Skip to content
October 29, 2013

IS BAPTISM A SACRAMENT!

The following quotes concerning baptism are taken from chapter 28 of the Westminster Confessions…  “1. Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.

*

First, baptism is NOT a sacrament.  There is NO special grace conferred by being baptized.  The word “sacrament” isn’t even found in the Bible.

*

Furthermore, there is NOT one single Verse in the entire Bible which teaches that a person is sealed through baptism.

*

On the contrary, Ephesians 1:13 states… “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.It’s God’s Holy Spirit which seals the believer; NOT baptism.    The only sure sign that a person has been placed into the Body of Christ is the Holy Spirit of God Himself, “Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit” (1st John 4:13).

Scripture clearly teaches then that, baptism is NOT a sacrament!

 

Leave a Comment
October 28, 2013

DID GOD REALLY SAY THAT?

I have read and re read theses passages and noticed that Satan used the same strategy when tempting both the first Adam, and the second Adam – Christ.
Gen 3: 1-6 Matt 4

Gen 3: 1-6
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,
3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman.
5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

By questioning the literal word of God and offering Eve spiritual benefits that she could attain, in effect, I think we see Satan here, originating the allegorical approach as a way to understand what God really said!
Likewise, when Satan tempted our Lord, he questioned the literal word of God, and then proceeded to allegorize and offer spiritual and physical blessings.

Mathew 4 1-41 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.” 4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”

I have looked at many proponents of the allegorical/ spiritualizing approach, all the way from Augustine, Origen, and down through Piper, Sproul, Robertson, Keller and Doriani.

However, I have found compelling evidence in the scripture to use the literal interpretation method for all genres of the word, as the safest, and best method to avoid the introduction of heresy. Jesus summed it up well:

Mathew 4:4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”

 

Leave a Comment
October 22, 2013

WHO IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE PREACHER?

There is a preacher of the old school, but he speaks as boldly as ever. He is not popular, though the world is his parish and he travels every part of the globe and speaks in every language. He visits the poor, calls upon the rich, preaches to people of every religion and no religion and the subject of his sermon is always the same. He is an eloquent preacher, often stirring feelings which no other preacher could in bringing tears to eyes that never weep. His arguments none are able to refute nor is there any heart that has remained unmoved by the force of his appeals. He shatters life with his message. Most people hate him, everyone fears him, his name?
 
Death.
 
Every tombstone is his pulpit. Every newspaper prints his text and some day everyone of you will be his sermon.
Thomas Gray looking at death, said the boast of heraldry, the pomp of power, and all that beauty and all that wealth err gave a way to like the inevitable hour, the paths of glory lead, but to the grave.
Men fear death. Thomas Gray says, it all ends in the grave. Maybe that is the unhope of the world, but it is not the hope of the Christian, and that’s what we’ve been seeing in 1 Corinthians 15. For the Christian, all of the fear of death is cancelled in the hope of bodily resurrection. We’ve learned, haven’t we, that we’re going to go into that grave and come out the other side glorified in new bodies for heaven
Leave a Comment
October 22, 2013

THE BIG BANG THEORY – FACT OR FICTION?

One of my students told me the other day that she disagreed with my view and that she believed in the “big bang” theory. She was surprised when I told her I agreed and I began to expain why:
I said to her, ” Ask me about how I built my house?”
She said, “How did you build your house?”
I replied:
* First I bought a one acre lot.* One day 5 trucks came and dumped a load of bricks on the lot.
* Next day 2 trucks came and off loaded all the roofing timbers and tiles.
* After that another truck brought all the electrical wires and things and left them in a pile on the lot.
* Then a paint van came and put 75  gallon size cans of paint on a corner of the lot..
* Next a plumber’s lorry (truck) brought all the water pipes and left them in a pile.
 * Finally I took 5 sticks of dynamite and lit them under all this stuff.
There was a “BIG BANG ” and now I have a beautiful house. All the bricks, roofing tiles, timbers, plumbing and electrical wires and fittings are all in their right place, and the walls are all painted Ina matching color.
My student said that it was impossible and that I was lying.
Yes, the “big bang” theory is impossible and just a big lie.
This equation:
“NOBODY + NOTHING = EVERYTHING” does not work!!!!!!!!!
Leave a Comment
October 22, 2013

IS THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION FILLED WITH UNBIBLICAL DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES?

