Back to the
cross,
the root, the word @
The
Radical Pilgrim

~
Pro Bible ~ Pro Apologetics ~ Pro Kingdom ~
All
scripture quotations from the Authorized Version, without
apologies.
Placed accents mine.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obedience, Freewill, and the Sovereignty of God
that he by
the grace of God should taste death for every man
Hebrews 2:9
The
doctrine of reconciliation
3
John 1:8. "We therefore ought
to receive
such, that we might be fellowhelpers to the truth."
Fellow
helpers to the
truth!!??
How can we (the believers/the elect) be fellowhelpers to the truth, or "labourers together
with God", or "workers together with him (thatz
God)", if God has done everything, does everything, independent of our
freewill or choosing, where we never have a say in anything, coz God
has already decreed it, settled it, arranged it, preordained it,
etc.? Just can't happen! Hypothetically speaking, if it
can, then scripture contradicts itself and God is a liar!
Recapping on the fact that every Bible believer is not only
brought to
the cross for
redemption's sake (is bought by the Lord) but is called to be a witness in this world for Christ;
where the Bible believer has been administered with the charge of
reconciling the lost to their Maker through the gospel. This is
not an
additional option but the responsibility of every Christian. It also
means it
is not
a just
matter for the individual being saved and ready for heaven, because
with spiritual privilege comes spiritual responsibility.
This is why scripture refers to the redeemed as "labourers together
with God" and "workers together with him". The reason we
have been entrusted with
this great ministry of reconciliation to God as we co-operate with the
Holy Ghost in being "fellowhelpers to the truth".
If
this was not so, then why are we (as believers) still here? There
would be no point. The only reasonable point would be for the
Lord to immediately take us home to heave upon rebirth.
Confirmation found in 2 Cor. 5: 14-19 (take a close examination please):
"For the love of Christ constraineth us (the love of Christ
constraineth us, motivates us, drives us - not the dictates of God, nor duty, nor guilt , nor obligation ); because
we
thus judge (so judgement is ours in this case), that
if one died for all, then were all dead (that's those
outside
of their Maker - everyone fallen, the unregenerate): And that he died for all (everyone fallen),
that
they which
live
(everyone redeemed, everyone regenerated), should not
henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them,
and
rose again. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea,
though
we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no
more (as a mere man in this case). Therefore if (that's the condition) any man (everyone fallen) be in
Christ, he is
a new creature:
old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God (meaning, He therefore has the right back to all things), who hath reconciled us to
himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of
reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world
unto himself, not imputing (not pinning the blame on) their trespasses unto them (everyone fallen);
and hath
committed unto us (those who have received His redemption, been regenerated)
the word of reconciliation."
Two
extremes in the doctrine of
reconciliation
Jacob
Arminius was
a man who lived at the beginning of the
Protestant Reformation. His teachings were a backlash against a
man
called John Calvin who used the Bible as a covering for tyranny and a
justification for setting up in political opposition to Papal
Rome.
Both
teachings were in opposition and were a reaction against the other (one
taking the soft approach, while the other the hard-line),
using
scripture taken to extreme to reinforce their doctrines. Hence,
these
two wings are from the same bird which carried the Reformation into
what is also known as the Protestant Movement. When it comes
to sound doctrine the Bible always teaches "a just balance" and
"rightly dividing the word of truth." Not a false balance
of two
opposing theologies (no wonder this bird didn't go anywhere apart from
returning to it's Mother's nest in Rome). Hence ...
Arminianism as
a doctrine (from the JA wing), leads to the
notion Jesus is just there
for 'the
taking or leaving' (due to the doctrine of preservation being left
'open ended'). Therefore, one can choose to accept or refuse to
accept Jesus before or
after conversion. This means if one chooses to say no to Jesus
prior
to
conversion, then that's fine with God for the present, as the
individual can
come later when he feels
he is ready. If one chooses to say "no" to Jesus after
conversion,
this
is even better, as Jesus will never ever leave that person irrespective
of that person walking with God daily, or whether he goes his own way
living a life in total rebellion and contrary to everything the Bible
teaches.
However,
contrary to this
teaching the word teaches that we
have been predestinated to receive Him. Therefore, if we don't draw
near
to
Him, He will not draw near to us. If we reject Him, He
will reject us. Where finally, judgement and eternal hell await
any
Christ rejecter, including those who were once of the faith (please
check these verses out ... 1 Tim. 1:19; 4:1; 5:8,15,24,25;
6:10,21; 2
Tim. 2:18; Heb. 6:6; 10:26-39?) before departing from the faith.
Arminianism
as a doctrine, is a
gospel of
convenience, placing
man in the centre and God on the outside, where Jesus becomes an errand
boy figurehead.
Not
so for the supposed few elitist
chosen,
who would
be born by
divine providence for obtaining salvation outside of exercising their
willingness to surrender to God, with nothing being able to affect them
coming to
Christ. However, we do know from scripture that the
Lord does grant the most foulest of sinners space (grace, mercy, a
measure of His Spirit) to respond towards Him in repentance so that He
would come and set up His abode in the repentant sinners life (live and abide
in their hearts) after it has been washed clean by the blood of Jesus.
The
doctrine of Calvinism portrays a
god who
is not a loving
father but an unreasonable god who exercises His power in a
harsh, cruel manner, and will not change His mind despite the
desperate, broken, intercessors plea (Ps. 34:18; Jer. 33:3), and denies
scriptures like Heb. 2:19
... that
Jesus
tasted death for every man.
The following are both non-Arminianism and non-Calvinism in doctrine
John 17:2. "As thou hast given him power over all flesh (both Jew and Gentile od ALL peoples),, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him."
The
Holy Ghost is poured out on all
flesh
like a net over a shoal of fish. The fish represent all nations
and
are not just one nation as under the Old Covenant. Many are
hauled in
by the fishermen leaving many of the multitude of fish still in the sea
where some will be fished out by others later. However, only a few
are chosen in the end as many are thrown back into the deep.
Due to
the
fact that many actually hear the call of God and respond to a degree,
but only a few take full heed and embrace the Son fully, because some
seed fall on good ground ... on an honest and good heart (Luke
8:15).
Therefore,
whosoever calls
out to the name of the Lord is actually calling out and acknowledging
everything the
name pertains to ... to the Son of God, the lamb slain for our sin, our atoner, our intercessor (one who
pleads our case) and
our mediator for salvation (the one and
only
avenue to God). In other words, it's
what the individual does
with the Son
(the word, the good seed) which determines their salvation.
1
Pe. 1:23. "Being born again,
not of
corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which
liveth and abideth for ever."
This is to do with those who receive
(embrace, take into heart) the Son!
Ps.
2:12. "Kiss the
Son
(embrace, cleave to), lest he be angry,
and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all they that put their trust in
him."
The
New Testament equivalent:
John
3:16. "For God so loved the
world,
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life."
The
issue is Jesus! The Son of
God! The only begotten of the Father! What we
do with Him!
That's the pearl of great price! Most will reject Him, but some
will
fall
down and cling to His ankles and wash His feet with their tears
and hair. Kissing Him dearly!
But
"Pilate saith unto them, What
shall I do
then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him,
Let him be crucified."
What
shall we do with Jesus which is
called
Christ? This is the issue! Let Him be crucified (over and
over
again), or call out to one whom we pierced? Most don't and will
reject
Him, but a few do and will accept Him.
This
is completely on His terms and
is fair
and just and reasonable outside the wisdom of man. If they accept
Him
as the lamb of God and His blood sacrifice as all sufficient for their
redemption and eternal salvation, then they are accepted beloved of the
Father
and He hands them back to His Son for safe keeping. Not one
of
them is lost in this security (unless they opt out and leave - "in the
latter times some shall depart
from the faith"). What a great salvation ... when someone is carried
and hidden secure in the bosom
of the great shepherd of the sheep!
John 6: 39-40. "And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me (the Father giving to the Son) I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day."
Therefore,
our walk is a constant
walk in
the
Son. If you are in the Son, then He is in you. This is
making JESUS
our
salvation, as both our surety and assurance. On a continued, eternal,
basis. The all and all, the alpha and the omega, the beginning
and the
end, the author and
finisher of our faith! "For in him we live, and move, and have
our
being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his
offspring."
A gift at the end of the day
Remembering:
Repentance
is a gift.
Salvation is a gift.
Faith is a gift.
Wisdom is a gift.
And a love for the truth is a gift (stuff like this really kills the
flesh - doesn't it?).
All
these things come down from
above, and
cometh down from the Father of lights, as
good gifts, and cannot be executed unless responded to and accepted by the
recipient ... the desperate sinner or the broken saint abiding in Him. Read
on and I will supply you with
all the
scriptural references allowing you to decide (if you believe in choice
that is) whether what I write is scriptural or not?
Freely ye have received, freely give. Which means we freely receive Him (God's free gift - our freewill exercised). Then others can receive (accept) from us. Again, this means receiving (or accepting) Jesus is scriptural after all!
John 6:21. "Then they willingly received him into the ship".
If
you can willingly receive or
accept the
person of
Jesus (both God and
man) physically into your house (Luke 10:38) or boat (John 6:21), then spiritually
you can
willingly receive Jesus into your life. Does this make sense? This is the same as
saying
you can
receive Him into your heart where He resides or abides, and
your body becomes the temple of God. Or ... "Christ in you, the hope of
glory"!
1
Pet. 4:10. "As every man hath
received
the gift,
even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards
(one who managers someone's property and affairs) of the
manifold
grace of God."
A
principle in scripture is always first the natural, then the spiritual
(1 Cor. 15:46). If one works, or is a possibility, then so is the
spiritual latter.
