God;, or not to do to others what you don't want to be done to you (the Silver Rule).

Most people will rub your back if you rub theirs--but what reward does that deserve?   However, Christ made the highest standard: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" the Golden Rule).  What goes around comes around, we reap what we sow. The Hindus call it good and bad karma. We have rights but also responsibilities to our fellow man. The basis of this is that we are created in the image of God (imago Dei).

Some philosophies like cosmic-humanism believe there is no absolute morality and everyone is moral. "All are moral because we do what feels right for us." Postmodernists believe morality doesn't exist and is only a byproduct of coercion and consensus, like everyone agreeing that broccoli tastes good. Secular humanism teaches that morality is relative. Marxism teaches utilitarianism, that the end justifies the means. Pragmatism, which is in vogue today teaches that if it works it must be Good. Islam teaches that Mohammad is the exemplar. Christ not only taught the highest standards but also gave the highest motive to achieve them. Confucius summed up morality with one word--reciprocity. J. Stephen Lang cites Rabbi Hillel being asked to sum up the law: "Whatever displeases you, do not do to others, this is the whole law." (The Silver Rule).  Nevertheless, morality is nebulous and we need divine revelation, otherwise, it is a fool's errand of speculation.   Soli Deo Gloria!

Worldview And Ethics...

There is a close correlation between your worldview and your ethics. For instance, if you don't believe in God you won't see anything wrong with free love. If you believe in jihad and Islam you will see nothing wrong with suicide bombings and terrorism. Goethe said, "Share with me your certainties, but not your doubts--I have enough of them myself." Worldview came from the German Weltanschauung.  It is important to realize we are in the image of God:  "Would you trust the convictions of a monkey's mind?" Darwin mused.

According to polls, it is reported that only some six percent Christian teens believe in moral absolutes and most non-Christian teens don't either! We all have a way of seeing the big picture or the grand scheme of things and must answer the basic questions such as: Why are we here; What is the purpose of life; and is there a hereafter (what is on the other side)? No one wants to compromise their beliefs, but there is a give and take to living in society. Science cannot make value judgments--they are out of their realm. The people that have the strongest convictions of right and wrong are those that have an anchor in their soul--such as the Word of God.

We all have to start from somewhere and thank God we all don't have to start from scratch. There is no such thing as total objectivity except with God. And we all take certain presuppositions into our equation. Leaving God out of the picture or out of the equation of life is a disaster, not liberty. We were meant for God and the highest purpose of man is to know and glorify God. (Cf. Isaiah 43:7). Soli Deo Gloria!

Origins Of Morality

If there was no morality or justice, we would not know it. Likewise, if there was no meaning to the universe, we would not know it. Does a fish know it is wet? Do animals know they are incapable of moral decisions because they don't have the equipment in that they don't have a will able to obey God? They are oblivious to Him.  Because we have a mind and a will we are capable of moral action. Animals are not responsible nor culpable. 

Many have heard of the saying, "There oughta be a law!" (or on sports, "There oughta be a rule!)  Well, it is to this sense of "ought" that I am addressing here. Everyone believes some things are wrong and some things are right. Have you ever heard of a society that honored cowardice or selfishness?

It was the principles of morality that were attractive to some pagans as they converted to Judaism. The Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle were embarrassed with the immorality of the "gods," e.g., Mars and Venus had sexual intercourse with mortal women. The morality of Judaism attracted many Greek God-seekers or God-fearers. In antiquity might made right and no one questioned the authority of the government to set standards. It was the Judeo-Christian ethic that brought the values we have today. Christians ended the gladiator fights and slavery. It would be another world had Jesus never been born. All the major Universities of Europe and the first 150 American Universities were started by Christians. Hospitals, relief organizations,  orphanages, charities, and humane societies and temperance leagues were influenced by Christians.

Before the Ten Commandments, there was the Hammurabi's Code, but there was no uniform code. People were generally ruled by whim and conscience. The law of the land was an eye for an eye. Jesus put an end to that and brought morality to a new level--loving our neighbor. The Dark Ages saw the "seven deadly sins" (lust, anger, jealousy, greed, envy, gluttony, and sloth) as the evil to avoid according to the Pope. Christian life was performance-based then before the Reformation.