        I thank God for His precious Word, which is a lamp for us to shine upon the darkness of men’s lies.  I am truly amazed that so many professed “Christians” are naive enough to follow the traditions of men, rather than the eternally preserved Word of God.  I am going to expose the Westminster Confession for what it is, the tradition of men (Mark 7:6-13).  Does the Westminster Confession contain any truth?  Of course; but, so does every lie which Satan has ever told.
According to WIKIPEDIA.com…
“The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith, in the Calvinist theological tradition. Although drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly largely of the Church of England, it became, and remains the ‘subordinate standard’ of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide (with appropriate changes it has also been adopted by some Congregationalists and even Baptists).” -SOURCE
Follow God’s Word; NOT men!
Kindly said, who cares about what a group of men had to say in 1646 A.D.?  It is crazy!  Why are professed Christians following groups of men instead of what the Bible teaches?  The Lutherans greatly error by following the Augsburg Confession, written in 1530 A.D.  Who cares about the Augsburg Confession!  Who cares about the Westminster Confession!  We should all be obeying Romans 3:4, “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar…”  Also, Psalm 118:8, “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.”
God does not want us following Calvin, Arminius, or the Protestant movement.  The Apostle Paul clearly warned against following men…
“Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.  Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?  I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.” -1st Corinthians 1:12-15
It is certainly not wrong to study the writings of other godly Christians; BUT, we must NEVER elevate the doctrines of those men to the level of the Word of God.  The Lutherans idolize Martin Luther, a man who led many people into Hell with his damnable doctrine of baptismal regeneration.  Likewise, the Westminster Confession contains many heresies, including the damnable doctrines of John Calvin.
Baptism is NOT a Sacrament!
The following quotes concerning baptism are taken from chapter 28 of the Westminster Confessions…
“1. Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.
First, baptism is NOT a sacrament.  There is NO special grace conferred by being baptized.  The word “sacrament” isn’t even found in the Bible.  Furthermore, there is NOT one single Verse in the entire Bible which teaches that a person is sealed through baptism.  On the contrary, Ephesians 1:13 states…
“In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.”
It is God’s Holy Spirit which seals the believer; NOT baptism.   The only sure sign that a person has been placed into the Body of Christ is the Holy Spirit of God Himself, “Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit” (1st John 4:13).
2. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto.
Biblical Baptism is by Immersion; NOT Sprinkling!
3. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.
EVERY convert baptized in the Word of God was baptized by IMMERSION.  Baptism by sprinkling is NOT taught in the Bible!  Immersion represents the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ; thus, sprinkling does not adequately represent the Gospel.  No one in the Bible was ever sprinkled, and no infant was ever baptized.
Infant Baptism is Unbiblical!
4. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.
Again, infant baptism is NOT taught in the Word of God.  The writers of the Westminster Confession ADDED doctrines to the Bible which God did not write.  Infant baptism is a heathen practice which originated in Catholicism.  No baby can understand the concepts of sin, Christ’s redeeming work, or salvation; therefore, it is ridiculous to baptize infants.  Not one baby was ever baptized in the Bible.  Not one person in the Bible was ever baptized who didn’t first believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation.
So why baptize babies when the Word of God doesn’t teach any such nonsense?  There is a great danger in baptizing infants, the danger that they’ll grow up thinking they’re ok with God because they were baptized.  Many adults, when witnessed to, reply that they were baptized as a child, and are ready to meet God.  Nothing could be further from the truth!  Children should NOT be baptized until they are old enough to realize their sin, and make a conscious decision to trust upon Jesus Christ as Saviour.  This age varies from child to child.
There is NO Power to Baptism!
5. Although it be a great sin to condemn or neglect his ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it: or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.
They claim that baptism is not necessary for regeneration; YET, they call it a “sacrament,” which by definition implies that there is some POWER to baptism.  Biblically, there is NO power in, or associated with, baptism.
6. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in His appointed time.
This is heresy!  There is NO “efficacy” (power) to baptism.  According to the Westminster Confession, baptism opens the door for God’s grace to be bestowed upon us, at a time appointed by God.  BUT, the Bible never teaches any such thing.  ALL of the blessings available to the believer are a direct result of placing our faith in Christ as Savior, nothing else.  When we trust Christ for salvation, all the graces of God become freely available to us, “That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel” (Ephesians 3:6).
Ephesians 2:7 states, “That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.”  I don’t see any mention of being baptized in those Scriptures.  Where did someone get the crazy unbiblical idea that baptism confers “grace” upon a believer?  The Word of God teaches in Romans 6:5,6 that baptism is only symbolic of the Gospel.  Baptism is the Biblical method for us to make a public profession of faith.
The Bible Never Calls Failure to be Baptized a Sin!
There is nothing to be gained personally from being baptized, other than a clear conscious (1st Peter 3:21).  Baptism is simply a believer’s act of obedience.  Those believer’s who refuse to be baptized will feel guilty for not following the Lord’s example to be baptized; but, that is true concerning all the commands in the Bible.  We should feel guilty for not following the Bible.  Yet, NO Christian perfectly follows the Bible, we all falter and mess up.  I am not condoning wrongdoing, I am just saying that we all come short of what God expects (Romans 3:23).
Yes, a believer should be baptized; BUT, it would be just a wrong for a Christian not to pray or treat their spouse properly.  The Bible never associates the graces bestowed upon the believer with baptism.  In Acts 10:47 Peter states, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?”  Carefully notice that these people had ALREADY received the Holy Spirit.  They were saved; but, had not yet been baptized.
The Westminster Confession doesn’t go as far as to teach baptismal regeneration; BUT, it does teach that it is A GREAT SIN (see point # 5) not to be baptized.  Can you show me that in the Bible?  In fact, show me where the Bible ever calls not getting baptized a sin … you cannot!  The Apostle Paul said in 1st Corinthians 1:17, “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.”  If baptism were so crucial, and such A GREAT SIN not to be baptized, then why would the Apostle Paul DIMINISH the importance of baptize?  John 4:2 states that Jesus didn’t baptize anyone; BUT, He told people to BELIEVE upon Him for salvation (John 14:6).
I had a Church of Christ minister defend baptismal regeneration by telling me that Jesus didn’t need to baptize because His disciples did it instead; BUT, there’s a problem with his reasoning because Jesus’ disciples weren’t with Him much of the time.  Where were the disciples when Jesus witnessed to the Samaritan woman at the well in John Chapter 4?  Baptism is not mentioned.  Where were the disciples when Jesus witnessed to Nicodemus in John Chapter 3 at the midnight hour (John 7:50)?  Again, baptism is not mentioned.  Clearly, water baptism is NOT required for salvation.
But is it a sin not to baptized?  The Bible states in James 4:17, “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”  Therefore, I do believe that it would be sinful for a believer not to be baptized if God is dealing with their heart about it.  However, the Word of God never actually makes an issue of baptism being a sin.  Is it a sin not to go to church in lieu of Hebrews 10:25?  Is it a sin not to partake of the Lord’s supper in lieu of Luke 22:19?  Is it a sin not pray continually in lieu of 1st Thessalonians 5:17?  These are often referred to as sins of “omission.”
However, carefully notice the words of James 4:17, “…to him it is sin…”  As a believer grows in the Lord, the Holy Spirit reveals more and more things to him/her that need to be addressed.  A person who gets saved needs time to grow in the Lord.  As they grow in the milk of the Word (1st Peter 2:2), the Holy Sprit will begin to open their eyes, showing them things which they should be doing as a believer.  It is at this time that the believer must make a decision to do what they have learned to be right, or refuse to do it.  It is a sin to grieve the Holy Spirit and not yield to His Will.  So what I am saying is this, what might be a sin of omission to a believer who has been saved for 10 years, may not be a sin to someone who has only been saved for a short time.
One cannot reasonably argue whether murder is a sin or not, because the 10 commandments openly condemns such a sin.  However, there is not a Verse in the Bible which condemns a person for staying home from church to watch a football game.  Now, it would be a sin for a believer who knows better; BUT, doing such a thing might seem perfectly acceptable to a younger convert.  Thus, I believe it is very unscriptural to label those who aren’t ready to be baptized as being guilty of committing “A GREAT SIN!”  You can’t show me that in the Bible!  We must be careful not to call something “sinful” which the Bible hasn’t called sinful.
Ministers Cannot Forgive Sin!
According to the Westminster Confession, chapter 30…
“The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of His Church, hath therein appointed a government, in the hand of Church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate … To these officers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed; by virtue whereof, they have power, respectively, to retain, and remit sins; to shut that kingdom against the impenitent…” -SOURCE
How arrogant!  No minister or priest was ever given the power to forgive sin!  There’s not one recorded incident in the entire Word of God where the Apostles or disciples ever forgave someone’s sins, not one!  Furthermore, who is a minister to “shut that kingdom against the impenitent”?  How pompous!  Presbyterian and Lutheran ministers do NOT have the power to forgive your sins!  In fact, Jesus said that if we didn’t forgive other’s sins, He wouldn’t forgive us, “But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6:15).
Clearly, the Bible does not give ministers the power to forgive sin, or deny forgiveness of sins.  There is no such thing as “Apostolic succession” taught in the Bible, i.e., there are no Apostles today.  In Matthew Chapter 10, Jesus empowered the Apostles to perform signs to validate their Gospel message to Israel, “And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease … These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.  And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.  Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.” (Matthew 10:1, 5-8).
Carefully notice, there is no mention in Matthew 10 about the power to forgive sin.  I’d like to see one, just one, of these ministers who claim to have the power to forgive sin, go into a hospital and heal the sick.  Jesus gave the Apostles the power “…to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.”  So why can’t these ministers today, who claim they can forgive sin, heal the sick?  Because they are imposters!!!  They can’t heal the sick, and they can’t forgive anyone’s sins, not even their own.
Conclusion
The Westminster Confession is filled with unbiblical doctrines, and should be AVOIDED by all professed Christians.  The problem is that many people are LAZY and don’t want to STUDY the Bible for themselves, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2nd Timothy 2:15).  It’s high time for ALL professed Christians to become as narrow-minded as the Word of God.  If anyone teaches something that doesn’t match up to the Bible, then we should expose them and their lies!
This is Biblical (Ephesians 5:11).  I’m not endorsing being mean to anyone, I’m just saying that we need to break away from Protestantism, and follow the incorruptible Word of God instead!  Protestantism may have come our of Catholicism; BUT, Catholicism didn’t come out of Protestantism.  We need to forsake the whole mess.  Most Protestants don’t know the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior, having Churchianity without Christianity, because they are trusting in their damnable baptismal regeneration, instead of placing their faith ALONE in Christ Jesus.
David J. Stewart
Leave a Comment
October 22, 2013