Luke
8:40. "And it came to pass,
that, when
Jesus was returned,
the people gladly received him: for they were all waiting for
him."
So
it is one thing to receive Jesus
of
Nazareth into your midst
(company of friends or home) but it is another thing to go further and
receive Him into your heart. Likewise,
we can also receive the
word, or
the Holy Ghost, or the
anointing, or the promise. Scripture says
plainly they "received the knowledge
of the truth" or "they received not the love of the truth".
Whattabout
receiving "your
ministry"? Just don't ever say, "I received Christ into my heart
(or
life)"!!! Ministry is okay! It's very important or makes
one feel
important ... doesn't it? But whattabout
Jesus? Oh, it's okay to say "I received healing", "I received
prayer", "I
received counsel", "I received the gift of this or that"! Or, "I
received
a
word, instruction, wisdom, the word, a rhema (oh, don't you just go all
gooey over the Greek?) and this or that"! But never say "I
received Jesus"!!! This is becoming a big "no no" in many more circles
of late! Yeah, right!!! What does scripture say?
Receiving
Christ
John
1:11-12. "He came unto his
own, and
his own received him
not. But as many as received him (Jesus), to them
gave
he
power to become the sons of God (the Father), even to them that
believe on his
name".
The
above verse is clear that it was God's
very own chosen nation who
refused to receive Jesus. Out of the nations of the world it was
now
the
whosoever (anyone who received Christ) who could be saved, still
including the Jews by the way (who were cut off from the vine), only on
the condition
of being grafted back in through Christ and His finished work (tough on
the "Hebrew Roots" Movement). Yes, the way is still (very)
narrow,
even for Jews as well as Gentiles, of intellectuals as well as the
unlearnt. He is the way and the truth. No one can get there
unless
they come through the door. No one can make it unless they call
out to
the one whom they pierced and embrace and kiss the Son.
Matt.
21:22. "And all things, whatsoever
ye
shall ask in prayer,
believing, ye shall receive."
Seeking,
asking, believing,
receiving, are
all scriptural terms
for those who would call out.
1 John 3:22. "And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight."
Yes,
seeking, believing, calling out,
receiving, are all
scriptural terms for those who would ask.
James
4:2 "... yet ye
have not, because ye
ask not."
God will not respond to us if we do not respond to Him (more on this later).
Col.
2:6. "As ye have therefore
received
(passive) Christ Jesus the
Lord, so walk (active) ye in him".
Therefore, it is not just enough to ask Him
into
your life
(or heart - in the passive tense). There must be a continuance in these things (in the active tense). We
must
continue in His word, and walk in the Spirit according to
scripture and "continue in faith and charity and holiness".
John
16:23. "And in that day ye shall
ask me
nothing. Verily, verily, I
say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he
will
give
it you."
John 20:22. "And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and
saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost".
1 John 5:14. "And this is the confidence that we have in him,
that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us".
Oh,
it's getting mundane, isn't
it? It's not
really my intention to plaster scripture all over these posts just for
the sake of
handing out knowledge like lolly scrambles, as most of us possess Bibles of our own.
Yes, indeed it is 'information overload', and information is not
revelation! However, I feel all these
verses are relevant
at this time and need a fresh visit in context with what is being
conveyed:
Matt. 7:8. "For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened."
Matt. 10:4. "He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him (the Father) that sent me."
Matt.
10:41. "He that receiveth
a prophet
in the name of a
prophet
shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man
in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward."
Matt. 13:20. "But he that received the seed into stony places,
the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it".
Although some of the following content may be new and thought provoking to some, others may wonder why it is too mundane and simplistic in places, with such detail and explanation. Once I would have felt the same way, but having made personal contact with some Christians in the last few years, which, against all logic and sound reasoning, insist that I, nor anyone else, has a freewill, nor is having a freewill Biblical in any sense of the word. However, I believe, there is no doubt, whatsoever, with sustained scriptural backing, freewill (as one word in this case) is Biblical.
Now
lets get down to tin tacks!
Psalms 54:6. "I will freely sacrifice unto thee".
Own freewill ...
Scriptural?
Yes!!
Own
... self ownership
(under the Lordship of Christ)! Freewill
... the freedom under the Lordship of Christ to self exercise the
will!
Ezra 7:13. "I make 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, go with thee."
There it is! Notice ... "own freewill"! Freewill in written form! From the holy script! Belonging to and of the individual!
Freewill is mentioned seventeen times in scripture. Only once (as the verse above) is it mentioned in conjunction with what geographical direction the individual's will chooses (and Jerusalem was the place to worship). The other sixteen times is it mentioned in scripture as in doing with offering/s.
An offering is always to do with what the individual proposes or initiates from within him or herself. It is to do with executing a gift or a consideration. Simply, such as ... "Please accept my gift?" Moreover, as stated earlier ... salvation is a gift (more on this later). On the other hand, in receiving a gift, the freewill is also exercised in responding to or being received by the recipient. In other words, an offering is made by choice as it is also received by choice where two parties are concerned.
1
Pet. 4: 9-10. "Use
hospitality one to another without
grudging.
As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to
another".
The
gift must be exercised by the recipient which is to do with the
exercising the will of of the recipient, as none else can do this for
him.
Moving on, lets
spell it out again ...
offering means (according to the dictionary):
To
put forward for
consideration; propose: offer an
opinion.
To present in order to meet a need or satisfy a requirement:
To present as an act of worship: offer up prayers.
To exhibit readiness or desire
Reiterating ... freewill is to do with what man initiates from within himself, towards God or his fellow man. How he responds to God or his fellow man by an act of his (wait for it) ... will! And being given the ability to exercise it! That's the 'will' folks!:
2 Cor. 8:12. "For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not."
The will is free by divine decree and design when conveyed in the right context. Hence, the biblical term 'freewill'! Which means the will is free to do with what the individual can choose to do. However, like in all things, there are limitations ... the will is not free when it comes to choosing according to which we hath not, cannot have, or cannot do. F'instance, I cannot choose to buy the Moon, or how about the planet Mars or the Crown Jewels for that matter, as this of course is way outside my boundaries; isn't it? Oh well, so much for the hyper faith "blab it and grab it" doctrine!!
Are you still with me?
Capping off this point in 1 Corinthians 7:37, Paul mentions a man who chooses not to give his daughter away "but hath power over his own will"! He does so because, as the head of the home (as someone vested with this responsibility) he still "hath power over his own will". E-nuff said?
Also,
'freewill' and 'choice' are two
different things in one
sense.
F'instance, I may choose which colour I want to paint my house because I
own it and there are no laws forbidding me not to do so. However,
in the same sense, I do not have a choice when it comes to a 'stop
sign'
while driving on a public road. Because the will of the authority
behind the sign (which I am subject to) commands me to, "Stop!"
If
I exercised my freewill and ignored the sign, and just drove straight
through,
I would
be abusing freewill by my rebellion against the authority I am
subject
to. This
would be called self-will! In like manner,
when God makes a
command we do not have choice
either (what God says ... goes!), although we can abuse freewill
(which is self-will) and rebel and suffer the consequences. Like
freewill being one word, self-will is also one word in the scriptures as
Genesis 49:6, Titus 1:7 and 2 Peter 2:10.
"For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled".
Adam
and Eve were created with
freewill ... to obey the Lord or
obey something contrary. However, in the Garden they were given a
command that "every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
But
of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of
it".
In other words ... Adam and Eve were free to eat from any tree,
with
a restriction of not eating from one particular tree. They had a
free choice with most trees except one. Like ... "I am free
to eat
pip fruit, stone fruit, and nuts, and also from the tree of life, but I
cannot eat from the outer-bounds tree!" This tree they were
commanded
not to partake from.
So here we find in scripture where man is free to make choices. However, these are restricted choices. Legalism means the bondage and straight-jacket of not being able to exercise the will. Meaning, someone else is doing your thinking for you (does this ring a bell?)! Liberalism means the freedom to go into excess in exercising the will without bounds, which becomes selfwill. This is doing only what feels good or is self-gratifying without being responsible towards consequences (placing experience above the word in other words)! Both legalism and liberalism are wrong doctrines and are two opposite extremes leading away from the truth.
Then there is the region where we can play on words. For example, in the theological, psychological or philosophical world (being very rampant in religious circles) this is the region where the spirit (the inner man) is cleverly bypassed. Moreover, it is when we can then easily misinterpret both an intended meaning from someone because of its phraseology or the context it is in, sometimes innocently or just to prove our own "doctrinal" point. So it is very important we do not twist or use words for our own gain, or eliminate what someone else is saying in another context, because their wording is meaning something different to how we see or use the wording. F'instance, one person my take liberty in using the word 'radical' (because the word radical has dual meanings) to make a point of "getting back to the basics of something" (had to throw in this one). Where another person, through either genuine misunderstanding or pretence, can label the person an 'extremist' because he misunderstood the application of the word, or misconstrued it deliberately (taking advantage of the other meaning in the English language), to wrongfully brand or bag the person.
In a nutshell, everything that has just been conveyed in the opening paragraphs is to do with how our Redeemer puts responsibility on how we make decisions as a believer. Non Christians are lost and outside of grace anyhow, and are therefore outside the spiritual realm. So God's word does not apply outside the call to repentance, despite what the Institutional Church teaches. Therefore (irrespective of the decisions they make outside of the cross), it does not change the fact they are still in rebellion against their Maker and in need of Him as Saviour in the first place. Where time moves on in the world's kingdom, irrespective of mans plans and endeavours. However, only for a season.
