Cheryl Schatz

Mara,
Here is the quote:

Systematic Theology an introduction to Biblical Doctrine by Wayne A. Grudem pgs 61-62

In fact, the word helper is used in the Old Testament of God himself who helps his people. But the point is that whenever someone “helps” someone else, whether in the Hebrew Old Testament or in our modern-day use of the word help, in the specific task in view the person who is helping is occupying a subordinate or inferior position with regard to the person being helped,. This is true even when I “help” a young boy in my neighborhood to fix his bicycle–it is his responsibility, and his task, and I am only giving some assistance as needed; it is not my responsibility. David Clines concludes that this is the case throughout the Hebrew Old Testament:

What I conclude, from viewing all the occurrences in the Hebrew Bible, is that though superiors may help inferiors, strong may help weak, gods may help humans, in the act of helping they are “inferior.” That is to say they are subjecting themselves to a secondary, subordinate position. Their help may be necessary or crucial, but they are assisting some task that is someone else’s responsibility. They are not actually doing the task themselves, or even in cooperation, for there is different language for that. Being a helper is not a Hebrew way of being an equal.

Jennifer,
Thanks for the kind words! Yes, I believe it was on this post and it was Suzanne that gave me a head’s up to Grudem’s quote. I can hardly believe that these men can say things like this in scholarly books and from the pulpit and godly men don’t say anything to correct them. I was mortified and really amazed that so many leaders are straying from orthodoxy in this way and yet their “name” keeps them from being openly corrected. It is as if men are afraid to be the one to point out the error. Good thing that there are egalitarians who are not afraid to point out the error. I also learn a lot from each of you.

Jennifer, you have identified the problem well. These men insist that they have the truth, but they will block people from responding and they don’t take challenges well. Here there is freedom to have respectful disagreement and challenges because the truth as light isn’t afraid. To me it is a serious red flag when free speech is quenched and challenges are not allowed. I ask myself what are they hiding and why would light run from “darkness”. The truth is that error will run from the truth and so we should not fear a challenge if we claim to be in the light. Why some people can’t see this from the Bayly blog really mystifies me.

Mark,
You said to Kay:

Let me encourage you to look at the passage exegetically. In my experience i rejected reformed theology, but after I studied this text my arminianism was shattered. My arminian theology simply could not hold up under the pressure of Romans 9-11. We must be faithful as bible believing people to accept it’s teaching.

I am able to can see both sides but after working through Romans exegetically, my faith has been strengthened by the amazing message of Paul and Calvinism has been shattered in front of my eyes because of that. Perhaps some day we can go through the passage together and I can show you what you missed. What I feel sad about is that so many reject their first Biblical roots to go after Calvinism without reading an apologetic for non-Calvinism that deals with the passages in context. It seems to me that for the most part once one has “found” Calvinism, the mind shuts down to anything that might contradict Calvinism.

In a former church where I attended it was so bad that no one was allowed to even quote a verse that appeared to contradict Calvinism and we could no longer mention man’s free will even in our prayers. The control that happened once Calvinism came in was difficult and unbending. I am glad that we have some Calvinists here who are willing to dialog in an open fashion. It doesn’t happen very often without the Calvinist getting mad and leaving, in my experience. I have often wondered why. I have come to the conclusion that Calvinism is like a security blanket for them that makes them special as well as safe in the fold and they don’t tolerate anyone pulling at their safety blanket.

But here we are willing to make our measurement of truth as the Bible itself with the inspired words and the inspired grammar in context so that we can allow it to speak for itself without forcing it into a theological pre-conceived box. I like that and hope that we have as much respect for God’s Word as we continue in John 6. It’s a great passage!

I agree with most of what you wrote, except that I do think that “ego eimi” or “I AM” was a reference to His Deity. Only as the “I AM” could take control of the water as He did. I would also like to add one comment to verse 21. Jesus would later repeat many more “I AM” statements later in John 6 that also refer to His Deity.

John 6:21 (NASB)
21 So they were willing to receive Him into the boat, and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going.

Notice here that “they were willing” to receive Him. The Greek word is “thelo” which means to be willing, desire, wish to have. It is interesting that John makes this note because he could have left it out. It is an important note that the disciple’s were made willing by the Lord identifying Himself and His command for them not to continue to fear.

This is quite a bit of fun, isn’t it to go verse by verse?

John 6:22–25 (NASB)

22 The next day the crowd that stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was no other small boat there, except one, and that Jesus had not entered with His disciples into the boat, but that His disciples had gone away alone.
23 There came other small boats from Tiberias near to the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks.
24 So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor His disciples, they themselves got into the small boats, and came to Capernaum seeking Jesus.
25 When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You get here?”

The crowd had paid attention that there had only been one boat and that Jesus had not entered that boat with His disciples. They didn’t understand that another miracle had taken place. But they were very curious as to what had happened to Jesus and they went looking for Him. They boarded the boats that had arrived from Tiberias in order to look for Jesus on the other side.

Over to you Mark.

Mark,
You said:

1. IT does not address ONLY ‘the jews’ of John 6. It seemed to me that Cheryl was saying that Romans 3:10-18 is only addressing the pharasee’s or Jews of John 6.

Nope.

2. Romans 3:9-18 is addressing all of humanity in their unregenerate state (so yes the Jews of John 6) would be included.

So it looks like you and I have an agreement on this one thing. We both agree that the Jews of John 6 are unregenerate and they are not seeking God, there is none of that special group that goes good and they are swift to shed blood, their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness and destruction is in their path and no fear of God is before their eyes.

Whew! Glad to get agreement before we go on.

As far as the rest of your comments about Romans, I don’t agree, but then we are talking about Romans except for when it might be necessary to make the text clear in John 6.

Therefore this is why i disagree with Cheryl oh Rom 3. It is not solely addressing the Jews of JOhn 6.

I didn’t say that it was solely addressing the Jews of John 6. It also includes everyone else who says in their heart there is no God.

Hope this helps. Romans 3:10-18 is not ONLY about the Jews of John 6, but ALL of humanity in thier UNREGENRATE state

I do know what your position is, even if I disagree with it, but I thought you were in danger of losing your position by insisting that the Jews of John 6 were not those who didn’t fear God. Glad we can agree that they were definitely part of the ones who had no fear of God before their eyes.

Mark,
Sorry about being so slow in answering. I am really stretched thin right now so I can’t be as prompt as I would like.

The issue is whether Adam had a responsibility that Eve did not. According the Cheryl (which i agree) the answer is yes.

You have misunderstood me. Adam and Eve and all of us have a responsibility to use the knowledge that we have been given. Eve used her knowledge to answer the serpent’s question and to defend God when the serpent originally suggested that God had not given them permission to eat from the fruit of the trees. Adam kept silent and did not share that knowledge.

And when Adam had knowledge that Eve did not, he was also required to give of what he had. He again was silent.

