Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts

Sunday, August 3, 2014

Universalism Is Next for the Soft Love Crowd by MICHAEL BROWN


Steve Chalke
Steve Chalke, once recognized as a top evangelical leader in England, last year declared his support for committed, same-sex relationships within the church. (Facebook)

Demi Lovato is the latest professing Christian (and celebrity) to declare that, "The LOVING God that I believe in, would never condemn anyone for loving another human of the same sex."

What's the next step on this slippery theological slope?

I predict it will be: "The LOVING God that I believe in would never condemn anyone." Just watch and see.

We know that one of the greatest strengths of the "gay Christian" movement is that there are lots of really nice people who are same-sex attracted, and some of them profess deep faith in Jesus and are active in compassionate and sacrificial service to the poor and needy.

How could a loving God condemn people like them?

I personally find that to be a very powerful question—one that I have agonized over before my heavenly Father many times. In fact, I honestly believe that if questions like this don't cause us some level of pain then we don't really have the heart of the Lord.

But here's the problem: It's not just same-sex attracted people we're talking about.

I personally know many fine individuals who are ultra-Orthodox Jews. In fact, as human beings go (meaning, we're all flawed and lacking), some of them are exceptional people, fearing God, seeking to keep His commandments, willing to give their lives for their faith, pouring into their families, studying the Scriptures and their traditional writings, and praying for hours every day.

How could a loving God send people like that to hell?

But it's not just Orthodox Jews. Some Muslims are exceptional human beings (most Muslims are not suicide bombers), as are some Hindus and Buddhists and atheists and others, including secular Jews and Mormons and people of all kinds of faiths and non-faiths.

Some are extremely kind and generous. Some are very patient and long-suffering. Some will give you the proverbial shirt off their backs.

How could a loving God send people like that to hell?

It was not that long ago that Steve Chalke, then recognized as a top evangelical leader in England, came out against the concept of substitutionary atonement (the idea that Jesus took the penalty for our sins on the cross), declaring it to be "cosmic child abuse." (Chalke also had a big problem with the idea that God actually required blood to appease His wrath, basically rejecting inspired teachings of the Torah as accommodations to pagan religion.)

Last year, he declared his support for committed, same-sex relationships within the church, calling on other believers to stand with these same-sex couples.

Is that really such a big surprise? And where will Chalke eventually land on the subject of future punishment for the lost, given his current stands? (I understand that Chalke has done a tremendous amount of good over the years in the U.K., with some even calling him the "Billy Graham of the U.K.," which makes his theological backsliding even more painful.)

A breakdown in one area of theology leads to a breakdown in another area of theology, and over time, these kinds of breakdowns—specifically, minimizing aspects of God's wrath, failing to grasp the depth of human sin, affirming committed homosexual relationships—will lead to universalism (or, at least universal reconciliation, a related but slightly different concept).

Rob Bell is another example of this, although proceeding in a little different order, first questioning concepts of future punishment in his Love Wins book and then affirming his support for same-sex couples in the church.

But this is just a variation of the same theme, one that allows us to sit in judgment of God, and, based on our standards of right and wrong, determine what His standards should be. The biblical way, of course, is the exact opposite.

According to Steve Chalke, the traditional teaching of God's wrath being poured out on His Son on the cross "stands in total contradiction to the statement 'God is love.'"

But couldn't it be just as easily argued that any type of future punishment for the lost, especially if it does not result in their ultimate salvation, "stands in total contradiction to the statement 'God is love'"?

After all, why would a loving God punish someone or judge someone when there's no hope of their redemption? Wouldn't that be utterly cruel?

And what about all the nice people who don't believe just as we do? Are they eternally lost? And let's not forget all the "gay Christians" (by which I mean those who claim to follow Jesus and practice homosexuality at the same time). Surely a loving God would not condemn nice people like them.

Do you see the pattern?

In a previous article, I pointed out that, although not an absolute rule, "with consistency, you'll see that as a church group gets more liberal, they become pro-abortion, pro-gay activism, and pro-Palestinian (at the expense of Israel)."

In the same way, as churches and church leaders become more embracing of committed, homosexual couples, they will move further and further away from the preaching of future wrath and divine judgment, ultimately embracing universalism in one form or another.

As I said, watch and see. And don't forget to pray that our loving God would deliver them from error and bring them back to the truth as it is found in Jesus.

Michael Brown is author of Can You Be Gay and Christian? Responding With Love and Truth to Questions About Homosexuality and host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network. He is also president of FIRE School of Ministry and director of the Coalition of Conscience. Follow him at AskDrBrown on Facebook or at @drmichaellbrown on Twitter.