Forget
about all the "Calvinism"
verses "Arminianism" nonsense
(and
vice versa) and various doctrinal forms of strawman building, to defend
a groups position or keep someone on their pedestal. Just the
same,
forget about the historical "Reformers" verses the "Liberals" of an
era,
and vice versa. All this stuff only divides, and causes enmity
between
the brethren because of the many slants and interpretations that can be
used. Please bear with me. In this whole treatise I promise
I will
not be quoting this name or that name, this personality or that
personality,
but only pure, unadulterated, scripture. Please jump on me if I
bend
them, brake them, misquote or take them out of context? That's the
scriptures
I am referring to! But before you shoot me down, just remember I
have
got nothing to lose or nothing to gain by this article, and do not
rely
on "church" circles or fraternities for finance or platform.
Which
means you may have a hard job placing conditions on what I might or
might
not say. In the end, it is up to you whether you want to become a
religious bully or a hierarchical heavy. However, by the grace of God I will
merely stick to His word.
Freewill
Freewill! Or "I will!" Meaning ... "I will use (exercise) my will"! Meaning from the dictionary ... Something done of one's own accord; voluntary.
If
you think I'm trying to prove a
point,
let's
allow the Lord's word to confirm it. If it is not the Lord
automating
me to do so, because I happen to be doing it through an act of my own
will (and
hopefully
with the unction and inspiration of the Holy Ghost) then maybe it could
worth considering and weighing up with scripture. Obviously the
Psalmist
could exercise, voluntarily (initiate, execute, exhibit, work, do, demonstrate,
determine)
his will (freewill). Try and prove me wrong or allow me to confirm it:
Psalms
2:7. I will
declare the
decree
Psalms 3:6. I will not be afraid
Psalms 5:3 ... in the morning will
I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up.
Psalms 5:7. But as for me, I will
come into thy house in the multitude of thy mercy: and in thy fear will
I worship
Psalms 7:17. I will praise the LORD
according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the
name
of the LORD most high.
Psalms 9:1. I will praise thee,
O LORD, with my whole heart; I will shew forth all thy
marvellous
works.
Psalms 9:2. I will be glad and rejoice
in thee: I will sing praise to thy name, O thou most High.
Psalms 9:14. That I may shew forth
all thy praise in the gates of the daughter of Zion: I will
rejoice
in thy salvation.
Psalms 13:6. I will sing unto the
LORD
Psalms 16:7. I will bless the LORD
Psalms 17:15. As for me, I will
behold thy face in righteousness
Psalms 18:1 ... I will love thee,
O LORD, my strength.
Psalms 18:2. The LORD is my rock, and my
fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will
trust
Psalms 18:3. I will call upon the
LORD
Psalms 18:49. Therefore will I give
thanks unto thee, O LORD
Psalms 20:5. We will (that can
be me or you) rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we
will set up our banners:
Psalms 20:7 ... we will (notice
how "I" has now changed to "we") remember the name of the LORD our God.
Psalms 21:13 ... so will we sing
and praise thy power.
Psalms 22:22. I will (back to the
individual's will) declare
thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I
praise thee.
Psalms 22:25. I will pay my vows
before them that fear him.
Psalms 23:4. I will fear no evil: for
thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Psalms 23:6 ... I will dwell in
the house of the LORD for ever.
Psalms 54:6. I will freely (I
better
emphasis this word) sacrifice unto thee: I will praise thy
name,
O LORD
Psalms 79:13 ... we will (again, that can
be me or you) shew forth
thy praise to all generations.
Psalms 80:18 ... we will call upon
thy name.
Psalms 115:18 ... we will bless
the LORD from this time forth and for evermore.
Psalms 118:24. This is the day which the
LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.
Psalms 132:7. We will go into his
tabernacles: we will worship at his footstool.
Lot's of "I's" here (not to be confused with "eyes" - aye aye!) plus a few "we's" (as if the onus really is on the believer to respond - oui oui!). Simply because, if God makes commands for us to act on (and He does), then surely doesn't one have the ability to obey or disobey, unless we are programmed with mere instinct like the beasts? Paul had a freewill would you believe? Or at least he encouraged it being exercised:
Eph.
6:6. "Not with eyeservice,
as
menpleasers;
but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart".
Eph. 6:7. "With good will doing
service, as to the Lord, and not to men".
1 Cor. 9:17. "For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me."
The remnant (that's Jesus' little flock - the true church) can exercise their wills also:
1
Tim. 6:18 - 20. "That they do
good,
that
they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing
to communicate; Laying up in store
for themselves
a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold
on eternal life. O Timothy, keep that
which is
committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings,
and
oppositions of science falsely so called".
No passivity in this department ... but lots of activity! Activated from the heart ... willingly!
Heb. 13:18. "Pray for us: for we trust we have a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly."
And whattabout this one?:
Matt.
10:8. "Heal the
sick, cleanse the lepers, raise
the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely
give."
Surely, this is freewill being demonstrated! Joseph, Jesus' step dad, exercised his freewill also:
Matt. 1:19. "Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily."
Obedience or disobedience! Is it a choice? You choose what you decide (whoops, did I say that)?
Is.
1:19. "If ye be willing
and obedient,
ye shall eat the good of the land (sounds conditional to me)".
Whose
willing? Answer ... those who have a will they
are free to exercise one way or the other! E-nuff said?
Getting the balance (or rightly dividing the word of truth)
I
remember a brother a few years ago
preaching how any truth taken
to
extreme becomes error. As time went by I realized how true his
statement
was. Especially by experiencing being caught up in the "Luv
Gospel"
myself and not having the scripture as my final authority (or at least
not being aware) at the time.
The
Beatles sang "All you need is
love", which became the hallmark
of
the "Flower Children" era and the boardwalk of the Counter Culture and
New Age . It soon was adopted by the Institutional Church to
appease
the crowds and swell the ranks.
"It
can't be wrong when it feeels sooo
right ;" as the song from
Debbie
Boone (representing the evangelical world) went in the late 70's.
John
1:14. "And the Word was
made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and
we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,)
full of grace and truth.
Love
and truth ... grace and
truth ... mercy and truth. The two must
always go together. They are always married ... according to Psalms
85:10 and the rest of scripture.
Yes,
"God is love"!
Which is all I heard many times back
in the Charismatic Movement during the 70's, from gooey teachings to
songs
and bumper stickers. However (looking from the other side of the
spectrum),
what was and is omitted in the Institutional
Church,
or played right down, is also the fact that "God is true" (Jn.
3:33). Or how about "God is holy" (Ps. 99:9)! Which places new light on
the
word, doesn't it? How about the Book of Job ...
"God is mighty"? Or "God is great" (thatz Jehovah, not
Allah)? Or how about "God is
terrible majesty" (will the War on Terror brand God
Almighty a terrorist too)?
Here
are some more to consider
... Deut. 4:24;
"God is a consuming fire,
even a jealous God" (do I really want to hear this)? Or ...
Psalms
7:11; "God is
angry
with the wicked every day" (thatz not when someone misses church only
on Good Friday)? However, most don't want to know this,
or
look outside the religious square of their "spiritual" comfort
zone. This doctrine just does not fit in with their PC snazzy
doctrine.
They only want to hear that "God is love", without even knowing what it
really means. How shallow and naive eh!
Here's a couple from the New Testament, proving God's immutability: John 1:5 ... "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." Or, Heb. 12:29 ... "God is a consuming fire (yes, in the New Test)." I guess, we don't want to hear or read this either!? Well, at least the religionist in the flesh would not. While the spirit (quickened by the Holy Ghost) is willing. We also have a few in the New Testament which says what God is not. Here is just one which sums it all up: 1 Cor. 14:33 ... "For God is not the author of confusion"!
In referring to love: Love is always based on trust and granting a beloved space. If space (liberty, freedom, the freedom to make choices) is not granted then there is no freedom, only bondage. My bible tells me that "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." David knew what liberty was. He said in Psalms 119:45:
"I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts."
David
chose to follow the word when
the chips were down. That's
why Jesus said to 'continue'
in His word. He did not, and does not compel us, programme us, or
use us like a puppet on a string to serve Him, or to serve Him
through
stupid ceremonies and grand pomp! However, when an
individual
substitutes the scriptures for tradition, dogma, or a cult's teaching,
it always end in some type of bondage. Whether it be to the
man or his teachings, or to his system. Because only continuing
in the
truth sets
us free. Which is living and practising the inspired scriptures ... the written word!
More
choice (Acts 17:11) "...
in that they received the word
with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily,
whether those things were so."
The Lord gives us liberty to serve Him. He does not straightjacket us or railroad us into a format in how we serve Him, but has actually called us to liberty:
Gal. 5:13. "For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love (not through restrain or compulsion) serve one another."
In the manner of Acts 27:3 portrays:
"Julius courteously entreated Paul, and gave him liberty to go unto his friends to refresh himself."
Just
the same way the Lord gives us an amount of individual
autonomy
for His own pleasure and purpose.
Jesus'
good news, which He has
entrusted to us, is to "to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the
opening
of the prison to them that are bound". James calls it "the
perfect
law of liberty". Galatians tells us that we have "been called
unto
liberty" and to "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ
hath
made us free." As long as we do not abuse our liberty, or use it
to be a cloak of maliciousness, or to allow it to be a stumbling block
to others; we are free to choose our friends, our careers, even the
place
where we live. If you have not had a specific instruction from
the
LORD
direct, or an audible voice from heaven, that is! Which rarely,
almost, doesn't
ever happen. If it did, we would not be living by faith, but
walking
around with our heads in the clouds, looking into space for
guidance.