Was Adam alone the protector of the garden? While God doesn’t say that Eve was not given that task, we do know that she was the ruler of the garden just as He was. It is a part of the rule that one protects. But one can only protect with the knowledge that one has. Eve did what she could until she was deceived. Adam did nothing with his knowledge and so he allowed evil into the garden when he recognized that evil.

Now what you have said is quite true but ONLY if everyone has the same responsibility to stop deception.

Everyone has the same responsibility to stop deception if one is aware of the deception. It isn’t the responsibility that was different. It was the knowledge that was different. Adam was the one who was not deceived.

The question is would Eve have had the same responsibility if the situation was reversed. From what Cheryl has stated the answer has to be no, simply becasue as Cheryl defined it- Adam saw God create and Eve did not. Adam had the mandate to protect the garden, Eve did not.

No, that is not right. Eve was a ruler just like Adam. Now if she had been created before Adam and it was Eve who had uniquely seen God’s work as Creator, then she would have had more responsibility for what she knew. But both were rulers and neither was the sole ruler of the garden.

This therefore is the problem. Cheryl is asserting that Adam had a responsibility that was impossible for Eve to have, but yet Cheryl holds onto an equality of roles and rulership.

You are defining this as a “role” instead of its proper definition of knowledge. If one has more knowledge of something, it is their responsibility to share. But having more knowledge doesn’t mean that there are unequal “roles” or unequal “rulers”. God said in the beginning that they were both rulers and His Word is what we measure ideas of “roles” that would cause us to create false ideas about unequal rulership.

Like i said, they were either completely equal in role/function or they were not. You cannot blame Adam for a lack of ‘resposibility’ if in fact you believe that Adam did not have more responsibility than Eve.

They were completely equal in rulership. Yet they were not the Bobbsey twins. They were individuals who had differences of knowledge because one was created before the other. It didn’t mean that Eve lacked a “role” because if we were going to say this, then you would have to say that Adam was the only one given the prohibition therefore she was exempt from this law. Rather, the laws applied to both and she was just as much a ruler as Adam was. If Eve had as much knowledge as Adam did, she would have been just as culpable as he was. Again – knowledge is not the same thing as a “role” nor does it make unequal “rulers”.

Now clearly the Bible teaches that Adam did have more responsibility, and clearly only he was given the mandate to guard the garden. This is clearly a differentiation of roles or functions between the man and the woman is it not?

Guarding the garden is part of the rule. If you think this is not true, please show me your case from the Scriptures where Eve was exempt from being ruler of the garden.

Mark, you also said:

However i reject that a pastor, elder, seminary lecturer do not therefore have authority over those they are ministering too. This is clear in the Bible that we are to submit to those who lead us because of that extra responsibility.

The Bible never says that a pastor, elder or seminary lecturer has “authority over” others in the body of Christ. While those who take the lead have a responsibility to protect us, this doesn’t mean that they have authority over us.

Hebrews 13:17 (HCSB)
17 Obey your leaders  and submit to them, for they keep watch  over your souls as those who will give an account, so that they can do this with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.

In this verse we are told to allow these ones to persuade us so that their work of protecting us (which they will have to give an account to God of how they did their work) will not be filled with grief when they work to protect and we don’t heed the warning. But they are not responsible for us. They are responsible for their work.
They will never stand before God and give Him an account of anyone else but themselves. If they had authority over us, Paul wouldn’t need to tell the church to submit to them. They would just take their authority. But because they don’t have authority, they need us to submit for them to do what they are called to do.

They are still equal in their salvation (Gal 3:28)- we are all one in Christ, but some are still in authority because of the position God has put them in.

This is tradition. But the Bible never tells the leaders to take authority over the brothers. It just isn’t there. If you think I am wrong, please show me where Paul or Jesus or anyone in the Bible instructs the leaders to take authority over others.

Where is that in the text if we are only going off the text? You are reading that into the text! I can’t see how you can say they had equal rulership in the garden, but include an extra subclause for Adam. Either they have equal rulership or they don’t. Equal is equal, anything else is not equal.

This is where you would need to get my DVD and look at my material on Genesis. I go through it very thoroughly using the Genesis text and I don’t have time to redo what I have painstakingly taken two years to create and produce.

Now if you want to say they are equal in essence yet distinct in role then i agree, since this is what we see in Genesis.

Sorry but there was only one “role” as ruler. God never restricted Eve to doing her ruler jobs in a different way than Adam. Never once.

It just seems to me that you are admitting that Adam had a different role, but are trying to divert around the fact therefore, that they had different roles/authority in the garden.

No, I am not saying that Adam had a different role that was restricted from Eve. I think that you have worn your complementarian glasses so long that you just can’t see outside of your own boundaries. I hope that one day you will be able to see things differently especially if any of your children are girls. I would think that you would owe it to them to be sure of what God does and doesn’t allow for females so that you don’t harm them especially if God were to call and gift them differently than you think He should.

kw,
We will just agree to disagree and leave it at that. While I could put in the time and effort to show where God Himself sent people to war, and I have done so in the past with JW’s who condemn the church for allowing anyone in the military, I just cannot stretch myself any thinner right now. I have so little time and I am not going to fight about the non-essentials. I am horribly behind on my emails as I am the only one answering right now and without help and I feel very guilty about that. There isn’t enough of me to go around and I choose to draw the line at arguing about things that are not necessary to the gospel.

So thanks for understanding.

Frank,
Thanks for sharing your story. I think what you went through helps all of us to understand the challenges of the comp/egal issue especially in the story of one who has been on the other camp. That was very helpful, thank you!

kw,

I appreciate you are zealous, but I agree with Grant that there are things to divide over and things not to divide over. Division that is over the non-essentials is very bad. This is the point of my post.

Again, God says otherwise through Paul in: Philippians 3:17-18 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so, as ye have us for an ensample. For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ

When Paul talked about the enemies of the cross of Christ, he was not talking about true Christians. The non-essentials should never divide us as Christians and it is a very serious to get to the point of identifying someone as an enemy of the cross of Christ. We do not identify such a one because they are a soldier or go to war.

During his preaching of repentance John the Baptist said:

Luke 3:9 (NASB)
9 “Indeed the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”

The crowd then asked John what they needed to do. He told them what would be signs of repentance. When some soldiers approached John he did not tell them that repentance was for them to stop being soldiers. Rather than condemn them for being soldiers, the Bible relates the account:

Luke 3:14 (NASB)
14 Some soldiers were questioning him, saying, “And what about us, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not take money from anyone by force, or accuse anyone falsely, and be content with your wages.”

There was no condemnation for being a soldier, but they were to be content with their wages.

Now I am asking that we put a period to these discussions that are off topic. While I appreciate that Christians can discuss these issues, I don’t want my blog to be a place of dialog on war, government, conspiracy theories, etc because this takes away from what I am trying to do here. It gets us off the task of encouraging women to obey God in the way that He has called them.