University Fires Christian Scientist for Discovery Proving Creationism

California State University Northridge
California State University Northridge fired a scientist after he discovered soft tissue on a triceratops fossil, indicating that dinosaurs roamed the earth only thousands of years in the past rather than going extinct 60 million years ago. (Facebook)

A scientist was terminated from his job at a California State University campus after discovering soft tissue on a triceratops fossil and then publishing his findings. Pacific Justice Institute filed suit last week with the Los Angeles County Superior Court against the board of trustees of CSU, Northridge, citing discrimination for perceived religious views.

"Terminating an employee because of their religious views is completely inappropriate and illegal," commented Brad Dacus, president of PJI. "But doing so in an attempt to silence scientific speech at a public university is even more alarming. This should be a wake-up call and warning to the entire world of academia," he continued.

While at a dig at the Hell Creek formation in Montana, the scientist, Mark Armitage, came upon the largest triceratops horn ever unearthed at the site. When examining the horn under a high-powered microscope back at CSUN, Armitage was fascinated to see the soft tissue. The discovery stunned members of the scientific community because it indicates that dinosaurs roamed the earth only thousands of years in the past rather than going extinct 65 million years ago, as the scientific consensus believes.

According to court documents, shortly after the original soft tissue discovery, a university official challenged the motives of Armitage, by shouting at him, "We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!"

Armitage, a published scientist of more than 30 years, was subsequently let go after CSUN abruptly claimed his appointment at the university of 38 months had been temporary and claimed a lack of funding for his position. This was news to him and contradicted prior statements and documents from the university.

"It has become apparent that 'diversity' and 'intellectual curiosity,' so often touted as hallmarks of a university education, do not apply to those with a religious point of view," said Michael Peffer, staff attorney with PJI's southern California office. "This suit was filed, in part, to vindicate those ideals."



Monday, June 16, 2014

Is the Sinner's Prayer biblical or not? by Tony Miano and Matt Slick




Is the sinner's prayer biblical?  Yes and no.  It is biblical for a sinner to pray to Jesus to forgive him of his sins.  It is not biblical to say someone is saved "because of reciting the Sinner's Prayer".  It is biblical to confess one's sins and ask for forgiveness and put trust, hope, and faith in Christ and his sacrifice on the cross. But, again, it is not biblical to give someone assurance of salvation based on reciting a prayer - on simply saying the words. Salvation is the work of God and the manifestation of that work is sometimes seen in people publicly confessing, even publicly praying to receive Christ as Savior.

So, we want to be clear that elements of the sinners prayer are biblical. However, we also want to be very clear that a person is not saved "because he prayed a prayer". Faith, assurance, and hope should never be placed in the prayer. Instead, faith, assurance, and hope should be placed in Christ via the proper presentation of the saving message which consists of presenting the Law (that we are sinners before God and deserve judgment) and the gospel (that only through faith and trust in what Christ has done on the cross where he bore our sins and died with them can we be saved from God's righteous judgment).  People must repent of their sins and believe the gospel.  That is what the Bible says.

Mark 1:15, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

1 Corinthians 15:1-4, "Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures."
Acts 16:30, "and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”  31 And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household."

What we are not saying about the Sinner’s Prayer

Many Christians have a prayer of repentance and faith as part of their conversion testimony. We know there are genuine, Christ-loving, born-again followers of Jesus Christ who will forever testify that someone shared the gospel with them and asked them to repeat a prayer, which they did, and they were saved. This article should in no way be interpreted or construed as an effort to bring into question one’s salvation because he “prayed a prayer.”

That being said, no one is saved because they “prayed a prayer.”  It is not reciting a phrase or the words of a prayer that saves anyone.   We are against formula salvation.  Those whom God sovereignly chooses to save (1 Peter 1:3; 2 Thess. 2:13) and draw to Himself (John 6:44) may pray a prayer - on their own or at someone else’s urging - as part of the first fruits of their salvation.

While there are many Christians who will testify, to the glory of God, that they prayed a “Sinner’s Prayer” the day God saved them.  But there are also people in the world who, as a result of being led in a false “Sinner’s Prayer,” are now apostate, they were false converts (Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:26-31). They have turned their back on Christ and have left the faith they thought they had, because they had never really come to genuine repentance and faith in Christ. They are and were false converts because they put their hope of salvation in "saying words", in "reciting a prayer", in "doing the christian prayer thing", instead of truly trusting Christ to forgive them of their sins against God.

The purpose of this article is not to discourage genuine Christians or cause them to question the authenticity of their faith because their conversion story includes a “Sinner’s Prayer.” Many people have truly been saved along with saying the Sinner's Prayer.  Rather, the purpose of this article is to warn Christians, to plead with Christians to preach the gosple biblically and if/when a person wants to trust in Christ and receive him as Savior, that it is done properly.