If God
thundered
out of Heaven every time we were going to make a next step or turn,
"This is the way walk ye in it", then our walk would not be really by
faith, would it? Is God really freaky, spooky and eccentric like
this? Did
Jesus walk around with wide spacey eyes, with a quivering and wavering
in His speech
every time He spoke? We know from scripture the devils acted
oddly,
especially in Jesus' presence when they knew their time of comfort was
coming to an end. We may be a peculiar people in the world's
eyes,
because we preach a gospel which is foolishness to them which perish,
but we have not been called to the abnormal but to the normal. A
'feet
on the ground' normal person, who happens to be saved by grace.
Beware
of spooky believers! Show caution with those who are ever acting
out a conversation with God in their head! Give no room for the
airy fairy! If
you really
love someone you don't have to act
'something' or try to be 'anyone', or "spiritualize" anything.
There is no substitute for being open, straight and honest. True
love
unfeigned, is natural, normal, affectionate, and trustworthy and
compassionate:
Charity
"is kind (looks out for the well being of others first)", "envieth not (does not compete or compare with others)",
"vaunteth not itself (does not brag, seek attention or show off)", "is not
puffed up (does not hide behind written qualifications or being a "know all" )". "Doth not behave itself unseemly (is not 'over the top', strange and freaky), seeketh not her
own (not out to prove one-self or win at the cost of others), is
not easily provoked (can handle correction, opposition and the truth), thinketh no evil (is not suspicious and thinks the best first)". "Rejoiceth not in
iniquity (what is harmful, malicious and unjust),
but rejoiceth in the truth (what is real, genuine, honest, straight and true)"!
Ephesians 5:24-33 speaks of a great mystery concerning Christ and the church. By reading this passage it is clear Paul is comparing the love affair between Christ and His Bride and a husband and his wife:
Husbands
are to love their wives as
Christ loved the church. How
can a husband be loving his wife if he is not giving her choices
(space).
I have met many dictatorial husbands who brutally treat their wives
through
abusing their God given right as head of their household. These
religious
tyrants, snug and smug, and at home in fundamentalist circles, do not
give their
wives
choices but keep them subjected through legalistic bondage. They
run them the way they want to run them, all in their favour, with
nothing
or very little in their wife's favour. This is certainly not how
Christ loves His
people (His Church, His Bride), who He has called to liberty, giving us
space and the liberty
in
making choices.
Pr. 31:11. "The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her".
Scripture says that perfect love casts out all fear. Therefore, as Christ loved the Church and gave His life for His Church, so husbands are to love their wives with this same perfect love. Not manipulating them through quoting a verse (1 Corinthians 7:4:A?). Nor ruling them and keeping them in line with fear tactics and intimidation, or emotional blackmail.
Pr. 3:31. "Envy thou not the oppressor, and choose none of his ways."
Looks like choice again! I just couldn't resist!
Decisions is making choices
God is love! That's scriptural, as already acknowledged. Moreover, because God loves us, He give us choices ... what toothpaste or shampoo we prefer! What meat I want to purchase and can eat (you can eat as much pork as you like, just leave me alone if I choose not to) etc. Which Brother I can call in on and have a cuppa tea with and which friends I choose to associate myself with (try 1 Cor. 5 & 15:33, & 2 Tim. 2:22).
Because we love our wives we just naturally accept they have choices like their husbands ... Is she free to go and have a latte with her girlfriends? What dress she would like to buy, how she wants to wear her hair (the Butch look is out of course), and how she presents her home to her own taste (here's da scriptures ... "her household", "guide the house", "keepers at home")! etc. Or do you work out her grocery list and menu for dinner? And stack the cupboards the way you want them stacked, after your own fashion? Or ... "look out if she gets details wrong!" That's the opposite to love, and is binding her, and being a control freak! Here's those scriptures again ... "her household", "guide the house", "keepers at home"!!!
Mundane? Common sense? Yes, to some. But to others what I am saying is apparently unscriptural, and even error. Some would even get irate! Some may unsubscribe from my list. Usually every time I send out a Beyond Snippets Plus email people unsubscribe, no matter what the topic is. I would say I would have just as many people unsubscribing as I do joining my list. That's life! It could be an indication I am up the Khyber (who's infallible anyhow?). Or it could be an indication I am speaking the truth. You choose (whoops!!! ... only if you believe you can)?
My
boys are well and truly young adults now, and working
and paying their keep. They have their own cars and within reason
can
choose
if they want to drive down to the shop and buy an ice-cream or go and
visit a mate or a girlfriend. That's freedom, is it not? We
also gave
them the choice of what
sports they
wanted to play, and whether they wanted to learn to play a musical
instrument or not, etc., as they
were growing up (what!! ... you didn't make them??). We even gave
them
the choice to "go to church" or not,
and which one to attend (they had been enlightened by their parents, of
course). After volunteering they opted out after the
second or third Sunday visit (phew!?). Therefore, is it a
coincidence
they have much more discernment than your average, everyday religionist?
I don't think I am a dictator ("the strict cruel tyrant" has been hopefully humbled over the years) and allow space for my family because I love them. If I made all their decisions and ran their lives, I would be hating them, wouldn't I? Don't get me wrong ... there is a lot of things we made them do and gave them no choices, when it came down to common everyday chores and behaviour. We gave them spankings for far less than what "loving" Christian parents (Pr. 13:24) let their brats off with today ("Oh, don't do that Dear ... O- n - e ... t - w - o ... t - h - r - e - e ... " "One more warning ... O - n - e ... t - w - o ... t - h - r - e - e ... " "I really mean it this time ... your last chance ... O - n - e ... t - w - o ... t - h - r - e - e ..." "Just do as I say ... O - n - e ... t - w - o ... t - h - r - e - e ... " Grrrrr!!). However, if I ruled with an iron fist all the time, I would be a dictator.
I have already mentioned on another occasion, about a Christian KJV man I know who ran his wife so much, because he was an utter control freak, that she took her life when she got hold of a firearm (after they had moved away to another district). I was so deeply saddened by this event, because I felt so powerless in helping her when she use to try and pour out her heart to me (even with the occasional black eye or something) when I use to pass her house walking the dog. I was also angered when I found out some time later this "Christian" husband had the audacity to conduct her funeral service single-handedly. He chose to of course!
Then there is a similar religious deception where people think God does all their thinking for them, just as some men want to do all their wives thinking for them. Or in reverse ... want a Jezebel to do all their thinking for them. Or further ... want a religious professional to do all their thinking for them (well, that's what they are hired to do, isn't it?). I remember going into the religious bookstore in our town a few years ago and bumping into a "Predestinationist Only" brother who was roaming the shelves in deep thought.
"Gidday Bro," I said. "What's ya up to?"
"It's my wife's birthday Tom, and I am asking the Lord to show me what to buy her for a present. However, He hasn't told me what to buy up till now."
"Don't worry about it Bro, as the Lord has given us a choice," I responded. "Just choose one yourself, and thank the Lord for His provision!"
I
could tell by his reaction he did
not like what I said, as it
was
totally against what he had been taught by his "Christian" guru. Besides,
if
he got the wrong present ... guess who got the blame? Then
again, how can God get the blame when He has told "me" what to buy or
what
to say? Which is the big 'put on' many use to manipulate others
by
taking them aside and quietly saying, "The LORD has told me to
tell
YOU ... blaa blaa blaa!" In other words
... "You'd better receive what I am saying as being from GOD or
else
you could
be in trouble!" You've got it ... in other words, "Do as I say!"
Three
days later, at a house-warming
weekend barbecue, I got
bailed
up in a corner of the garden (almost pinned to the wall in fact) by his
leader,
himself, and the rest of "the Mob", who came straight at me doing the
'heavy
thing', reprimanding me severely for making such an outlandish
statement,
that we can make choices from exercising our will. Now, of
course,
they did choose to tackle me for what I said (no one dragged them over
to me involuntary wise ... I think?), and it could have been
through just plain immaturity and ignorance on their part. Or it
could have
been
because they had chosen to give themselves over to error. Or then
again, was
it because they were being driven by some invisible heavies they had
unbeknownly let into their lives by religious deception? Still,
it was hard getting around the fact ... they had chosen to, if
this was the case!
Job 34:33. "Should it be according to thy mind? he will recompense it, whether thou refuse, or whether thou choose; and not I: therefore speak what thou knowest.
Exercising our will is not easy by the way. Especially early, on a very cold and dark frosty morning, when I have to get out of bed to go and earn a living. The Lord has never physically thrown me out of bed yet (although my wife has tried to).
A few years ago a friend of mine, who had just come to the Lord and been delivered of heroin (plus teenage years of financing his habit through crime), was asked by someone how he managed to give up smoking cigarettes. There were other brothers around at the time, who had been confessing Christians, acting spiritual, but were still regular cigarette smokers (you know ... the LORD had not directly and audibly told them to, 'Give up' ... yet, using a heavenly megaphone type of thing!). My friends simple reply was something like this:
"If you are not prepared to give up smoking you have got no excuse. You wilfully go and get your car keys off the shelf, then go and get into your car and start up the engine. Next, you drive down to the nearest dairy yourself (drugstore for my US readers). Then you get out of your car and physically go into the shop on your own accord, and grab a packet of cigarettes off the shelf and pay for them yourself over the counter. Then you take the packet outside and physically open them yourself, and place a ciggy in your mouth and light up to begin to inhale. Next you are inhaling. Nobody else has done this for you. You are the one performing this exercise on your own. You can't blame God, the Devil, but only yourself!"
The
scriptures say ... "For
this is the love of God, that we keep
his commandments."