WAS C.S. LEWIS A DELUDED ROMAN CATHOLIC?

Lewis’s Heresies
Christianity Today noted that he was “a man whose theology had decidedly unevangelical elements” (CT, Sept. 7, 1998).
He believed in purgatory, confessed his sins to a priest, and had the last rites performed by a Catholic priest (C.S. Lewis: A Biography, pp. 198, 301).
 
He received the Catholic sacrament of last rites on July 16, 1963.
Lewis rejected the doctrine of bodily resurrection (Biblical Discernment Ministries Letter, Sept.-Oct. 1996).
He believed there is salvation in pagan religions.
 
Lewis denied the total depravity of man and the substitutionary atonement of Christ.
 
He believed in theistic evolution and rejected the Bible as the infallible Word of God.
He denied the biblical doctrine of an eternal fiery hell, claiming, instead, that hell is a state of mind: “And every state of mind, left to itself, every shutting up of the creature within the dungeon of its own mind—is, in the end, Hell” (Lewis, The Great Divorce, p. 65).
 
 
Leave a Comment
October 20, 2013

TRUE REPENTANCE IS A RESULT OF CONVICTION OF SIN

What is the meaning of repentance? How important is it in our salvation from sin? Is it the same as godly sorrow? Must we admit or acknowledge our sins to be forgiven? What other conditions must we meet to be saved? What about faith and baptism? Should Christians ever repent or is it just for alien sinners? What are the fruits of repentance? What is restitution, and how important is it? Have you repented of your sins?

Introduction:

Repentance is a fundamental part of God’s requirements of man.
Jeremiah 25:4,5 – A typical summary of the message of the Old Testament prophets: “Repent now everyone of his evil way and his evil doing…” [35:15; Ezekiel 18:30; 2 Kings 17:13]
Matthew 3:2 – John the Baptist taught, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”
Mark 1:15 – Mark’s summary of Jesus’ message includes: “Repent, and believe in the gospel.”
Luke 13:3 – Unless you repent you will all likewise perish.
Mark 6:12 – Jesus sent the apostles to preach that people should repent.
Acts 2:38 – In the first gospel sermon, Peter preached, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you for the remission of sins…”
Acts 17:30 – God commands all men everywhere to repent.
Revelation 3:19 – “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent.”

All who study the Bible agree that repentance is fundamental to Bible teaching.
The purpose of this lesson is to study what the Bible says about repentance.
Despite the frequent Bible references to repentance, many people misunderstand it and still more neglect it. Many people commit immorality, indifference, mistreatment of others, or doctrinal error, yet never truly repent.
What is repentance and why is it important? What does repentance require us to do?
Note that people who are not Christians need to repent, but so do Christians when we sin. This is a lesson needed by everyone.

