Tag Archive | christian

Biblical examples of individuals who lost their salvation

Satan’s favorite teaching: “once saved always saved”

We don’t get ultimately “saved” until we have completed all of our days on earth and entered into the kingdom of God, but we can still express ourselves as being “saved” when we are presently “spiritually alive”.

Either Christians can lose their salvation, or they have a license to sin. Remember Satan’s lie in the garden of Eden when he successfully made Eve believe that she could afford to sin (disobey God) and still not die. HE LIED! The opposite is true – sinning will make true believers (just like Eve) be separated from God and lose their salvation. Not necessarily for eternity since we have the opportunity to repent, but if we spend our days sinning and “repenting” we have not truly repented. Unfortunately you will hear the false tune of Satan in many churches today when pastors teach that you can never lose your salvation once you have been born again. Be careful with such churches and websites that side with Satan’s false teaching of “once saved always saved”, because this false teaching could very well tempt weak Christians to be comfortable in their sins while believing they have a fire insurance. We cannot fool God and we cannot serve two masters and still be saved. Remember always the lie:

Gen. 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die

Do read the rest of my articles about the erroneous teaching of “once saved always saved” and the urgent need to live righteous lives. If you run into a website which teach you that you do not have to be righteous in order to be saved, and that it is enough to “feel sorry” and pretend that God does not see your sins but only the blood of Jesus, then you know you are in the wrong place.

1 John 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that DOETH RIGHTEOUSNESS IS RIGHTEOUS, even as he is righteous.

EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE IN THE BIBLE WHO LOST THEIR SALVATION

If Christians sin they might repent immediately, but they might also repent after a while (days, or years) or they might never repent. What if they die while living in the midst of adultery and lies? A Christian who serves two masters (mixes holiness and sin) is not saved. The cross we have to carry is not light as a feather. Some of those who lost their salvation (below) repented and returned back to God.

1) KING SOLOMON

Many wonderful promises were made to Solomon, but he ruined it.

1 Chr. 22:⁹Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.¹⁰He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.

1 Chr. 28:⁹And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

1 King. 11:1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites:²Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.³And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.⁴For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father.⁵For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.⁶And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father.⁷Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.⁸And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.⁹And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had appeared unto him twice,¹⁰And had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods: but he kept not that which the Lord commanded.¹¹Wherefore the Lord said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant.

Solomon aspired to kill Jeroboam, but Jeroboam fled to King Shishak in Egypt and stayed there until Solomon died. Seems to be a wise choice to stay away from someone who wants to kill you.

1 King. 11:⁴⁰Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam. And Jeroboam arose, and fled into Egypt, unto Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.

There are many verses which tell us about all the wicked acts he did as an old man, but there are no verses that suggest that he ever repented. One would think that such an important piece of information as his repentance would be recorded somewhere if that is what he did. Even if he did repent, it still wouldn’t change the fact that he went from being righteous to being unrighteous. Had he died during his time in wickedness, he would have been spiritually lost for ever.

2) KING SAUL

It started out good for Saul, but eventually he ended up as God’s enemy. Here is the story in some Bible verses in chronological order.

1 Sam. 9:¹⁵Now the Lord had told Samuel in his ear a day before Saul came, saying,¹⁶To morrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people Israel, that he may save my people out of the hand of the Philistines: for I have looked upon my people, because their cry is come unto me.

1 Sam. 11:⁶And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.⁷And he took a yoke of oxen, and hewed them in pieces, and sent them throughout all the coasts of Israel by the hands of messengers, saying, Whosoever cometh not forth after Saul and after Samuel, so shall it be done unto his oxen. And the fear of the Lord fell on the people, and they came out with one consent.

1 Sam. 13:¹³And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.¹⁴But now thy kingdom shall not continue: the Lord hath sought him a man after his own heart, and the Lord hath commanded him to be captain over his people, because thou hast not kept that which the Lord commanded thee.

1 Sam. 15:¹¹It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the Lord all night.

1 Sam. 16:14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

1 Sam. 18: ⁸And Saul was very wroth, and the saying displeased him; and he said, They have ascribed unto David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands: and what can he have more but the kingdom?⁹And Saul eyed David from that day and forward

1 Sam. 22:¹⁸And the king said to Doeg, Turn thou, and fall upon the priests. And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he fell upon the priests, and slew on that day fourscore and five persons that did wear a linen ephod.¹⁹And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen, and asses, and sheep, with the edge of the sword.

So Saul was a murderer, and when Saul only had one day to live Samuel confirmed that the Lord has departed from him and became his enemy.

1 Sam. 28:¹⁶Then said Samuel, Wherefore then dost thou ask of me, seeing the Lord is departed from thee, and is become thine enemy?

3) KING DAVID

2 Sam. 12:9 Why did you despise the word of the Lord by doing what is EVIL in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You KILLED him with the sword of the Ammonites. 10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.

1 Kings 15:5 Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, SAVE ONLY in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.

King David lived under the Old Testament, but murderers were considered evil also during this time. What did Ezekiel say about righteous people (much like David) who chose to sin? They would DIE for it (spiritually)! The Bible means what it says.

Ezek 18:²⁰The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.²¹But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.²²All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.²³Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?²⁴But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die. ²⁵Yet ye say, The way of the LORD is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?²⁶When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.²⁷Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.²⁸Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

Luckily King David REPENTED and restored his salvation. However, it took him about a year – the entire duration of Bathsheba’s pregnancy. Can unrepentant murderers enter the Kingdom of God? Not a chance. Heaven is not a place full of unrepentant sinners.

1 John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that NO MURDERER HATH ETERNAL LIFE ABIDING IN HIM

Arguments for gun control

Jul28

For a Scandinavian it’s difficult to understand the attitude that many Americans have towards guns and gun control, but if I lived in Colombia, the Middle East, or maybe even in the US where pretty much any non-convicted adult can spontaneously buy one or more guns without much trouble – resulting in loads of guns in circulation also in the hands of criminals – then I too might feel the need to get a gun to protect myself. But I live in Sweden and I’m only SO happy that we don’t have the same situation in my own country. I would consequently be against any kind of change towards more liberal gun laws where I live because I prefer to keep criminals away from guns. I wish Americans would understand why Europeans would dread to have American gun laws introduced to their countries. We have considerable lower homicide rates, which makes sense since it’s so much easier for a murderer to kill people if he can use firearms instead of knives, bombs (takes time, patience, skills and money to make) or his fists. I can also understand the frustration Americans have if they feel that their politicians play under different rules.

It’s truly wonderful to know that you can go out running alone late at night without feeling you should be carrying a gun or a knife in your hand – so every change in our current gun laws would be for the WORSE.

Over here it’s hard to get hold of a gun or own a gun unless you can pass certain requirements, so I don’t feel the need to buy a gun myself for protection and I have personally never encountered a single person in my life in this country who has expressed such a need. That is surely a good thing and something we should try to maintain? There are lots of weapons over here though, and that’s because there are lots of hunters and many of them own more than one weapon (rifle). It’s of course tricky to change the laws in the US now when the harm (lots of uncontrolled guns in circulation) is already done, and it would equally be a nightmare to make the gun laws more liberal in Sweden now when we seldom need to fear guns in the wrong hands.

It’s interesting to read the arguments against gun control. I include some below:

– If one or more law-abiding citizens in the Cinema at Aurora, Colorado would have carried a gun for protection, then the damage that James Holmes did would have been reduced

So that is the goal for the nation? To reach a level where there are so many uncontrolled guns in circulation (not to mention that a person can store up 25 shotguns in his home without a single gun seller saying “What?”) that normal law-abiding people would feel the need to go protected even at the movies, while eating in a restaurant, on the beach, when taking your dog for a walk, etc? If there is a gun control, this could prevent criminals from obtaining guns in the first place, resulting in that we don’t need to carry guns for protection while living our every day lives.

– Criminals would get hold of guns anyway, like on the black market. They don’t stop using guns just because certain laws tell them to stop or for reading a sign that says “Guns prohibited”. They are criminals for Pete’s sake!

This might be the case in America where loads of guns are already in circulation without much control, why there consequently is a large black market for weapons, but this is not the case in countries like Sweden. How could criminals “get hold of guns anyway” if the laws prevent them from buying one, and when they can’t even acquire any from friends who also can’t get hold of guns? Don’t get me wrong because there ARE guns in the wrong hands also in Sweden but the point is that the cases where guns are used for homicide is relatively low here, and especially compared with the US. I believe this is thanks to our gun control that we have had for generations.

But couldn’t persistent criminals get weapons if they really wanted through other means? Only if they have the right contacts and a great deal of good luck – both are hard to achieve. If they desperately want to cause a lot of damage and lack guns, they might want to use bombs but then they are obligated to have the know-how and to get the ingredients. They must also have the time to make experiments and willing to spend some time in jail if they get caught. This alone will prevent some people from taking such risks, but of course not all. One option is to smuggle in weapons from neighboring countries, but the problem is that it’s just as tough to get hold of guns over there, and there is a risk to get caught.