Many
are forced to give up smoking now not because they have yielded their
bodies to God as His temple and dwelling place, but because society has
coerced them to through social engineering techniques. However,
the believer does so because he chooses to through the conviction power
of the Holy Ghost, to live according to the word. His body has
now became the temple of God, and not the church "sanctuary" a couple
of blocks away.
Isaiah
7:15. "Butter and honey
shall he
eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose
the
good."
Can't getaway from that word "choose" can we? Especially if you choose to read your Bible quite regularly!
Obedience
It's true! We can do nothing except it be HIM and of HIM! The LORD that is!. He is our Maker and the believers Redeemer as scripture says: "For in him we live, and move, and have our being".
However, within the sphere He has called us, or planted us, we do have God given autonomy over our own lives (because God is sovereign and gives gifts unto men for His own purpose). We teach our own children that with gifts and privileges come responsibility. The most paramount responsibility we have is that we have been commissioned to go and make disciples of the nations (the peoples of the world). In every facet of New Testament life and faith, the onus is put on the individual believer. This is an undeniable and irrefutable fact, as already proven in these posts.
To
make disciples is to make converts
first. The ball is in the
believers
court and the Lord has called the shot. However, the believer
cannot
act
alone as Jesus said the Holy Spirit would be given as our Comforter and
as the Psalmist declared ... "Behold, God is mine helper: the
Lord is
with them that uphold my soul."
Yes,
the onus is on the believer, to
do the will of the Lord, and not
serve his own agenda; with the Lord's help of course. When
Jesus met up with a certain
lame man at the pool named
Bethesda Jesus
asked him, "Wilt thou be made whole?" Paraphrased as, "Would you
like
to be healed?"
The
lame man's response was how he
couldn't, unless someone picked him up and transported him into the
pool. Yes, he wanted to be healed all right and he also thought
his
healing
would be found in that pool. When Jesus told him to "Rise, take
up thy
bed, and walk", it was
the man who responded to Jesus by his own actions, and was not
transported
supernaturally to that place of walking upright and free from
hindrance, as he found that he could stand and walk on his own two
feet. This happened as the miraculous process
was activated by God, as he responded to Jesus by trusting in His
words. Therefore, no pool was necessary, just his obedience to
Jesus by acting on His word.
At another incidence, when Peter was in the boat with the rest of the disciples, and Jesus came to them walking on the water, Jesus did not command Peter to come to Him (this command had already been given to Peter when they first met) but Peter appealed to Jesus:
"Lord, if it be thou (not a spirit or a spook, nor a mirage or an illusion), bid me come unto thee on the water."
What
happens to a muscle when it is being exercised? It gets
strengthened,
does it not? What happens to a Christian when faith is being
exercised?
His faith is strengthened! If it is not
being exercised it grows weak and limp. Therefore,
though we are weak, we are strong in Him, by walking and trusting in
Him, as His power is manifested in our weakness.
This is a biblical principle.
"Not that we are sufficient of
ourselves
to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of
God.
That our boasting may be in Him and not ourselves."
Peter
got out of the boat by an act of his own freewill in
response
to Jesus' admission. Jesus did not command or compel, or
manipulate,
or automate Peter the individual disciple. But Peter responded by
choice.
Walking on water was done by Peter. He was in charge of his own
faculties.
His limbs responded to the impulses of his brain, which he was supposed
to be in control of. The water holding
up Peter was God's part. Peter had Divine help as he stepped out
in
faith. Peter walking was
his part. The water miraculously not giving way to Peter was the
Lord's part. The fact Peter responded in this contrary situation
was to do with faith. Faith is a gift from God. But faith,
now (present tense), is a substance according to Hebrew 11:1. The
substance of things
hoped
for. Without this substance being exercised, faith is dead.
Thus
faith needs to be exercised to prove it is the evidence of things not
seen and this is the disciples part. Because without faith (a
living
substance)
being exercised and applied, it is impossible to please God.
This is
the difference between being a doer of the word than just a mere
hearer! Yes, Peter responding and walking, and using his
faculties and limbs, was indeed his part. Holding Peter up and
not allowing him to sink into the liquid called water was God's part.
The miraculous part.
Amos 3:3:
"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
God does His part and the disciple obeys. God commands the disciple and the command places the onus on the disciple. The disciple is in charge of his own limbs, his own faculties, his own speech, his own responses. This includes his own spirit (Proverbs 25:28). He has a choice in responding to God. If he draws near to God, then God will draw near to him. If he abides in Christ, then Christ will abide in Him. If he dies with Christ, then He will surely reign with Christ. The onus is on the disciple. He can either choose life or death, blessing or cursing, walking in the Spirit or walking in the flesh. The blessings of God are hinged on the disciples obedience. As the verse previously mentioned says, "the Lord is with them that uphold (his) soul." The disciple merely reaps what he sows in the Lord. Remembering; God is still God, who will never violate His own principles.
To
be haughty and use the privilege of a free gift and to say it is of
your
own doing
is error, because everything comes back to God anyhow. Even our
obedience
and the choices we make. Pride can hinder God in our life
(especially
religious pride) as God
may choose to harden or soften our heart, or take grace away and hand
us over to depravity. The sins of Sodom, by the way, were not
homosexuality;
but pride, idleness, and fullness of bread. Going after strange
flesh
was not a choice in the end (and nothing to do with aliens or monsters or fallen angels), but a handing over to it from the
Lord.
This revelation should change our whole idea and attitude to sin and
perversion, as well as both personal and collective "moral" crusades we
may be instigating. It would also fill us with the fear of
God.
Knowing, even repentance is a
gift. Simply because without it, we are lost and helpless.
That is why we need to be desperate for God and walk circumspectly
before Him, continually.
Obedience is nothing to do with religion or works. Religion and works are an alternative or counterfeit to obedience. Adam and Eve were disobedient. As an alternative they covered up their inadequacy with rigging fig leaves as a cover. This was the first religious act recorded in the Bible, and was still disobedience (deception actually), as they tried to disguise their disobedience. The next religious act was Cain bringing his produce to God as an offering. Trying to buy his way in other words, thinking God would be pleased with his effort. In contrast, Abel sacrificed a lamb (it cost him and meant an innocent life, with the shedding of blood) and God was pleased. Abel was not automated by God to fulfil God's need, but came as an act of his own accord with a freewill offering. That is why scripture said it was his (Abel's) offering which counted him as righteous. This is why there was an offering in the Old Testament called the free offering (or freewill offering) as already explained (and proven), as in type ... looking forward to the cross, "that speaketh better things than that of Abel".
Ex.
36:3. "And they received of
Moses all the offering, which
the
children of Israel had brought for the work of the service of the
sanctuary,
to make it withal. And they brought yet unto him free offerings
every morning."
Amos 4:5. "And offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving with leaven,
and proclaim and publish the free offerings: for this liketh
you,
O ye children of Israel, saith the Lord GOD."
In regards to our services to others, for the Lord's work, let's look at the next two verses:
Ezra 2:68 ... "when they came to the house of the LORD which is at Jerusalem, offered freely for the house of God to set it up in his place".
Ezra 7:15. "And to carry the
silver and
gold, which the king and his counsellors have freely offered
unto
the God of Israel, whose habitation is in Jerusalem".
Yes,
God responds to us when we respond to
Him, in humility and knowing His way is higher than mans, and without
Him, we can do nothing. Obedience is better than sacrifice.
Being a
doer of what is written and not just a forgetful hearer, or going beyond
the commandment of the Lord with our own form of service, is indeed better! As
Ephesians
6:6 says "... doing the will of God from the heart".
When we don't have a choice
A cult is any religious group where a man teaches that he can overrule the Bible and impose his own teachings. It is where scripture is used to justify a cause other than God's. Many preach a watered down lovey-dovey gospel, where truth has been removed out of the equation. It is where the notion is paraded that God has given us a choice when it comes to salvation and where Jesus pleads with the sinner constantly to come to Him and make some sort of commitment to go in His direction, like we were doing the Lord a favour. This is making salvation comfortable for the sinner ("Jesus is giving me a choice now, which means I can come later when I feel I might be ready") where true biblical repentance is no longer needed in order for someone to be converted. However, repentance is a command not a choice:
Acts 17:30. "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent".
This is the gospel with truth in the equation. However, this truth is not just hard, cold facts, and clinical in application; but is coupled with compassion and feeling for the lost and dying:
2 Peter 3:9. "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
Many tend to forget that repentance is a gift. Saying, "I will go and enjoy the world now, and later, when I'm ready, I will come back to God." No doubt a great lie from down below. A lie which has fuelled the apostasy of our day, and keeps it rolling like a runaway steamroller.Does all mean all?
Revisiting the word ALL again in scripture, lets look at 2 Cor. 5: 14-15 again:
If
all in scripture was only
referring to the "us-ward" (as 2 Pet. 3:9 above), then why did the elect need to
repent when they already
should
have, which was the condition for them to become a child of God in the first place (born
again
into the election)? Paul constantly makes
reference
to all men throughout his epistles. Some argue that when Paul was
saying all men he was only referring to redeemed men, and never
to the unregenerated. Though this can easily be construed as true
in
some
cases, from many of the references it can be safely said that when Paul
mentioned all he was generalizing (meaning redeemed and
unredeemed
together), although some times narrowing it to the elect. The above passage (2 Cor. 5: 14-15) is very clear that all is applying to the whole world whereas they is applying to those in Christ, the Household of faith.
F'instance,
is Paul only referring to
the Household of faith
here? Scripture proves he certainly was not:
2 Tim. 2:24. "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient".
If all men was only referring to the elect then Paul wouldn't have mentioned in other verses about our conduct in regards to not only those within (the redeemed) but also those without (the unregenerate lost) ... Titus 3: 1-2 & Hebrews 12:14.