So please, let’s stay on topic so that I don’t need to moderate the comments. I really hate having to do that as I believe in free expression but within proper boundaries.

Thanks!

One other thing, kw, I waded through my spam box and there are 9 comments that are filled with stuff on Zionism. I am not going to “rescue” the comments from the spam box because they are not on topic and the long comments are difficult to wade through. I can’t have my blog taken over by other topics as this blog is dedicated to women in ministry and God’s word on that subject.

Also I really can’t see myself being able to read the 234 pages that you sent me. My time is limited at best and I have a difficult time even keeping up with the comments on my own blog. All I can do is ask people here to pray for you that God will help you find a place of fellowship where you will be free to submit yourself to the teaching of the Word and correction.

KW,
I know that you have posted on this site before and I usually try to welcome each new person. If I failed to welcome you, I am sorry. That would be a failure on my part.

You said that you wrote to me and I didn’t answer. I did a search of my gmail account for your email address to see what it was that I missed and I found it and I now know why I didn’t answer. The email was marked as “to answer” but it was so overwhelming it was left until I had time to wade through it and that time just never came. When it was transferred to Word, it was 234 pages long!!!

So I briefly skimmed through it and it was filled with quotes about Zionist Israel and quotes about China, talk about the CIA and George Bush, a long history of the US and vaccinations, politics, satan’s system, Mormonism as a “denomination”, the Vatican and secret societies, Project paperclip, none of which are applicable to this blog.

I have pulled out a couple of quotes from what you wrote. You said:

According to His Words, pray always that we may be accounted worthy to escape all things that will come about. We should pray continuously that we will never be deceived, and we will never deceive anyone as well. We must be aware, that things are not as they appear to be.

We really have to forget everything we’ve been taught by mankind and traditon. When we do these things, we will learn and then know Him. We will learn how to pray and what to pray for, so we don’t pray amiss. We must know Him if we are to know what to pray for.
If you cannot find a church that truly follows Pure Lord Jesus Christ, God Almighty, follow the lead of Paul, Peter; the TRUE ANNOINTED TEACHERS of the Word. Seek like minded people and gather any place you’d like to. Perfect solution.

When I read these words, I feel like what Grant wrote. It seems to me that you feel that true Christianity is extremely small and most churches are not following God in any way.

The Scriptures tell us that we need to gather together with other Christians so that we may be fed by God’s word and we may receive correction. The attitude of submissiveness that we are instructed to have as Christians is important so that we can receive the gifts that others have in the body of Christ. If we do not submit to learn and submit to being corrected we can go off into an extreme left field and not even notice where we have been deceived ourselves. The gathering together is for our own safety.

I appreciate all the verses that you quoted in the email you sent me but hundreds and hundreds of verses put together with warnings about false churches and deception is overwhelming and it makes me wonder how you can know that you are not being deceived yourself without apparent fellowship in the body of Christ. You said at one part:

Remember, if there is deception, a person will not even know that they are in deception.

I agree. We need the church as the body of Christ to help us recognize our own deception so that if we are at a place where we claim that we can “see” but we are really “blind” that we can have correction.

Mark,
I ran out of time tonight. I’ll try to catch up on your questions/comments tomorrow. Thanks for your patience. 🙂

Kay,
That is also very good news for you about your move. It is nice to be near grandchildren and I am sure that this move will be a welcome one. I hope that your move goes well!

Now to cover a few more verses.

John 6:14–17 (NASB)
14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”
15 So Jesus, perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone.
16 Now when evening came, His disciples went down to the sea,
17 and after getting into a boat, they started to cross the sea to Capernaum. It had already become dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them.

In verse 14 when the people said that this is the “prophet”, they were not looking for a Savior who would save them from their sins. They were looking for a leader who would save them from the Romans just as you said.

In verse 15, Jesus withdrew to the mountain by Himself. The mountain is the place where Jesus would often meet with God and talk with Him. It was symbolic too because it was on a mountain where Moses was destined to meet with God and where God communicated with man. Jesus needed to spend time with His father as He was coming up to a very important time in His life and it was time to make sure that He knew and followed His Father’s will. It was another “mountain” time for Jesus.

Jesus also went by Himself to the mountain for another reason. By being alone His disciples would experience a revelation of who He is that would help them to understand the soon coming revelation that He is the God of creation. It would also prepare them for the words that He would say later about Himself being God.

It is not exactly apparent why the disciples left without Jesus, but perhaps they expected that Jesus would come later as this may have happened before where Jesus sent them off ahead of Him. Yet with whatever reason they had to go ahead, we can be sure that God was arranging for the events that were shortly to come to pass. The storm that would come upon them was not unknown to God, nor was God’s own actions to send Jesus walking on the water unknown to God. For just as Jesus knew what He was intending to do with the feeding of the 5,000, so God also knew what He was going to do with the upcoming crisis.

John 6:6 (NASB) This He was saying to test him, for He Himself knew what He was intending to do.

What was to come was also a test for the disciples and through the test came a special revelation of the Deity of Jesus.

Over to you Mark.

Mark, you said:

I’m a bit concerned about your 7 points. None of your references mention at all that the Jews did not fear God. You are bringing that into the text.

I am actually quite shocked that you would contradict this point. After all you were the one who said that Romans 3:10-18 applied to all unsaved people so that all people (except those who are “born again”) do not seek for God, none of them does good and none fears God. Now you are trying to say that this passage does not apply to the Pharisees? Common now. What is making you afraid to agree that the Romans 3 passage applies to the Jews who wanted to kill Jesus?

I very carefully went through the passage to show that the Jewish Pharisees were not seeking God, they were not righteous but evil, they did not understand, their feet were swift to shed blood, they did not know the path of peace and thus there could be no fear of God in them.

Now, Mark, my friend, if you are going to say that Romans 3:10-18 does not apply to the Jewish Pharisees, then how is it that you are maintaining that all unsaved people are included in the passage except for the Jewish Pharisees? Huh?

I am especially concerned about point 7.
You conclude that your points 1-6, therefore show that Romans 3:10-18 applies to them. On the contrary Paul is writing to the Roman Church, a group of Christians. I cannot agree with you on that point. You cannot take Jesus words applied to the Pharisees and scribes and interpolate that into Romans 3.

Oh dear, are you now trying to say that Romans 3:10-18 only applies to Christians? That it is Christians who do not seek for God, Christians who do not do good and Christians who do not fear God?

Now i do not believe the pharisees were ‘God fearers’ in the sense that we generally associate the word. I was simply disagreeing with your discription of them as non God fearers. We agree they were pious. They sought to uphold the sabbath

So you don’t believe that the Pharisees were “God fearers” but you do not agree with me that the Pharisees did not fear God?

Please explain yourself. It appears to me that you are contradicting yourself big-time.