A Familiar Story: Sinner’s Prayer Evangelism

"So, do you understand what I've shared with you?"
"Yes."
"Is there any reason why you wouldn't want to receive Jesus as your Lord and Savior, right now?"
"Umm. No. I guess not."
"Great. Then just pray this prayer after me. There's nothing magical about the words. What matters is the condition of your heart."
"Out loud?"
"Yes. Jesus said if you confess me before men I will confess you before my Father."
"Right here? Right now?"
"Well, it's up to you, of course. But what could be more important than making sure you're right with God. After all, tomorrow isn't promised to anyone."
"Okay."
"Great! Just pray this prayer after me. Lord Jesus..."
"Lord Jesus..."
"I know I'm a sinner..."
"I know I'm a sinner..."
"I want my sins forgiven..."
"I want my sins forgiven..."
"I don't want to spend eternity in Hell..."
"I don't want to spend eternity in Hell..."
"I want to be in Heaven with you..."
"I want to be in Heaven with you..."
"Please forgive me..."
"Please forgive me..."
"Come into my life..."
"Come into my life..."
"Save me..."
"Save me..."
"Make me a new creature..."
"Make me a new creature..."
"Be my Lord and Savior..."
"Be my Lord and Savior..."
"In Jesus' name, I pray..."
"In Jesus' name, I pray..."
"Amen."
"Amen."
"Praise God! Welcome to the family, brother!"
"Thanks."

"Now, it's real important you start reading your Bible and praying every day. And you've got to start going to church. You need to be around other believers. You need to be discipled. You need to begin the life-long process of growing in your faith. And I'm here to help in any way I can."
"Okay."

Please not that we have underlined those parts of the prayer that are biblical. So, there are biblical elements to the sinners prayer but it is not the sinners prayer itself it saves and again, it must be made clear that it is not reciting the prayer that saves anyone.

It happens thousands of times every day around the world. It happens in one-to-one conversations between friends, relatives, and even strangers. It happens in pastors' offices. It happens via email. It happens in online chat rooms. A well-intentioned Christian shares the gospel with someone (hopefully a gospel that is consistent with the Word of God). The listener seems to understand and even seems emotionally moved by the conversation. The Christian, with eagerness and sincerity, asks the person if he wants to know Jesus as his personal Savior. If the other person responds favorably, then the Christian leads him in a "Sinner's Prayer."

The Sinner's Prayer, False Conversion, and Tradition

This is important.  Many Christians make the cataclysmic and unbiblical mistake of giving the other person a false sense of assurance of salvation, by asserting the person is saved because he prayed a prayer. So, many people walk away from such a conversation still dead in their sins, but believing what they've been told. "I believed what my friend told me, and I prayed a prayer. So, now I'm a Christian!"

It is unbiblical confidence in the "Sinner's Prayer" (instead of repentance and trust in Christ) that often leaves me thinking American Evangelicalism is much closer to Rome than she realizes. The reason is that like the apostate Roman Catholic Church, which holds up church tradition as equal or superior to the Word of God, American Evangelicalism sometimes does the same with her own traditions.

The "Sinner's Prayer" is a case in point.

My presupposition regarding it is an easy one to articulate. Simply put...

There is not a single verse or passage in Scripture, whether in a narrative account or in prescriptive or descriptive texts, regarding the use of a “Sinner’s Prayer” in evangelism. Not one.

However, proponents of the use of the "Sinner's Prayer" will cite several verses/passages of Scripture in a failed attempt to support the unbiblical practice. Here are several:

Matthew 7:7, "Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you."

Luke 18:10-14, " “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee, and the other a tax-gatherer. 11 “The Pharisee stood and was praying thus to himself, ‘God, I thank Thee that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax-gatherer. 12 ‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13 “But the tax-gatherer, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14 “I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled, but he who humbles himself shall be exalted."

Romans 10:9-10, "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved; 10 for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."

1 John 1:9, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

Revelation 3:20, "‘Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will dine with him, and he with Me."


A brief exposition of each of the above texts will show they should not be used to support the practice of the "Sinner's Prayer."

Continue reading: Does Matthew 7:7 support the Sinner’s Prayer?

The Sinner's Prayer: "Modern apostasy and false teaching that prevents men from being saved."


The earliest notion of sinners prayer is less than 500 years old. It wasn't formalized as a theology until around the time of Billy Graham.

No one in the Bible ever prayed for their initial salvation. They did however believe, repent, confess Jesus and be immersed in water for the forgiveness of their sins. The sinners prayer is a an innovation that thwarts God's plan of salvation.