1.  The Meaning of Repentance
What Does Repentance Mean?
A. A Change of Mind – Greek. metonoia
The basic message of the gospel is change. To be forgiven of sins, you need to change. To please God you need to change. To receive eternal life you need to change. This emphasis on change is focused in the word “repent.”
“Repentance” – “a change of mind: as it appears in one who repents of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done … esp. the change of mind of those who have begun to abhor their errors and misdeeds, and have determined to enter upon a better course of life, so that it embraces both a recognition of sin and sorrow for it and hearty amendment, the tokens and effects of which are good deeds …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.

Repentance is “a change of mind” – a decision, a choice, a determination of the heart, a deliberate exercise of the will – in which one determines to act differently in the future than he has in the past.

B. Examples of Repentance

Jonah 3:4-10 – When Jonah preached, the people of Nineveh gave heed, were sorry, and turned from their evil ways (vv 8,10). “Turn” and “return” are common Old Testament words meaning “repent.” Jesus said these people “repented” at the preaching of Jonah (Matthew 12:41).
Matthew 21:28-32 – A son refused to work for his father, but later repented (regretted it – NKJV) and went. He “changed his mind.” Jesus applied this to sinners who repented at John’s preaching in contrast to priests would not repent (relent – NKJV).

C. Repentance from Sin
The change of mind required by the gospel is repentance of sin. This involves changing ones mind about sin – making up ones mind to cease practicing sin and to become obedient to God.
Luke 24:47 – Those who are not God’s children should be taught the need for repentance and remission of sin. What they need remission of is what they need to repent of: sin! [2 Tim. 2:25,26; Matt. 9:13]
Acts 8:22 – Likewise, Christians who sin need to be taught to repent of their wickedness. [Luke 15:7,10; 17:3,4; 2 Cor. 12:21]
Repentance is a decision to cease sinning and begin serving God instead.
[Ezekiel 14:6; Deuteronomy 30:2,8,10; Jeremiah 8:4-6; 3:7,10-14; 25:3-7; 36:3,7; 2 Kings 17:13; Zechariah 1:3,4; 2 Chronicles 30:6-9; 1 Samuel 7:3,4; Revelation 2:5. Like hearing, faith, obedience, etc., repentance may refer to a specific decision to obey or may generally include all that a person does to be saved.]

2.   What Must Precede Repentance

Before people can truly repent, certain other things must occur first. Sometimes people misunderstand or fail to practice repentance because they misunderstand or fail to practice the things that must precede it.

A. One Must Hear and Believe God’s Will.
Learning and believing is necessary in order to inform men that they need to repent and to motivate them to do so.
Remember that prophets, apostles, and Jesus all preached and taught repentance (see introduction). Teaching is necessary to lead one to repent.
Luke 24:47 – Jesus commanded repentance and remission to be preached to all men. Men cannot know they need to repent unless they are told to repent.
2 Kings 17:13 – God repeatedly sent prophets to warn the people to repent. Every Old Testament prophet you can name preached this way.
Today people sometimes tire of hearing preachers rebuke sin. But read the prophets! This is God’s plan. His way to lead men to leave sin is to warn them to repent.
2 Timothy 2:25,26 – Correct those who are in error hoping they will come to repentance and escape the snare of the devil. No one will ever change until he realizes he is wrong and sees the consequence of his error. To convince people they are wrong we must show them the evidence in God’s word.
Romans 2:4,5 – Failure to repent treasures up wrath at the day of God’s judgment of mankind. When people are in sin, telling them to repent is not unkind or cruel. It is an act of love, because only in this way can they correct their lives and receive eternal life.
[See other Scriptures in introduction.]
The message that leads men to repent must be God’s word.
Ezekiel 13:22 – False prophets encourage people to continue in sin by not telling them that they need to turn (repent) from their wicked ways. When people sin, faithful preachers must not let them continue thinking they are acceptable before God. If we do not rebuke them, they may be lost.
Ezekiel 33:7-9,14-16 – If preachers do not warn people of their sins, and the people are lost, God will also hold the preachers accountable. Some cannot bring themselves to tell folks they are wrong, so they compromise the truth. God will hold them accountable for the lost souls that result.
People in sin need to hear exactly what God’s word says. To withhold the truth does not do anyone a favor.
[Jeremiah 23:12; 26:2,3; Isaiah 6:10; 2 Corinthians 7:8ff; Acts 20:21; 17:30; 26:20; Luke 16:27-31; 5:32; Jonah 3:4,5; Proverbs 1:23; Revelation 3:19]

B. One Must Acknowledge Sin.
When honest people hear the truth preached, they see the application and are convicted of sin.
Psalm 38:18 – I will declare my iniquity. We must admit it as a fact.
Proverbs 28:13 – One who covers his sins will not prosper. In order to have mercy, he must confess and forsake it.
Malachi 3:7 – When confronted about their sins, some people refuse to admit guilt. They ask, “What sin? What do I have to repent of?”
Before one will change his life, he must decide to change (repent). Before he decides to change, he must recognize that he has been guilty. As long as a person defends his practice and refuses to admit error, he has not repented.
[1 John 1:9; 1 Kings 8:47; 2 Chronicles 6:24-39; 7:14; Acts 19:18; James 5:16; Jeremiah 3:12f; 8:4-6; 5:3; 44:4,5; Jonah 3:8,10; Amos 4:6-11; Luke 15:18,21; 17:3,4; Psalm 32:5; Leviticus 26:40]