So let’s settle this right now. Do you or do you not say that Romans 3 has Paul saying that no one seeks for God and no one fears God until one is born again? What say you? Are you going to be rethinking your disagreement with me on point #7?

They were zealous for the supremacy of God

Oh really? Then why is it that Jesus said that they did not believe God’s word? No they were not zealous for the supremacy of God. Rather they loved making rules for others that they didn’t keep and they loved to have others look up to them. But they were not zealous for God. Jesus said:

Matthew 23:2–4 (NASB)
2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses;
3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.
4 “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger.

You said:

They followed in the light of John the Baptist

5:35 ” He was a burning and ?shining lamp, and ?you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. “

They rejoiced only because they wanted to be noticed and John drew a crowd so they were there, but they were not coming to the light. Jesus said:

Matthew 23:5 (NASB)
5 “But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments.

Yes they came to John but they were not repentant.

Matthew 3:7–8 (NASB)
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 “Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance;

You said:

They also searched the scriptures for eternal life (5:39). I do not think we can rightly label these men as those who “have no fear of God”.

They are not searching the Scriptures to learn what God has to say. They didn’t believe God. Jesus said:

John 5:39 (NASB) “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

The grammar here is present tense. They are searching the Scriptures ” because” they think they already have eternal life right now. Check out the grammar for yourself. They were not looking to get eternal life in the future. They believed they had it. After all they thought all they needed was to be children of Abraham. No, Jesus did not say that the Pharisees were looking to hear and learn from God. They weren’t. They were proud and self-righteous and they did not fear God.

Also since we are looking at John 6 can we stay with that text and keep to it’s context.

It is important to the context to know why the Pharisees did not come to Jesus since John 6 reveals that they were not followers of Jesus. This is where the Scripture’s revelation of who and what the Pharisees were will help us understand the passage better. I won’t be going outside the passage unless it directly corrolates to John 6.

Now the crowd was another story. They were not the same as the Jewish Pharisees.

What i mean by the ‘passover’ being theological is that the context of the passage parallels with Moses. Jesus is the bread of life parallel to the bread in the desert.

Okay. Sure, I agree with that too. However the Passover that is first mentioned in verse 4 is the actual event. Just so that we can agree on that too.

Basically what i mean is that there is deep theology behind the narrative, so the passover is theological not only primarily chronological.

Yes there is deep theology behind the narrative. But the passover that was mentioned in verse 4 was the actual passover celebration and this is what made the backdrop of Jesus’ words so powerful.

no problems with what you have said, but i would like to add one more thing. THe crowd is 5000 ‘men’. Now presumably there were women and childern aswell, so it was a substantial number to feed.

Yes, this is a good point. It was a very large crowed of people with many more than 5,000 there when we include the women and children.

THe 12 baskets emphasise that the miracle provided ‘more than enough’ food for everyone.

Yes, excellent point.

Jesus knew their intentions so he withdrew by himself. The detail of ‘by himself’ becomes important futher into the passage.

I will comment on this shortly in my next comment.

P.S- in the coming weeks i may be slow to respond, as we are expecting our 3rd baby in a week or so. Please bare with me.

How wonderful! Congratulations, Mark! Looks like you will have your hands full. We will just go at the pace that we can both handle responding. If either one of us is not able to respond for days or longer, neither will think that we have left the discussion, agreed?

I hope that you will keep us all informed when the blessed day arrives. Please give my regards to your wife.

Grant, welcome to my blog!

I appreciate your comments and your call to moderation.

The issue here is not about secondary issues but about the primary issue that has had an addition of a secondary issue as necessary. If we allow a separation like this then it will be easy to dismiss godly Christian brothers and sisters in Christ as outside the faith merely for disagreeing on a non-essential doctrine.

There have been some really serious talk in the CBMW group about egalitarians as ones who are either in heresy or heading towards heresy merely because we believe that God can call and gift women and use them for the benefit of the body of Christ. I have heard the sermons myself and I can’t tell you how sad it makes me feel. But when the line is crossed by listing complementarianism as essential and necessary for the gospel to be preached and for converts to be educated on the essentials of the faith, we need to make a stand so the rift that has occurred in the body will not lead to complete separation. This is divisive and dangerous and unhealthy. We simply cannot add our own secondary doctrines to the gospel and expect it will be tolerated. While I commend the T4G men for standing up to defend the gospel against the challenges of liberalism, they have taken it too far by adding egalitarianism as a challenge to the gospel.

We need to take out our spiritual knives and cut away the false and perverted gospel but we dare not cut deep into the gospel itself and graft in a supposed essential addition unknown through Church history.

I really do appreciate your gracious tone and your appeal to balance. I too am interested in balance but I allow people to speak freely here especially out of their hurt and mistrust of men who have stifled them and taught churches to hold women back in contradiction to the direct call and gifting of God. Many forums will not allow egalitarians to speak freely. This blog is not like those that restrict free speech.

As far as T4G, my message to these men would be to go back to treating us as dear brothers and sisters in Christ and keep this issue as a secondary issue of faith and leave it out of the gospel.

You also mentioned the issue of whether there were women in the T4G conference and I can assure you that there were very few allowed. Because the conference is so popular, the organizers gave men preference so that men who wanted to attend were not kept away and displaced by women. The event is primarily for pastors and church workers and since they believe that these should be men, it isn’t surprising that the group was made up of almost exclusively men.

But does this really make it “Together for the Gospel”? With the complementarian message it is men alone who are to teach doctrine to the church so women do not appear to be needed in the togetherness for the gospel. I don’t think that men really understand what they are missing out on when they exclude their sisters in Christ. God’s gifts are all necessary no matter what vessel that God decides to use.

Thanks again for your comments!

Hannah,

If a women saw a man being deceived, and she sat back and went along with it she would be in sin. If she points the deception to him is she taking authority over him?

What we are all expected to read into this is that this applies to men only. Anything a woman does, does not imply authority. Anything a man does implies authority. It is the classic reading into the text what you expect to find. I am almost certain that if the text said that Adam scratched her ear and the text didn’t say that Eve also scratched his ear, his scratching would be taken as a sign of his authority over her!

Okay, Mark here is my comments on the next verses:

John 6:5–6 (NASB)
5 Therefore Jesus, lifting up His eyes and seeing that a large crowd was coming to Him, said to Philip, “Where are we to buy bread, so that these may eat?”
6 This He was saying to test him, for He Himself knew what He was intending to do.

This is the first reference to bread and Jesus sets the stage for his revelation about Himself by asking a question of Philip about feeding bread to the crowd. It is important to note that Jesus was not talking about feeding only His disciples. He was talking about feeding all of the people who were coming to Him.

Jesus knew what He was going to do but He wanted to test him.