1.      First they replaced believers baptism by immersion with infant baptism by sprinkling.


2.      Second they later replaced baptism altogether with the "sinners prayer" so that baptism is no longer even part of the plan of salvation. If you prayed the "sinners prayer" for your salvation, you are still lost in your sins, because it is not what God said to do.

C.S. Lewis used the term "a great cataract of nonsense" to describe how people use a modern idea to construe Bible theology. One such example, perhaps the best example, is a conversion method called the Sinner's Prayer. It is more popularly known as the Four Spiritual Laws.

Lewis used this term to describe what happens when someone looks backward at the Bible based only on what he or she has known. Instead, an evangelical should first discern conversion practices from Scriptures and then consider the topic in light of two thousand years of other thinkers. As it is, a novel technique popularized through recent revivals has replaced the biblically sound practice.

Today, hundreds of millions hold to a belief system and salvation practice that no one had ever held until relatively recently. The notion that one can pray Jesus into his or her heart and that baptism is merely an outward sign are actually late developments. The prayer itself dates to the Billy Sunday era; however, the basis for talking in prayer for salvation goes back a few hundred years.

Consider the following appeal:

"Just accept Christ into your heart through prayer and he'll receive you. It doesn't matter what church you belong to or if you ever do good works. You'll be born again at the moment you receive Christ. He's at the door knocking. You don't even have to change bad habits, just trust Christ as Savior. God loves you and forgives you unconditionally. Anyone out there can be saved if they ... Accept Christ, now! Let us pray for Christ to now come into your heart."

Sound familiar? This method of conversion has had far-reaching effects worldwide as many have claimed this as the basis for their salvation. Yet, what is the historical significance of this conversion? How did the process of rebirth, which Jesus spoke of in John 3, evolve into praying him into one's heart? I believe it was an error germinating shortly after the Reformation, which eventually caused great ruin and dismay in Christendom. By supplying a brief documentation of its short, historical development, I hope to show how this error has served as "a great cataract of nonsense".

The Reformation 
Although things weren't ideal after the Reformation, for the first time in over a thousand years the general populace was reading the Scriptures. By the early 1600s, one hundred years after the Reformation was initiated, there were various branches of European Christendom that followed national lines. 

For instance, Germans followed Martin Luther. There were also Calvinists (Presbyterian), the Church of England (Episcopalian), various branches of Anabaptists and, of course, the Roman church (Catholics). Most of these groups were trying to revive the waning faith of their already traditionalized denominations. However, a consensus had not been reached on issues like rebirth, baptism or salvation--even between Protestants.

The majority still held to the validity of infant baptism even though they disagreed on its significance. Preachers tended to minimize baptism because people hid their lack of commitment behind sayings like "I am a baptized Lutheran and that's that." The influence of the preachers eventually led to the popular notion that one was forgiven at infant baptism but not yet reborn.

Most Protestants were confused or ambivalent about the connection between rebirth and forgiveness.

Continue reading: The Sinner's Prayer

Monday, September 12, 2011

"How Do I Know if I'm Saved?" (Paul Washer)

Friday, August 19, 2011

Was Jesus ever tempted by the opposite sex?

by Perry Stone (Voice of Evangelism)

For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin." - Hebrews 4:15

When Christians visualize Christ's ministry, we see Him preaching to thousands, healing the sick, taking boat rides across the blue waters of Lake Tiberias, and eating dinner with His disciples. There are some images that never cross our mind. For example, can you image Jesus, in the middle of His message, winking at some single woman in the crowd? Or sitting down to eat in the home of a ministry partner, seeing a single daughter and, like a southern gentleman saying, "Hey there darling, what are you cooking tonight?"

Neither can we picture Christ sitting under a full moon overlooking the Sea of Galilee with His arm around a girlfriend He met in an evangelistic campaign, and suddenly kissing her. It just does not fit the mental images of anything we read about Christ in the Gospels. In fact, we assume He probably never even considered a woman in such a way.

However, in recent years, liberal researchers and scholars have challenged the Christ we know and love by assuming that He had a secret love life and was married to Mary Magdalene. Attacks have always been leveled against Christ. Some teach that He was a mere man with no Divinity; others say He was a good teacher—nothing more and nothing less. Others, such as Muslims, accept Him as a great prophet but deny Him as the Son of God. Some say He was the Gentile Messiah, but not a Messiah for the Jewish people. However, the new attacks, as presented in books and movies, deal more with Christ's morality on earth than with the historical narratives of His earthly ministry.