– Banning guns might create a potential risk for organized crimes, black markets and smuggling

So we should therefore make drug use and prostitution legal? No, we should make it hard for criminals to attain their goals, and if they transgress laws, they do this illegally and they risk charges. Some people think again for this reason. One way to smuggle guns into Sweden would be to transport them over the bridge between Denmark and Sweden, but how would you get hold of guns in Denmark in the first place? They have similar gun laws as in Sweden. We can only pray that no country in Europe will ever apply similar gun laws as in the US, resulting in more illegal weapons crossing our boarders (and if that happens, one could only hope for an extensive border control).

– Woman may have no means of self-defense from rape or other crimes

Women have also died from domestic violence where guns have been in use. Again, if criminals have a hard time obtaining weapons, then it will automatically be harder for them to commit such crimes and women have less need to defend themselves.

– Guns in the possession of citizens are an added protection against government tyranny. Just look at Germany in WWII!

Citizens in Sweden would of course NOTICE and KNOW if the gun control laws would suddenly be amended to their disadvantage and to the advantage of politicians in rule. (Besides, this risk would be higher if the citizens would be voting for a person instead of a party – that normally must cooperate with yet other parties in order to get a majority rule.) Laws are not changed overnight and not without first publicly announcing them. Everything that concerns hunting, firearms, gun laws, etc is covered in the big hunting magazines, and they will naturally announce all changes which concern the world of hunting and firearms usage.

– The homicide rate is high in the US because it’s a melting post for so many different races and cultures, and not due to a liberal gun control

That is not a good argument unless you believe a certain race is more prone to commit crimes than others. If individuals and their ancestors have lived in the US for generations, then the race issue is no longer valid since they have been assimilated. What might be a factor however is RECENT IMMIGRATION (like the first and second generation of immigrants). You will find a lot of that in Europe where loads of people from a certain country immigrate to a certain country, often placed in the same city or suburb. Statistics sadly show that immigrants from the Middle East and the northern part of Africa commit crime more frequently than the rest of the population. In the last few years Sweden has received a lot of immigrants from Iraq.

– All violent crimes are not reported so the high rate in the US might also depend on this

Yes all crimes are not reported but one crime that is reported to a great deal in all countries is murder, and that’s what makes the statistics for homicide rather interesting. Countries that neglect to report such crimes would be countries that have a high homicide rate to start with. Statistics for homicide with guns would of course be the most interesting ones, but you will more often find statistics and charts where the homicide rate is not divided any further.

You can also kill people with knives, bats, etc. Should we try to ban and control those weapons as well?

It would be hard to control such objects, wouldn’t it? So totally unlike firearms which CAN be restricted and which potentially could kill more people at the same time than a knife ever could. Yes, knives, bats and bombs could also be used to kill people but this is not a factor that applies only for the US. This is a truth for all countries so the statistics are still fair. The homicide rate per country can give us a clue whether a liberal gun control has saved lives or not.

– Guns don’t kill people. People kill people!

Then it’s a good idea to prevent such people from obtaining guns! In that way YOU don’t feel the need to be protected.

– It’s my right as a citizen to own guns for me and my family’s protection. Why does the government prevent me from doing this?

It’s a government’s responsibility to make sure the citizens of a country can live in peace, and if possible (as it is in Sweden) without having to carry guns for protection. If we reach a state where we start to feel insecure due to the awareness that guns can be bought rather freely and therefore abound in the wrong hands all around us, then the government has failed with its mission.

– Anders Breivik in Norway managed to kill LOADS of people even though he was a member in a proper gun club

Yes, and I’ve never said the system is airtight. Most people kill someone they know, and those who are willing to kill strangers for no reason are oftentimes those who kill because of an ideology/evil religion or because they are totally disturbed and simply enjoy killing. Terrorists come to mind, and we also have odd fellows like Anders Breivik. He was a smart guy, he was not poor, not on drugs and he was not in a hurry. Those are not the typical factors in a murderer’s life. He had a license for three weapons; a Glock to be used in the gun club where he was a member, a semiautomatic Ruger rifle to be used in hunting and also a shotgun. The Norwegian police PST got a tip that Breivik bought aluminium powder and sodium nitrate from Poland (to build a bomb) but unfortunately they didn’t make a follow-up on the tip because Breivik had previously not been convicted for any crimes. The idea was good though (seeking control of suspected substances) and this procedure could prevent future crime. Breivik ended up killing 77 people the year 2011. 8 of them through a bomb explosion in Oslo, and the rest (mostly young teenagers) on a little island outside Oslo. This tragic event will pull down the homicide rate for Norway tremendously. It’s impossible to always be protected against lunatics like Breivik. You would have to carry a gun around the clock and you wouldn’t be safe even then.

– Why is it so bad to be able to buy lots of guns? It is also sad that so many people are obese because of these sheer amount of forks and spoons available to them

This argument totally baffled me when I read it. So if we can’t prevent people from getting forks and spoons, then neither should we try to prevent people from getting guns? Is it possible to ban or control forks and spoons? NO, right? Is it possible to restrict guns through gun control laws and make it difficult for criminals to get hold of guns? YES! So why not doing exactly that? Isn’t the idea to save lives? Can a spoon in the hands of someone kill 10 people in 2 minutes? Can a gun in the hands of someone kill 10 people in 2 minutes? If we know that dangerous people could use guns for dangerous things, isn’t it a good idea to try to prevent such people from obtaining guns since we CAN?

– When the guns are removed from the law-abiding citizen, only criminals will have guns

Not if they are not able to get hold of guns due to severe restrictions and requirements.

– Guns aren’t evil or the cause of violent situations. Like a hammer drives the nails, guns are the tools of these crazies

Some countries have gun control laws in order to prevent such “tools” ending up in the hands of criminals. It seems like it’s working based on the statistics.

– Disarming innocent people does not protect innocent people

Over here they don’t disarm people, because they can buy guns for hunting and target shooting if they pass the requirements. The requirements are tough and that will prevent many criminals from getting guns. So the idea is to disarm CRIMINALS and prevent them from getting guns. This will lead to a safe environment for INNOCENT people. Hard to see why this is not a good thing in all people’s lives. This of course works best in countries which have had a history of strict gun control laws for quite some time, so that weapons already in circulation will not be in use in the wrong hands.

– You can prove anything with statistics

Maybe, and I’ve read all kinds of silly statistics for pro-gun lobbyists, usually comparing one American state with another American state, as though this could apply to the whole world. But if statistics are fair, they could also reveal the truth and especially if several sources get similar results. The rule shouldn’t be “if statistics work against you, then you don’t need to rely on them because you can prove anything with statistics”. The question is if we can find any statistics for that a liberal gun control reduces the homicide rate compared to other countries, and/or if statistics show that a strict gun control law (as the one in Sweden) reduces the homicide rate compared to other countries. When we look at various statistics and charts, for instance this or this or this or this (the latter is from 2012 and is more specific concerning firearms) then the US is always listed with a very high homicide rate per capita, and European countries much further down. It’s interesting to see that Canada, which is so close in culture and a neighbor country to the US, has a low homicide rate.

– In Switzerland it’s very common to own guns also for protection and they have a low homicide rate, so this shows gun ownership is not related to murder

There are some differences between the US and Switzerland. 1) Switzerland has MUCH STRICTER GUN CONTROL LAWS. All military weapons (which are long-barreled) must be kept locked up, with their ammunition sealed, stored in a separate place, and strictly accounted for. Hence it is almost impossible to use these weapons for crime without detection. 2) Switzerland (one of the richest countries in the world) has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialized countries, like drugs or urban deprivation. The US is of course also one of the richest countries in the world BUT there are still many areas which are considered poor and where drugs are in much use. 3) In comparison Switzerland is a small country both in square meters and in population, and therefore easier to control. All the neighboring countries have the same strict gun control as is common in western Europe, so there is no great danger of guns smuggled across the boarders. More info:

Up until October 2007, a specified personal retention quantity of government-issued personal ammunition was issued, which was sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that no unauthorized use had taken place. In October 2007, the Swiss Federal Council decided that the distribution of ammunition to soldiers shall stop and that all previously issued ammo shall be returned. By March 2011, more than 99% of the ammo has been received. Only special rapid deployment units and the military police still have ammunition stored at home today.

Gun ownership in Switzerland is not universal; only 32 percent of the general population own guns. By comparison, this figure is 49 percent in the U.S. Handguns are also HIGHLY REGULATED. Even then Switzerland has both the highest handgun ownership and highest handgun murder rate in EUROPE. The suicide rate in Switzerland is very high. You can buy ammunition at ranges, but there is a regulatory requirement that ammunition sold at ranges must be used there. More here .

Brief comments about the Swedish gun laws (similar in all Scandinavia)

The two reasons for owning guns in Sweden are due to hunting and for target shooting. If citizens one day would want guns for protection then I feel that the government has failed with its mission to produce a safe environment for us to live in. Today we don’t have to live with such fear (unless we have placed ourselves in risk groups, such as being criminals ourselves or by marrying criminals) and a good guess is that it’s due to the strict gun control laws. Many criminals might want to kill a person NOW, and they don’t have patience enough to be a member of a gun club for 6 months before they do it. This alone will prevent some people to kill others in a sudden rage when they are involved in a deep argument.