John 6:7–12 (NASB)
7 Philip answered Him, “Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them, for everyone to receive a little.”
8 One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, said to Him,
9 “There is a lad here who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what are these for so many people?”
10 Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand.
11 Jesus then took the loaves, and having given thanks, He distributed to those who were seated; likewise also of the fish as much as they wanted.
12 When they were filled, He said to His disciples, “Gather up the leftover fragments so that nothing will be lost.”

In this portion there are some very important things that Jesus did. The people were not sent away to buy their own food, but they were made to sit down to receive. Jesus then took of the bread, gave thanks and He distributed to the crowd as much as they wanted to eat. Then he told the disciples to “gather up the leftover gragments so that nothing will be lost.” This is a picture of what He is going to say shortly where the food is distributed to all and nothing is lost.

Okay over to you Mark.

Thanks for your participation Mark on our dialog on John 6.

We did start with a little bit from John 5 to set the stage. You mentioned that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus because he broke the Sabbath and He claimed to be equal with God. That is a good addition.

There are several other things about the Jewsh Pharisees that showed why they hated Jesus. Jesus tells us. The conversations with these Jews that should be noted are also in John 5 & John 8. Here is what we know about them:

1. They cannot hear Jesus’ Word because they are of their father the devil and as sons of the devil they want to do the devil’s work. He was a murderer from the beginning and they too want to murder. And because they are of the devil they cannot hear or understand Jesus’ words.

John 8:43–44 (NASB)
43 “Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.
44 “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

2. They were ones who do evil and hate the Light. They were unwilling to come to the Light for fear that their deeds would be exposed.

John 3:19–21 (NASB)
19 “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 “But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

John 5:40 (NASB)
40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

3. They were not from God.

John 8:42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.

John 8:47 “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

4. They are not seekers of God’s glory but they seek glory from man

John 8:44 “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?

5. They did not believe God’s Word

John 8:46 “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.

6. They were not of the truth because all who would not listen to Jesus are not of the truth according to Jesus’ testimony.

John 18:37 (NASB)
37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”

7. Because of all of the things that are said about these Jews in John, we can know that Romans 3 applies to these men:

Romans 3:10–18 (NASB)
10 as it is written,
“THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;
11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;
12 ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD,
THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.”
13 “THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE,
WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,”
“THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS”;
14 “WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS”;
15 “THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD,
16 DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS,
17 AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN.”
18 “THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.”

They are of the ones who do not seek God, they are not righteous but are evil, they do not understand, their feet are swift to shed blood, they do not know the path of peace and there is no fear of God in them and because of of this, destruction is in their path.

Yet even with all of this terrible stuff said about the Jewish Pharisees, Jesus still said that the words He was saying were said so that they may be saved.

John 5:34 (NASB)
34 “But the testimony which I receive is not from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved.

The will of God was for the Jews to repent and to believe Jesus so that they could be saved.

Mark, your words about John 5:39-47 were good. The one point of contention is this:

However i reject Cheryl’s point that these Jews have no ‘fear’ of God. THis is not in the text anywhere.

While it is not directly said in the text, the things said about these Jews match up exactly with what is said of those who do not hear God, do not seek for Him, whose works are evil, who do not understand and who are murderers and do not fear God. Romans 3:10-18 fits them to a tee.

If you still believe that these Jews were ones who feared God, it would be helpful to show from the text where this fear of God showed up.

Mark, you said:

These Jews were pious and religious. They searched the scriptures looking for eternal life.

They may have been pious, but they didn’t believe the Scriptures that they were searching and their pious outside was called a white washed tomb by Jesus.

Matthew 23:27 (NASB)
27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.

Under John 6, you said:

Verse 1- ’some time after this’ is indefinate. This means that the events of Chapter 6 may or may not have happened immediately after chapter 5. Some commentator think it could be as much as 6 months, but that is a side issue.

The preposition that joins the dialog of Jesus with the Jews in chapter 5 with the events of chapter 6 most certainly is joined together because the Greek word that is used to join the two means:

3. marker of attendant circumstances of someth. that takes place, with
   Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.) (637).

It is a an attendant circumstance that follows and so we can confidently know that what happened in chapter 6 is going to be related to the attendant circumstances of chapter 5.

You also said:

What is important to note is the ‘crowd’ is not the same Jews addressed in chapter 5. We know this because the Jews of chapter 5 did not recognise Jesus authority.

But there are two groups in chapter 6. The first group is the “crowd” that was following Jesus because of the miracles. The second group shows up in verse 41 as having problems with Jesus. They are not called the crowd but “the Jews”.

You said:

The crowd of 6:1-15 however were different.

Yes, the crowd of verses 1 – 15 were not the Pharisees who had challenged Jesus.

You said:

It seems evcident that the ‘crowd’ is looking for a new ‘Moses’ to deliver them from the Roman bondage. This seems true once we see the reaction of the people post miracle and Jesus response.

Yes, good work.

You said:

The mention of ‘passover’ is theological not chronological.

I am not sure I understand you. Are you saying that the Passover that was said to be near in verse 4 is really not a proper passover?

John 6:4 (NASB)
4 Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was near.

One other thing that really helps to keep things civil here even though we are all passionate. It is the fact that we are brothers and sisters in Christ. We can give our view in a passionate way but we don’t have to force our view on the other person. If our view is reasonable and well thought-out it may be considered and that is all that we could hope for. It is not a life and death matter and we can still have love and respect as we deal with these issues.

Hi Gazza, and thanks for joining the discussion again.
You said:

Yet in Post 244 you expressed sadness that people believe “that God deliberately and unconditionally creates people to go to hell.”
I struggle to put these together. If God indeed had no doubt about who or how many will be saved then at the point he creates those who will rejet Him is He not knowingly creating someone who will go to hell?

Yes, God is knowingly creating people who will reject Him and go to hell. However this is far different than God creating people who unconditionally are created to go to hell.

The difference is that in the first instance these people may have put their faith in Him and in the second instance they may not. If God unconditionally creates them to go to hell, then it is God who desires them to go there without any conditions including their sin. Their election to reprobation before they ever sinned and before they were created demanded their destruction. If we did this, we would be considered unfair and may I dare say monstrous? It would be like a judge who arbitrarily pre-decides cases brought before him without even looking at the case history or evidence. He could say that cases 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9 will be sentenced with the death penalty and cases 2, 4, and 8 will set set free. His decision is made of his own will and without any conditions on the person or the crime. We would want that judge fired.

But God bringing people into the world that have been given a free-will choice that He knows will exercise that choice to reject Him is not even in the same category. Everyday Christians bring children into the world who they know will be sinners, yet we still give birth to them. We know that they have a purpose and can bring glory even if in the end they reject Him.

David didn’t create himself God created Him. So even though the faith is Davids own faith, it is also and expression of who God created David to be. This is different to the blessings of growing up in a Christian family etc – three are plenty of examples where brothers and sisters grow up in a Christian home some reject Christ while some accept. Their different responses are due to the fact that God created them as different people. Each makes up their own mind but it will always be a mind that God created for them.