C. One Must Be Sorry for His Sins.
Simply admitting one has sinned is not enough. Some people know they have sinned but don’t care, or at least don’t really regret what they did.
Psalm 38:18 – I will declare my iniquity and be in anguish for my sin.
Joel 2:12,13 – Turn to God (repent) with weeping and mourning. Tear your heart, not your garment. God wants, not mere outward expressions of grief, but sincere sorrow. We must sincerely wish we had never done the act.
2 Corinthians 7:10 – Godly sorrow leads to repentance unto salvation. One who does not repent cannot be saved, and he cannot truly repent without sorrow.
James 4:8,9 – Sinners must mourn and weep.
A person may admit he did wrong and may even stop committing the sin, but that does not prove he regrets what he did. He may think it was justified under the circumstances, but he simply has no reason to do it again.
For example, a couple may live together without marriage then get married; they are no longer committing fornication, but that does not prove they regret the fornication committed before marriage.
To be saved one must Scripturally repent. But He will never truly repent until he knows and admits he was wrong and is truly sorry.
[Psalm 34:18; 51:17; 31:10; Isaiah 57:15; 66:2; 22:12-14; Job 42:6; Jeremiah 31:19; 5:3; 6:26; Jonah 3:5-8; Matthew 26:75; 11:20; 2 Chronicles 34:27; Ezra 10:1]

3.  The Importance of Repentance
It is also possible for a person to know he is wrong and be sorry without really making up his mind to change. Some people have the idea that repentance just means being sorry – if they just admit they were wrong and say they are sorry, everything is forgiven.

But repentance is a decision to change. Why is this important?

A. Repentance Is Essential in Order to Develop Proper Attitudes.
We can never please God till we develop a proper state of mind.
Proverbs 4:23 – Keep your heart diligently because out of it are the issues of life. People do wrong because they chose to do wrong. In order to start doing right, they must change their mind and decide to do right – repent.
The mind is where we decide what we will do. This is why our state of mind is so important.
Romans 6:17,18 – One who is a servant of sin needs to be made free from sin and become a servant of righteousness. To do this, he must obey God “from the heart.” You cannot obey from the heart until you have decided in your heart to obey. That decision to do right is repentance.
Joel 2:12,13 – Repentance must involve the heart – the inner man. We can never please God till we get our heart right. That happens in repentance. When people know what God wants but will not do it, they lack repentance. (They may also lack faith, love, etc., but one thing they definitely lack is repentance.)
[1 Kings 8:33-36,46-50; 2 Chronicles 6:24-39; 7:14; Ezekiel 18:31; Jeremiah 24:7; 2 Kings 23:25; 1 Samuel 7:3,4]

B. Repentance Is Essential in order to Receive God’s Forgiveness.
2 Peter 3:9 – God is not willing for men to perish but wants all to come to repentance. The alternative to repentance is perishing! [Luke 13:3,5]
Acts 2:38 – Repent and be baptized for remission of sins.
Ezekiel 18:21-23,27,28,30-32 – Wicked men must turn from evil and do right or they will die (spiritually). God does not want us to die. He is willing to forgive, but first we must be willing to change. Before we can change, we must decide to change – that is repentance.
The gospel emphasizes repentance because repentance is essential to changing our attitudes and our life. Until we are willing to change our lives, God is not willing to forgive our sins!
If you have sinned, you must admit the sin and be sorry. Then you must make up your mind to change. Have you done so, or are you just expecting everything to be forgotten because you said you were sorry? Forgiveness comes only after a decision to change!
[Ezekiel 33:10-19; 2 Timothy 2:25,26; Romans 2:4,5; Acts 3:19; 8:22; 5:31; 17:30,31; Revelation 2:5,16,21-23; Luke 3:8,9; 24:47; 2 Corinthians 7:10; 1 Kings 8:46-50; 2 Chronicles 6:24-29; 7:14; Joel 2:12-14; Jeremiah 36:3,7; Isaiah 55:7; Matthew 11:20-24; 21:28-32]

4. Things That Must Follow Repentance
Some think it is enough just to decide to change. That constitutes repentance, but something more must follow the repentance.

A. After Repentance, One Must Meet Other Conditions of Forgiveness.
What the conditions are depends on whether one has or has not been baptized.
After repenting, one who is not a child of God must be baptized.
Acts 2:38 – Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. Some people do not realize that the Bible teaches baptism is essential. Other people have been shown but still will not accept it. These people are not showing true repentance!
Remember, repentance is a decision to do what God’s word says. When a person sees what God’s word says but will not do it, that person is not showing true repentance.
When a person refuses to be baptized, his primary problem is not baptism: it is his faith or his repentance! If believes the truth he will know he must repent and be baptized. If he then truly repents, you won’t be able to keep him from the water!
[Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3,4; Galatians 3:27; 1 Peter 3:21]
A Child of God who sins must pray for forgiveness.
Sometimes children of God sin after they have been baptized. They do not need to be baptized again, but they do need to repent again.
Acts 8:22 – Simon was told to repent and pray that his sin might be forgiven. The Christian who sins needs to repent and pray, not repent and be baptized. [1 John 1:9; Matthew 6:12]
If one has wronged other people, he must also confess to them – Matthew 5:23,24. If the sin is known and has been a bad influence on the congregation or hindered the effort of the church to teach, then the whole church needs to be told the person has repented.
[Luke 17:3,4; 15:18,21; Genesis 50:17; James 5:16; Proverbs 28:13; study passages on influence and reputation]

B. Then One Must Change His Conduct – Quit Practicing Sin.
Repentance is a decision to change. After receiving forgiveness, one must follow through and make the changes he decided to make.

