Four Thoughts for Forethought

I had a most intriguing week, several things occurred to me about our present society and its desperate depravity. I will attempt to limit those observations here to only four.

1.) I was doing as I do often objecting to the Twilight serious and to my shock, someone responded to that with this statement, "Twilight makes love seem real." I couldn't believe it! Can we not see this huge disconnect!? I mean, WHAT IS REAL ABOUT LOVING A !!!VAMPIRE!!!? Where is that in reality!? And that leads to the next disconnect. Every Twilight supporter universally agrees that Edward Cullen is the perfect suitor. OK, so then that makes him unlike any REAL man. What does that make Edward? UNREAL!!! Why is this so hard to grasp!? Perhaps it all roots in its being emotional pornography for women... but that is another topic for another time.
2.) I was observing that most of the individuals I know outside of the Church are just overgrown children. It came to me as like a brick to the face that most of the ladies in my acquaintance, again outside of the church, my age are two things: single and mothers. These women were never married. This came to me as a shock when I was observing one of their little children. The thought came to me that they have no family structure nor any example thereof. So we see, my brethren, my generation, the destruction of the family in our day. Behold, in our children's generation, the family will be virtually nonexistent.
3.) Sometimes I feel like I am in a rated "R" movie in my work environment with all the most horribly offensive oaths and swearing from left to right. This in a "professional" enviornemnt. This is only confirming my belief, it is not technology that makes a people civilized, but rather, the love of Christ. We are fast becoming a barbaric, heathen people.
4.) When I and some other degenerate are on conversation about holy matrimony, it often leads to the point of children. When asked how many kids I want, I often say 12 as just a round number denoting I want as many as with which the Lord blesses me and expresses my innate fraternal desire to have many kids. However, this fundamental hope of mine is often looked down upon, even in "Christian" circles. They say that I am looking for a woman to be a baby machine. This I find highly offensive as I think it a degrading picture of my wife future and a belief that I see her as naught more than an object. This is disgusting and putrid as this is not at all the case. And I could go on and on on this rant, however that is not my point. My point comes from the lady I noticed in front of my at the grocery store. She had three kids, adorable children, however, I observed this 30s something woman to have no wedding ring. Then the thought occurred to me. The Biblical image of a woman as after whom my heart desires is not infact the degraded creature but, rather, it is the modern woman, thrust forward into career yet is considered little more than a pleasure machine for self-centered men.

Now if you are anything like me, then this sort of thing will only perplex you until you can figure out how to fix it. My conclusion to this complex is that there is nothing we can fax because as wicked as these things or people are, we have to come to the conclusion that we were once just like them, lost in our sin and wicked. So for social problems, we must begin with ourselves. We must not loose sight of the fact that the problem begins with ourselves. However, you may ask the question, what of all them degenerate sinners!? Well, also remember that before you were redeemed, you were them. And what changed you? Certainly not yourselves. Nay, it was Christ! Thus the only solution to these many issues is to proclaim Christ and Him Crucified! This is our mission (Matt. 28:19) and we must simply trust Christ to enact His Will (Isaiah 14:27).

Soli Deo Gloria

The Perseverance of the Saints: A Defense of the Reformed Doctrine

The issue of perseverance has been an area of heated discussion for centuries. Men have hashed over and over questions like: How much does man contribute to salvation? How much does God contribute? Is perseverance unto the end a work for man to accomplish, or is it within the scope of God’s grace that man live a holy life? In recent decades, a new view has come onto the scene; one that puts a whole new twist on the perseverance debate. Now one must even ask whether or not one must persevere to the end in order to enter Heaven. Although these issues are difficult to answer, they are highly practical and must be handled with extreme care. An answer to this crucial subject must be sought out diligently, for one’s stance on it may affect one’s assurance of salvation, one’s view on the relationship between faith and repentance or even affect a person’s practical holiness. Thus, the issue of perseverance is highly practical for the obvious reason that it entails the relationship between one’s practical life and salvation.

When the honest student of scriptures carefully studies the relevant passages, the answer becomes clear: Perseverance is a necessity for the Christian life, but is the fruit of saving faith and thus does not add to one’s justification. Thus the precious Reformed doctrine of Sola Fide can be maintained while recognizing the fact that there is a holiness without which no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

The scriptures are unequivocally clear that justification is by faith alone. This is indeed the central thrust of Paul’s argument in Romans and numerous other passages. The truth of justification by grace through faith in Christ is clearly set forth thus:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.—Romans 3:23, 24, 28

A man is certainly justified before God by faith alone. By “justification” we mean the act of being made righteous in God’s sight. Once one is justified, he is made right with God for all eternity; there is no way that he may ever lose this, for he has achieved peace with God (Romans 5:1). Thus, on that basis Paul can conclude that “neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38, 39). This one-time finished act Paul contrasts with striving to be justified by the law, which every man is condemned by. Because every man is found guilty under the law, Henry writes,

Must guilty man then remain totally under wrath? Is there no hope? Is the wound become incurable because of transgression? No, blessed be God, it is not…there is another way laid open for us, the righteousness of God apart from the law (1760).