If that was the case then God really didn’t make us in His image. It would mean that we did not have a will as God has but a programmed response. And if we all have a programmed response, then it is nothing more than a game and God is not the good God that He claims to be since He purposely programs people to sin against Him and then delights to judge them for what He has programmed them to do.

The only way that any of this makes any sense is for God to have made a creation like Him with a will and choices and an ability to love without coercion or pre-programming. It is this kind of creation that gives God glory. A pre-programmed variety would only say speak about a God that was a master manipulator and who was afraid to create anyone in His image with a real will and a real choice. It would speak of fear more than Sovereignty. In fact that is what the serpent hinted at in the garden. That humans could be like God but God was fearful and jealous that they might be like Him so He deliberately limited their choices.

But the God of the Bible reveals Himself as one is prepared for every choice we make so that our decisions are intimately known. He sent the merchants to the area where Joseph’s brothers were long before the brothers arrived on the scene. Nothing is out of God’s ability to bring glory and honor to His name – even our free will choices.

What do you see is the difference between believers and non believers? To phrase it another way why do you believe some have faith while others do not?

That’s an excellent question and I believe the Bible gives us the answer.

John 3:19 (NASB)
19 “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.

There are those people who love their sin so much that they refuse to allow God to shine a light on that sin and they reject God rather than give up their sin and their idols.

I have witnessed to a man for several years concerning coming to faith in Christ. He loves to be around Christians and he attends Christian functions but he refuses to become a Christian. He told me that he has no love for Jesus and can’t see that he needs a savior. The real struggle that he has is that he is a homosexual and he knows that he would have to give up this love of his to come to God. He is unwilling to do that.

So I believe that it is a love of sin that causes people to turn away from God. I also believe that fear stops people from coming to Christ. These people are more afraid of man than they are of God so they don’t come to Jesus because of the stigma that being a Christian would give them.

The book of Revelation talks about those who go to hell are “cowardly”.

Revelation 21:8 (NASB)
8 “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

I believe that cowardly refers to choosing he fear of man rather than the fear of God.

Thanks for your comments about the environment here. I have been to blogs where they shut down comments and either discouraged dialog or berated people for having a belief that is not the same as the blog host and thus challenges were not allowed. I believe that the healthy way is to allow challenges and to encourage questions. All of us can learn including me. And I am so happy that the people who come here are willing to challenge, question and learn.

Mark,
You said:

You want me to believe that both had equal authority in the garden, yet you admit that Adam had a reponsibility that Eve did not in protecting the garden.

Adam had more knowledge than Eve did as she was not yet created when God created the garden and the animals. If Eve had been around to see what Adam saw, and if God would have disallowed her as a watchman, then she would have been unequal since they would have had the same knowledge but only one would have been responsible for that knowledge. But that is not the case.

God’s way has always been to make us accountable for the individual revelation that He has given us. When God gave Adam revelation of who He is as Creator, Adam was responsible for that revelation and he was held accountable.

God made both Adam and Eve rulers of the world. There was no distinction. Knowledge given to one when the other one did not yet exist is a responsibility to use that knowledge that has nothing to do with an inequality between the two.

Today God gives individual knowledge of His word in a special way that helps to protect the flock. Those who have knowledge are not unequal with the flock that they are protecting.

God has given me wisdom in working with the cults and many pastors have used that wisdom to become informed and to informed the Christians in their church. Does that make me better than the pastor who was not taught this information in seminary? Not at all. But I am still responsible for doing something with what God gives me. Individual knowledge never makes one person as better than another nor does it allow the person who has the knowledge to “rule over” others. Knowledge like this that has been given by God is meant to benefit the flock and all those who have been gifted are accountable in the way that they benefit others. If we hold back our gifts for our own use and refuse to give what we have to serve others, we will one day stand before God to give an account of ourselves and for our lack of faithfulness.

So, no, I do not believe that Adam had more authority. Adam had more knowledge of the nature of God and this knowledge gave him a responsibility that was very grave. Adam failed. We must not.

It seems you want to say Adam did indeed have a role or responsibility above that of Eve in protecting the garden, yet want to try and hold onto equality.

It was not a responsibility “above” that of Eve. It was a responsibility in line with the direct knowledge and experience of God that He had. For them to be unequal would entail a restriction on Eve in the equal knowledge or a responsibility of Adam over Eve. Neither of these are in the text, so we need to stick with what God wrote and He made them both rulers in the same way. Eve ruled in the garden in the same way that Adam ruled. Adam was just responsible for knowing evil because of the knowledge that he had.

I hope that helps!

John 6. I am going to start with only two verses because that should get this going. Mark, you can give your differing point of view as we go or you can go on to the next 2 or more verses.

John 6:1–2 (NASB)
1 After these things Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (or Tiberias).

There is a couple of important things that we can notice from the beginning of this passage. The first thing is that John says “after these things”. What things? We have to go back to chapter 5 to find out.

At the end of John 5 we find Jesus dialogging with the Jews that wanted to kill him (see John 5:18, 19) Jesus told them:

John 5:39–40 (NASB)
39 “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

We can see from Jesus’ words that these Jews were “unwilling” to come to Jesus. Jesus doesn’t say that God didn’t allow them to come, but that they were “unwilling” to come to receive life.

Why were they unwilling to come to Jesus? We can see from the beginning of the discussion with Jesus that they hated Him enough to want Him dead and Jesus goes on to say:

John 5:42 (NASB)
42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God in yourselves.

Jesus knew their hearts and Jesus said that in their hearts they did not have the love of God in them. These were the ones who did not fear God and did not love God. This important fact will come up again later in chapter 6.

In John 6:2, we see the next important thing that we need to pay attention to:

John 6:2 (NASB) A large crowd followed Him, because they saw the signs which He was performing on those who were sick.

Here we see the reason why the crowd is seeking Jesus. It is because of the “signs” which He had been performing.

Over to you, Mark.

Okay, I know I have something else to answer about a challenge I gave you, but I can’t find it right now an after spending all night answering questions and comments, I just want to get onto John 6 so that I can go to bed. It is after 2 am right now and I couldn’t go to sleep until I started what I promised. So the next comment will start the John 6 passage.

Mark,
You said:

“Let me quote from a position to see if you agree with it:

That man could not obtain saving faith of himself or by the strength of his own free will, but stood in need of God’s grace through Christ to be renewed in thought and will.

Is this what you believe?”
On the surface this might look ok but once you did deaper into the theology it is simply wrong.

I am not asking you to go beyond the quote. There has been a history of misrepresentation of what non-Calvinists believe. I was just asking you if you believe what the quote said. Yet you said “on the surface this might look okay”. It seems like if something doesn’t come from John Calvin, there is not truth in it. I am just amazed that you have come alongside me and agreed with me a lot at the end of our discussions.

Is this what you believe?