Scriptures
Acts 26:20 – After forgiveness men must do works worthy of repentance. [Luke 3:8-14; Matthew 3:8]
Ezekiel 18:21-32 – To avoid death, the wicked must turn from evil and do right and keep God’s statutes.
Matthew 21:28-31 – The ultimate question, in the story of the two sons, was which of the two did the will of the father. The son who was right was the one who eventually went and did what he was supposed to do.
Proverbs 28:13 – We prosper, not by hiding our sins, but by confessing and forsaking them.
Applications
This is where many members of the church fail. They profess that they want forgiveness, then are baptized or pray for forgiveness, but never follow through and change. They want forgiveness but not change.
There is a difference between repentance and the fruits of repentance. Sometimes people go through the motions of baptism (or public confession), but do not truly repent. These people will never truly be forgiven until they first truly repent.
Other people really did repent and intended to change their lives, but never followed through. These people may have been forgiven the first time but now are back in sin. They need to repent again and this time produce the fruits of repentance.
[Genesis 44 cf. Genesis 37; Luke 13:5-9; 15:19; Ezekiel 33:10-19; Revelation 2:5; Deuteronomy 30:2; 2 Kings 17:13; Jonah 3:8,10; Isaiah 55:7; Jeremiah 4:1; 18:8,11; 44:4,5; 25:3-7; 35:15; 2 Chronicles 30:6-9; 1 Samuel 7:3,4]

C. Then One Must Make Restitution.
The fruits of repentance require more than just deciding to do right “next time” or to “never do that again.” To the extent possible we must attempt to go back and correct the harmful effects of our sins on other people.
Ezekiel 33:14,15 – One who was wicked must not only walk in the statutes, but also return what he stole. [Exodus 22:1-15; Leviticus 6:1-5; Numbers 5:5-8; 2 Samuel 12:6]
Ezra 10:3,11,17,19,44 – When Israelite men had married foreign women, contrary to God’s law, they had to repent and put away the wives. This is what repentance requires today when people are living in adultery because of unscriptural divorce and remarriage [9:1-10:44; Matt. 19:9]
Luke 19:8 – Zacchaeus had been a publican. When he was converted, he determined to return the taxes charged wrongfully.
This can be a difficult principle to apply because sometimes the effect of a sin cannot be undone (for example, murder). But it is a Bible principle and must be accomplished to the extent possible.
[Philem. 10-14,18,19; Matthew 21:28-31; Nehemiah 5:11-13; 2 Corinthians 7:9-11; Genesis 20:1-14; 1 Samuel 12:3; Proverbs 6:31; Acts 16:33; 26:20; 19:18,19]

Conclusion
Luke 15:17-24 – The story of the prodigal son illustrates all the principles we have studied. The younger son wasted his inheritance in riotous living (vv 13,30). He came to be in need and “came to himself” (vv 14-17). [The story does not use the word “repent,” but the parallel stories do in vv 7,10.]
* He acknowledged his error: “I have sinned” (v18).
* His sorrow was implied by the fact he no longer believed himself worthy to be called a son (v19).
* He then decided to go back to the father (vv 18,19). This decision is repentance. (Cf. vv 7,10)
* He met the conditions of forgiveness by confessing his sin to the father (vv 20,21).
* He left the practice of sin (vv 20,21).
* He offered to make restitution by being just a servant of the father, not even a son any longer (vv 19,21).
The gospel is a message of change. Sinners can change. You can change.
Note the attitude of the father when the son did return: vv 20,22-24. Truly there is joy in heaven among the angels when a sinner “repents” (vv 7,10)

Leave a Comment
October 17, 2013

A WARNING TO PASTORS, MINISTERS, SEMINARY TEACHERS AND OTHER WANNABEES

In 1 Thessalonians 5:12, the apostle Paul says, “Appreciate those that are over you in the Lord.” It says, “Love them, appreciate them.” Yes, love them; yes. Give them glory–no. Exalt them–no. First Peter, Peter writes in chapter 5 instruction to pastors. He says this: “Clothe yourselves with humility, for God is opposed to the proud but gives grace to the humble. Therefore, humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God that He may exalt you at the proper time.” Again, humility is the first law of ministry. All faithful, all honorable ministers make much of Christ and nothing of themselves.

Any so-called minister, any so-called minister who exalts his own office and his own position into that of a priest, a mediator, is perverted in his claims. There is only one High Priest and one Mediator between man and God, the man Christ Jesus. Any so-called minister who declares himself an authority over the church is a deceiver and a liar. Any so-called minister who says he exercises power over the church is a deceiver and an antichrist. Any minister who views himself as anything more than a simple Christian equal to every other Christian has corrupted himself. Any so-called minister who claims to be the head of the church, dishonors the Son of God to whom that title belongs exclusively. Any so-called minister who claims the name Holy Father dishonors the true Father/God to whom that title belongs exclusively, and thus did Jesus say, “Call no man Father.” Any so-called minister who takes the title vicar, or replacement for Christ, dishonors the Holy Spirit who is in the world today, and who possesses truly that title exclusively. Any professing Christians who treat a so-called pastor or minister or a priest as if he were anything more than any other believer, dishonors the Lord Jesus Christ to whom all honor belongs totally and exclusively.

As churches defect, as churches fall into apostasy, they think less of Christ and they make more of their ministers. So they keep elevating and elevating and elevating and elevating, until it becomes bizarre. The resplendent decorations, foolish costumes, hats, accoutrements, are inverse to the diminishing of the glory of Christ. As the sun goes out, the stars appear in the darkness. Not enough to dispel the darkness. To the decaying, corrupt church the sun has gone out and the stars have ascended into the blackness of the sky. In a truly holy church, true church, the church makes little of the ministers and much of Christ. And the Son Himself shines so fully and so brightly in a starless sky that His glory fills everything.

Leave a Comment
October 13, 2013

MORE CONCERNS ABOUT N.T. WRIGHT’S NEW THEOLOGY BYJ. LIGON DUNCAN III

                The modem New Testament scholar, N. T. Wright, offers yet another variant on the theme of justification by experience. According to Wright, justification means God’s declaration that we are members of the covenant community. He accepts that in making this declaration God’s only requirement is faith, but rejects old Protestant view that the value of faith lies in the fact that it unites us to Christ and thus makes us partakers of His righteousness. Instead, according to Wright, God takes faith as a sign that the Spirit already at work in us and that we are already members of the covenant people. It demonstrates that we have a new, penitent heart; and God, seeing saving grace already at work, justifies us.
 