Following is more indisputable proof from scripture that the gospel is to the whosoever and ALL usually does mean ALL:
1 Timothy 2:4. "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
Could this verse just be referring to the elect? No way! Before verse 4 comes, verses 1 and 2 are keeping everything in context:
"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty."
No
doubt Paul was referring to the
civil
system
of men outside the kingdom.
1 Thes. 5:15. "See that none render evil for evil unto any
man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves (the brethren), and to
all men (those outside Christ)."
Try
reading through the above verse again and again until you see quite
clearly Paul is referring to two distinct groups of people here
... one being those who were part of the Body. And two
... those who were still in the world ... all men outside of
Christ! There simply cannot be any other way to look at it unless
you delectably change words or lines to fit in with your doctrine, or
someone's doctrine.
1 Tim. 4:10. "For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe."
The above verse says God is the saviour of ALL men. Which means ALL, because out of the ALL, the scripture is also pointing out a segment of 'the all' to those that believe. To ... "ALL men (the whosoever)", "specially of those that believe (the remnant)."
Therefore, it is safe to conclude in the following verse that ALL means to ALL men, being reminded that Jesus was the light that shone in darkness:
Titus 2:11. "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men"
From Titus 3: 1-2 we can see that Paul was referring to all men from them being in the kingdom as well as those being outside.
Then there are others who justify being indifferent when it comes to fulfilling "the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men".
"All", not meaning "all" in an individual head-count of course. What I am saying here is when scripture says "all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan" went out to meet John the Baptist, it obviously did not mean all the bedridden and insane, and all those who held positions of vital responsibility (in some cases). What scripture means with "all" here is in a blanket generalization ... in all types of people in all categories. But to (all) "them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people (Rev. 14:6)".
However, some would say the word "all" does not necessarily mean "all" in this sense either (contradicting Rev, 14:6 and other equal opposites such as Jer. 2:29, Rom. 3:23, Rom. 5:12, & 1 Cor. 8:1 ), but only purveys to those who qualify, or have been pre qualified, through pre election. If this was true, then how can the verse "let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith", be of relevance? If "all" did not mean "all", then Paul would not have added ... "especially unto them who are of the household of faith." Confirmed by other verses, should I say. F'instance:
"See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves (the brotherhood), and to all men (the world)."
Again, if this particular verse was not literally referring to "all men" would not of Paul mentioned "both among yourselves (the elect within), and to all men (without)"?
Repeating this one again:
"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe."
Reinforcing the fact, if Paul was not meaning "all men" then again he would not have added "specially of those that believe (the elect)"!
"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."
"Love the brotherhood", again differentiating the brotherhood (God's elect) from honouring "all men" (within and without)! Also, if honouring "all men" was only referring to those within, scripture would only be referring to honouring a regenerate king, but not an unregenerate king without. I don't think so!!! One of the qualifications of electing elders was for him to be "gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men." Not just to the brotherhood within! Paul also said, "I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some."
The "some" here would be those few who would be saved. However, Paul was being all things to all men (all men) that some out of them all might come to salvation. Again, we have the "some" as those being within and the "all" being those without. Both parties cannot be the elect here, as in all the above scripture mentioned. Two distinct types of people ... the "all" being those without, and the other party mentioned ... the elect within.
Following is quite a few more examples irrefutably differentiating between those of the household of faith and ALL also including everyone outside the household of faith.
2 Cor. 3:2. "Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men"
We
are a living witness for Christ
unto the
whole
world, and are not called to be a witness to the elect. What
point would that be ... reaching the found and ignoring the lost?
2 Cor. 9:13. "Whiles by the experiment of this ministration they glorify God for your professed subjection unto the gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men".
"Them" being the household of faith. "All" being those without also ... the lost.
Rom. 5:12. "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned".
Rom. 5:18. "Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
The above scriptures prove beyond doubt that if ALL means ALL in sin and condemnation, then ALL must mean equally ALL when it comes to who the free gift is for ALL men! As the scripture is not showing discrimination one way or the other.
Rom. 12:17. "Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men."
In other words, our witness to Christ is to be towards ALL men.
1 Cor. 10:33. "Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved."
There is no room left for doubt here that Paul is referring to ALL as the lost also, giving as many as he can, the offer of salvation. That the free gift of God is to the 'whosoever' in other words.
The Whosoever
Exodus 32:33. "And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever (of any of ALL the children of Israel) hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book."
Right up to 2 Kings 21:12 there are about 52 "whosoevers" alone in scripture, as pure warnings against the children of Israel in general (not to a special elect of that nation, the remnant of Israel). With these "whosoever" warnings throughout the books of the Bible it can mean no other than ALL the children of Israel, as a type of the world, in the same way as 'the remnant of Israel' being a type of 'the remnant in Christ' carried over into the New Testament. Therefore, the question that needs to be asked against those who claim the "whosoever" are just a pre select few is ... "how can scripture be a warning to the detrimental effect of not obeying God, and only be limited to a few, when common sense knows clearly God was referring ALL those who disobeyed Him?" Just as in the same context, how can God be referring to a few (His chosen remnant) when a blessing is issued to those who obey? Take just these few references f'instance:
Matt. 5:19. "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
Here also, "whosoever" must be meaning ALL as it is referring as a warning to anyone who disobeys, in the same sense those "whosoevers" who obey shall be rewarded. If it was just a warning to the chosen few who can't be lost or lose their salvation, then why do the chosen few have to be warned like this, repeatedly through scripture? There is heaps more similarities in scripture, in the same context:
Matt.
10:32. "Whosoever
therefore shall
confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father
which
is in heaven."
Opposite
to ...
Matt. 10:33. "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."
If scripture is referring to those "whosoevers" who deny Him before man, and go to damnation, then surely scripture must be equally referring to the "whosoevers" who confesses Him before man and receive eternal life. It is pure and simple logic as well as plain arithmetic here, that both opposites are the same "whosoevers" referred to:
Matt. 16:25. "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it."
Again, the above verse cannot just be referring to the so-called pre elect for the pre elects sake. If it was referring to just the pre elect, then how can the pre elect save or lose his life? How can the pre elect be given the ultimatum of having a choice of two responses? If the pre elect are saved anyway, it would not make sense for God to have this warning and promise together in the scriptures, for the purpose of the "whosoever" (whosoever this is?) to act or respond one way or the other.
Gal. 5:10. " I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be."
There is no doubt Paul was meaning just that ... whosoever he be. And none other. Look out if a religionist of the concession (not a true believer) comes and tries and places a burden on you!
Rev. 14:11. "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
If the whosoever in the above verse is referring to the pre elect when it comes to salvation, then surely using this logic, the whosoever who are lost must only be a selection out of the world. Of course this is not the case, as the scripture means the whosoever is the whosoever:
Rev. 20:15. "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."
The "whosoever" here is not just a "pre select whosoever", but ALL those who were not found written in the book of life. Which means they were part of those who were lost anyway.
Rev. 22:17. "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Surely
this call is for the
whosoever, not
just
a pre select whosoever, because both the Spirit (God) and the Bride
(the
elect) are saying "Come!" So how can, and what is the point of
the
pre elect calling the pre elect? It is obvious the elect, in
agreement
with the Spirit, are calling the whosoever, who are not the elect but
the
lost. It's just plain common sense! The whosoevers in 22:17 are
the
same categorized whosoevers in 14:11 and 20:15. Just as Matthew
10
verse 32 and verse 33 are.
Whosoever
believes this ... do
so please,
only on the grounds of rightly dividing the word of truth!
Abusing freewill
Many men (and women) are called but few are choosing, as repentance is a gift and is not to be obtained lightly or responded to glibly. Our call to the Lord is not a facile walk:
John 6: 64 - 65. "But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father."
The following statement is abuse of freewill, reiterating what we have already touched on:
"I will come to Jesus when I'm ready!!"
Oh yeah!! What if the Lord does not grant His Spirit? Then you can do nothing, and will be with them in the weeping and gnashing of teeth because they fooled with God and abused His gift, and were not desperate for His mercy and grace. Here's the scripture:
2 Tim. 2:25. "In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth".
If you have got backslidden friends or relatives then you'd better snatch them out of the fire! Now, before it's too late! If they continually make excuses, then move on, shaking off the dust! Didn't Jesus say, Let the dead bury their dead? The Lord knows from the beginning. He sees the end from the beginning. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Where does the Lord choose His elect? Answer is in Isaiah 48:10:
"Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction."
Many are called, but how many of them "being called" receive the word gladly, then "when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended (Mark 4:17)"?
Jesus
said, "Take heed what ye
hear: with what measure ye mete,
it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be
given."
What
was the very first command given
to Israel? Answer ... TO
HEAR!!
Mark
12:29. "And Jesus answered
him, The first of all the
commandments is, Hear, O Israel (mentioned another seven
times in
the OT); The Lord our God is one Lord"!
Who's hearing the word of God? May be many of those who are called, but few are those who do it! This is the vast difference between the forgetful hearer and the effectual doer. He also said, "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." That's why we are exhorted to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. It is frightening and sobering to know that salvation is not given lightly or thrown at us like a Santa Claus lolly scramble. Nor is it likened unto rubbing a Jeanie Lamp. Because at the end of the day ... God does give every one a chance:
"I gave her space to repent of her fornication."