I think that it is well said. We have a need for God to work in our lives to bring us to the truth. Then we need to respond to God in faith so that we can be born again to a brand new life for salvation is never of or from us but only the work of our God.

Mark,
You said:

So we both agree that God draws, calls, opens eyes, soften hearts all before people accept the message of Christ. But yet i guess we still disagree that faith is a gift. I’m quite surprised actually that you don’t even believe grace is a gift.

In the passage, grace is not spoken of as a gift. God’s grace or His unmerited favor is why He gives us the gift of salvation, but the passage has one gift alone. It is singular not plural. One gift, not three. I believe that God inspired the Word this way so that we would not become confused. Can you imagine that worry of a person who is not sure if the faith they have is their own faith or whether it is God’s gift? It would cause many to wonder if they are really saved. The fact is that if we have faith in God it is the only kind of faith that we need and it will be accounted to us as righteousness. If it was a gift of God it wouldn’t need to be “credited” to us as righteousness, it would be “gifted”.

Can i ask is repentance a gift or not?

No, rather it is an assignment, an authority to carry out a task, an entrusting, a grant, an allowance. If God does not assign or allow repentance, no repentance can happen. When God hardens one’s heart, there is no allowance for repentance.

Also you did not define your view of God’s sovereignty. You simply asked me if God had the ability to make choices.

I am sure that I defined God’s sovereignty, but honestly I am too tired to go through the comments to find it. But I don’t have a problem refining.

God’s Sovereignty is the Divine Power to do whatever He wants to do that is not against His nature.

Psalm 115:3 (NASB)
3 But our God is in the heavens;
He does whatever He pleases.

Daniel 4:35 (NASB)
35 “All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
But He does according to His will in the host of heaven
And among the inhabitants of earth;
And no one can ward off His hand
Or say to Him, ‘What have You done?’

Whatever God pleases will never be unjust or unrighteous for that would go against His nature as God cannot sin.

Why is it people will go to such lengths when Romans 9-11 is so clear. You want me to reject the reformed position and accept a view that is not even found in the Bible. Come on now.

And Romans 9 – 11 is so clear to me that God does not do anything that goes against His nature and He is kind and merciful. When Romans 9 – 11 is studied from the Bible alone without the mindset of Calvinism, this passage is breathtaking in showing God’s mercy, not God’s unjust hatred of babies. Maybe we can get to that passage at some point.

With regards to the limited atonement, i wonder how you understand John 10, when Jesus himslef declares that he lays down his life ‘for his sheep’. Maybe you think God’s sheep is everybody, i dunno?

I just take Jesus at His word with His inspired words. Jesus said that He lays down his life for His sheep. I accept that. But did Jesus say that I lay down my life only for my sheep? If He didn’t, why would we add that in?

I wonder if you feel that the OT sacrifices atoned for the whole world? Is this what you believe, or was it limited?

Any person from any nation was allowed to join with Israel and they could be a part of the covenant.

Nothing in scripture teaches that Jesus atoned for the sins of every single person except the passages that use universal language.

Then why don’t you believe this language? Do you think that God could not have inspired the terms “died for the few” or “paid for the elect alone”? Was God trying to confuse us by using universal language or should we believe Him that He said that He meant?

Now we can have a more thorough discussion on that terminology but i think we both know the danger in placing a theology on universal language. After all, this is precisely what universalists do.

The universalists do much more. They teach that the death of Jesus bought the application of the price that Jesus paid. They do not believe in a two-fold sacrifice & application. This is where they go wrong. I spent months dealing with a universalist years ago who had crept in unawares to a Calvary Chapel church where he was recruiting for universalism. My friends were having him do “bible studies” at their home and one of them was being sucked in to the lies. I took on the guy head on as if I was a mother lion protecting her young. That experience was very educational for me. And the universalist did not win. The study was dismantled and he was forced to leave the church and my friends were saved from his influence.

You can’t have Jesus saying he only died for his sheep (limited) and that he died for the whole world (unlimited).

Where does Jesus say “only” His sheep. You see, this is the problem of Calvinism. It teaches you to read into the text what is not there. Jesus NEVER said ONLY His sheep. If I am wrong, please show me.

Clearly universal language is the more ambiguous, since the analogy of sheep and goats is quite clear.

No, universal language is not ambiguous. It is the truth that Jesus came to testify to. And certainly we know that the goats will be separated from the sheep in the end, but where did Jesus say that He didn’t die for the goats?

I have already shown one example from John to disprove the universal language assumption, but there are plenty more.

And I have already disproved your example. Unfortunately one has to come to the passage with a preconceived idea of what it says before your interpretation can even hope to stand. It isn’t what the passage says.

I agree, Cheryl’s analogy is worthless.(why is it Cheryl you used an analogy anyway after slamming Gazza’s earlier) That is precisely why i said her view of the atonement is also limited.

I don’t think that Gazza said “worthless”. He was asking questions not “slamming” me. And why do we have to use such language as “slamming”? We are having a passionate discussion here and we don’t need to introduce fighting words, do we? Let’s just keep this as a discussion between brothers and sisters in Christ. That is unless you really don’t believe that I am your sister in Christ. In that case you may just want to pray for God to grant me repentance and just leave the discussion alone.

Mark,
You said:

First of all i never called you a semi-pelagian. I asked you to show me how your view is not semi-pelagian, there is a difference.

Mark, when you present my view as what is semi-pelagian and then ask me to prove that I am not a semi-pelagian, it means the same to me. And it isn’t something new to me. I have heard non-Calvinists called semi-pelagian all the time. Sometimes I honestly wonder why Calvinsts would even consider us brothers and sisters in Christ. It is so divisive and I have seen so many people hurt. I have been hurt by my old pastor more than you can even imagine. I developed a stress related disease that the doctors said would never go away – all because of the persecution of Calvinism by someone who was supposed to love the sheep not eat them. The fact that I can even discuss these issues with a Calvinist and call them a brother in Christ is a miracle of God’s grace after what I went through.

From what you have written it seems that we somewhat are closer to agreeing than perhaps first thought. You have admitted that we need God to open the eyes of believers, which i think is good.

I think you mean unbelievers. Yes God needs to do that.

Here is where I feel very strongly. Please pardon me if I have already said this before….Some people think that they can delay accepting Jesus and putting their faith in Him until their last moments of life because, frankly, they want to live their lives for fun and for themselves and then take the escape hatch at the end. But what they don’t understand is that no one can come to God without Him drawing them. We cannot of ourselves conjure up saving faith. We cannot just snap our fingers and “decide” for God on our own. God said that now is the day of salvation:

2 Corinthians 6:2 (NASB) for He says,
“AT THE ACCEPTABLE TIME I LISTENED TO YOU,
AND ON THE DAY OF SALVATION I HELPED YOU.”
Behold, now is “THE ACCEPTABLE TIME,” behold, now is “THE DAY OF SALVATION”—

The fact is that God has to let us find Him because we cannot come to Him on our own accord:

Isaiah 55:6 (NASB)
6 Seek the LORD while He may be found;
Call upon Him while He is near.