For all its laboured originality, this theory completely fails to escape the gravitational pull of the religion of self-justification. Wright’s basic thrust is that justification is no legal fiction: the believer is righteous. This righteousness may be the result of grace and of the Spirit’s work within us, but when all is said and done it is our own personal righteousness. It is inherent, not imputed. We asked to stand on the rock of our own covenant-keeping. Could that have given Martin Luther peace? Could it give any of us peace? On the contrary, our hope would ebb and flow with every rise and fall in the tide of our personal spirituality (A Faith to Live By, Mentor, 2002, pages 166-167).
 
Indeed, it is fair to say that the leading evangelical and Reformed scholars of our time (men who believe in biblical inerrancy and the Pauline authorship of all the New Testament books attributed to Paul – unlike N.T. Wright), think that the reformational exegesis of Paul on justification (while not beyond improvement) is better (that is, more biblical) than any of the various “new perspective” approaches. And furthermore, they believe that the errors promoted by Wright regarding justification, consistently embraced, undermine the gospel. It is also interesting to note that one of the major mainstream academic proponents of the new perspective has recently begun acknowledging in graduate seminars at Duke that Wright’s version of the new perspective “is not working as a reliable interpretive or explanatory framework for Paul.”
 
There are, no doubt, a very few men in the PCA who would suggest that one may embrace much of Wright’s view and lose nothing regarding justification that is vital. This is patently impossible by any historic Protestant and evangelical standard. Wright’s view necessitates the loss of the doctrines of imputation, the active obedience of Christ, the extrinsic ground of justification, and faith as the alone instrument of justification (to mention only a few). In other words, sola fide is mangled beyond recognition in Wright’s paradigm. To commend it as benign is the height of naivete. Justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, as set forth in the Westminster Confession 11, is a non-negotiable in the PCA. For a Protestant pastor to want to “re-think” the core of the Reformation’s exposition of the Scripture’s teaching on justification, is like (to borrow an analogy) “a plumber who wants to re-think pipes.”
 
In connection with this it is important to note that a hallmark of the Reformed doctrine of the Christian life is that it highlights not only the imperatives, but also the great indicatives, and features not only the subjective work of the Holy Spirit in us but the objective work of God for us. It does so precisely because it believes (on exegetical grounds) that the divine monergism at work in regeneration and justification has a vital role still to play in sanctification. Sanctification, too, is by grace.
 
This emphasis, counter-balancing some aspects of what we might call a more fundamentalistic view of sanctification, is evident in many quarters of the PCA today, coming from many streams. Whether it is Tim Keller, Michael Horton, Bryan Chapell, Sinclair Ferguson, Skip Ryan, John Piper, Scotty Smith, Jerry Bridges, Paul Kooistra or the Sonship curriculum – there is a prevalent emphasis on the grace of God in justification and sanctification. That tendency should not be missed or unappreciated, even if we would want to put it slightly differently sometimes.
 
Now, understand clearly, if the systematic view of N.T. Wright on the Pauline doctrine of justification is correct, the exegetical grounds for this above-mentioned theological emphasis on grace are eviscerated. Why? Because this view of sanctification is inextricably tied to the historic Protestant doctrine of justification. This fact alone indicates that the risks are very high indeed in this discussion. Brethren who act surprised at strong responses from those who express these kinds of concerns about the teaching of N.T. Wright have not adequately considered the implications of the overall position and are not sufficiently sensitized to the pastoral and theological stakes of the discussion.
 
Now for those who are utterly lost in this debate, never having heard of “the New Perspective(s)” or N. T. Wright, let me offer the following. For around twenty years now, a “new” approach to reading Paul’s polemics with Judaism has been making waves in the field of New Testament studies, and gradually making inroads into evangelical circles. Actually, there is not just one approach but a group of approaches that are part of this movement.
 
The ground-breaking work of E.P. Sanders (formerly Dean Ireland’s Professor of Exegesis, Oxford, and now Professor in the Divinity faculty at Duke) in the area of Palestinian Judaism (and its relation to Jesus’ and Paul’s teachings) prepared the way for this new resuscitation of some familiar approaches to interpreting Paul’s thought. British New Testament scholar James D. G. Dunn (of Durham University) coined the term “the new perspective on Paul” (in his famous Manson Memorial lecture) and elaborated some ideas popular among various students of Paul in the post-holocaust era of New Testament studies (among them, Krister Stendahl).
 
But it is N.T. Wright (a prolific author and effective communicator, who is now Bishop of Durham [Church of England], and was formerly dean of Litchfield Cathedral, England, as well as former Canon Theologian of Westminster Abbey), who has most prominently contributed to the propagation of this view in the evangelical arena.
 
At the heart of the new perspectives’ critique of both Protestant and Catholic interpretations of Paul is the charge that Reformation-era theologians read Paul via a medieval framework that obscured the categories of first-century Judaism, resulting in a complete misunderstanding of his teaching on justification. Protestant ideas of “the righteousness of God,” “imputation,” and even the definition of justification itself – all these have been invented or misunderstood by the Lutheran and Catholic traditions of interpretation.
 
In a nutshell, the new perspective (as set forth by Wright) suggests that: (1) the Judaism of Paul’s day was not a religion of self-righteousness that taught salvation by merit; (2) Paul’s argument with the Judaizers was not about a “works-righteousness” view of salvation, over against the Christian view of salvation by grace; (3) Instead, Paul’s concern was for the status of Gentiles in the church; (4) So justification is more about ecclesiology than soteriology, more about who is part of the covenant community and what are its boundary markers than about how a person stands before God.
 