Good enough for Jezebel the witch, the adulteress, the apostate and deceiver, then good enough for everyone. This is why Peter made it clear to all in Acts that they had to repent in order to be saved. They could not do it on their own merit, or initiative, or strength. It had to be a Divine encounter or nothing:
Acts 3:19. "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord".
Acts
8:22. "Repent therefore of
this thy wickedness, and pray God,
if perhaps the thought of thine
heart
may be forgiven thee."
Paul
went further than Peter and the
apostles. God had granted
him the revelation of Jesus Christ in its fullness. This was also known in
the
NT as 'the
mystery of His will (God's will)' in that salvation is fully wrapped-up
in none other than in the person and name of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Being
decided, in
other words, on what we do or don't do with this mystery (the Lord
Jesus Christ) ... "Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages
and
from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints"! Has
God
revealed this mystery to your spirit direct, or are you
"saved" on
the basis of what your church or minister has said?
Just
the other day at work (this part
being written about two
years after I was well into writing this treatise) I had to correct
a Christian sister who
tried
to make it easy for another work colleague. She said to me in
front
of our colleague how our colleague was baptized and had asked the Lord
into her heart at one time in her life. On these premises (and on
these premises alone) she had
convinced herself and was trying to convince me and our colleague that she was a Christian. I said in front of them both
that although these actions may have been right, at the end they meant
absolutely nothing. I said Jesus said we can only be His disciple when we
continue
in His word. And before we can do this we need to be
spiritually
born again first,
in the innerman that is. Our spirit has to be made new, in other
words. This meant our spirit had to go through a spiritual
regeneration process called being born again and made alive unto God
our Maker through His Son
Jesus. A spirit that was
willing
and obedient to be led by the Spirit of the Lord. Where at the
end of the day, we could
confidently say, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet
not I, but Christ liveth in me"!
A hairy fairy "Jesus in my heart" is not good enough without abiding in the word daily, where we "bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance." Paul put it slightly different ... "that they (both Jew and Gentile - Acts 26:20) should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance." This is called abiding in Him, and He is in us (Jn. 15:4). Drawing near to God in order for God to draw near to us (to paraphrase the verse James 4:8)!
If
I let this person off the hook
thinking I was doing her a good
turn
by my vocal pleasantries, I would be denying her true salvation and
would not be
loving her God's way that is (who
believed
you could be a Christian without reading your Bible, along side using
His name
in vain and having a foul mouth, as well as fraternizing with the
world)!
According to scripture, let me repeat ... if I did not bring her
the
truth, the way God sees it, I would be hating her. Even not
disciplining your kids or pampering their wants is hating them,
according to scripture. Don't take up your argument with me
...
take
it to Dad! I never wrote the Book! Molly coddling is
wicked! This
indeed goes against the grain in today's PC age (again, please don't
shoot the
messenger - Proverbs 27:6) ... "Faithful are the wounds of
a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful." Heb.
12: 5 - 9:
"Ye have not
yet resisted unto blood,
striving
against sin. And ye have forgotten the exhortation which
speaketh unto
you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the
Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the
Lord
loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he
receiveth.
If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for
what
son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be
without
chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not
sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which
corrected us,
and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection
unto the Father of spirits, and live?"
Yes,
salvation is a gift as knowing God is a privilege! However, with
this gift comes commands, admonishments, instructions, disciplines, and
responsibility. Who wants to be called to this? Do I see
that hand!!!
Jesus
in your heart
What I am trying to point out here is there is nothing new under the sun, and everything has been done or been used before. Getting back to "accepting (or receiving) Christ into your heart" is nothing new but is actually a scriptural principle when taken in context:
Eph. 3:17. "That Christ may dwell (be, live, liveth, abide, reside, make home, tabernacle, set up His residence) in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love"By taking the word or the Holy Spirit into our hearts is taking Christ into our hearts. The whole difference between the two covenants is that the New is serving the Lord in newness of spirit from the engrafted word in the heart, while the Old is serving letters inscribed on stone, and leaving God on a mountain or its leader dead in the wilderness. Scripture is very clear and precise:
Gal. 4:6. "And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father."Where does one see this operating and taught today? If it was, in most cases it would be a "lovely" sermon to add eloquence and colour to Sunday or routine. Which is the religious pattern and platitude of our day, is it not?
2 Cor. 3:2. "Ye are our epistle written in our
hearts,
known
and read of all men".
Moreover, this certainly is
not leaving God back on a mountain, or leaving Him
back in the building as under the Old Covenant!
Some may not have a problem
with Jesus living or dwelling in our hearts
but may with the term "accepting Him into our heart". I
know if
the
emphasis on this is done in an easy and flippant way, without the aim
of
sanctification and holiness through being dead to the world and alive
unto
God, then it is in error. However, the individual being given the
ability by His Maker to make choices is scriptural, along with
considering
God will never gatecrash into our life, violating our willingness or
non
willingness to yield to Him. Here is the scripture as 1 Peter
3:15.:
"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts".
The Lord will never rule over our spirit intruding into our own lives and taking us over, even though He is sovereign, omnipotent, and almighty. Remember this verse?:
The important thing is that Christ does now live in us (in our hearts) as we are sealed by Him, where we no longer own ourselves but are owned by our Maker, as we also live unto Him. For we have chosen, by a willing heart He has granted us, to relinquish self-ownership and selfwill (a scriptural term) of ourselves to the Lordship of Christ. Being now His servants, serving a gracious and loving King. Therefore, our earnest prayer should be that God gives us His Spirit (Ps. 51:11) to respond to Him in the way He desires. Repeating again ... for without Him, we can do nothing. For we are "the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."
Yes ... Christ in you, the hope of glory!
Who chooses who?
Why is the doctrine of 'Predestination'
being
pushed so much at present, even to the extent of being majored on above other doctrines in
many cases, causing
all sorts of havoc and division within the Body? Please show me where
Predestination Only is being taught by
preachers
without reference to "famous" "heroes" and advocates being used as
evidence to its supposed scriptural
validity as in the context of 'pre
elitism through Divine pre selection'? In other words, why the absence of using
just pure scripture
to back scripture, placing this recycled movement on a par with other
man-made
teachings at present, adding to the confusion Christendom already portrays? Instead of
relying on the likes of the "credibility" of the Reformers and other
historic preachers, whose writings have been re-translated over and
over again,
distorted and taken out of context in many instances, with the
questionable side of their character removed from sermons and
quotations? Even
Christian books from
the turn of the 20th Century have been edited and changed to the point
it is
hard to sort out the authentic from the falsified. Meaning, the only
true
reliable account we can get our hands on today is, as always, the Holy
Bible. In
the end, why
not believe God who said not "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise
pass", above the wisest and cleverest statements ever made by mere
flesh and blood? Very
elementary really!
The
above questions are not so puzzling when
you consider the age old heresy of religionists insinuating anyone
found
outside
their clique as lost, whereas inside their group one would be
guaranteed "the exclusive rights" of salvation and heaven to
come.
A convenient way for man to stamp his own marker-points on salvation
and eternity, no matter how biblically packaged he tries to sell it; so
he gets the final control over revelation and holds the keys to the
kingdom
in the end.
This following passage rules out
sectarianism, denominationalism, cliques and "spiritual clubs" of any
sort, entirely:
John 9: 38 - 42. "Master, we saw one
casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we
forbad
him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid
him not:
for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can
lightly speak evil of me. "For he that is not against us is
on our
part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of
water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily
I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward. And whosoever shall
offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is
better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were
cast into the sea."
The amazing thing is God had His purpose and
plan all sown-up before Creation . For ALL His Creation that
is, and
not just a
selective, pre-worked-out special few. Scripture is clear that God
does not choose an individual before Creation (show me just one verse
where He does?) but "in the furnace of affliction (Is. 48:10)", after
the calling
(post
Creation) ... "For many are called, but few are chosen."
Now let's
examine more
scriptures comparing the odd rotten apple with figs:
Eph. 2:10. "For we are his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before
ordained
that we should walk in them."
Col. 1:16. "For by him were all things
created, that are in
heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be
thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things
were created by him, and for him".
Rev. 4:11. "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to
receive glory and honour
and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy
pleasure they
are and were created.
This would also include reprobates by the
way! Even though it grieved God, and "it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth (Gen. 6:6)," God
obviously knew (in His manifold wisdom) that man would fall and that
some in the end (if not
many) would not
repent. Moreover, some others would err and fall away from the faith, the
likes of what scripture calls a reprobate.
However, the meaning of reprobate has been
misconstrued in the advent of 'Predestination Only' teaching.
Because,
a
reprobate is someone who has deviated
(been corrupted) away from the truth (post conversion) and is not
someone who has not kept the truth from
day
one, or before day one. Meaning ... a reprobate once had the truth,
had tasted of the heavenly gift, and been of the faith, until he veered
off the plain path:
Titus 1:16. "They profess that they know God; but in works they
deny
him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work
reprobate (corrupted, haven become enemies of the cross)."
2 Tim. 3:8 - 9. "Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do
these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning
the faith. But they shall proceed no further (their sojourning has come to an end prematurely)".
We can see from the above verse that some
point in their walk these spiritual
deviants had become
corrupted where they could proceed no further in the path of the just.
In fact, God is so infuriated that He even takes them further away from
the truth and hands them over:
Rom. 1:28. "And even as they did not like to
retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind (corrupted mind),
to do those things which are not convenient".
Here, the above verse clearly shows at a
point in
time God was in the minds of a reprobate
but they did not retain Him in their minds, so Satan was
allowed to
snatch the seed away as God handed them over (by withdrawing His
favour). This meant once they were not reprobate,
until they were given over to a reprobate mind.
Why is a reprobate called a reprobate in
scripture? Simply because Romans 1:28 says:
"And even as they did not like to
retain God
in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to
do those
things which are not convenient".
Actually (getting back to the subject) the word "predestination" or "predestined" are not mentioned in scripture. Go on ... check it out yourself? However, the word predestinated or the word predestinate are. Although they are only mentioned twice each throughout the whole Bible, whereas the word peradventure (meaning "if possible") is mentioned dozens and dozens of time. Yes, something more to think about and something more we will look at, as we come to the end of this series.
As the elect (those born again into His
predestinated will) we
have been, 1 ... predestinated
for
adoption into Abraham's family obtaining his promised inheritance (Eph.
1:5). Fantastic! And 2 ... we have been predestinated to be conformed
to Jesus and to be
justified
and glorified in Him (Rom. 8:29). What more could one wish for!
I do not have
a problem with this at
all. Predestination is scriptural when it is to do with what ALL
people are divinely predestined to in Him. Bearing in mind Hebrews 2:9
also says (which goes beyond the Creation to the new creation) ...
Jesus tasted death for every man! "Christ
Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Tim.
1:15)! It does not say He died to save the chosen, does it? Sinners! Repeating again, to "taste death for every man." The "just for the unjust" (1 Peter 3:18)! Not the just for the pre
selected few!
Unfortunately, the majority
miss out (even the many called, as pointed out), because they reject
God's free gift of
life eternal and are
cast away into outer darkness, which also includes reprobates ...
those who have fallen away from the faith and will never find space to
repent. This is why Paul tells us to be on guard and to examine
ourselves, to make sure we are still in the faith, "and be not moved away
from the hope of the gospel":
2 Cor. 13:5. "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the
faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that
Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"
Notice again it does not say, "except ye be infidels?" But whether ye be reprobates (a big difference)! And, "whether ye be in the faith"!
The faith
What is "the faith"
which the New Testament continually
makes a
big reference to? I have heard so many sermons on faith, and read
much
material about faith, until it has been pouring out of my ears.
Moreover, I am
fully aware that it says that it is impossible to please God without
faith. However, what is The Faith (spelt T-H-E in front of the
word
FAITH) we have read and heard so much about, right through from Acts
6:7
to Jude 1:3, since the time we were exposed to biblical teaching?
Which include
"being obedient to", "continue(ing) in", being
"established in", simply "being in", "striving together for" (sounds
like works to me!), "stand(ing) fast in", "stablished in", "holding the
mystery of", having "great boldness in", "be(ing) sound in", "rooted
and
built up in", "grounded and settled" in, "have(ing) kept", and
"earnestly
contend(ing) for"? Phew!! That is not an exaggeration by
the way, but verses you are free look up for yourself in regards to
"the faith"!
Many get "earnestly
contend(ing) for" confused with "earnestly contending for the
doctrine" (no wonder there is so much scrapping
and going for the
jugular among the saints), which is not exactly what the Bible is
saying. It does say
however,
"contend
earnestly for the faith"!
Yeah ...
THE FAITH!!! The faith of what? "The faith of the
gospel"
that is! "The faith of the Lord Jesus Christ"! "The faith
of the Son
of
God"! "The faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God"!
Again, all verse quoted here, which you are free to look up for
yourself!
Yeah, the faith!!! Are you still in the faith? Continuing in the
faith? Earnestly contending for the faith? The faith ... that's the part
of the
gospel
(the essence of the gospel) which has been ignored, omitted,
distorted, or explained away; which
the New Testament also clearly says "that in the latter times some
shall depart from", "giving heed to
seducing spirits, and doctrines of
devils"! That, "denied the faith, and (become) worse
than an
infidel (a non believer - meaning, believers can deny the
faith and be worse than a non believer)"!
"Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the
resurrection is
past already; and overthrow the faith of some". Which
means ... the faith can be undermined, taken away, subverted, overthrown, or stolen from the saint of God!
How else are we suppose to read into all this, with more additional verses to look up?
Here's more: Having
"erred from the
faith (meaning they once were in the faith - then erred), and pierced
themselves
through with many sorrows"! "Which some professing (that's
professing
Christians - encase it has not sunk in yet) have erred
concerning the
faith." "Who concerning the truth have erred" (meaning some
have
received it - then given up on the truth and the faith)! And on it goes!
Oh children, who has forgotten such child like simplicity in
trusting God as our Father, our Dad, and left the faith for such
clever,
sophisticated alternatives and lofty expositions? "How shall we
escape, if we neglect
so great salvation"?
Chapter and verse ... Hebrews 2:3!
Again ... THE FAITH!!! What is "the faith"
which the New
Testament continually makes a
big reference to? "Divine entrustment" would make a good
definition! That's to do with entrusting our weak and feeble self to this great entrustment!
Taking
on God's entrustment with complete and utter trust. Taking
on God's entrustment as mortified, going-for-broke, mortals.
Granting
Him our full trust and commitment to His faithfulness, whether we
feel like it or not, are accustomed to it or not, are consumed by it or
not. Or whether we can
conjure up enough
belief
for it or not. This could never be anything to do with "sinless
perfection" or floundering
in faith by the way. Nor pumping ourselves up with anticipation,
expectation, selfwill and false hope (presumption is more the
scriptural word here - 2 Pet. 2:10).
One is not lost merely
because
he falls short of
the grace from time to time. Nor for stumbling, or for your failures and
weaknesses. Nor for giving into temptation, or because "as we confess our sins, he is
faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness." However, one can give up in their heart and be
determined to always be in denial to this ongoing entrustment
... in departing from the faith, as we have just read from the New
Testament.
An amazing thing is, we can't trust in this
entrustment (my
paraphrase of 'the faith' - if you have not worked this out yet) by our
own faith (called selfwill in scripture - Titus 1:7), which in
the end, only trusts in the arm of flesh or human
academic achievement. We need His faith, the faith of Christ, which is
a gift from God. Yes, a gift that is, and not a fruit of the Spirit or
the fruits of righteousness as
some would try to explain it! Faithfulness may be
a fruit of the Spirit (a result
of faith). However, faith in itself is a gift! And everyone who comes
to Him is
given a certain
measure of faith, which is always adequate for trusting Him in a given
situation; coupled with fear and trembling, so we don't end up placing
confidence in ourselves again, or focus again on
self-achievement. Therefore, it is the faith the size of a mustard seed, in
the
words of Jesus of Nazareth, which count at the end of the day.
Oh how many times do you hear these days about "the power of
faith" or "the
power of prayer" or "the power of praise" or "the power of love", for
that matter (all catch phrases invented by man to camouflage selfwill
and presumption)? These are all in the same context as the, or, a Higher
Power
being out there somewhere, or trusting in the Higher Power, whoever,
or, whatever this is ("may the Force be with you"). As if God is
brought down to being an impersonal
deism. Or can only qualify as "the man upstairs". Living by faith is
nothing to do with one placing one's trust in "the power of prayer" or
"the power of love", or "a higher power whoever or whatever you
perceive it to be". Which are just mere New Age phrases
being thrashed so much within contemporary Christianized circles. How
can a
converted sinner confess to have placed their faith in "the power of
love" as if love was all important and an all conquering attribute?
The fact is God is love and love is not God. Love is not an attribute
of God either, but His very nature. God is love. Please don't sing
about "the power of love" if you claim to be born again by the Spirit
of God. Where do you find this in scripture? Just the same, how can
someone who has thrown themselves at the mercy and forgiveness of God
say it was to do with "the power of prayer"? Nonsense! If someone
stretched their hand out to God calling for help, and God reached out
and took that persons hand in His compassion and mercy, how could the
rescued soul praise or give claim to the fact it was the power of their
own hand that saved them? They trusted in their own grip eh! Get a grip! Hello!!??
"Oh, you've just gotta feeel the poweeer Brother!!!" "The poweeer
Sister!!!" "Didn't you feeel the warm glow when his hand just touched yours!?
Now,
who would like
to sing-a-long with me?":
"Some believe in the power of the hand (I see that hand!)
To wave the magic wand and bring in the promised land
Others believe in the power of prayer
To make it all happen without trembling and fear
Not to forget to mention the power of love
To lift you in the air as you fly like a dove
While others would dare to call it religious baloney
To avoid making another into a New Age phoney.
While the faithful believe in the power of God
Who view trusting in man more than just a little odd
Placing their trust in the work of the cross
Seeing other alternatives as just candyfloss gloss
Not to forget to mention walking in truth
To let their good works shine as proof
That the rock is more solid than clay
Where at the end of the day ...
God's holy book has the final say."
Why place our faith in faith when we have a loving and merciful
heavenly Father? Who both made us then saved us! Oh, how the word faith (like many other biblical
terms) has been
corrupted and redefined over the years, by man, to suit man! That is
to say and believe the fable, "our faith saves us and makes us
overcomers" ... or "how our
faith
can move mountains and speak things into being, whether it be for great
health or for great wealth!" As if one has the ability to conjuror up
great
mighty faith by share will-power, to do great mighty exploits for God, by
not needing Him. So the name of Jesus becomes just a neat and tidy
packaged name to accommodate and meet our requirements ... full stop!
Here's another myth busted between the faiths and the faith:
"I am a great believer in prayer!!"
Oh yeah ... all faiths are quick to state this are they not?
Whattabout ...
The Faith!? Those in the faith pray because they believe in the God
they pray to, not
because they place their trust in their prayers. Leave that to the
religionists!
May
'98. Updated last 30/4/09 NZ. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feel free to down load, or make copies of any article on The Radical Pilgrim, on the request that its contents are not changed, or sold; along with a link to its Home Page.