This “righteousness of God” is based in Christ’s penal substitution on the cross and is received by faith alone.

A word should here be said about the nature of faith. It has generally been accepted in the protestant church that faith is a passive instrument with which one accepts the salvation offered in the cross (see Horton 87). Also, because justification is ultimately an act of God (Romans 3:24, 8:33), it then follows that faith is a divine gift. This is made clear through passages such as John 1:12, 13, 2 Peter 1:1 and Ephesians 2:8, 9. Thus, Paul can say that there is nothing in the believer’s life that makes justification something that is owed to the sinner—not even faith (Romans 4:1-4). It will be demonstrated later that all of salvation, not just justification, is by God’s free grace.

Thus the beautiful doctrine of man’s enduring peace with God becomes clear. Does it then follow that good works have no sure place in the Christian life? Surely not! The scriptures make abundantly clear that good works are a necessity to the Christian life, but do not contribute to one’s standing before God. This is set forth in innumerable passages of scripture, and we will start with Paul’s great treatise on soteriology; Romans.

Romans six begins Paul’s discourse on sanctification. He begins the chapter by asking a very important question: “Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?” The inquiry is very important, for Paul has just made an extensive and strong argument for salvation by grace through faith. He tells us in Romans 5 that where sin increased, grace increased all the more. One must then wonder, “With all of this grace can we just have a heyday with our sin?” Paul answers almost with disgust: “May it never be!” To understand why this is so, an examination of his argument is in order.

The apostle explains that we will not continue in sin because we are dead to sin. Such a statement is very strong and implies finality. He argues that not only are we dead to sin, but we are alive to God. The language that he uses implies that this is our nature, not some requirement looming over our heads. One commentator writes,

Paul’s great concern is that those who have been justified have been justified unto holiness. We have not been justified by our holiness or through our holiness but unto it so that we might grow in conformity to the image of Christ (Sproul).

Sanctification is a natural outgrowth of salvation. Why is this so, though? Paul argues that it is because of our union with Christ in His death and resurrection. In verse four he says that as we died to sin through the death of Christ we will walk in “newness of life” through the power of His resurrection. The effects of this death to the old self and new spiritual life are then laid out before us clearly in Paul’s argument: We are set free from the slavery of sin (vv. 6); sin is no longer our master (vv. 14) and we are slaves of righteousness rather than slaves of sin (vv. 18-23).

Some very important observations are needed. Notice that Paul does not say that we are freed from sin, for no one this side of eternity has experienced complete freedom from sin. Rather, through our union with Christ, which takes place at the moment of salvation, we are freed from slavery to sin. Jesus says that “everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin” (John 8:34), thus we must be set free from that slavery. When we are regenerated and given new life in Christ, we are then dead to sin and we now live to God; the bonds are loosed and we are free to serve God.

Although we no longer are slaves to sin, we are still in a struggle against sin. Thus, there is a very important already/not yet element to the Christian life: We are already free from slavery to sin by virtue of our new spiritual life, but there remains a remnant of the sinful nature (called “the flesh”) that wars within us and thus we are not yet completely free from sin. Understanding this truth is critical to understanding numerous Biblical texts, such as Colossians three when we are told that we have put off the old man and put on the new man and yet we are told to continually practice these things.

Also we must be sure to notice what now happens to us since we are not slaves to sin. The text does not teach us that we are now free to live neutrally, but we are now slaves of righteousness (vv. 18-23). This means that in our old life before salvation our lifestyles were marked by sinfulness, but in our new life in Christ our lives will be marked by righteous living.

Romans six teaches us the critical truth that the Christian is a new creature and new creatures live a different way. In closing, we must remember that holiness in the Christian life is not a legalistic requirement that binds the believer, but according to Paul it is a natural outgrowth of genuine salvation. Through this truth justification by faith alone is proven to be true while recognizing that holiness does have a place in the Christian life.