...in recent years, liberal researchers and scholars have challenged the Christ we know and love by assuming that He had a secret love life

Several years ago, Dan Brown wrote a bestseller called, The DaVinci Code. The idea behind the book of fiction was based upon the famous Last Supper painting by Leonardo DaVinci. Allegedly, according to Brown, there was a "code" hidden within the painting, as one of the persons in the painting was allegedly a woman and not a man. The book claimed that Christ made no claims of divinity; that He had a secret lover named Mary Magdalene; and that it was Mary who was chosen to lead the church, as the church was originally goddess-oriented. Brown wrote that persecution from Peter sent Mary into exile in France, where she birthed a daughter that was of Christ's flesh and blood. He suggested that the Catholic Church knew the information but hid it to protect itself.

Brown's theory, which continues with the teaching of the Merovingian bloodline , the Knights Templar, and the Priory of Sion, have all been debunked by scholars years ago. Therefore I will not attempt to rehash what has already been refuted in past books and articles. However, the idea that Christ was married and had children is nowhere to be found in Scripture, and there is no indication of it in the earliest history of the church.

The reasons Christ would never marry

Could Christ have married a woman on earth? I believe that physically, the answer is yes; but spiritually, the answer is no. There were twelve men that Christ personally selected as His disciples (Matt. 10:1-5). Christ also had "secret followers;" namely Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus (John 19:38-39). There were women who supported His ministry; we read of Joanna the wife of Herod's steward and Suzanna (Luke 8:3). There were also many women who followed Christ's ministry, including four different women with the name Mary: Mary his mother; Mary the mother of James and John; Mary from Magdalena (Matt. 27:57); and Mary the sister of Martha (Luke 10:38-39). There was one family that Christ appears to have been very close to, and that was Mary, Martha and Lazarus, who were two sisters and a brother (John 11)

While the Bible does not necessarily give the reader the details of how many of these women had husbands and how many were unmarried, Christ did have many dedicated followers who were women. But there is no indication or implication that He ever became physically attracted to any woman linked with His ministry. I believe there is a significant reason why.

Jesus was to begin a new family

Christ knew His purpose for coming to the earth. He was to be crucified, buried, and raised on the third day (Matt. 17:23). His mission from the foundation of the world was to shed His blood and initiate a new covenant of redemption for all mankind who would believe upon His name (Eph. 1:7; Col 1:14). This new covenant would also create a family of God (Eph. 3:14). In fact, God is the father, Christ is His Son, and the church is Christ's bride. Paul wrote to the church and used a marriage term when he penned

"For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ" (2 Cor. 11:2) NKJV

Presenting a chaste virgin to Christ was a phrase indicating that the church is a bride that will be presented to the bridegroom (Christ) in heaven, and Paul desired to present the church pure and faithful to its bridegroom. Even Christ called Himself the bridegroom (Matt. 9:15; Luke 5:35). John the Baptist even identified himself as a friend of the bridegroom, which was a person whom the bridegroom chose to stay in contact with the bride prior to the wedding supper (John 3:28-30). Paul spoke about the family of God in heaven and earth (Eph 3:15).

I am certain that Christ, knowing His destiny, never married for many reasons. First, it was not the will of His heavenly Father. Christ ascended to heaven at about the age of 33 to 34. If He were an earthly husband, He would be leaving His wife behind (Acts 1:3, 9). He knew that His "kingdom was not of this world" (John 18:36). If Christ would have married and had a child, can you image how the worship of Christ would have eventually been turned from Christ, to his wife, and His child, and eventually to anyone who descended from His bloodline? There would be great cathedrals and museums built to honor the family, and I am certain the children would have been viewed as part deity and part human by their followers.

Christ's "family" consisted of both men and women from every tribe and nation. This family will become the bride when they are presented at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb in heaven. The wedding gift will be the New Jerusalem:

"Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife." And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal." (Rev. 21:9-12- NKJV

Some teach that the church is not the bride; the New Jerusalem is the bride. John said the New Jerusalem was prepared as a bride adorned for her husband (Rev. 21:2). We must remember that Christ's throne will be in the center of the city and this will be the home of the saints. Thus the bride is living within the city.

Christ and Temptation

This brings us to the original question: was Jesus tempted by the opposite sex? First we must understand what temptation is. The word temptation, as used in the New Testament 15 times, means to put something to the test by solicitation or by provoking and pressuring it. According to the Bible, it is Satan who is the tempter (Matt. 4:3). We are also told that "God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts he any man" (James 1:13). I describe temptation as a pressure in the mind to draw you away from truth or into an action contrary to the will and the Word of God. The Bible indicates that no temptation can come to us unless it is common to man (1 Cor. 10:13). It is a fact that, because you live in a human body of flesh and blood, you will encounter some form of temptation.