Thus the new perspective on Paul purports to help us (1) better understand Paul and the early church in their original context, (2) vindicate Paul and early Christianity from the charge of anti-Semitism; (3) slip the Gordian knot of theological impasse between Catholic and Protestant interpreters of Paul; and (4) articulate an understanding of justification that has inherent social dimensions and thus secure a better theological foundation for social justice and ecumenism among evangelical interpreters of the Scriptures; among other things.
 
So where does a busy pastor or church officer, who wants to know what’s going on but who doesn’t want to read thirteen books on something that’s not going to turn into a sermon or a Sunday School lesson, go? Let me suggest the following materials available via the internet at “The Paul Page” (a very one-sided and pro-New Perspective site) www.angelfire.com/mi2/paulpage/  or, better, at the Web site of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals www.alliancenet.org (and look under articles for Kim Riddlebarger’s useful critique of the New Perspective) or visit the “Third Millenium Ministries” Web site (operated by RTS/Orlando Professor Richard Pratt) and read Chuck Hill’s and Reggie Kidd’s measured and helpful criticisms and descriptions of the New Perspective www.thirdmill.org. The articles listed below can all be found via one of these three sites.
 
Justified Hesitation? J.D.G. Dunn vs. the Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Lee Gatiss.
A very helpful article from the editor of The Theologian. Gatiss exposes significant gaps in James D.G. Dunn’s knowledge of historical theology, flaws in his argument and exegesis, and even his unfamiliarity with the writings and views of Martin Luther on justification and Israel.
 
A Summary of the New Perspective on Paul by Mark M. Mattison.
Mattison is an unabashed fan of the new perspective. He offers a helpful, if giddy, introduction to its history, agenda, and themes.
 
Reformed Confessionalism and the “New Perspective” on Paul by Kim Riddlebarger. This essay, by a friend of Michael Horton, is posted on the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals Web site. It comes at the New Perspective from the standpoint of Reformed orthodoxy. Very good.
 
For some of you, a passing, brief, second-hand account of the new perspective may not suffice. You may want to read a presentation of the new perspective from its most articulate advocate and then read an intelligent response from a scholar of equal standing. If so, then you’ll want to read the following books.
 
What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), 1997, is a short, popular summary of the new perspective (and more) by the chief advocate of this new approach, N.T. Wright
 
Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective by Peter Stuhlmacher and Donald Hagner (IVP), 2001, is relatively new. These lectures (given at Beeson Divinity School a few years ago, and appended with an article by Hagner) give a strong, if incomplete, critique of the New Perspective by two recognized New Testament scholars
 
Counted Righteous in Christ by John Piper (Crossway), 2003. Piper, a pastor and first-rate New Testament scholar shows that if you lose imputation (a doctrine for which Wright explicitly denies there is any canonical grounding) you lose justification by faith. Piper is moving more and more to a classical covenant theology in his soteriology.
 
I have a larger bibliography available on these themes that will be made available in the next two weeks in connection with a paper that I have produced on the subject. I will send it to the PCANews when it is readied.
============
TE J. Ligon Duncan III is senior minister of First Presbyterian Church (PCA), Jackson, Mississippi and adjunct professor of Reformed Theological Seminary. 
Leave a Comment
October 11, 2013

THE HERESY OF TULLIAN TCHIVIDJIAN & THE NEW CALVINISTS

THE HERESY OF TULLIAN TCHIVIDJIAN & THE NEW CALVINISTS
 
“Just as I am without one plea” is just as true for sanctification as it is for justification.
 

Think about it.
Just as you are – no spiritual growth or maturity, no increased knowledge of Jesus Christ or God’s Word is needed. According to Tchividjian, none of that is necessary. It’s all grace, baby. Once you’re in Christ, you don’t need to do a thing. Cruise through life ‘just as you are.’ That’s what the man is teaching.

There are what? 700+ commands in the Bible?
If what this man is saying is true, was Jesus Christ wrong in commanding us the Great Commission? Of course not. Is God wrong when He tells us to put off anger, malice, jealousy, etc? Of course not. Or were these merely suggestions for us to consider as options?
This man is a heretic, and the new Calvinism that he espouses is heresy of the worst sort. Tullian doesn’t want you to mature in Christ. He doesn’t want you to do anything, just continue ‘just as you are’ – and he calls that sanctification! being made holy!
Now, before you swallow this antinomian lie from Hell, be aware of what God has said:
Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God – Hebrews 6:1 (NASB)
When we were born again, we were born again as infants, babes in Christ. It’s perfectly natural for a babe to grow up and become an adult, but Tullian wants you to remain a babe. Why?
Brethren, this is contrary to all things Christian.

Grace alone and gospel contemplation will not cut the mustard when it comes to your sanctification.
Sanctification is about growth in the knowledge of the Christ and God’s Word, of prayer and of fighting, mortifying sin in our lives, of becoming holy in word and deed, increasingly set apart from the world, it’s lusts and its culture – sticking out like a sore thumb. It is not about remaining ‘just as you are’. Indeed, the only way to grow in grace is to grow, increase, in your knowledge of Christ. 2 Peter 3:18
Prayer and no action against sin is an abject failure and a rejection of God’s will. So then, at best, listening to and believing Tullian Tchividjian will keep you in spiritual infancy contrary to God’s plan while you reject God’s clearly communicated will. At worst, Tullian is leading people to Hell and damnation with an antinomian lie.
This ‘pastor’ is not a mere miscreant muttering in some dark corner. No. The Gospel Coalition has given him a platform from which he reaches untold numbers with this new Calvinist lie. He is one of many babblers masquerading in effulgence and with much alacrity. With his own words he combines sanctification with justification, and therefore this is no calumny on my part.


This is not a knee-jerk, snarling petulance on my part. I have, with great interest on behalf of the Church, attempted to warn readers of this dangerous new Calvinist fusion of justification with sanctification, often times, seemingly, with little success. It can be frustrating.
Yet the brutish stupidity of this man’s theology needs to be made public, and indeed he has done that for us. Any believer who has spent serious study in God’s word can see the folly of this man’s teaching.

Leave a Comment
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »