Author Archives: Dan C.

USA Divers Acknowledge Christ at the Olympics

Posted by Dan C. on

As reported by Townhall.com,

“A golden moment took place alongside the Rio Olympic diving boards Monday night. The Chinese team of Chen Aisen and Lin Yue may have taken first place, but U.S. divers David Boudia and Steele Johnson stole the spotlight in their NBC interview by giving all the glory to God after their silver medal-winning performance.”

I watched the Olympic event, listened to the interview, and I think it’s great that these athletes spoke of their identities in Christ when interviewed after winning their silver medal! At the same time, the headline at the Townhall article could have been more accurately written. Here’s the headline:

“USA Divers Tell NBC Reporter They Won Silver Medals Thanks to Their ‘Identity in Christ’”

That title seems to say that they won because of their identity in Christ, which is a different issue than what I actually heard. David Boudia, in a recently released book, expressed the pair’s sentiment during the interview:

“It’s totally freeing when I stay in tune with scripture,” Boudia said. “I don’t have to worry if I miss a dive. I go into competition and it’s like, ‘Praise God no matter what.’ If I do well, that’s awesome. I praise Him. If I don’t do well, praise Him even more. Competition looks way different now.”

The pair’s prevailing sentiment wasn’t that they won because they are Christians, which the article’s title can be interpreted to say. Rather, they said that self-identity ‘in Christ’, is more significant for them than their identities as Olympic medal winners. Ultimate significance is tied to our identity in Christ, not in being world class athletes or any other great achievement in this life. That’s the truth of the matter, as I see it.

Sometimes the ‘demonstrations’ of star athletes gives the impression that God somehow ‘made sure’ one of His kid’s took the medal, made the great play or touchdown, etc. I don’t think that we as Christians should be communicating that sort of message. There are plenty of ‘wolves in sheep suits’ out there that preach exactly that, that if you are a believer, you ought to be the best of the best at whatever you do.

The point I am making is that David Boudia and Steele Johnson communicated something of far greater significance than the title of a Townhall article suggested, and that’s important.

Food for thought.

Responding to Miracle Claims

Posted by Dan C. on

by Eric Davis at The Cripplegate

clip_image002“But I’m telling you, I saw it! I was there and it really happened.”

Often miracle claims are brought before us. Fairly regularly, I hear of things like local, impromptu, evangelistic, healing events during which individuals were approached at random, prayed over, and healed of some various physical ailment. The claim might be followed by an individual testifying sincerely that it happened or a video documenting the healing miracle as undeniable proof that the pain departed, the crutches dropped, or the oppression lifted. Excitement erupts. God is at work. The Spirit is moving. It’s a God thing. How could it not be?

But is it? How should we respond to these things? After all, well-meaning and sincere professing Christians saw it and documented it, so how could it be denied? Why wouldn’t the Holy Spirit want to do that? And doesn’t that mean that the Spirit wants to use us in such ways?

It’s astonishing how flippantly we Christians sometimes claim miracles. Scripture beckons us to exercise great caution here. In this order, here is how I would generally respond to a friend’s miracle claim:

1. It’s probably best to avoid denying the individual’s experience.

Usually, it’s more profitable to avoid playing the “that-didn’t-happen” card. Granted, it may not have. But this can quickly deteriorate into a, “No it didn’t!” “Yes it did!” ping-pong match. And, something very well may have happened (see #7, 8, and 9 below).

Instead of bringing our negation to bear on their experience, we owe it to the individual to bring the word of God to bear. That way, the authority of inerrant Scripture, rather than our “Nuh-uhh,” becomes the issue.

Further, it’s helpful to ask, “What do you mean by a miracle?” Child-birth, for example, though remarkable, is not a miracle. A miracle is when God works contrary to his established laws of creation (e.g. raising the dead).

2. God can do miracles and it’s ok to pray for them.

clip_image004And praise him that he has, can, and does. Our God sits in the heavens and does whatever he pleases. It has pleased him to divide seas and rivers, rewind days, and cease storms. And though nature miracles have been, for the most part, limited to a few small clusters of history (Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, and Christ and the apostles), spiritual miracles have not been. The greatest miracle is turning depraved spiritual corpses into regenerate children of God.

And it’s ok to pray for miracles. Whether it be a debilitating disease, traumatic accident, or salvation, it’s loving to pray for miracles in these kinds of situations.