Those who do not fear the Lord will not put their faith in Christ, thinking that they can have His favour anytime they want. But that is not true. God is not mocked.

Hebrews 12:15–18 (NASB)
15 See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be defiled;
16 that there be no immoral or godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal.
17 For you know that even afterwards, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears.

Repentance is not granted to someone who despised their birthright. For many there is no going back once God has hardened the heart. Today is the day of salvation for all but there is no guarantee of tomorrow if we harden our hearts today.

More to come.

Gazza #255,

David speaks of God knitting him together in his mothers womb (Psalm 139), God made David exactly who he was.He made David trust God right from the time he left the womb (Psalm 22). As our creator He makes us exactly who we are. I did not choose to love peaches and hate apricots – its simply who I am, my brother loves them both – that is who he is, it is how God has made us. In the same way was not the love of God part of who David was?

Yes, but David still had a choice. This is very much like another person who was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb. This was John the Baptist. But even with being filled with the Holy Spirit, John the Baptist had a choice whether to trust or not.

In Matthew 11:3 John expresses doubt about whether Jesus is the expected Messiah even though he had been filled with the Spirit from birth and his own birth had been prophesied in the OT.

Jesus uses this doubt to teach a very valuable lesson to his followers. Jesus said:

Matthew 11:4–6 (NASB)
4 Jesus answered and said to them, “Go and report to John what you hear and see:
5 the BLIND RECEIVE SIGHT and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THEM.
6 “And blessed is he who does not take offense at Me.”

Jesus not only gives the signs of His being the true Messiah, but he gives a message to John saying that the blessed ones are those who do not take offense at Him.

Was John without faith at this moment due to his own choice? Jesus said that anyone in the Kingdom was greater than John at that moment. Why? Because someone who is without faith is not in the kingdom.

Even though John had everything that one could get for earthly predestination – filled with the Spirit from birth, he was the messenger of the Messiah and he saw the Holy Spirit light on the Lord Jesus, still his earthly position and his being filled with the Holy Spirit from before birth was not enough to grant him faith as one who was given the “gift” of saving faith. He had to believe God for himself. And at that moment John was not believing.

Sure it was a choice he made – I am not disputing that David chose to stick by God in tough times when he could have turned his back. But why did he choose to trust God? Where did he choose to have such fortitude? Was it not part of who God made him to be- part of his character knitted by God Himself?

No. At some point it had to be David’s own faith. He could not inherit his faith from God.

Psalm 37:5 (NASB)
5 Commit your way to the LORD,
Trust also in Him, and He will do it.

The consistent message of Scripture is that we must trust in God and then He will do it. No matter how good our position is on this earth, no matter how privileged God has made us, we are still required to believe God on our own. If God could just put inbred faith into us as humans, so that we were saved without ever having to fight through our inner struggles between believing God or not believing Him, don’t you think that God would have created us all with ‘natural’ faith? God is a good God, not wanting to be unjust and so He has committed all of us to the place of sin so that all of us will be in the place of needing to trust Him. We are all equal in this way and God planned it that way.

This also fits with Romans 9 v20 “Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ We are who God made us to be, our choices are our own, they are the choices we want to make, when and how we want to make them. Yet God made us who we are, He chose what we would like and dislike, He chose what we would choose to do and not do.

While this is true of our earthly position and each of us has no choice regarding whether we were born or not and to whom and where and how much privilege we got, it is not true of salvation. God never said that He chose Jacob to be saved and Esau to be dammed. Don’t you think that God could have made this plain in Romans 9?

Romans 9:11–12 (NASB)
11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
12 it was said to her, “THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.”

Why did God say that his purpose was that “the older will serve younger” instead of “the older will be damned and the younger will be saved”? The choice of God was their earthly circumstances, not their eternal destiny. If even John the Baptist had to choice his eternal destiny, then why should we think that God chose Esau to be damned from the time that he was a baby in the womb?

WE DO CHOOSE our actions but they are only ever an expression of the nature God gave us. Thus we are accountable if we reject Christ – it is our free choice, but it is not a surprise to the God who defined our being as He created each of us our mothers wombs.

But God has not defined our eternal destiny by our nature.

What happened to John the Baptist?

Matthew 14:10–13 (NASB)
10 He sent and had John beheaded in the prison.
11 And his head was brought on a platter and given to the girl, and she brought it to her mother.
12 His disciples came and took away the body and buried it; and they went and reported to Jesus.
13 Now when Jesus heard about John, He withdrew from there in a boat to a secluded place by Himself; and when the people heard of this, they followed Him on foot from the cities.

When Jesus heard about John’s death, he withdrew to a secluded place by Himself. Was He mourning? I don’t know. The Scriptures don’t tell us. But what I do know is that John was not born saved. Even though he was given the Holy Spirit in the womb, he still had to believe God for himself.

This speaks a lot to me about not taking anything for granted. It speaks to me about being humble and knowing that what God has given us with privileges of having Christian parents and Christian families does not guarantee anyone’s salvation. We are like everyone else. We must believe God and fear Him and if we do we will be saved. If we don’t, it doesn’t matter that we were a prophesied person from the OT. John was born once as a baby with the Holy Spirit right there. But he too had to be born again of the Spirit to see the Kingdom of Heaven.

Gazza #253

You said:

I have a few questions mostly arising from 243:
1. In your understanding of the sacrifice requiring acceptance was it possible that as He died Jesus could not be certain even a single person would accept His death?

No that is not possible. God is not confined to time so He lives with us in the past, present and future so there has never been a doubt about who or how many will be saved. And Jesus even living as a man had assurance that His disciples would not be lost. He Himself kept them.

2. If you have purchased the certificate and not cashed it, it is worthless, despite the price having been paid. But if it requires me to cash it to have any value then surely that is works – I can now boast that I saw the value in the certificate while the non-believer did not cash theirs, can I not?

The certificate is not worthless at all. Let’s look at another example to understand this. If you opened up your billfold and pulled out a hundred dollar bill, is it worthless? Who would say that it was? But if it stayed in your billfold and you never used it to buy what you want is it worthless? No. It is never worthless. It’s value is not dependent on whether you turn it in to buy merchandise. It’s value is still there even in your wallet. The fact is not that the bill is worthless, but that it is ineffective to you if you don’t turn it in.

This is exactly what happens with the people in hell. Jesus died for them and the value of His death is not worthless. It is worth the same as when He died for them even while they are in hell. But for them His death is ineffective because they refused to meet God’s condition of faith to apply the price on their own behalf.

Does this make sense?

By the way I would like to thank you for the way you ask your questions. I do not feel attacked by you as a heretic or called names as if I was a semi-pelagian. You simply ask very thoughtful and gracious questions. I really appreciate this.