All sin that is birthed out of temptation comes from either lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, or pride of life (1 John 2:16). After Christ was baptized in the Jordan River, the Holy Spirit led Him into the wilderness to experience a season of temptation from Satan (Matt. 4:1-11). Notice that Satan struck Christ in these three areas: lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life:

The Statement of Satan in the temptation

Command the stones to be made bread - Lust of the flesh
Cast yourself down from the pinnacle of the temple - Pride of life
Worship me and you I will give you the world's kingdoms - Lust of the eyes

It is not a sin to be tempted, for if it were a sin simply to be tempted, then Christ would have sinned during this temptation. The Bible teaches us that action must be taken on the thought of temptation. As James 1:14-15 says "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."

Lust, when it is acted upon, causes a conception. It gives birth to sin. Christ conquered the temptation by resisting the adversary through the Word of God.

Could Jesus have Sinned

This theological question has been debated for some time. The answer is again, physically yes and spiritually no. Physically, Christ had the mind and the body of any normal man. He could have walked where His feet should not have walked, used His hands to do things that were forbidden by the law of God, and used His body to perform forbidden acts. Physically, Christ had the capability of sinning, and this explains why and how He can understand our infirmities and weakness. He walked in the same suit of flesh that we wear today. Christ had a body which could sin; but spiritually, Christ could not—or perhaps we should say, would not—have sinned.

Christ came not to do His will, but the will of the father (John 6:38). Christ's hatred for Satan's kingdom of darkness, and His resistance toward the powers of darkness, would have caused Him to resist the thought of sinning against God or against Himself. When Satan tempted Him, Christ began quoting Scripture that applied to that particular situation.

Satan's temptation - Christ's rebuttal - Scripture Christ used
Turn stones to bread -- Man lives only from the Word of God -- Deut 8:3
Cast yourself down -- You shall not tempt the Lord your God -- Deut 6:16
Bow and worship me -- You shall worship the Lord God only -- Deut 6:13

Christ's obedience to His heavenly Father can be seen in two major events in His life. The Old Testament prophets predicted that Messiah would be a king, setting up the headquarters of His global kingdom in Jerusalem (Psa. 47:2, 7; Zech 14:9, 16-17). On one occasion Christ's followers, along with a multitude of people, wanted to make him a king. Christ could have thought, "Since this is predicted by the prophets, why not follow through with it now?" However, He departed from the multitude to a private place, rejecting their offer. He knew that He would be King in the future, but He must first become the suffering Lamb and bring redemption (John 6:15). His kingship would be established at the end of the age (Rev. 19:11-16). Christ was more concerned about God's will than with His own popularity and potential as an earthly ruler.

The second example was in the Garden of Gethsemane. During a lonely time of intercession, Christ earnestly prayed until His sweat became as great drops of blood (Luke 22:44). When the arresting officers arrived to lead Christ to an illegal trial, Peter sliced an ear off the high priest's servant (Luke 22:50-51). Christ informed Peter to stop his aggression, and told him that He (Christ) had the power to call more than twelve legions of angels and stop the entire process if He chose to do so (Matt. 26:53). Christ had asked the Father that, if it were possible, to allow this cup of suffering to pass. But if not, Christ would proceed with His predicted death (Matt. 26:1-2). Christ once again demonstrated His desire to do God's will.

If we move from the agony in the garden to the suffering on the cross, another view emerges, often overlooked by the casual reader. At the beginning of Christ's ministry, Satan personally challenged His position with God and demanded a sign from Him to prove that He really is the Son of God. Twice Satan said, "If you are the Son of God..." (Matt. 4:3, 6). About forty-two months passed and Christ was hanging on the cross between heaven and earth. The voices of men surrounding Him demanded a sign from Him that He is the Son of God. "If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross" (Matt. 27:40). They mocked Him saying that, if God was with Him and He was God's Son, then surely God would save Him now (Matt. 27:43). Christ had the authority at that moment to call the angelic deliverers to His rescue, but He chose not to fall to the temptation to prove to the people what He Himself already knew—that He was the Son of God!

Christ had all human emotions

When a believer experiences severe testing or trials, some have commented, "God cannot understand what I am dealing with. How can He know what I am going through? He is God; He can't experience this." According to Hebrews chapter four, Christ is our heavenly High Priest who is "touched with the feeling of our infirmities" (Heb. 4:15). The Greek word infirmities is asthenia, and does not simply mean some form of physical sickness, but can allude to any moral, physical or spiritual weakness we experience. When the writer revealed that Christ was touched, this word is not the standard Greek word used in the New Testament for "touch" as found in 21 verses, which means "to attach to someone or to physically touch them." In Hebrews 4:15 the word touch is sumpatheo and it means "to have sympathy and compassion for someone!" The reason our heavenly High Priest, Jesus Christ, has sympathy for us is because He was also tempted in all points in the same manner as we are.

We know that Christ was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrow and familiar with grief (Isa. 53:3). During His ministry, He became so angry at the abuse and merchandising at the temple, that He overthrew the money changers (Mark 11:15-17). When Christ arrived at the tomb of Lazarus, we read the shortest verse in the Bible that simply says, "Jesus wept" (John 11:35). Perhaps not because His friend had died, since Christ planned to resurrect him, but because there was such unbelief among His own friends, concerning Christ's ability to raise Lazarus from the dead (John 11). We also read where Jesus "rejoiced in spirit," thanking God for revealing such deep spiritual truths to babes, while hiding them from the wise men of the world (Luke 10:21). There are several possible Greek words for rejoice in the New Testament, meaning to be cheerful or to be in celebration with a person on behalf of their blessing (Luke 1:58). When Jesus rejoiced in spirit (Luke 10:21), the Greek word is agalliao, and it means to be exceeding joyful to the point of jumping for joy!

I realize the average Christian might have difficulty believing that Christ ever became so happy that He leaped for joy. Years ago one minister rebuked me for encouraging people to worship with their hands raised (1 Tim. 2:8) or by clapping their hands (Psa. 47:1), or for allowing them to rejoice by praising out loud and dancing for joy (Psa. 149:3). With a rather sour expression on his face, this rigid minister commented, "Son, all of this physical expression in worship is wrong. I've read the New Testament hundreds of times and nowhere did Jesus act like that!" I thought for a moment and replied, "Sir, you are right...but everyone He touched and healed acted that way!" I reminded him of the lame man at the gate who, after being supernaturally healed, began "running and leaping and praising God" (Acts 3:8). A man born blind who receives his healing is not going to simply nod his head and say thank you in a timid voice.

It is clear that Christ experienced every human emotion that we, too, experience. Considering that Christ had all human emotion and feeling, this would indicate that He, too, was tempted with all manner of temptation, yet without sinning. This should be of great comfort to all believers. It is one thing to say, "Christ knows what it is like to become angry, sad and even lonely." There is deeper appreciation of Christ taking on the form of flesh, when we understand that He, too, was tempted while in His earthy body. The Bible only gives us the temptation of Christ at the beginning of His ministry. Yet, we know that many events were not recorded—so many that John said that, if all the words and works of Christ had been recorded, the world could not hold all the books (John 21:25).

Jesus and the Opposite Sex

I realize some would disagree with this comment; however, if Christ was tempted with all manner of temptation, He must have occasionally been tempted by the opposite sex. This does not imply that Christ lusted after women, as He warned against such activity:
"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." - Matt. 5:27-28 (NKJV)

Every believer living on earth in this house of clay has an area of weakness that can be a trap door for the adversary to slip through. For some the struggle is with their attitude. Perhaps it is unforgiveness or bitterness, or greed, or fear. Any man can and will occasionally have a dart of temptation cross his mind. However, a thought is not a sin, as long as the thought is cast down before it is planted in the mind as a seed. Once the seeds are planted they will, under certain conditions, blossom into a plant and produce negative fruit.

The reason it becomes important for a believer to understand Christ's human nature and the fact that Satan sent fiery darts against Him, is because it causes us to know that Christ does understand the struggle of a flesh verses a spirit nature. Christ was the master over His flesh; He understands that the "spirit is indeed willing but the flesh is weak" (Matt. 26:41).

We should not get overly concerned with whether or not Christ was tempted with the opposite sex, because we know that He was "yet without sin." We should, however, rejoice that He does have compassion upon us when we are being tested and will make a way of escape, so that we can bear the test without falling.

Friday, July 15, 2011

Does God Love His Enemies?

Tommy Clayton
Content Developer and Broadcast Editor - GTY BLOG


I can still remember the chair I was sitting in years ago when I read a life-changing page in John MacArthur’s book The God Who Loves. In an economy of words, John exposed, confronted, and changed my thinking on one of the most critical areas of theology, the nature of God. My understanding of God’s love—specifically His love for the non-elect—was never the same.

For months, I had been wrestling with the question of whether God’s love extends beyond those He chose for salvation. “Does God love all humanity, even the Judas Iscariots and Adolf Hitlers of the world?” At the time, I couldn’t answer that question with any degree of certainty. And although I was sitting under sound biblical teaching, I had begun entertaining the idea that God’s elect have a monopoly on His love. I couldn't reconcile the idea of God loving His enemies with the following texts:
  • Psalm 5:5, “You hate all workers of iniquity.”
  • Psalm 7:11, “God is angry with the wicked every day.”
  • Psalm 26:5, “I have hated the assembly of evil doers.”
Beyond those troubling texts, I was grappling with God’s explicit statements about hating Esau found in Romans 9 and Malachi 1. “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” You have to admit, that’s a hard verse to refute. God’s hatred was unrelated to Esau’s conduct or character. It was rooted in His eternal, sovereign purposes.

The more I pondered those verses, the more resistant I became to acknowledging God’s love to all humanity. I failed to see the tragic effects such thinking had on my evangelistic fervency. I had adopted a self-righteous mindset, thinking God was absolutely repulsed by unbelievers—probably just as repulsed as I was. I became blind to all the Scriptures speaking to God’s steadfast love and compassion for the lost. Somewhere along the way, my love and compassion for sinners waned.

I was convinced in my own mind. God loves the elect and hates the non-elect. End of discussion. But then, I read the following words by John MacArthur:

Scripture clearly says that God is love. “The Lord is good to all, and His mercies are over all His works” (Ps. 145:9). Christ even commands us to love our enemies, and the reason He gives is this: “In order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matt. 5:45). The clear implication is that in some sense God loves His enemies. He loves both “the evil and the good,” both “the righteous and the unrighteous” in precisely the same sense we are commanded to love our enemies.

In fact, the second greatest commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mk. 12:31; cf. Lev. 19:18), is a commandment for us to love everyone. We can be certain the scope of this commandment is universal, because Luke 10 records that a lawyer, “wishing to justify himself … said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbor?’” (Lk. 10:29)—and Jesus answered with the Parable of the Good Samaritan. The point? Even Samaritans, a semi-pagan race who had utterly corrupted Jewish worship and whom the Jews generally detested as enemies of God, were neighbors whom they were commanded to love. In other words, the command to love one’s “neighbor” applies to everyone. This love commanded here is clearly a universal, indiscriminate love.

Consider this: Jesus perfectly fulfilled the law in every respect (Matt. 5:17–18), including this command for universal love. His love for others was surely as far-reaching as His own application of the commandment in Luke 10. Therefore, we can be certain that He loved everyone. He must have loved everyone in order to fulfill the Law. After all, the apostle Paul wrote, “The whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (Gal. 5:14). He reiterates this theme in Romans 13:8: “He who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.” Therefore, Jesus must have loved His “neighbor.” And since He Himself defined “neighbor” in universal terms, we know that His love while on earth was universal.

Do we imagine that Jesus as perfect man loves those whom Jesus as God does not love? Would God command us to love in a way that He does not? Would God demand that our love be more far-reaching than His own? And did Christ, having loved all humanity during His earthly sojourn, then revert after His ascension to pure hatred for the non-elect? Such would be unthinkable; “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes and forever” (Heb 13:8) (John MacArthur, The God Who Loves, 102-03).


John’s simple explanation of those Scriptures compelled me to rethink my position on God’s love. Jesus was God. Jesus loved His neighbors—even His non-elect neighbors. Jesus was a friend to sinners. Jesus loved His enemies—all of them. How could I have missed that? What caused me to overlook such clear, vital truths about the character of God? The answer is pride, that hideous sin lurking in all of us, waiting for the opportunity to express itself.

If you wrestle with some of the verses I listed, or struggle to reconcile God’s love with his wrath, I’d recommend you pick up a copy of John’s book The God Who Loves.

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Why Does Evil Dominate the World?

Watch the complete video here: http://www.gty.org/Resources/Videos/T8290-333a
http://www.gty.org/Resources/Videos/T8290-333b

Why did God allow evil in the world? You could frame the question a number of ways. If the Creator God is so good, why is there so much evil in the world? In fact, the reality of evil in the world is one of the favorite justifications of those who reject the God of the Bible. They're eager to ask those questions in a myriad of different ways...how can God be holy and allow His creation to be dominated by unholiness? How can God be perfectly righteous and ordain the presence of unrighteousness? There are a number of ways that this particular idea is effectively communicated. One is a syllogism, a series of logical steps such as the biblical God is loving...the biblical God is all-knowing, the biblical God is all powerful, yet massive evil exists in the world therefore the biblical God does not exist. That is to say that whoever allows this evil cannot be loving, or cannot be holy, or cannot be all powerful or all knowing and still allow evil.

Monday, August 23, 2010

John MacArthur with CNN (Who Is Jesus, Anyway?, What Happens When You Die, God and Good vs. Evil)

Who Is Jesus, Anyway? Pt. 1 of 3






What Happens When You Die - Part 1-2




God and Good vs. Evil, Pt. 1 of 3