Over here you’re obligated to have control over your guns at all times (when not in use locked up in certain cabinets, weighing at least 150 kilos) and not lend them to anyone unless a certain license is made for the other person who is also obligated to pass strict gun requirements. There are basically two gun categories, for hunting and for sports (target shooting). All weapons are licensed with a few exceptions and the serial number of the weapon is written on the license.

Hunting; rifles and shotguns – One has to pass the hunter exam that includes a theoretical test concerning animals and hunting, and a practical safety test including judging distances and a shooting. You would need some sort of written declaration from others that you are a law-abiding person, and you can apply for up to 4 licenses for long guns (rifles or shotguns).

Target weapons – You need to be an active member of a gun club that competes with the weapon you want to buy. For handguns you need to be a member of a gun club for at least 6 months and shoot three “gold series” and a “fast series”. Your club can then certify that you may own a gun for competition only. After 5 years one has to reapply. Owning guns for protection is not allowed and such exceptions are therefore extremely unusual. More info here

Yes, extra protection in form of guns might be needed in certain countries

Again, if I lived in an area or country where there was a high risk for violent crimes and/or robberies, then I too might choose to get a gun. There are many white farm owners in South Africa who feel the need to protect themselves with guns (or they might choose to leave the country) due to the high risk of being attacked. Just the mere fact that criminals KNOW those farmers are protected might prevent them (the criminals) from making any attempts to harm them. So yes, guns might not be a bad idea in such situations. Read more about such cases in South Africa here.

In Scandinavia however it would be a VERY BAD IDEA to make the gun laws more liberal, because that would change our countries from having a SMALL amount of guns in the wrong hands into countries with LOTS of guns in the wrong hands, causing more criminals to make offenses and more people to buy guns to protect themselves, which would lead to even more crimes. An evil circle. Since the homicide rate is low in Sweden it wouldn’t make any sense at all to gamble with the situation and start amending the gun laws. If we do, then an evaluation will likely show an increase of violent gun crimes but then it will be too late to revoke the damage. Instead we would have lots of guns in the hands of criminals and there is a long expiration date for guns. They can be used again and again, and found on the black market, and if we then try to save the situation by making yet another law that guns must be turned in, then criminals will not stand first in line to return them.

In summary, I understand the situation that America is in, but I hope Americans will not reason “Gun control doesn’t seem to work here, and people now have the need to protect themselves, so this means strict gun control won’t work in any country”. I hope they don’t believe that liberal gun laws in our countries would be for the benefit of the citizens or reduce the homicide rate because that is NOT true and the statistics seem to confirm it. If there are countries which have had strict gun laws and therefore a low amount of guns among criminals, resulting in no need for citizens to protect themselves, then it’s good to keep it that way. America might not have gun laws that I admire, but I admire and envy the country in so many other ways.

Why do calvinists erroneously call all Free-willers ARMINIANS?

May22

All arminians are free-willers, but not all free-willers are arminians

Calvinists often reveal that they have studied too much calvinism and too little from non-calvinists, by making the mistake to automatically call us arminians as soon as we tell them that we are not calvinists (and the next step is to call us semi-pelagians). Since there may be issues within arminianism (which some people call “calvinism light”) that we disagree with, it’s wrong to automatically assume that we are arminians – because that would be like ascribing views to us that we may not have. It’s wrong to make a person who believes in synergism an arminian by default. Strangely enough, some calvinists are reluctant to rephrase themselves even when corrected!

I still remember the first time I heard the phrase “arminian” (it’s a word not found in the Bible), and it was the first time someone assured me that I was one! (Funny to be an arminian your whole life without even knowing it…) I had not heard of James Arminius (1560-1609) either, and compared with all the books that I’d like to read, I feel no motivation to study up on what this particular person believed and to check whether I agree with him or not. I know loads of christians in real life and online, but I only know a couple who call themselves arminians. This tells me that arminians are very rare. There are no arminians in Sweden which I’m aware of, but I can certainly see that people constantly make free will choices in the Bible and often act against the will of God, so it’s not hard to find the concept of free will.

I can understand if people would like to call themselves calvinists if they agree with John Calvin and also believe that he was first with his doctrines/theology (even if they don’t necessarily agree with everything he taught). Calvin was the one who started calvinism, even if he got many of his ideas from Augustine. It’s also a good way to show one’s basic principles by saying one single word “calvinist”. Calling oneself an arminian on the other hand, doesn’t make much sense if you have the same views as people who lived several hundred years before he did. (I do respect those who prefer to call themselves “arminians” – maybe for the sake of convenience when having dialogues with calvinists, or for other reasons.)

ALL the early church fathers the first 300 years AD believed in free will without exception (see quotes here) and none of them taught that man was born with a sinful nature. This means that Mr Arminius was hardly the first person with his theology views, and it would make more sense to call oneself after Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Clement, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Eusebius, Origen, or some other church father who lived shortly after the death of Jesus. The disadvantage with calling oneself after a person, is that you are then expected to study the views of this person, in case someone asks you why you call yourself the way you do. If your claim is “I call myself an irenaeusian, because I believe in free will just like he did”, then the follow-up question is why you don’t call yourself after another theologian who also believes the same. This places an unnecessary burden on you to be forced to study books outside the Bible, and it takes valuable time from Bible reading. It’s of great value to study the views from the early church fathers (or reading books from other authors) and it’s sometimes I can recommend, but it’s wrong to make it a requirement. I personally feel no obligation to study up on what arminians believe due to the expectations from others.

If I have an uncle who believes in free will, would it make sense to call myself after him, instead of a person who lived in the end of the 1500’s? If I lived prior to the year 1590 (when James Arminius was 30 years old and still sided with the calvininist Theodore Beza) what would I call myself?

If a person doesn’t side with Mr Brown, does it follow that he absolutely HAS TO side with Mr Green? It’s one or the other and no other options? Let’s say that in the future a Mr White becomes a well-known christian and a man who believes in free will and who also writes famous books about it. Must I know change labels and call myself after HIM? I’m not against the idea to label oneself after a person per se, if the views in question originated with him.

The Synod of Dort

The synod of Dort was a Dutch regional conference (with a political context) which plays a big role for calvinists, but christians believed in free will long before this local meeting as well as afterwards. This synod was not a council of the Protestant churches of Europe, but a Dutch national synod to which some Reformed theologians were invited from various parts of Europe. It was not a free assembly for the discussion of the Bible, but a national ecclesiastical court for the trial of alleged heretics. Theodore Beza was John Calvin’s direct successor and he sent his disciple Arminius to Holland in 1589 to put down the arguments against his theology views. Beza believed that if God was absolutely sovereign and man helpless in sin and that men are saved/damned by predestination, then it followed that God causes men to sin just as he causes men to be saved. This position existed also in various degrees in Augustine and Calvin’s theology. The opponents argued that if God causes sin then God is in point of fact the author of sin. Arminius changed his position (against Beza) when starting to research the topic deeper and comparing with the Bible.

Whenever Arminius was given a chance to publicly defend his theology, his sound scholarship won the argument and nobody wanted to publicly debate against him. Nobody suggested that the Remonstrants mishandled Scripture but only that they failed to use Scripture to defend a predetermined position. Ironically nearly all of those who opposed Arminius wanted him to quit preaching the Bible as the final authority, because they felt such a message undermined their own authority. To settle this, Arminius sought after a synod to publicly debate and settle the theological and political rift that had occurred in Holland about these issues but he was denied a synod during his lifetime. Instead a synod was made after his death under conditions all together different from what he and his followers expected. Free debate was denied and the Remonstrants were treated as criminals. They were present only as defenders, and the calvinists were the accusers, and never the other way around. Four days after the Synod’s closure, those same leaders beheaded Johan van Oldenbarnevelt for the crime of general perturbation (treason) for his support of the Remonstrants. About the synod we can read:

“Whosoever casts his eye over the list of the foreign divines that composed this last of Protestant councils will find scarcely one man who had not distinguished himself by his decided opposition to the doctrine of conditional predestination, and who was not consequently disqualified from acting the part of an impartial judge of the existing religious differences, or that of a peace-maker.”

William Birch: “Arminianism was condemned at the Synod of Dort (1618-19). And what of it? A group of supralapsarian Calvinists joined theological and political forces, calling on foreign political allies, to ruin the reputation, ministry, and systematic theology of some theologians who disagreed with their doctrines on soteriology. And this local phenomenon is supposed to carry weight in thwarting Arminianism? History itself is a witness to the sham of an operation under which the Calvinists instigated the hearings of the Synod of Dort.”

Read more about the unfair and horrible events concerning the Synod of Dort and the aftermath here

The fear of the Lord and holy living

Apr2

Our unpopular message for the day

So many Christians are compromising these days! It is not very popular to make a stand for holy living. You become “self righteous” to many by doing so. It is a sad fact that many are falling while truly believing everything is just fine, because they hold a knowledge of God within them.

“Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.” 2 Corinthians 6:17

Unfortunately, too many people have been deceived to think they can have their sin and be a Christian at the same time. These lack wisdom! And the Bible tells us in Proverbs 9:10 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom …” And that is just it. People do not fear God, and therefore they have no wisdom to lead them. So they naturally turn to fleshly pleasures while trying to convince everyone that they are Christians.

2 Timothy 3:1-5
1This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Do you allow sin in your life while trying to convince everyone that it isn’t all that bad? Do you claim to be a Christian because of a knowledge of the truth, with a form of godliness, but denying the power of it to free you completely from this world and its sins? The good news is that Jesus can set you free! There is great joy in separating ourselves from this world! It can only come by the Holy Spirit as He fills us and transforms us, making us new creatures that are set apart from the rest of this world. If you look like the world; talk like the world; act like the world; and live like the world; then you are of the world and cannot be of Christ – no matter how much you may think you are. The form of godliness is a great deception of these last days! So many believe they are right with God, but are not! The Bible says in Isaiah 5:20

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”

This is exactly what so many “Christians” are doing today. They will go out drinking, smoking, partying like the world, and then claim they do it in moderation. Many will cuss up a storm, get involved in bitter arguments, gossip, slander of others, and act lie the world in every way – never living according the the fruit of the spirit. When confronted about there sinful living, they will accuse the righteous person of being full of pride, self righteous, and judgmental. Some will go as far as to think they are more spiritual in their drinking and smoking, as they are more tolerable of sinners, and they are not so “self-righteous”. They are more mature Christians and able to handle doing those things. Hogwash! It is time to rise up people of God! It is time to stand for what is right! Start with your own life. Start with your family. Be an example for others to follow. Share the love of God and the good life He offers through holy living. Otherwise, sin lies at your door – Genesis 4:7.

We are in a spiritual warfare! This is a war that is unseen in the natural, so that those who drift away from Christ cannot even see it is happening all around them. All the while thinking they are right with God because of what they once had, they slip away into the darkness of the enemy. Don’t ever think you are so spiritual you cannot be overtaken! Our ONLY hope is in Christ jesus alone. Look to Him and search your own heart in humility.

“The fear of the LORD teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.” Proverbs 15:33

Many Christians today are not necessarily sinning, but they are playing with a strange fire, and then offering it up to the Lord. What do we offer to Him? Is it holy or strange? Paul said that we need to examine ourselves whether we be in the Lord. Never assume it! But let us examine our own hearts as we look for the deception in our own minds that has been planted by the enemy.

Righteousness is not a gift, nor is it something we work for. It is a choice. A choice to walk in what he has provided for us. But we have a choice set before us, as it says in Deuteronomy 30:19, “This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live”.
John dealt with the issue of sin and said in 1 John 5:18, “We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.” Then in 1 john 3:3-10

3 Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure.
4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.
5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.
6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.
7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous.
8 He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.
9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.
10 This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother.

So, I am not talking about new converts who have not yet been sanctified. I am talking about seasoned Christians who after years of living holy lives slowly begin to turn back to sinful living while claiming to be saved. This is very dangerous territory!

When Jesus said, “It is finished”, He was not saying that sin no longer had any power to condemn. Obviously many sinners are still going to hell. Paul’s said in Romans 6:23 that the wages of sin is death. Nothing changes this. Not even the work of Christ. The gift of God that is eternal life is through Christ Jesus. To be IN Christ is to walk in the spirit and not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. Paul said that if we sow to the flesh, we will reap of the flesh corruption. He also said that if we defile the temple of God, which we are, then such people will God destroy. Many, many more warnings are given to Christians all throughout the scriptures to be careful and always check our hearts, lest will fall. In Romans 11:21 Paul said, “For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.” Obviously, we are not in the clear just because Jesus died for our sins and we are presently saved.

We cannot miss the good news in this message, which is that God will cast our sins as far as the east is from the west and remember them no more. But we need to understand that this ONLY refers to past sins that have been confessed through repentance, and not to present or future sins. No scripture says anything close to the idea of future sins being cover under our first repentance. It is not an issue of being completely sinless. We know that is not possible. It is an issue of not committing sins we know are wrong, and thus being in rebellion to God – which the bible says is as the sin of witchcraft. And we know that no witch will be saved. But as we turn to Him after we have examined our lives and allow Him to purify our lives, we will be transformed, becoming new creatures. And such a creature will hate sin as much as God does and will want nothing to do with it.

James spoke of a sin unto death and a sin not unto death. The sin not unto death are those little things that we are not aware of that are buried deep within and only pop up on certain occasions. These are a part of our spiritual growth. A sin unto death is a sin of rebellion, when we do something we know is wrong but just don’t care. We can try to justify and deceive ourselves, and then our conscience can be seared – causing us to think all is fine, when in fact we are backslidden in heart.

Jesus will take us just the way we are – no doubt! But He will not keep us the way were are. This is what being “born again” is all about. We start a new life in christ and we are transformed as it says in 2 Corinthians 5:17. The old is passed away, and all becomes new.

What married couple will say that because they are married they do not need to work on their relationship, but that their married alone makes the relationship? This kind of marriage is one that winds up in divorce. Their is always work involved in a relationship. a relations takes two parties both working together to make it work. We know God is always faithful to do His part in this. His part is never in question! It is our part that has to be questioned. Are we talking to Him? Are we listening to Him? Are we submitting to Him? Or are we doing our own thing and then calling it a relationship?

Any person who allows sin in their life needs to fell bad, low, and unworthy. This is called conviction. This is not condemnation. However, the bible does that that those who live in sin are condemned already. The great hope is that Jesus came to set men free. And He who the Son sets free is free indeed! He came to take away the guilt, to lift up our spirits, and to make us worthy! It is only in Him that we can have all of these things. If we turn to sin, we are not turning to Him. And if we are not turning to Him, then we cannot have what He offers – which is freedom from sin. This is not a superficial freedom, and a real life changing freedom. How we live our lives is a direct expression of what Christ has done and is doing in our lives. And this is something He has put in our own power to receive and walk in, or to reject and walk away from.

The original lie of Satan was to tell Eve, “You shall not surely die as God has said”.

The same lie exists in the Church today as many will teach that you shall not surely die (spiritually) as God has said. That sin has completely lost its power to damn the soul of the Christian to hell. Sin has not lost its power! Sin still brings death! But the gift of God is eternal life through CHRIST JESUS. Not a one-time confession, but a daily confession through an obedient walk in the spirit.

There is plenty of good news to put behind this entire message. But it is all in Christ Jesus alone! It is not in a doctrine. It is not in a one-time confession of sins. It is not in a previous relationship with Him. It is in a continued walk with Him, in obedience to His commands, as we are “free indeed” from sin and the walk of the flesh. He is ever present to make intercession for us. But we must be willing to confess our sins so He can do that.

In Romans Paul makes it clear that if it had not been for the law then we would not know right and wrong. Jesus said that He did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. It is in Christ that we receive power of sin and to live holy lives. Law is fulfilled in us as we walk in the spirit and do not fulfill the lists of the flesh.

Jesus took away the burden of animal sacrifice and penalty for sins in this life. Now, through Him, we have access to the throne of grace, whereby we may receive forgiveness of sins. But forgiveness can only come through repentance. We know that true repentance means to turn ourback on our past sins. This is a choice we have to make. And as we make the choice, God gives us the ability to overcome. Repentance of sins is first of all an act of obedience. And Jesus said, “if you love me, keep my commandments”. Jesus has done the work! But He leaves the choice up to men whether they will follow and obey His commandments. If we do not obey His commandments then we are denying Him. We are saying we do not trust Him or believe in what He said in His Word. And if we deny Him, He will deny us before His father in heaven. Our lives must be a walk of faith or we cannot please Him.

‎[Live] as children of obedience [to God]; do not conform yourselves to the evil desires [that governed you] in your former ignorance [when you did not know the requirements of the Gospel]. 1 Peter 1: 14

If anyone serves Me, he must continue to follow Me [to cleave steadfastly to Me, conform wholly to My example in living and, if need be, in dying] and wherever I am, there will My servant be also. If anyone serves Me, the Father will honor him. John 12: 26

It is through Him that we have received grace and [our] apostleship to promote obedience to the faith and make disciples for His name’s sake among all the nations. Romans 1: 5

Do you not know that if you continually surrender yourselves to anyone to do his will, you are the slaves of him whom you obey, whether that be to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience which leads to righteousness (right doing and right standing with God)? Romans 6: 16

If you keep My commandments [if you continue to obey My instructions], you will abide in My love and live on in it, just as I have obeyed My Father’s commandments and live on in His love. John 15: 10

But He said, Blessed (happy and to be envied) rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey and practice it! Luke 11: 28

For as the human body apart from the spirit is lifeless, so faith apart from [its] works of obedience is also dead. James 2: 26

But now we are discharged from the Law and have terminated all intercourse with it, having died to what once restrained and held us captive. So now we serve not under [obedience to] the old code of written regulations, but [under obedience to the promptings] of the Spirit in newness [of life]. Romans 7: 6
For the time [has arrived] for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will [be] the end of those who do not respect or believe or obey the good news (the Gospel) of God? 1 Peter 4: 17

And we receive from Him whatever we ask, because we [watchfully] obey His orders [observe His suggestions and injunctions, follow His plan for us] and [habitually] practice what is pleasing to Him. 1 John 3: 22

Whoever says, I know Him [I perceive, recognize, understand, and am acquainted with Him] but fails to keep and obey His commandments (teachings) is a liar, and the Truth [of the Gospel] is not in him.
1 John 2: 4

[Live] as children of obedience [to God]; do not conform yourselves to the evil desires [that governed you] in your former ignorance [when you did not know the requirements of the Gospel]. 1 Peter 1: 14

The wise in heart will accept and obey commandments, but the foolish of lips will fall headlong. Proverbs 10: 8

Since by your obedience to the Truth through the [Holy ] Spirit you have purified your hearts for the sincere affection of the brethren, [see that you] love one another fervently from a pure heart. 1 Peter 1: 22

Jesus said that no man can serve two masters. The devil is a thief who has come to steal, kill, and destroy. He cannot steal what one does not have. Sinners have nothing he wants to take or end in their lives. It is Christians he is after. He wants to steal our peace and joy and the abundant life we have in Christ; he wants to kill us spiritually; and then it is his final hope to destroy our souls in hell if he can. Many have been deceived into thinking they can serve two masters and still be okay. If this was an easy thing to see, then it would not be a deception. People who call themselves Christians and even go to Church every week are perishing in the pews of the Church. This is because they live like the world during the week, and with this deception have come to believe that they are saved all along.

As much as we would like to strip satan of all his power, and claim that he has be completely defeated by the work of Christ, this simply is not at all what the scriptures teach us. He is only defeated for those who abide in Christ, walk in the spirit, and obey Him daily as they take up their cross and follow Him. But satan is hard at work for a few different reasons. One, because he knows he only has a short time to get his job done. Second, it the fact that he knows he is able to deceive even Christians and pull them away from a walk with Christ. Otherwise he would be totally wasting his time and efforts to no avail.

Not too many Christians are going to take the bait of blatant heresy and lies. If they knew they were lies then they would turn away immediately! But satan is very slick at what he does. He will make sin appear to be “not so bad”, as it sucks the spiritual life out of people without them even realizing it. This is why Jesus told us to be watchful, be on the guard, to beware, and to diligently seek Him. The bible says that satan walks about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. Obviously this is not referring to sinners. He already has them. It is Christians he is after. He is looking for those who have put their guard down; who have lain down their spiritual armor. This is why we need to go thru our spiritual armor check list and make sure we have it and keep it on all the time. Satan is looking for the one he can catch off guard. And then he will come in subtly so that we do not even realize it is him.

This is why Paul said that when you think that you stand, take heed, lest you fall. An overconfidence in the work of Christ without doing our part will lead to spiritual death. We can believe we are saved all we want. But faith without works is dead! We can have COMPLETE confidence in the work of Christ – as long as we walk in obedience to His will and commands. But if we allow sin to creep in, then death lies at the door. Faith then becomes nothing more than a presumption, without any true power to save. And just as the devils in hell believe and cannot be saved, so it is with those who claim Christ and willfully and in rebellion live in sin.

All the promises we have are “in Christ”. We must understand what it means to be in Christ. It is not a one time prayer that magically transfers us from death to life without any further conditions. It is a transformed life! The old is passed away, and all is become new. So as John said, we no long live in sin, but we walk in the spirit and by true faith thru obedience.

Through Jesus Christ we are no longer under the condemnation of the law?

Let’s not forget one major thing here. We must be “in Christ” in order to be free from these things. The devil is given back his rights the moment we give in to willful sin and do not repent. The cross DID NOT disarm him! It is only through our faith in the cross that he can be disarmed. And just as we can have faith, we can lose faith. This is a fact that has be proven to be true with many backsliders.

The Bible does not teach a sin debt. It teaches “wages of sin”. Wages are earnings, not a debt. We have earned death for our sin. Christ came to die as the atoning sacrifice for our sins. But not as a literal payment. This term should only be understood as a figurative term to say that Christ took care of the sin issue on our behalf. The literal understanding of what Christ did can only be properly understood as a provision for forgiveness. When John saw Jesus coming to be baptized, he announced, “Behold, the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world”. Now we know that Jesus has not literally taken away the sins of all men. Otherwise all men would be saved already without any conditions. This actually points back to the Levitical sacrifices for the sins of Israel, as two goats were brought. One was just a sacrifice unto the Lord, while the other was the one who had sins confessed over it and it was released into the wilderness. Some believe it was led to a cliff to fall to its death. But either way it was not punished for sins, nor did it “pay” for sins. What this was is a picture of the true atonement that was to come through Christ as men are being born again through faith in the sacrifice of Christ. Then as Paul said, the old is passed away and all things become new. When we are transformed in such a supernatural way, our old life of sin passes away, and we enter into a new life of faith and holiness in Christ. If we sin, we deny this power to free us from sin, and thus deny Christ.

Sin really is not the issue at all. It is only the symptom. The root of the problem is never the sin, but a matter of our faith. If we truly walk by faith, then we will be walking in the spirit, and we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

James, in the first chapter says this: 14. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15. Then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death.

You see, sin still brings death. Only a true Christian who walks by faith can later be “drawn away and enticed”. The end result of sin is and always will be death. The wages of sin IS death, and always will be. So it is our responsibility to discipline our own lives to make sure we make wise decisions and do not give in to the lusts of the flesh – as they can and will bring death.
There is no doubt that Satan will bring condemnation upon us for past sins that we have been forgiven of. It is at this time that we need to realize he is a liar and all that is under the blood of Jesus and cast away. But present and future sins are a completely different issue. No sin is automatically forgiven just because we are Christians.

In Hebrews 10:26 we are told, “For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins.”

So obviously sin still has the power to harm the Christian. “No more sacrifice” here does not mean that there can be no future forgiveness, or that the sacrifice of Christ is not sufficient. This means that the confession of a past sin in which we trusted in the sacrifice of Christ cannot cover future sins committed – without another act of repentance on our part. The work of Christ is finished! But it does not cover unrepented sins, or else the entire world would be saved. Sin is only the symptom of a much deeper issue taking place in a persons heart. And if it goes undealt with, then their soul is in danger just like the rest of the world who is in their sins. And If Christ conquered sin in the way you are saying, then sinners should not need to repent to be saved. Since sin has lost its power, all they need to do is believe in Him and believe they are save, and they can continue in their sins. All is good.

Christianity is done done done, not do do do?

What Christ did for us is only on the sacrificial and provision part. It is man’s part to believe, continue, abide, follow, trust, walk in the spirit, etc. So many commands are given it is incredible. This is not about “works salvation” as many like to try to make it. This is about truly trusting in His work. A true faith will have a direct affect on the way we will our lives every day. But we are able to lose that faith through lust, which leads to sin. This is why we are told we must take up our cross and follow Him daily, crucify the old man, and walk in the spirit so we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. Such instruction is given because of the absolute certain possibility or probability of falling from Grace and forfeiting the life we once had in Christ.

We are not talking about working on our own. We are talking about having true faith in His work, which leads to holiness and a separation from sin. Sin is only the works of the flesh that show where we are spiritually. Just as the fruit of the spirit shows where we are spiritually. Jesus said, “You shall know them by their fruit”. How a person lives shows where their heart really is. And if it is after sin, the father of sin is then their master. As the scripture says in Romans 6:16, “Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey-either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?”

Any person who turns to sin is doing what the devil wants, and he becomes their master. I am not talking about sins we commit now and then, and then repent. I am talking about habitual sins that people try to justify. And notice the word “Obey” here? We are only considered the servant of God if we obey Him!

Romans 3:25, “Whom God hath set forth to be an atoning sacrifice through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.”

Only past sins can be forgiven. Present sins have not godly sorrow if they remain. And future sins – lets get real. If I slug a brother in the face and I say I am sorry and ask him to forgive me – does that mean that if I do the same thing every now and then that he should automatically forgive me each time without me ever being truly sorry? Or if I punch him today, but tomorrow I steal from him, should my stealing be forgiven because I asked for forgiveness for punching him? Yet this is what this idea says of God and salvation. Sin has offended God. He is holy and He cannot be in the presence of sin. If men want to abide in His presence, then they have to separate themselves from sin. The work of Christ in no way changes who God is. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. And He see’s sin in the same way as always. Having law or doing away with it changed nothing. Men sinned and offended God long before the law came. God judged Cain, He flooded the earth in Noah’s day, He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, and so much more before the law ever came along. So after law we cannot expect Him to have any different of an attitude towards sin. Sin is not covered up. It MUST be removed from us through the work of Christ, and by repentance. If it isn’t it will damn the soul. This is just a simple Biblical fact. It was taught by the early Church very boldly for hundreds of years – before the corruption by the Catholic Church. It is a truth that we must take heed to today. This is why Paul said that when you stand, take heed lest you fall. Sin still has the power to destroy the soul. We are completely safe “In Christ”. But if we step across the line into sin, we give up our protection.

“John 1:29 29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! that word sin is a noun ( person place thing), John knew that Jesus came to take sin the whole thing from the world, it doesnt say who comes to take away the past sin of the world, current sin of the world, but “SIN of the world” What a waste of time it would have been to have God send His only Son Jesus to do a work like that,”

As already mentioned, atonement is a provision, not a literal payment. And sin is not a substance that can be literally removed. It is an issue of heart that has to be changed. The figurative always leads to a literal meaning different than the figure itself. This is why we must be “born again”, which we know is not a literal entering back into the womb, but a new life in Christ that starts as we are changed – transformed. So of course not part of the sin of the world is taken away – because it is not talking about a substance of sin, but an issue of heart that is changed when a person puts their faith in Jesus. And this can only happen when there is faith in Christ. The sins of millions will take them to hell still, regardless the work of Christ. So did Christ’s work fail or fall short? Of course not. It is men who failed to not put their faith in Him. Jesus dies for ALL sins, past, present and future. But forgiveness of these sins can ONLY come through repentance of them. And until there is repentance, there is not forgiveness or taking away of sins – since the heart of the person has not been change when they continue to sin.

“He who the son sets free is free indeed”

Absolutely! But what is freedom? It is not freedom in sin, but freedom FROM sin. Huge difference here. There is not “freedom” in sin. That is called bondage. The word “indeed” is like an exclamation point on the “free”. This shows it to not be a superficial freedom from the power of sin to condemn while still committing sin, but a real and complete freedom from both sins power, effect, and existence in our lives. In Romans 6 Paul made it clear that sin will no longer have dominion over those who are in Christ and remain in Him. A true freedom from sin is the completely changed life where sin no longer has any controlling power. If we do sin, we will confess that sin. But we will not live under it.

I wrote a book called, “Faith without Works” years ago that is full of hundreds of scriptures against this doctrine. Since then I had studied and read through the early Church writings that had proven what they really believed on the issue, confirming everything I am saying here. Then after that I did an in-depth study and research on the Levitical sacrificial system and how it pointed to the work of Christ. It is from false ideas of atonement that so many false teachings arise. But this work shows through the sacrificial system how sin has always been the issue with God, and that Christ took care of it in the provisional sense – but not as a payment as so many assume. The Bible does not teach a payment in the literal sense at all. The fact that WE are bought does not speak of sin, and it is figurative – as no money was exchanged or deal made between Satan our old master and Jesus our Atonement. It is through the OT that the NT is revealed. Yet so many try to teach atonement from the NT perspective without understand the OT system. When we really look into the OT, then we can see what atonement is really all about in Christ. And now, it is by faith that we are able to obtain Grace, as we confess Him and our sins in repentance as the people were told by Peter in Acts 2:38. A one-time repentance can never cover future sins! This is been show by scripture and simple logic.

Thanks to LYNDON CONN

Christmas – once pagan always pagan?

Dec13

Is it wrong to turn a pagan holiday into a christian celebration where we make a special commemoration of the birth of Jesus Christ? Would it really be better to view the day as an ordinary day, and skip all christmas carols, christmas food and meeting up with family and friends for the special occasion? You might say that it’s only the pagan parts of christmas that you’re against, but in that case the better option would be to avoid whatever christmas ingredients you dislike and celebrate christmas as per your own choice. Many people do just that, and the case is that most people celebrate christmas with Jesus Christ in mind and they truly believe he is the reason for the season. Also non-believers view christmas as a celebration for the birth of Jesus and that is what makes it so special. Every single year they are reminded of JESUS CHRIST. How else would a country where 90% are non-believers be exposed to Jesus Christ to the same extent? They certainly won’t come to church to find out.

There is a whole mixture of christmas traditions, and they differ world-wide, as well as within a country. Some celebrate it in a very secular way, and others with religious symbolism, and there really isn’t a “right way” (but there are many wrong ways) since the Bible doesn’t even mention Jesus’ birthday. The Bible doesn’t mention any other birthdays at all, perhaps with the exception of Herodes’ birthday, and he was a pretty mean guy who had a birthday party where he cut off the head of John the Baptist who was the forerunner to JESUS. Despite of this horrible event, we all imitate Herodes’ practice and celebrate our own birthdays. So the only Biblical mention of a birthday is tied to a very wicked ruler who maybe even invented “birthdays” and/or had a “birthday” party to bring fame to his own big name (I’m only speculating), and yet people today celebrate their own birthdays without giving it second thoughts. Also those who are against christmas celebrate their own birthdays.

Some families mix in traditions into christmas which are questionable, and maybe this is a bigger problem than the fact that it started out as pagan? We don’t have to take the same route as they though. The fact that certain things are not mentioned in the Bible is of course not a reason in itself to avoid them, or else I could list quite a few traditions which people are involved with which are not mentioned or encouraged to be carried out by christians. Where in the Bible does it say that christians should eat birthday cakes? Or use special wedding rings, celebrate Thanksgiving (with turkey and other traditions), arrange special funeral events, mark oneself with tattoos, etc? Some of those who are against christmas are engaged in all of the above. Tattoos are very much rooted in paganism, and even if some feel they can show that there is no Biblical law against them, they are certainly not encouraged. I can’t find any support for that jews or christians used tattoos.

How it all started in Europe

When Europe started to get christianised, the Germanics used the same word for the celebration of the birth of Jesus, as for their own pagan celebration. Later on during 1000 AD in England and 1100 AD in Germany, “Cristes Mæsse” started to be used which became “Christmas” in English, whereas “wîhe nah” (the holy night) became “Weihnachten” in German. The Scandinavian countries kept the word Jul and never used any references to a “mass”. Noel entered English in the late 14th century and is from the Old French noel or nael, meaning “Christmas season”, itself ultimately from the Latinnatalis (dies), “birth (day)”.

The year 354 AD Liberius established the date for Christmas on December 25th (and a Holiday is considered to start at 18.00 the previous day which could explain why December 24th is celebrated in many countries). According to an old understanding of Genesis, the world was created during the vernal equinox and March 25th was considered as Mary’s Annunciation Day, so the birth of Jesus was calculated to 9 months thereafter – December 25th. The celebration of the birth of Jesus replaced, among other events, the Roman celebration of the sun-god Ra which was held during the winter solstice, but many other types of celebrations were held throughout Europe during the winter solstice. The transmission from the various types of celebrations that people were engaged in, to the new christian celebration, went smoothly since celebrations were already in practice during this time. The return of the light to earth after mid winter has symbolized the light of Jesus. The winter solstice occurs a few days before christmas nowadays due to changes in the calendar. It makes perfect sense for people who had not heard about Jesus to make a special event for the winter solstice.

The origin of “Santa Clause” is uncertain as well, and even though we can trace him back to 300 AD and St. Nicholas, each culture has added its own flavor to this man. In the US he is always depicted as a man with a red and white suit, but he can wear other colors in other countries, and he has various assignments. In the 1800’s in Sweden, he was often depicted as a little midget (much like the dwarves in Snow white) who helped the land owners to guard barns and stables and to help feed the animals. He did not come with any presents but HE liked to get a bowl of porridge once in a while, why some had as a tradition to place this dish outside the door for him. The content sometimes disappeared so it could be Jultomten (The Santa Clause) who ate it – or perhaps a fox? For us today it’s possible to celebrate Christmas without this man if he is too much of a problem.

How it all started in Scandinavia

In Sweden and in some other countries in Europe, it’s December 24th which is the big day, and particularly in the evening, but the entire “christmas season” is between December 24th to January 13th when the celebration is officially over. Many choose to get rid of their christmas tree on or around this final day (or a few days before if it’s shedding too many needles), and why the christmas tree is not referred to in Jeremiah 10 can be read here. The modern use of a tree inside the house for christmas is a tradition from Germany in the 1500´s, and candles started to be used in the trees in the 1600´s and 1700´s. Initially christmas trees, at least in Scandinavia, were used only among the more wealthy families.

It’s hard to know where “Jul” first started to be used as a word but the first occasion seems to be from Codes Ambrosianus A of the Gothic calendar, which was written about 500-600 AD. The fragment describes the end of October and the beginning of November, and the month of November is overwritten with “Naubaimbair: fruma Jiuleis” which could be translated as “November, the month before Yule”. At around 730 Ad Beda venerabilis wrote that the Anglosaxians’ calendar has the month “geola” or “giuli” which can correspond to December and/or December and January. December 25th seems to be the first day of the pagan new year which was celebrated. By the time Scandinavia was christianised around 1000 AD, christmas celebrations started to involve mixed elements between pagan, christian, Nordic and Germanic traditions from the time of the vikings and onwards. Most of the present traditions derive from the 1800’s and 1900’s so they are modern and not tied to any pagan gods.