There is a plethora of other scriptures that clearly teach this truth, and space prohibits a defense of each one. The reader is directed to passages such as Matthew seven and James two in which works are shown to be a definite necessity in the Christian life

Two more critical texts will be examined to show that they are a defense of the Biblical doctrine. First, Romans 7:14-25. In this text Paul comes to something of a climax regarding sanctification and begins a discourse on the conflict between the sin nature and the new spiritual life of the believer. This passage is significant, for it has often been used as support for the belief that a Christian can live in continual carnality, but the text surely does not support such a notion. It clearly tells us that there is a battle within Paul between the law of his mind (inner, regenerate man) and his flesh. This, however, is not true of the average “carnal Christian” who simply lives in continual sin. There is a real difference between a Christian who sins against his own nature but has a struggle with old fleshly desires and an unregenerate man who is simply being who he is when he sins. Commenting on verse 22 and the fact that Paul delighted in God’s law, Gill writes, “This an unregenerate man cannot do…it can never be delighted in by him” (474). Thus the man described in Romans seven cannot be a Christian livin in continual sin with no battle nor desire to stop.

Lastly, the entire book of First John tells us that there are very important tests of a true Christian. Some that are brought out include walking in the light (1:5-7), hatred for the world (2:15-17), obedience (2:3, 4) and perseverance in doctrine (2:24, 25). These are all evidences that someone has the new life in Christ that every true believer has.

The scriptures are clear that holiness is a promise of the Christian life; every true Christian lives in a lifestyle of following and serving Christ although not perfectly. Though holiness will occur, a Christian’s salvation through faith in Christ cannot ever be lost; he is eternally secure. There are two alternatives to this view: One claims that salvation is secure and justification cannot be lost, however a Christian may or may not persevere to the end. The other group contends that once justified one must persevere through his own efforts in order to be saved—if he doesn’t, his salvation will be lost. There are fallacies within both of these camps that must be brought to light.

The belief in carnal Christianity is a departure from Biblical Christianity. This view asserts that one is eternally secure upon profession of faith, thus one may live like a demon and still go to Heaven when he dies. Some even claim that if one departs from the faith he will still be saved on the Day of Judgment.

The primary argument used to support this position is that salvation must be by faith alone. However, proponents of carnal Christianity modify the sense in which salvation by grace through faith has historically been understood. Those who strongly held to Sola Fide during the Reformation still believed that good works were necessary to the Christian life, as many scriptures so plainly teach (Matthew 7, the entire argument of First John). However, the Reformers understood that no one is made right with the Lord by good works, whether totally or partially. Rather, one is made right with God (and thus saved) by the one-time act of justification by faith. The good works in one’s life do not add or take away from a man’s standing before God (i.e. they are not meritorious), rather they are a result of the changed heart within a believer and God’s keeping grace.

Charles Stanley, in his book “Eternal Security: Can You Be Sure?,” defends his understanding of the believer’s security. He comments,

Once good works are introduced into the salvation process, salvation is no loner by faith alone; it is by faith and works (Stanley).

In Stanley’s view, for salvation to be non-meritorious works must be an option for the believer—they cannot be a necessity. Thus everyone who makes a profession of faith in Christ must be saved; there is no such thing as false faith in this view; for faith has essentially no outward evidences except a profession with the mouth. This flies in the face of Jesus’ clear teaching in Matthew seven in which there are myriads of professing believers who say “Lord, Lord!” on judgment day and Jesus’ response is shocking—“Depart from me, I never knew you…” And what is the characteristic of these professing believers that discredits their confession of faith? “You who practice lawlessness” (Matthew 7:23). Thus there is a thing such as “spurious faith” as this passage clearly teaches. Those who profess Christ and yet practice lawlessness as a style of life will not enter Heaven. Is this because they did not have meritorious works necessary to be saved? No, but as we have demonstrated, the supernatural work of salvation results in good works due to a new nature. Thus John can conclude of those who depart from the faith—

They went out from us, but they were not really of us; For if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us (1 John 2:19).

Many of those who espouse the doctrine of carnal Christianity would actually assert “Oh no, they may have gone out from us, but they are still of us!” and assert that those who apostatize are actually still saved. This is surely not the scripture’s teaching, however.

In defense of his view of assurance, Stanley interestingly quotes 1 John 5:13 which states that John was writing the book that the readers would know that they have eternal life. But Stanley does not show us why what John had written supports his view. In the context of 1 John, the writer presents a series of tests by which one may know that they have eternal life (some stated above), a concept completely contradictory to Stanley’s view of eternal security.

One might ask, “If works ultimately have nothing to do with salvation, then what is the motivation for living a holy life?” For proponents of this view, it is the fact that one who does not choose to “make Jesus Lord” loses out on his rewards. The support for this is found in 1 Corinthians 3:12-23. The Scofield Study Bible makes clear its position on this text: “God, in the N.T. scriptures, offers to the lost, salvation; and for the faithful service of the saved, rewards” (Scofield 1515). This interpretation, however, is a tremendous abuse of the text and it ignores its context. It is not speaking of the rewards of Christians in light of their sanctification but of rewards for ministers in light of building their ministries on Christ. This is so unmistakable through a consistent reading of the context that it is hard to understand how so many miss this. From the beginning of the book Paul contrasts the preaching of the foolishness of the cross with the wisdom of the world and in rebuking the Corinthians’ partiality of teachers goes into the analogies of 3:5-10 and 3:12-23. In both analogies the ones planting, watering and building are Bible teachers, not carnal Christians. Thus the text teaches us that if a minister builds his ministry on man’s wisdom instead of Christ he will lose his reward. The text simply is not giving doctrine concerning sanctification.

Sanctification is essential to the believer, and yet it is not meritorious. To claim that sanctification is merely an option by trying to preserve the doctrine of salvation by faith alone is to go beyond the boundaries of scripture into dangerous man-made theological territory.

On the other hand, there is another branch of Christianity that preserves the necessity of sanctification while denying its surety. This view, which could be called full Arminianism (for both of these views espouse a belief in free will) asserts that one will lose his salvation if he does not persevere to the end. Thus, in this system the doctrine of salvation by grace alone is truly infringed, for if I must keep myself saved of my own free volition, I have much to boast about before God in eternity. Evans comments,

From this, we understand that no one claiming to be a Christian can expect to go to Heaven just because he has believed. His belief has to develop into a godly lifestyle reflective of the redemptive work of Christ (Evans).

For those who hold to this view, in order to be saved there is something that we must do—actually, there is a lot that we must do. In order to be saved we need to persevere, and this is thoroughly our work to do; for if it were God’s work that we persevere all saints surely would. This stance focuses much on the conditions of scripture and asserts that since there are conditions to be met then our work must come into play.

The scriptures make clear, however, that salvation is all of grace. Merit and grace cannot mix, and to do so is to return to Rome in their view of salvation. How do we reconcile these things, then? I think Philippians 2:12, 13 answers this question—

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

This passage teaches us that when I work out my salvation it is nothing more than the result of God working within me to produce the desires and works that are in accordance with His good pleasure. It becomes clear, then, that the only way to maintain salvation by grace alone without denying the necessity of perseverance is to adhere to a Biblical view of God’s sovereignty in all things. If perseverance is my work, I must have merit; but if salvation is all of God; including perseverance, the believer has no other response than to praise Him for His marvelous grace.

These views are both utterly lacking in maintaining the Biblical view of perseverance. We cannot emphasize one side of the coin over the other—Both the security of the believer as well as the necessity of perseverance are true. The only view that does justice to all of the Biblical data is the Reformed view.

Contrary to these unbalanced standpoints, the Reformed understanding of perseverance known as “the perseverance of the saints” does justice to all of scripture. It maintains salvation by grace through faith while understanding that sanctification is essential. One commentator explains the doctrine thus—

The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints does not maintain that all who profess the Christian faith are certain of Heaven. It is saints—those who are set apart by the Spirit—who persevere to the end (Steele 64).

Thus, perseverance is essential to the Biblical understanding. However, perseverance is not meritorious, as Calvin put it in explaining the relationship between faith and repentance—

A man is justified freely by faith alone, and yet that holiness of life, real holiness, as it is called, is inseparable from the free imputation of righteousness (III.I.I).

This is how one balances the texts concerning perseverance and salvation by grace alone.

There is a fundamental difference that exists between the Reformed view and the other two views that is essentially at the root of what divides them. That difference is the doctrine of God’s sovereignty. The only way one can espouse the Biblical view of perseverance is to acknowledge that God is sovereign in every stage of salvation—faith, repentance, justification, sanctification. The difference between the viewpoints runs much deeper than merely methods of interpretation, then; it goes as deep as the very nature of God and His kingly rule over creation. Thus James White can say concerning sovereignty, “This is why we must affirm without apology the truth of the perseverance of the saints. We persevere because it is God’s will that we do so” (White & Hunt). If one holds to the free will of man, either sanctification is an option due to man’s will or one’s salvation can be lost if he does not exercise his will to be sanctified. When one understands that salvation is of the Lord, however, it becomes possible to bind together the doctrine of grace and the doctrine of perseverance.

Bad theology leads to bad practice, and good theology leads to good practice. The belief of carnal Christianity leads to false professions and shallow faith, and the belief of conditional salvation leads to a loss of security and assurance. The application of the Biblical view is simple: Be what you are. Through God’s miracle power of regeneration we are new creatures who are empowered to live the life that God has for us. When we understand that we learn that we simply need to live in accordance with the new life that God has given us. This is the thrust of Paul’s arguments in numerous scriptures in which there is a connection between who we are and the command to live in accordance with it. We have been given the spirit of truth, we must now walk in Him. For the born again believer, God’s commands are not burdensome; for His law is written on his heart (Ezekiel 36:25-27) and we are given the divine promise that Christ will preserve us in Him and keep us from sin (1 John 5:18). May we who have been given hearts of flesh, the Spirit to bear witness and the free gift of justification learn to serve and honor the God who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in Heavenly places (Ephesians 1:4).

Dirge for Who to Die

Death draweth near
I can smell it
like ashes in the air
I can taste it
like iron filings
as on fingers clings
to cell bound
souls underground
chains bound to hell
A city six feet under
where dwell the fell.
Man, the garden after
where to man fell
no better than the fell;
the fallen demon,
Now walking dead men.
Sin in Sin, lets sin again
Now look within
and you'll see the reason
there is so much suffering:
You are the reason
and you are dieing
You will soon be dead
on your death bead
under Wrath of God
your sins punished
unless you accept
Christ Crucified
The gift in except
of your deserts
your heart accepts
your soul converts
The Old Man died
And for once and always
you live in praise
For Salvation
From Christ Risen

Soli Deo Gloria

(c)James Marikle 2009

Definite Atonement: The Perfection of the Work of Christ

The atonement of Christ is one of the most important topics in Christian thought. This is because the work of the cross is the core message of Christianity. Put simply, if the church does not have the cross right, it will crumble into heresy and unbelief. When building a house, one of the most important stages of construction is the foundation. The house may be built beautifully and decorated better than any other building on the block, but if the foundation is bad, it will be useless and, eventually, demolished. This is true of Christianity today. Believers seem to be very infatuated with the minor details of church life: The preaching, the entertainment, the quality of youth group and other services offered. They even worry about theological issues such as who should be baptized, who should take communion, what kind of music is correct for the church, and a gamut of other concerns. But the average Christian’s knowledge of the cross of Christ is rudimentary and often biblically unsound. If believers today were to answer what the words atonement, propitiation, or reconciliation mean, they would be helpless to answer such a query.

Steven Gaston is a high school student that lives in Spotsylvania, VA. He was raised in a thoroughly Christian home and has been brought up with parents that are extremely involved in church. When asked to define these terms, he answered: “Atonement is the covering up of something that was someone else’s’” “Reconciliation is when you are forgiven and given a new beginning.” Steven did not know the definition of propitiation.

Such a loss of understanding on the subject of the atonement in our culture is lamentable. Not just in laymen circles, but among respected theologians the perception of the cross of Christ is almost completely unbiblical and focuses on minor texts on the atonement and, at times, is founded solely on traditions and ideas of men. Christians must regain a balanced and biblical view of the atonement. The view that Christ died for all men incompletely is inconsistent and based on questionable Biblical evidence whereas a strong adherence to a limited and complete atonement has great biblical support. In other words, Christ’s atonement was definite, or specific. It is complete and secure. A regaining of such a view is much needed in the church today.

The doctrine of universal atonement, the most common view in evangelicalism today, is unbiblical and is based on faulty arguments. This doctrine claims that Christ’s work on the cross was intended for all men who have ever lived, but it only made them savable; it didn’t actually secure salvation for anyone in particular. Alternative views are quickly rebuked as an insult on Christ and His work. To deny a universal atonement is, in most minds, on the border of apostasy. This belief is held because of a somewhat understandable but misled desire not to limit the atonement .What this argument does not realize, though, is that both the Arminian and the Calvinist limits the atonement. The Calvinist limits its extent; the Arminian limits its power. The only view that does not limit the atonement is universalism, which believes that all men everywhere will inevitably go to heaven. Thus the one who rejects Definite Atonement is left with only two other options. If one believes that Christ died for all men, as John Owen points out,

“Then one of these two things will necessarily follow: That God and Christ failed at their end proposed, and did not accomplish that which they intended, the death of Christ being not a fitly proportioned means for attaining that end…or else, that all men, all the posterity of Adam, must be saved, purged, sanctified and glorified” (47).

In other words, apart from definite atonement, one must limit the quality of the blood of Christ and assert that His atoning death wasn’t enough to save anybody in the long run, or else must embrace universalism; a standpoint that very few Arminians would accept.

The biblical data supporting universal atonement is lacking. One would think that if someone would go so far as to say that the blood of Christ was not effectual for those it was intended then there must be ample biblical data to support such a claim. In a search for substantial evidence for it, the unbiased student of scripture finds none. The Arminian view of atonement hinges on the definition of universal terms such as “all” or “world”. The universal atonement advocate asserts that passages that say Christ died for the “whole world” or “all men” inevitably mean that Christ died indiscriminately for all who have ever lived. One must wonder why anyone automatically comes to that conclusion, though, since the bible as well as every language in existence do not always mean universal things when they use such terms. These words are often used in scripture to mean men from every race or mankind in general. One theologian comments, “The words ‘world’ and ‘all’ are used in seven or eight senses in Scripture; and it is very rarely that ‘all’ means all persons, taken individually” (Spurgeon). One must assume that the several texts that refer to the atonement as universal are speaking of every man who has ever lived. The only sound way to interpret the meaning of such terms is to conform them to the context in which they were written. When one does that, the support for universal atonement loses its foundation. when someone accepts that “all” and “world” do not always mean everyone who ever lived, the rest of scripture’s account on the atonement forces one to believe in a definite atonement.

The universal atonement theory is even more inconsistent when it is applied to the Trinity’s work in saving sinners. This is an area not often realized by the Arminian. According to their theory, God the Father predestined a plan of salvation, Christ bore the penalty for all men (this is in accordance with modern Arminianism. Historical Arminianism did not hold this view), but the Holy Spirit only seals certain men (those who believe). This view of atonement puts the trinity at odds with each other. Contrary to such a teaching, Ephesians 1:3-14 teaches us that the Father chose a people, the Son redeemed that people and the Holy Spirit is sealing that same people. Michael Horton writes, “Our salvation, therefore, arises first of all out of the joint solidarity of the divine persons” (79). Definite atonement believes that salvation is dependent on the power and faithfulness of each member of the Godhead. Universal atonement simply can not have such security.

Adherents to universal atonement often shy away from the alternative view because they feel that if the salvation of those whom Christ died for are secure, then there will be no reason or fruit in evangelism. Thus many today see the orthodox view of a perfected redemption as the end of evangelism. Not only is this false, but definite atonement actually gives the evangelist hope. As Packer points out, “Far from making evangelism pointless, the sovereignty of God in grace is the one thing that prevents evangelism from being pointless” (116). The one who feels it is up to the sinner to decide to accept Christ’s atonement on his behalf is far more apt to become discouraged than the one who relies on the faithfulness of God. We must remember that God has ordained that His elect are to receive the benefits of the redemption wrought for them through the preaching of the gospel accompanied by the work of the Holy Spirit. As Paul, the greatest evangelist since Christ points out, “I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 2:10). Knowing that God has a people secured for salvation in the world is the motivation of evangelism.

Unlike the flaw- filled theory of universal atonement, the concept of the cross of Christ known as definite atonement is rich in biblical content and is philosophically reasonable. The Arminian view of atonement centers on one sentence statements throughout the New Testament that are not the primary texts concerning the atonement. The Calvinistic view is based on the primary texts and uses the knowledge of them to help interpret the secondary texts.

The Old Testament shows a shining example of a definite atonement. In the Levitical priesthood; the high priest was the intercessor of the Israeli people. It is striking to notice that redemption was not provided for the Hittites or the Philistines. In fact, every nation on earth was excluded from the Old Testament atonement except Israel. Thus we see that the entire sacrificial system before Christ was a limited atonement. The Calvinist asserts that while the Old Testament sacrifices were intended for national Israel, the New Testament sacrifice of Christ is intended for the spiritual Israel, all of God’s elect. The Arminian, however, asserts that the Old Testament sacrifice was for national Israel and the New Testament sacrifice is intended for every man who ever lived. The former appears to be more consistent in this area.

The New Testament gives so much evidence regarding the true nature of the cross that the conclusion is undeniable. The most compelling evidence in favor of definite atonement is the truth that the New Testament views the sacrifice of Christ as perfect and complete, needing nothing in addition to it. John Murray, in defending this doctrine, writes,

“A work was perfected which antedates any and every recognition or response from its beneficiaries. Any curtailing of this fact in the interest of what is supposed to be a more ethical interpretation or in the interest of interpreting the atonement in terms of the ethical effects it is calculated to produce in us is to eviscerate the truth of the atonement” (52).

This in fact is the entire argument of the book of Hebrews. We read,
“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the Holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption…by this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, after offering one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified” (Hebrews 9:11, 12, 10:10-14).

The implication from this text is that in the Old Covenant the priests had to administer multiple sacrifices because they were unable to perfect anybody. Christ’s sacrifice, however, was a finished act. It secured salvation for all whom it mediated. This is shown forth undeniably as the text says that although the priests stand daily ministering, constantly working to atone for Israel’s sins, when Christ made His sacrifice He sat down at the right hand of God. His work is finished from that time onward, thus he does not need to minister daily. Grudem comments on the application of the perfection of the cross to our lives, “It assures us that there is no more penalty for sin left for us to pay. The penalty has entirely been paid by Christ, and we should have no remaining fear of condemnation or punishment” (578). The knowledge that the eternal destiny of God’s people is secure should invoke great comfort to the believer.

Christ secured the salvation of all of His people because he paid their sin debt as a substitute. The term propitiation is often used in the Bible. The word simply means the satisfaction of wrath. Christ was the substitute for a particular people, and the wrath of God is appeased on their behalf through the sacrifice of Christ. Thus Paul can conclude,

“He who did not spare His own son, but delivered Him over for (literally “in place of”) us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? Who will bring a charge to God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; Who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died” (Romans 8:32-34).

Although the penal substitution of Christ is accepted as the orthodox view in modern Christianity (Grudem 579), the stance is only given justice by those who have most strongly propagated it, those of the Reformation and Calvinists. Those who were substituted will never have to pay the penalty for their sin, though universal atonement advocates say otherwise. One can only wonder how the Arminian can believe that Christ paid the debt of men who will afterward pay for their sins again in Hell.

The universal atonement theory is utterly inconsistent and unbiblical. It is based on faulty reasoning and minor passages of scripture. Definite atonement, however, is based on biblical truth and the authority of God’s word above all else. The reader must not allow the trap of following the crowd or standing on long held traditions to get in the way of a sound understanding of the cross of Christ. May we struggle to build the foundation of our faith on solid ground, so that the structure of our faith will be unwavering, rooted deeply in the all- sufficient cross of Christ.




Works Cited
Grudem, Wayne. “Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine.” Zondervan
Publishing 1994. Print.
Horton, Michael. “God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology.” Baker Books Publishing
2006. Print
Murray, John. “Redemption Accomplished and Applied.” Eerdmans Publishing 1955. Print.
Owen, John. “The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.” Banner of Truth 1967.
Print.
Packer, J. I. “Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God.” Intervarsity Press 2008. Print.
Spurgeon, Charles. “Particular Redemption.” Spurgeon.org. The Spurgeon Archive 1858.

Hyper Calvinsm.

I was asked today by a very dear friend of mine if since I believe differently, have different views, if I still believe in evangelism. I replied, "most assuredly! Since coming to the point of understanding and believing in the doctrines of grace, I've been astronomically more involved in evangelism. I have a better understanding of why I evangelize, and by relying soley on the Lord and His power and His will, I find there to be nothing more enjoyable and fulfilling than to share His word with a lost world. Since becoming "Calvinist" (said in tone of distaste), I find myself, Praise be to God, more willing, more ready and more graceful and understanding with evangelism."
It kills me how people accuse us reformed christians of one, not believing or practicing evangelism, two, not believing in eternal security and basing our walks on a works salvation because we believe in the perseverance of the saints.
I BY NO MEANS am perfect in any area!!! You, my brothers and sisters in Christ have seen my many faults, failures, acts of immaturity. I write this to try to explain and enlighten y'all on where I stand. As my friend and I discussed tonight, we really are not that different at all in our beliefs, we agree in almost everything. And for the record, show me someone who agrees with me 100% on EVERY issue and I'll congratulate you and slap you on the back! lol Sadly, because I believe in the doctrines of grace, brothers and sisters in Christ are no longer as close to me as they once were, some ways my fault some ways theirs. Thankfully though we will always have a common bond in Christ Jesus, praise be to God!

Anyways, that's my interduction to a link I found today. Phil Johnson (Spurgeon blogger) wrote a very good article on Hyper Calvinism. Sadly many people think this way of us instantly upon hearing that we're "calvinists". Please, Please, Please read the article, for that is the main thing I posted for, not my piddly words.

www.spurgeon.org

Of Salvation, Its Loss, and its Perseverance

Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. For, "Yet a little while, and the coming one will come and will not delay; but my righteous one shall live by faith, and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him." But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls. (Hebrews 10:28-39)