The Golden Rule that Christ taught is the epitome of morality that we can only hope to emulate. Today most people are cynical and believe in "do unto others as they do unto you," (Brazen Rule) or "do unto others before they do unto you" (Iron Rule).  They think recompense and comeuppance. It is like Hindu philosophy that good and bad karma works out our fates or good karma cancels bad.

Of course, there is an element of truth in all religious systems. Islam believes morality is arbitrary because Allah's decrees can change. Without an absolute standard such as God's holiness, there can be no morality. The Christian God is not arbitrary, capricious, nor whimsical, but dependable and immutable. But we know intrinsically that morality exists as absolute standards (is there ever an instance where rape is moral; once could argue when one had no choice, but this isn't justification, just a moral dilemma)?) Justice, love, courage, and mercy have always been admired; while cowardice, lying, and stealing have always been despised. God gave everyone a conscience and we are responsible to Him. "They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness..." (Rom. 2:15).

Today some modern philosophies teach to do what feels right for you. This is nothing but the old apostasy of Israel in Judges 21:25; 17:16 which is described: "Each man did what was right in his own eyes."

The reason behind morality is responsibility. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind" (Luke 10:27). We are not free to make up our own rules as we go along--we always make up a system we think we have kept (acc. to D. James Kennedy). Animals are not responsible to God for moral behavior but we are in the imago Dei (image of God).

When we become the source of our values it is nothing short of blasphemy--it is God's prerogative as the Judge of all mankind. The summation of ethics is to follow Christ, the great mandate of salvation. Today they teach the children they are animals--is it any wonder they act like them?  Soli Deo Gloria!

Ethics With A Capital "E"

I realized the way our qualms or principles evoke reactions in others watching Gunsmoke. A common criminal who had stolen golden relics from a church went into a bar and when the prostitute saw them he said, "Don't you have any principles?" He retorted, "I have as many as you!" Next, he held up the bartender but noticed he was wearing a crucifix. He couldn't do it, but said, "You don't know how close you came to being killed." He later became a Christian.

Julian Huxley's Religion Without Revelation reveals how you can be moral and not believe in God. The New Morality or situation ethics justify wrongdoing but the Bible's teachings are immutable and rock-solid. We are to imitate that which is good and not evil. Without God morality is just consensus and if there is no judge or judgment day why not eat, drink, [and be merry] for tomorrow we die" like the Bible says? If you just want to be a nice guy or an ethical person, any [ethnic] religion will do, but this is for the seeker of God. For instance, Buddhism is so popular because you can be good without God. (Buddha was an atheist.)

What about the unlearned, unsophisticated person--does he/she have any discernment? We all have the ability to make value judgments by the moral compass God has given us. Like Jiminy Cricket said, "Always let your conscience be your guide." Martin Luther said it is neither right nor safe to go against conscience. But the conscience can be wrong if it isn't enlightened by the Word of God. Alexander and Hymenaeus ignored and rejected their conscience and thus made shipwreck of their faith: A word to the wise is sufficient.

Do not be confused that the Christian life is a philosophy or a code of conduct or system of ethics; one can lead a very moral life and still not be saved. Being a Christian is knowing Jesus personally and having a relationship with Him.

Why do universities that believe in relative morality (What's right for me) even teach ethics? Because it's good for business. Orthopraxy is the name for putting into practice what you believe and how correct it is, just like orthodoxy is right believing, orthopraxy is right doing. Everyone has a code of conduct, their own conscience, so to speak; even criminals have a prison code! But what I'm concerned with is the Christian perspective; that of perfection, which no one can satisfy. ("Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.").  Perfection is the standard, the direction is the test.

Christians believe morality stems from God's immutable character and are therefore immutable and not arbitrary or changeable. James is the book dedicated to ethics because it's theme is the faith you have is the faith you show. "I will show you my faith by my works" (James 2:18). God has redeemed "a people zealous unto good works," (cf. Titus 2:14).  The admonition to follow Christ is the decision every Christian has made and Paul has some insight when he says "Abstain from every form of evil." "By their fruit, you shall know them."

Nowadays people think ethics are relative (I believe in absolute moral values) and we can make up our own rules as we go along. I believe in absolute morality because it is the only system of ethics compatible with faith in a righteous and moral God. The statement, "All truth is relative" is itself relative and of no value and is a truth statement.   Have you heard of the professor who introduced his class by saying, "You can know nothing for certain." One student replies: "Professor, are you sure?" He answers, "I AM sure."

I have heard it said that the summation of Christian ethics is to overcome evil with good (Rom. 12:21). Jesus made famous the Golden Rule: "Treat unto others the way you would have them treat unto you." This is an impossibly high ethic that no one has completed to perfection.  "The Christian life is not hard, it's impossible"--only Christ has fulfilled it.

But the idea wasn't unique. The Jews had heard of the great Rabbi Hillel who said that you must not do anything to others you wouldn't want to be done in return--that this summed up the Law. Confucius was asked to sum up his teachings with one word and he did: "Reciprocity." Buddha's rule was called the Silver Rule because it was slightly easier and it was in the negative: "Don't do to others what you don't want done to you." The Golden Rule was also in the Old Testament. In Obadiah, it says, "As you have done, so shall it be done to you." It's the highest ethic.  This is the reverse of said rule. Solomon also had a word of wisdom that will suffice: "Do not withhold good to others when it is within your power."  Solomon also said we should return evil for evil:  "Don't say, 'I'll do to him what he did to me; I'll repay the man for what he has done.'" (Prov. 24:29). Americans mostly live by the Brazen Rule:  "I'll do to him as he has done to me."

Finally, the famous physician Hippocrates said in his famous oath, "First, do no harm." Unfortunately, some people go by the Iron Rule:  "I'll do to them before they do unto me, or might makes right."   We want to go the extra mile and do some good, not just avoid evil. Faith is a verb that does good deeds. We are not saved by our good deeds, but we are not saved without them either--we are saved unto good works (cf. Eph. 2:10).

To sum up, Micah 6:8 is a good Old Testament paradigm of ethics: "He has told you, O man, what is good and what does the Lord require of you, but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God" (When my pastor asked me my philosophy in a verse, that was the one. The definition of the Christian life from Paul could very well be this: "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, and yet not I, but Christ who lives in me, and the life that I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me" (Gal. 2:20). Thus the hallmark of the Christian is love as Jesus said to the disciples: "By this shall men know that you are my disciples, that you love one another.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Apologetics For All Believers?...

"...Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have..." (1 Pet. 3:15, NIV).

"Casting down arguments, and high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God..." (cf. 2 Cor. 10:5). 

Some overly zealous believers get carried away and went on a tangent, becoming experts on the shroud of Turin or on documented near-death experiences, but the focus should be on the gospel, for it is the preaching of the cross that has the power. Don't get me wrong, every believer should know his way around the block theologically and apologetically and have a working knowledge of all basic doctrine.   It is not good to have zeal without knowledge (cf. Rom. 10:2; Prov. 19:2).

Note that doctrine is not too arcane for the run-of-the-mill believer. The man of God handles the mysteries of God faithfully.  "They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience" (1 Tim. 3:9, NIV).  But this is not for everyone because it takes a certain aptitude to comprehend some of these finer points and theories of science. We are not to twist Scripture  (cf. 2 Pet. 3:16) or to be carried about by every wind of doctrine (cf. Eph. 4:14). 

Paul tried to reach out to the eggheads of Athens and had no luck so to speak. He later said that he strove to "know nothing but Christ, and Christ crucified" (cf. 1 Cor. 2:2).  The KISS principle of keeping it simple is valid. The awesome theories of quantum mechanics and general relativity blow me away, but this is how some find God.

Let's not knock it just because it's out of our league! The principle is that "Ignorance is not bliss!"IN fact, "Knowledge is power" (Sir Francis Bacon, cf. Prov. 24:5).   "Where there is no vision the people perish" (Prov. 29:18).  Hosea says that the "people perish" for "lack of knowledge" (cf. Hos. 4:1). Ignorance leads to ruin (cf. Hosea 4:14).     Soli Deo Gloria!