But the argument typically goes beyond this: “So you’re saying that God can’t/won’t do miracles?!” The case seems closed because we never want to say that God cannot do something. But the discussion is broader than that. The existence of Scripture as God’s authoritative word has massive implications on proper understanding of life’s experiences, especially the miraculous. Speaking of which…

3. When it comes to miracles, or any experience, our experiences and perceptions must not be our interpretive authority.

Our interpretive authority is that criteria by which we interpret experiences and perceptions so as to make absolute conclusions about them. Generally, there exist two interpretive authorities; God’s word and everything else (e.g. human reasoning, a textbook, famous philosophers, majority opinion, false religion). For example, if I interpret every bad dream I have as Satan attacking me because a friend told me it was so, my interpretive authority is that friend, not Scripture.

In each stream of life, we exercise some interpretive authority. When it comes to experiencing and perceiving miracles, Scripture is to be our interpretive authority. Why? Because of what Scripture is; God-breathed revelation (2 Tim. 3:16-17, 2 Pet. 1:20-21). The repercussions of what Scripture is are major. Since it is God-breathed, it is inerrant, authoritative, and sufficient as our interpretive authority (Ps. 12:6, 119:89; Prov. 30:5; John 17:17; Titus 1:2; 2 Pet. 1:3).

Much of this boils down to, “How do we know what we know?” It’s a question of knowledge and authority. And I wish that more of my miracle-claiming friends would dwell longer on this matter because this is the heart of the issue. Far more than being about, “I saw it!” or, “Come on, don’t you believe God can do miracles?!”, this is about how we know what we know.

Since Scripture is the word of God, it is authoritative in determining what we know. It overrides everything as our interpretive authority. Which is to say, God’s interpretation overrides man’s interpretation, no matter how intense the experience was. So, before confidently attributing a miracle to a thing that God seems to be doing, we need be prepared to submit to Scripture.

clip_image006Consider an example. Imagine that you unexpectedly lose your job and are short $1500 for a month’s budget. So, you and three friends fast for one day. At the end of the day, you pray together for an hour on top of a local mountain. The next day, an anonymous check shows up for $1500. If we used experience as our interpretive authority, we would conclude that fasting with three friends for a day and praying for an hour on a mountain is the means to get big prayers answered. If we used Scripture as our interpretive authority, we would find no such formula. We would find that God is good, sovereign over all things, and does as he pleases. Also, we would find individuals sometimes failing to receive what they ask for in prayer (e.g. 2 Cor. 12:8-9). Would this mean that we cease fasting and praying? No, because Scripture contains commands for both. More generally, our correlations must go no further than what Scripture permits.

Even the miracle-working apostle Peter took this route. In 2 Peter 1:16-21, he recalls the incredible experience of Christ’s transfiguration. But he concludes that Scripture is the “more sure” authority and source of knowledge (2 Pet. 1:19). In effect, Peter is saying, “Look, the Bible, rightly understood, is to be my absolute guide in determining what I should conclude about my experiences.” By application, then, Peter would say to us, “You and others seem to have experienced some healings? Ok, I have some miracle experience. But, before you celebrate, ‘These are real miracles! And the Spirit is working through us!’ go to the thing that can tell you exactly how to understand your experience; the Bible. Because there is more going on here than you might think.” And Peter might say, “Are you more interested in submitting to everything that the Bible has to say about miracles or being able to believe and tell others that a miracle happened?”

Scripture is to form my conclusions more than my opinions, desires, and even experiences. And if not, then, whether intentionally or not, I am saying, “Well, God, yes, you have spoken about this issue by your Spirit. But, I do not want to take into consideration everything you’ve said. So, I am going to hold to my biased, poorly informed view on this matter and call it a ‘God thing’ anyways.”

But this will not do. We are prohibited from interpreting miracles in a way contrary to Scripture.

And if it is determined that a miracle did occur, praise God! Give him glory. And stay focused on what Scripture commands, which does not include the chasing of, or fixation upon, miracles.

4. No one has the spiritual gift of miracles and healing as defined in Scripture.

clip_image008This not to say that miracles never happen through people (see #’s 7, 8, and 9 below). But it is to say that no one possesses the gift of miracles and healing as it is described in the NT. It’s at this point that many of my charismatic friends walk away from the conversation. But I would urge them to honestly study the issue from Scripture.

When the first century closed, the spiritual concrete had been poured for the footers and foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20). All that Jesus did through the apostles was poured into the forms upon which our church rests today. The apostolic gifts, the miracles, the ecclesiological pioneering, the inspiration of the canon—it all rests in the foundation giving the stability of the church for some twenty centuries so far.

And on a lesser note, if individuals did possess the NT gift of healing and miracles, then they should be flown every day to a different ICU around the world.

5. Miracle claims should be verified.

If actual physiological miracle-healings are occurring, then let’s get medical professionals involved. Let’s have them pull up the records, confirm the previous ailment, and verify physiologically that the healing occurred. Go get the X-Ray, MRI, CT, or exam from your regular GP. Have them compare your last physical and verify that the “miracle” was indeed so; that it is not regressing or a temporary pain relief that is coming back or some placebo effect. That way, they can see it for themselves, and, more importantly, here about the Jesus who propitiated the wrath of God due their sin in order to give them the miracle of the new birth. But of course, if they will not believe the more-sure Scriptures, then neither will a miracle convince them (cf. Luke 16:31).

Claims of miracles ought to be verified so that glory can be given to God.

6. Biblical miracles had distinct characteristics.

Healing miracles in Scripture were profound displays of God’s power. We could define a biblical healing as God’s power demonstrated through a human mediator with the result that a specific physiological ailment was instantaneously, completely, and undeniably healed. They were not gradual. No follow-up healing appointments were required. And they typically involved a major display of power. Quadriplegics walked. The blind saw. The dead were raised

When Peter did miracles (Acts 3:8, 9:40), he was not shooing away aches, adding an inch to a leg, or lifting emotional clouds. Nor did he have to repeat incantations in the name of Jesus with increasing force and volume to warm up the Holy Spirit. With a word, God repaired spinal cords, neurons, atrophied limbs, and death. Thus, we should compare our miracle claims to those of Scripture.

7. Miracles can be performed by those who worship false gods.

The presence of legitimate miracles is no sign that it is a God thing. In fact, it could be a Satan thing.

clip_image009For example, prior to Israel’s exodus, the pagan Egyptian magicians were able to perform three of the miracles. They turned their staffs into snakes (Exod. 7:11-12), changed the Nile into blood (Exod. 7:22), and made frogs come up on the land (Exod. 8:7). And, during the Tribulation, Satan and his associates will perform various signs and wonders (cf. Rev. 13:3, 13).

I’ve heard miracle claims from both sides of redemption. For every one miraculous thing that someone’s uncle’s cousin’s co-worker’s son’s friend’s missionary friend whose name he can’t remember saw in an unverifiable African village in the name of God, there are three miraculous things that a close friend experienced in a verifiable pagan festival in our town in the name of Gaia. I’ve heard of many miracles from professing believers. And I’ve heard many from professing unbelievers.

I don’t know if these claims are authentic. But I do know this: Satan is an angel of light. He’s capable of doing powerful things through pagans. Unbelievers are, whether knowingly or not, servants of Satan. A miracle is not an automatic sign that God’s favor is among us.

8. God has used miracles to test individuals.

At times in history, God has permitted miracles, not to bless, but test. Israel was warned accordingly:

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God…” (Deut. 13:1-5).

In 1 Kings 22, God permitted a “deceiving spirit” to enter some 400 prophets to give false counsel.

And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ Now therefore behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has declared disaster for you” (1 Kings 22:19-23).

Though not a miracle per se, the incident demonstrates that God has permitted teachers who profess faith in him to be led astray by satanic influence for retributive reasons. In this case, 400 supposed teachers of God’s word were caused to falsely prophesy. All of this suggests that we should exercise restraint with miracle (and prophecy) claims.

9. Miracles in the name of Christ by professing Christians are no sign of the presence of salvation or true Christian worship.

One of the most sobering passages in Scripture comes from Matthew 7.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness’” (Matt. 7:21-23).

According to Jesus, not few, but many people assume that they are going to heaven, but will be turned away in the judgment. These will be individuals who professed Christ as Lord and performed “many miracles” in his name. They assumed that they believed in Jesus. They approached people, commanded healings in the name of Jesus, and experienced apparent miracles. Those were the things they often looked to and counted on as God’s blessing and the presence of the Spirit. However, Jesus says there will be a large number of such individuals who are sent to hell.