This is, quite simply, a hard passage. As a TULIP pusher (coined by our own Pilot Missionary), I do not believe this contradicts the doctrine of the Perseverance to the Saints. I am going to make three points on this subject. I will present two arguments why this does not contradict the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints and why it does pose a problem for that doctrine of spiritual insecurity; i.e., we can loose our salvation. But I do feel it is very necessary to first put forth wither in Scripture as defines the doctrine of Perseverance. Lets us look to Scripture as our advocate, in John 5:24 we are told them as "hear the Word and believes him who sent me[Christ] has eternal life" and will not come into judgement. Both John 6:35-37 and John 10:27-29 tell us that "All that the Father gives me[Christ] will come to me, and whoever comes to me I[Christ] will never cast out" and that "My Father, who has given them[Christ's sheep] to me[Christ], is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." And thees not to mention Romans 8:1, Romans 8:35-39, Rom 11:29, and Hebrews 3:14. These passages strongly defend the doctrine, and many others as are said to contradict this doctrine do nothing of the sort. However, the passage of Hebrews 10:28-29 seem to throw a monkey wrench into the mix. Therefore, I hope to clarify with the following three points.

First, we need always, when reading a passage as defines a theological point to read it in context. Above I quoted the whole passage all the way to verse 39. Wherein we will find our first defense and a great point. Verse 39 says:

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

We have here where Paul explains to us that we have 1.) "faith" and 2.) "preserve" our souls. Please note Ephesians 2:8-10. By faith, our souls are preserved and from Ephesians we see that this faith is not of us but a gift of God. Quite simply, the Lord saved us and will carry His work to completion (Philippians 1:6). So what does this say to the loss of our salvation in context of the full passage in Hebrews 10? Well, what we have here is a picture of the terrible wrath that should come on us should we shun what the Lord hath done in our hearts. This is a picture of the consequence of what could be if we did shun the Lord but, as v.39 says, we hope of promise in our sealed faith. What then are we told? We are told not to fall away and that the wrath of God for doing so would be great. It is a warning of what would happen, not what does happen to them as are chosen.

Second, we do infact have examples of them as appear to "fall away". The argument for this goes thusly, that these individuals were quite simply never saved in the first place. Our Biblical example was King Saul, 1 Samuel 16:14, "Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul". We do not have a picture of a man "after God's own heart" but a man of rebellion and sin. He was never truly of God's fold. This can be evidenced in Saul's life. Let us look briefly, in 1 Sam. 9:5-8 shows us that Saul was not a man of God and that his servant knew more about the Lord and the Prophet Samuel than even did he. Saul himself had tried to hide himself from God's calling (1 Sam. 10:22). Further, Samuel disobeyed, a sign of his reverence in his heart for God, before the Spirit of the Lord left him (1 Samuel 15:22). Samuel was never truly saved. However this passage would and did apply to him as the Lord was quick in His wrath upon Saul and the kingdom was indeed torn from him. Which brings us to our final point.

Third and finally, this passage posses a problem for them as believe you can loose your salvation and you must come back to faith. If you read this passage fully, you will see that when one "shrinks back" he is "destroyed". The passage is very harsh in its description of them as "spurn the Son of God", "profane the blood of the covenant", and has "outraged the Spirit of Grace" (Heb 10:29). And we are told in v.39 that these "who shrink back... are destroyed" (Heb 10:39). So this passage is as difficult for those against the Perseverance of the Saints as it is presumed to be for them who hold to that doctrine. For my part, I feel that my first point is our strongest defense and, as always, encourage you to read in context and let Scripture interpret Scripture. The grace of Christ be with you.

Soli Deo Gloria

Recorded

This is a poem that was written out of the frustration that many believe they are saved because they made a decision for Christ on a given day. This is completely absurd! "Making a decision for Christ" does not save you! It is Christ's sacrifice that saves us! By His shed blood are we redeemed (Matt 26:28)! The day you "made a decision", recorded in the front cover flap of your Bible does not shew that you are indeed saved. Yay, that date means naught. Even if you do not remember the day you were saved does not mean that you are not saved. Behold, the day we were saved is recorded in the Word!

Recorded

The day I was saved
Was written
Grave Stone Engraved
Where within
My Bible Displayed

Was written within
So I knew
that the Devil when
Whispered new
I knew my salvation

I know not exact
month and day
My sin to exact
I knelt to pray
so to sign contract

The line, "My Decision"
is as blank
White as is clean
as is blank
The book of my sin

Where then is written
that am I
saved from Perdition,
though I die,
Will I to Heaven?

Within the Scriptures
Recorded
Is Christ to the Cross
Reported
My salvation thus

And praise the Most High
I was saved
Christ, me for to die
Recorded
In Lamb's Book of Life.

Soli Deo Gloria

(c) James Marikle 2010