Saint Lucia – Celebrated December 13th in major parts of Scandinavia, with start in Sweden. The most commonly used explanation for the origin of this celebration is that it concerns a young Italian woman from Syracuse on Sicily (Italy) who around 300 AD was forced to marry a man who did not share her faith, and in order to not having to marry him she took her eyes out. Before the new Gregorian Calendar, the Lucia day occurred during the day of the winter solstice but this later changed. Again, it’s common to make extra festivities during a winter solstice. The origin of the Lucia celebrations in Sicily differs entirely from the one in Sweden. The Swedish Lucia tradition actually seems to be separated from the saint altogether, and the name Lucia was tied to the winter solstice festivities during a later stage. It wasn’t until around the year 1900 when the Lucia tradition was established and commonly celebrated in Sweden. The way it has been celebrated has changed since the year 1900, but in schools today the Lucia and her maids sing Lucia songs and christian christmas songs (and a few others) and that in itself is spectacular. Because “forcing” a religion on someone is usually not acceptable in schools, so religious songs or teachings would normally not pass, BUT since the Lucia tradition is so old and so loved this tradition is an exception. Even if a parent in school would protest, all other parents would overrule the protest, and the tradition continues. This means students will continue to be affected by the glorious gospel about JESUS CHRIST who the Lucia sings about. The Lucia songs can be heard in public places all around the country and on TV, and it’s a great way to evangelize! Children often sing these christian songs to their grandparents or similar, when visiting them in their homes this special day. Lucia on youtube can be viewed here:

With this background in mind, is celebrating christmas wrong?

Maybe it’s harder for me to understand people’s disdain for christmas due to where I live – in a very secular country where people would raise their eyebrows and maybe even be shocked if you would ever say “God bless you” to them. Religion is usually understood as something very private and politicians would therefore never say “God bless you” or “Let’s pray…” during any public circumstances. In the US you might feel that it’s not a big deal to skip christmas altogether and delete it as a Holiday since you will always be surrounded by people, even at work, who do NOT feel you’re odd for being a born again christian.

I am just SO pleased we have christmas celebrations! During the rest of the year (maybe apart from Easter, Pentecost and Christ’s Ascension day) any promotion of christianity seems to be prohibited from the public arena. You wouldn’t hear any songs about Jesus Christ on the radio or TV, unless there is a certain documentary or similar, but during the christmas season suddenly everything is allowed! JESUS CHRIST is promoted big time, and churches don’t pay a dime for this promotion! If you’re in a store, a bus or in a waiting room, you might be hearing christmas music in the background, and the same applies if you zap around among the TV channels. Just imagine; without the need of christians coming together and pay big money for spreading the gospel of Jesus, THIS IS DONE FOR FREE! And it’s done by SECULAR people who are helping out promoting our Savior even if they are not aware of it! For several days in a row you will be listening to christmas songs which keep reminding also atheists of:

A savior is born! In Bethlehem, by a virgin which would be a sign for the Messiah! The baby in the manger is MIGHTY GOD says Isaiah! The LORD OF LORDS! Shepherds came to see him! They were guided from the East by a star, expecting a NEW BORN KING. Angels spoke to them and assured them a Savior is come to earth! Herod was afraid! This baby would be born just to save people from their sins! People were expecting the Messiah and there he was! Oh Holy night! Peace on earth!

WHY would I vote for deleting christmas as a holiday, now when the gospel of Jesus Christ is spread to so many atheists?

Radio and TV

If religious songs would be played during any other time of the year, people would complain and point out that they shouldn’t have to be forced to listen to religious propaganda and that the radio hosts favor one religion over another, and they will likely be reported. But during the christmas time no one would even think about complaining despite that these songs are so frequent on all radio stations! It’s possible that you in the US have christian radio stations where you could listen to christian songs also the rest of the year, and there must be a few over here too, but if you’re not a christian of course you wouldn’t even look for one. When it comes to christmas, people WILL hear the christian songs whether they like it or not because ALL the radio stations play them – which are the radio stations these people usually listen to!

If we succeeded to persuade the politicians to abolish christmas altogether, it would mean that the radio stations and the TV channels would have no reason to play such christmas songs any more. Then those christians who voted down christmas, might contact the radio stations and offer to pay for “time slots” to play christians songs, but they would be turned down because the radio stations don’t play religious songs. Also TV-channels show many quality programs with christian christmas songs, and they are aired during the peak hours so loads of people can see them. They also make reruns of many programs. If you compare with other type of evangelization I can think of NO greater impact than broadcasting the Gospel right into people’s living rooms (for atheists) during the time when they will likely sit in front of the TV! These atheists might very well enjoy the music and sing along with the christian text. The Bible actually says that faith comes from hearing (the word of God) so this might be a start to peak their interest and a start on their salvation! And again, it doesn’t cost us christians anything! If we would try to make this on our own, it would cost us many millions to arrange a similar gospel campaign. Now, we don’t have to lift a finger, and still secular media will continue to spread the gospel by free will and no one is stopping them! The only ones who might interfere with this tradition and try to silence the christian christmas music might be those christians who oppose Christmas…

Changing dates?

The idea of changing dates for the Christmas holiday would of course not be achievable. I wouldn’t be able to make an impact on the leaders of this country to change Christmas from December 24th to September 24th even if many christians joined me in my efforts, and WHY would I even want to make an effort? It doesn’t matter when we celebrate christmas, but over here December 24th is perfect. It’s getting dark at 15.00 so we don’t have many hours of daylight, why a celebration which contain much Light comes in handy. IF christmas would be eliminated as a Holiday, it would likely result in LESS people who seek Jesus Christ and LESS people who get saved! If the politicians agreed to adhere to the christians’ call to eliminate christmas altogether since it’s pagan, and declared that the holiday would no longer be officially celebrated since it’s pagan and since it’s better to be neutral about religious holidays, then I’m rather sure atheists would take over this holiday and REALLY make it pagan. They might miss the Holiday of light and all the special events, so they might make their own traditions, and getting drunk might be one of the ingredients. Halloween started very recently in this country just from one year to another, so if Christmas was abolished something else will likely take its place.

Christian holidays will one day be abolished for the sake of neutrality

I believe that religious holidays will be abolished in the future anyway since the Antichrist is on his way and he won’t accept any public holidays where Jesus Christ is focused on, but why would we christians try to reach to this point sooner than we need? Jesus is coming soon and we need to spread the gospel! Not silence it! I read that in China also secular chinese people have started to pay attention to the christmas celebration. Particularly the youth and people who live on the coasts. When a lot of people celebrate christmas and tell the world WHY, also others might be affected and seek the Lord.

Even in schools they feel led to explain to their children WHY we celebrate christmas, and some even make a tradition to walk to a nearby church to see a nativity scene. Lately this has been questioned since the school education is supposed to be neutral, and it might start with one single parent who questions this tradition, with the result that school principal feels prone to agree and cancels a tradition which has been going on for many years. In reality there is room within the school laws to teach children about religions by making this type of excursions. Since this country has a christian history, why is it wrong to tell children about the reason for celebrating christmas? Where I live they solved the controversy (to single out christianity among other religions) by placing the nativity scene in the library instead of in the church (even though the church is just beside the library), and they explained the story of Joseph and Mary both from a christian point of view AND from the Islamic point of view! All for the sake of “neutrality”.

You decide over your own traditions

I just feel, that if we dislike certain christmas traditions, like the focus on Santa, too many and too expensive gifts, mistletoe arrangements, etc, then we should just avoid them and keep other traditions and/or start new ones which are more appropriate. Why the desire to eliminate the entire holiday and make it plain just because there are people who focus on the wrong things during this season? If you celebrate your own birthday without letting the wicked man Herodes bother you who is the only Biblical person who is mentioned celebrating a birthday, why is it wrong to select a day to celebrate the birth of Jesus, and why is it wrong to choose a former pagan day for this event? By choosing a former pagan day, you would kill two birds with one stone since you would disarm Satan with his pagan traditions, at the same time as you replaced the wicked traditions with a focus on JESUS CHRIST. Now we don’t have two competing holidays. Plus it’s a bit late to change dates now anyway. This is not about trying to turn the “pagan ship” around because it has already been turned around by people before us. We don’t celebrate December 25th to commemorate the sun-god any more, and even atheists can testify that the idea is to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ. Seems like the angels, shepherds and wise men found it natural to react quite visibly on the birth of Jesus Christ, and would they really be sinning if they commemorated the birth every year?

Christmas tree is not referred to in Jeremiah 10 in the Bible

Nov30

JEREMIAH 10 AND THE “PAGAN” CHRISTMAS TREE?

A number or well-meaning readers of the “Origin and Meaning of the Christmas Tree” article have written me with questions or accusations based on Jeremiah 10. These readers state that Jeremiah 10 proves that the Christmas tree is a pagan custom and is forbidden by God. Therefore, they argue, all those who decorate a Christmas tree in their home are sinning in God’s sight. This is quite the serious charge. Let us briefly examine Jeremiah 10 and the argument based upon it to see if there is any merit to this argument.

What exactly does Jeremiah 10 say? Below is Jeremiah 10:1-10:

This is what the LORD says: “Do not learn the ways of the nations or be terrified by signs in the sky, though the nations are terrified by them. 3 For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut a tree out of the forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel. 4 They adorn it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so it will not totter. 5 Like a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they do any good.” 6 No one is like you, O LORD; you are great, and your name is mighty in power. 7 Who should not revere you, O King of the nations? This is your due. Among all the wise men of the nations and in all their kingdoms, there is no one like you. 8 They are all senseless and foolish; they are taught by worthless wooden idols. 9 Hammered silver is brought from Tarshish and gold from Uphaz. What the craftsman and goldsmith have made is then dressed in blue and purple– all made by skilled workers. 10 But the LORD is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath.

The verses that the concerned readers repeatedly cite are 10:2-4: “Do not learn the ways of the nations . . . For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut a tree out of the forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel. 4 They adorn it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so it will not totter.” “Aha!” these readers say. “Jeremiah is talking about the Christmas tree!” But closer examination reveals that he certainly is not!

First, there is the immediate context of this passage. The very next verse, 10:5, goes on to say, “Like a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they do any good.” This passage and the passages that follow make it crystal clear that the “decorated tree” that Jeremiah was talking about in 10:3-4, was a tree that was cut down and made into an idol, a very common custom in the ancient world. 10:8-10 also confirms this, where the wooden idols are contrasted with the LORD, who is the true and living God. Keil and Delitsch, the well-respected Old Testament commentary, confirms this interpretation that the trees in question were idols that were then worshiped (C. F. Keil and F. Delitsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, “Jeremiah, Lamentations,” vol 8 (Grand Rapids: William B. Eeerdmans Publishing Company, 1980), 196-199).

Second, when we search the rest of the Old Testament, we find many other examples of trees being planted, cut down, or carved into idols. One of the most common examples of a tree idol was the Asherah, mentioned often in the Old Testament. Asherah was a pagan goddess that was worshiped throughout the Mediterranean world. She was considered to be the goddess of the sea, the consort of El, and the mother of Baal. She was always represented as a tree or pole, either planted or erected, then decorated. There are many warnings in the Old Testament about the Asherah tree. For example, in Exodus 34:12-14, we read, “Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land where you are going, or they will be a snare among you. 13 Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles. 14 Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.” From a more thorough study we learn that the Asherah idol was sometimes planted (Deut. 16:21; Micah 5:14), sometimes erected at high places (1 Kings 14:23, 2 Kings 17:10), with altars and incense stands next to them where they would be worshiped (In Judges 6:25, Gideon is commanded by God to “Tear down your father’s altar to Baal and cut down the Asherah pole beside it.” See also Isaiah 17:8 and Jeremiah 17:2). The Asherah, along with other man-made idols, were often decorated with various cloth hangings (2 Kings 23:7), as well as gold and silver.

Isaiah 44:14-19 gives a detailed picture of how a tree was cut down and fashioned into an idol – and the absurdity of it all.

He cut down cedars, or perhaps took a cypress or oak. He let it grow among the trees of the forest, or planted a pine, and the rain made it grow. 15 It is man’s fuel for burning; some of it he takes and warms himself, he kindles a fire and bakes bread. But he also fashions a god and worships it; he makes an idol and bows down to it. 16 Half of the wood he burns in the fire; over it he prepares his meal, he roasts his meat and eats his fill. He also warms himself and says, “Ah! I am warm; I see the fire.” 17 From the rest he makes a god, his idol; he bows down to it and worships. He prays to it and says, “Save me; you are my god.” 18 They know nothing, they understand nothing; their eyes are plastered over so they cannot see, and their minds closed so they cannot understand. 19 No one stops to think, no one has the knowledge or understanding to say, “Half of it I used for fuel; I even baked bread over its coals, I roasted meat and I ate. Shall I make a detestable thing from what is left? Shall I bow down to a block of wood?”

From the foregoing, it is abundantly clear that the “decorated tree” to which Jeremiah 10 refers is an idol, very likely the Asherah. Therefore, it is very superficial Bible interpretation and pure silliness to understand this passage as directly referring to the use of a fir tree for Christmas! If, and I repeat, if those who set up a Christmas tree fall down and worship it as a god or goddess, complete with altars and incense stands, then Jeremiah 10 applies here. Or if someone loves their Christmas tree more than God, then such a thing might also be considered spiritual idolatry. But apart from these exceptions, I think it is abundantly clear that Christians who erect Christmas trees are NOT worshiping them as gods or goddesses, nor are they loving them more than their Savior Jesus Christ. They are simply using the Christmas tree as a fun custom, one that can remind them of Jesus who is the branch of David (Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15), the root of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1). One that can remind them of the tree that led Adam and Eve to sin, but more importantly, the tree on which Christ Jesus died to make atonement for the sins of the whole world (Acts 5:30; Gal. 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24).

Christians should know that they can use a Christmas tree with a good conscience. It is unfortunate and wrong when well-meaning Christians call something sin that is not sin, and enslave the consciences of their fellow believers with imaginary sin! Shame on such Christians! Those who continue to believe that the Christmas tree is pagan and sinful, even after having their conscience correctly informed, should not use them. For it is not right to sin against conscience. This is regrettable, however, since there is absolutely nothing wrong with using a Christmas tree.

Thanks to Richard P. Bucher

through SANDRA HOOPER

Muslims should follow “the people of the BOOK” from before them

Jun4

The people of “the book” are christians and jews who follow THE BIBLE. Muslims usually claim that the Bible is corrupted but that doesn’t fit the bill. The Bible was a complete book for many centuries before Muhammed even entered the scene, and he seems to trust it as a complete book.

“If you (Muhammad) are in doubt regarding that which We have revealed to thee, ASK those who READ the book from before you…” S. 10:94

If the Bible is corrupted or lost, this proves that Allah is telling Muhammad to verify his own message, the Quran, on a corrupted source! Therefore by disproving the Bible you would also disprove the Quran. Even the Quran says to judge based on previous scriptures.

“And I will write down (my mercy) for those who are righteous and give alms and who believe in our signs; who follow the apostle, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in the Torah and the Gospel that IS WITH THEM.”

Here the Quran even claims that Muhammad is found in previous scriptures! So if the Bible was corrupted then we must conclude that Allah is a liar since we wouldn’t be able to find Muhammad in it. If it is corrupted then it shows that Muhammad is a corrupted prophet being prophesied by a corrupted book.

“And let the People of the Gospel JUDGE by what God has revealed in it. If any fail to judge by what God has revealed, they are licentious.” S. 5:50 “

“If only the People of the Book had believed and been righteous, we should have blotted out their sins and admitted them to gardens of bliss.” “If only they had performed the Torah and the Gospel and all that was revealed to them from their Lord, they would have eaten from above and from under their feet. Among them is a People (umma) on the right course, but evil is that which many of them do…”

“Say,O People of the Book! You are not (founded) on anything until you PERFORM the Torah and the Gospel, and what was revealed to you from your Lord.” S. 5:68-71

Hence to accept Bible corruption, one would be force to conclude that Allah’s revelations can be change by mere human beings. Also it says that the people of the book (Bible means book) have to perform the Torah.

The words of thy Lord are perfect in truth and in justice; NONE CAN CHANGE HIS WORDS: For He is the one who heareth and knoweth all. S. 6:115

THERE IS NONE THAT CAN ALTER THE WORDS OF ALLAH. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers. S. 6:34

THERE IS NO CHANGING THE WORDS OF GOD; that is the supreme triumph. S. 10:65

And recite that which hath been revealed unto thee of the Scripture of thy Lord. THERE IS NONE WHO CAN CHANGE HIS WORDS, and thou wilt find no refuge beside Him. S.18:27

If the Bible is corrupted or lost then this means that the Quran is incorrect.

“God has bought from the believers their selves and their wealth, and for them is the garden (of Paradise) if they fight in the ways of God: and whether they kill or are killed, the promise of God IS true in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an, and who is more faithful to his promise than God?” S. 9:111

“To you (Muhammad) We revealed the book in truth,attesting to (the truth of) that which IS between his (its) hands from the scripture (the Torah and Gospel), and guarding it (wa muhaiminan `alaihi)…” S. 5:51

According to the Quran, the promise of God is true in both the Torah and Gospel. Also Allah said that he revealed “THE BOOK”.

“They (the Meccans) say, `Why does he not bring us a sign from his Lord?’ What! Has not a clear sign come to them in what IS in the former pages (al-suhuf al-aulla )?” S. 20:133

“And before thee (Muhammad), We sent no one, except men, to whom We granted revelation. ASK (plural) the people of the Scripture message, if you don’t know.” S. 21:7

According to the Quran clear proof of God himself is in the former scriptures of the Torah and Gospel and he even commanded Muhammad to ask the people of the scripture if he didn’t know.

Mohammed said, “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” (Hadith Al Buhkari vol. 9:57)

“Slay the idolators [non-Muslims] wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the last Day…. Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! (Sura 9:5,29,41).

So according to the Quran self defence is not a needed excuse for slaying someone else, but it’s enough if he or she is a non-muslim.

Also read “How to explain the trinity for muslims”.