10. True signs of the Holy Spirit have nothing to do with miraculous healings.

Much of this issue centers on widespread, erroneous pneumatology in our day. Evangelicalism has capriciously assigned works to the Holy Spirit which God does not. Thus, it behooves us to carefully study who the Spirit is and what he does.

Miracles can be performed by devout pagans and Satan. Many individuals performing miracles in the name of Jesus will be turned away by Christ in the judgment. Therefore, the presence of miracles is no evidence that the Holy Spirit is at work.

11. Miracles were not part of Christ’s commanded mission, nor considered evangelism.

Often healing-evangelism is excitedly recounted as, “We were able to encourage many people with God’s healing love!” along with a report of the various healings. But more importantly, did those with departed back pain hear that God is willing to divert their due, eternal pain if they mourn their sin and surrender in faith to the Lord Jesus Christ? In other words, did evangelism occur? Which is to say, did we really love them?

clip_image011In the NT, the concept and doing of evangelism always has to do with preaching the content of Christ crucified in the place of sinful man that he might repent and be reconciled to God under the lordship of Christ. If our evangelism merely consists of telling people that God wants to heal and bless them, then we have fallen short of evangelism.

Proper understanding of miracle claims requires God’s word as our interpretive authority. A brief consideration of Scripture’s teaching on miracles demands we exercise caution with respect to their claims. We must interpret miracles in light of the many things which Scripture has to say about the matter. The miracle that we can say is the work of God with absolute certainty is salvation. Other than that, there are a variety of possibilities which must be carefully considered before we cry, “Miracle!”

How to Argue Against the Wicked Heresy of Calvinism

Posted by Dan C. on

Here are 7 principles for arguing against the heresy of Calvinism courtesy of Randy Siever. You can view Randy’s video here, in which he explains these essential principles.

1. Make sure you have misrepresented his (the Calvinist’s) position so badly that even he wouldn’t recognize it as what he actually believes.

2. Have a handful of proof texts you can use against their arguments.

3. Never ‘exegete’ passages of scripture in order to draw out what the human writer and Holy Spirit actually wrote.

4. You always want to share a part of the truth as if it is the whole truth and pretend that Calvinists don’t believe the part of the truth you stated.

5. Find areas where most Calvinists would disagree with Calvin and insist that they must believe everything Calvin had to say if they are really Calvinists.

6. Never quote a Calvinist in the context in which his comments actually occurred.

7. When all else fails, resort to name calling.

I encourage you to watch Randy’s video, available here.

Useful Links for Open Minds

Posted by Dan C. on

The following links represent the history of John Calvin & Calvinism. They are being posted due to my having received some comments lately from a few folks who really hate all things Calvin, mostly due to never having been exposed to honest and objective scholarship relating to reformed theology. I have published a couple of those comments but left others in moderation due to their vitriol and complete lack of intelligent thought (John Calvin was NOT the tyrant of Geneva, nor did he murder Michael Servetus).

I pray for the authors of those comments, that their minds and hearts would be open to actually considering John Calvin, his times & history, and the actual origins of reformed thought and theology.

Some or all of them might also be useful for those with open minds. Share them as much as you would like.

As a final note, know that I personally believe concerning the doctrines of sovereign grace was formed well before I engaged in serious study of Calvinism. In fact, it was reading the text of scripture that persuaded me that fallen men cannot and will not make a move toward Christ and the Cross unless God firstly divinely intervene in a person’s life and heart.

Enjoy!

Articles:

Why I Became a Calvinist

Cake or Death: How I became a Calvinist

Calvinism and Arminianism

False Views on John Calvin

John Calvin The man behind the name – Calvin College

John Calvin Leads Geneva Reform

John Calvin

John Calvin’s Geneva

The Geneva of John Calvin

The Origins of Calvinism

Theologian for the Ages: John Calvin

Was Geneva A Theocracy?

Who Was John Calvin and Why Was He Important?

 

Seminary level Audio Course Lessons are here. (I’ve listened to them all.)

YouTube course on Luther and Calvin is here. (I have not seen yet There are 35 videos.)

The Power of Idolatry

Posted by Dan C. on

I have long been puzzled by the demonstrated vitriol of many who rave and rant against John Calvin and Calvinism. These folks don’t just disagree with what is probably better defined as sovereign grace doctrine, they absolutely HATE it, blaming everything the hate about it at the fate of John Calvin, as if he invented the idea of sovereign grace and personally originated the much despised TULIP acronym, an idea proven completely false by any honest historian. I won’t get into the ‘poisonous flower’ (according to non-Calvinists) here; that’s a story unto itself. It’s the abject hatred to which I refer.

By now, I’ve managed to gather a rather large amount of the above mentioned vitriol, but I won’t get into the sordid details. Like I intimated, my question is “WHY such hatred?” In all of the documents I have assembled thus far, I haven’t found what I think might be the core issue, although I probably just haven’t found what is undoubtedly out there – somewhere.

You see, I’ve come to the conclusion, right or wrong, that the reason for all the hatred and vitriol against Calvinism is what I call the ‘assumption of libertarian free will’ that has become so ingrained in so much of today’s Protestant evangelicalism, that considering the opposite (the fallen human will cannot, nor will not ever choose Christ).

For the sake of argument, assume for a moment that my conclusion is correct. Now we must face the question of “WHY won’t so many even consider the possibility that the human will of fallen man might be incapable of choosing Christ?” After all, scripture seems very clear about such things. Take Romans 3:9-11, Romans 8:5-8, or 1 Corinthians 2:14 just for starters. If you want to go deeper into it just do an internet search on ‘the nature of fallen man’. I cannot fathom why anyone could read any of those passages and not wonder if the belief in complete natural free will is really true!

Back to my WHY question. “WHY won’t so many even consider the possibility that the human will of fallen man might be incapable of choosing Christ?” The simple answer is that they just don’t want to. But again, “WHY not?” Here’s where I make some people really mad. I think it’s a simple case of ‘idolatry’. You see, we hate it when that which we ‘worship’ is attacked or shown to be wrong or false. False idols don’t go down easy. We humans are a stubborn lot. And when one does come crashing down, we tend to find another, at least until God opens our eyes to our idolatry.

The ‘free will’ idol might just be the toughest and most firmly entrenched false God of American Christendom. To consider something is to examine every side and use the information obtained from reputable sources and only then come to conclusions. It’s a call to rational thinking, nothing more. My prayers are also to that end. I used to be ‘Ed’ a long time ago, but at some point I began serious study of the Bible and the history of John Calvin and Calvinism.

But like I said, false idols go down hard!

Before the Throne of God Above

Posted by Dan C. on

gracewriterrandy's avatarTruth Unchanging

Before the throne of God above I have a strong, a perfect plea;
A great High Priest, whose name is Love, who ever lives and pleads for me.
My name is graven on his hands, my name is written on his heart;
I know that while in heaven he stands no tongue can bid me thence depart.

When Satan tempts me to despair and tells me of the guilt within,
Upward I look, and see him there who made an end of all my sin.
Because the sinless Savior died, my sinful soul is counted free;
For God the Just is satisfied to look on him and pardon me,
Behold him there! the risen Lamb, my perfect, spotless righteousness;
The great unchangeable “I AM,” the King of glory and of grace!
One with himself, I cannot die, my soul is purchased by his blood;
My life is hid with Christ…

View original post 11 more words

The Importance of Biblical Language in Evangelism

Posted by Dan C. on

This one’s for my friend Ed, who seems to have missed the point of the earlier post about ‘accepting’ Jesus. When presented with a gift, the recipient will either accept it or reject. The point made by the source of the Gotquestions.com article seems to be that using the language of ‘accepting’ Jesus is the best way to “communicate the truth more effectively to someone with limited biblical understanding”. I disagree. The message of the gospel has to do with the problem of sin and the need to ‘repent and believe the gospel’ that Jesus died for our sins. As the original article stated, the language of ‘accepting Jesus’ is not found in scripture.

We need not worry about the ‘biblical understanding’ level or those to whom we present the gospel. Before anyone can understand the message of the gospel, God must open the heart to hear and respond, just as he did with Lydia in Acts, Chapter 16. When God opens a human heart to hear the gospel, salvation follows. On the other hand, a person can have tremendous biblical knowledge, and know the contents of the Bible from end to end, but completely misunderstand the gospel message, if God has not opened his heart to hear!

I remember hearing once a conversation about salvation between two ladies that was about ‘knowing’ you are actually saved. One of the ladies wanted to be sure she knew she was saved. What followed was extremely that went something like this:

Lady #1: “How can I know I am saved?”

Lady #2: “You accepted Jesus into your heart, didn’t you?

Lady #1: “Yes.”

Lady #2: “Well then, you’re saved.”

Lady #1: “Wow, I didn’t know it was that easy to save yourself!”

I’ll never forgot that lady’s exclamation. ‘Accepting Jesus’ language had her believing she had literally ‘saved herself’ by ‘accepting Jesus’, which is a logical, but dangerous conclusion and one that insults God. When there is a chain of events and the final act in the change (accepting Jesus) causes the ultimate result, it’s natural to make the conclusion even though earlier acts in the chain of events (Christ’s death for sin) were necessary for the end result.

So that’s how I see it. There is absolutely no way that using non-biblical language when presenting Christ. Whether it’s ‘accept Jesus’, ‘give your life to Jesus’, or any variation thereof, we need not fear using the Bible’s language for the Bible’s topic of salvation.

Why is “accepting Christ” mentioned in evangelism when it is not in the Bible?

Posted by Dan C. on

From Gotquestions.com

Question: “Why is ‘accepting Christ’ mentioned in evangelism when it is not in the Bible?”

Answer: Ever since the New Testament era, Christians have found the need to coin new terms to simplify or explain various doctrines. We reference the Trinity and the protoevangelium, although neither term occurs in the Bible. While “accepting Christ” is not a phrase found in the Bible, it does have a biblical basis, just as Trinity does.

Jesus and His followers often called salvation and the subsequent indwelling of the Holy Spirit a “gift.” For instance, Jesus told the woman at the well, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water” (John 4:10). Paul said, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).

 
By definition, a gift is not forced—but it must be accepted. A gift can be refused. John the Baptist said of Jesus, “He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. The man who has accepted it has certified that God is truthful” (John 3:32-33). The word accept here is a translation of the same Greek word translated “take” in Revelation 22:17: “Whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.” “Take,” “accept,” “receive”—this is what we are to do with the free gift of God. Salvation is offered, but we must accept the offer in order to receive the gift. Since we do this by exercising faith in Christ, the phrase “accept Christ” is simply shorthand for saying “place faith in Christ and receive His salvation.”

The goal of using terms like “accept Christ” is to communicate the truth more effectively to someone with limited biblical understanding. As long as a term is theologically correct and aids understanding, it need not be part of the biblical vocabulary. If, during evangelism, a certain term causes misunderstanding, then it’s good to jettison the confusing term and patiently explain the truth from Scripture. While the phrase “accept Christ” does not appear in the Bible, the concept of receiving a gift does, and the phrase seems to works well in most evangelistic contexts.

Recommended Resource: How To Book on Personal Evangelism by Larry Moyer

I’m afraid I must disagree with the last paragraph. How is ‘more effective’ to communicate Biblical truth by not using the Biblical terms? The Bible commands us to ‘repent and believe’, not merely ‘accept a gift’. In fact, it’s much easier to explain ‘repent and believe’ than supernatural ‘gift giving’, although it is correct to speak of salvation as a gift. In my opinion, the ‘accepting the gift’ approach outlined above fails to describe the true nature of the seriousness of sin! It places the sin issue on the back burner when it is the MAIN issue that needs to be addressed. As such, I think it does a great disservice to those we would want to lead to Christ in that it diminishes the very ‘gift’ of salvation! There is nothing wrong with speaking of salvation as a gift, however we must ‘keep the main thing, the MAIN THING’.

Any thoughts?

Who is God’s Candidate?

Posted by Dan C. on

There are two sermons by Dr. John MacArthur that probably should be mandatory listening for all of us. There are two parts:

Part 1: https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-489/who-is-gods-candidate-part-1

Part 2: https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-490/who-is-gods-candidate-part-2

They might not be what you expect :).

On a personal level, I’m frankly tired and disgusted by so many things I see and read  and hear concerning the current election cycle. God doesn’t have a ‘political party’. God is for God and his own divine purposes. It might be that either candidate, when elected, represent God’s judgment against our sinful nation. Think about it.