The Homeless Preacher

A preacher transformed himself into a homeless person and went to the church that he was to be introduced as the head preacher that morning. He walked around his soon-to-be church for 30 minutes while it was filling with people for service. Only three people said "Hello" to him, most looked the other way. He asked people for change to buy food because he was hungry. Not one gave him anything.

He went into the sanctuary to sit down in the front of the church and was told by the ushers that he would need to get up and go sit in the back of the church. (See James 2:2-4.) He said "Hello" to people as they walked in but was greeted with cold stares and dirty looks from people looking down on him and judging him.

He sat in the back of the church and listened to the church announcements for the week. He listened as new visitors were welcomed into the church that morning, but no one acknowledged that he was new. He watched people around him continue to look his way with stares that said, "You are not welcome here."

Then the elders of the church went to the podium to make the announcement. They said they were excited to introduce the new preacher of the church to the congregation: "We would like to introduce you to our new preacher." The congregation stood up and looked around clapping with joy and anticipation. The homeless man sitting in the back stood up and started walking down the aisle.

That's when all the clapping stopped and the church was silent. With all eyes on him, he walked up to the podium and reached for the microphone. He stood there for a moment and then recited so elegantly a verse from the Bible...

“Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.' Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'"

After he recited this, he introduced himself as their new preacher and told the congregation what he had experienced that morning. Many began to cry and bow their heads in shame. "Today I see a gathering of people here, but I do not see a church of Jesus. The world has enough people that look the other way. What the world needs is disciples of Jesus that can follow this teachings and live as he did. When will YOU decide to become disciples?"

He then dismissed service until the following Sunday.

His sermon had been given.

If this describes YOUR character and behaviour toward a homeless person in your church, or someone wearing shorts in your church, I suggest you REPENT, remove the log buried in your eye, and earnestly seek Christ Jesus to be Lord of your entire life so that you may imitate Him fully and completely WITHOUT hypocrisy and unbelief.

To Preach or Not to Preach

"Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it."
—Will Durant, Twentieth-century American Historian

Basically, the same disobedience committed by Israel when they possessed the Promised Land and were commanded by Yahweh to destroy all the other peoples was committed by the Christians in the fourth century and beyond—especially by the Roman Catholics. They adopted every form of paganism imaginable in an attempt to "convert" followers. Christians are supposed to remove all elements of sin from among themselves (Eph.5:3, et al.) and live holy lives (2 Tim. 3:12, et al.), living as lights to this dark world (Matt. 5:14-16, et al.). Our lives are the only 'Bible' some people will ever read, and yet we willfully and deliberately live as unbelievers and hypocrites, and then attempt to make excuses for the sin we continue to harbour in our lives. May Yahweh have mercy on our souls!

We ass-u-me there are all these "sermons" in the Bible, but in reality there are none. We call Jesus' instructions on what it looks like to live as His followers and to serve as members of Yahweh's Kingdom the "Sermon on the Mount," and we refer to Peter's speech in Acts 2 and Paul's speaking until midnight in Acts 20 as "sermons," because we are imposing our experience and understanding back upon the text. There were no "sermons" back then. The "sermon" has no roots in Scripture! It was borrowed from pagan culture, nursed, and adopted into the Christian faith. If you would like to debate this irrefutable historical fact, let's have at it! If you would like to learn more, pick up To Preach or Not to Preach by David C. Norrington.

While Augustine was the first person to title Matthew 5-7 as "The Lord's Sermon on the Mount," it was not generally referred to as "The Sermon on the Mount" until the sixteenth century. (Hmm... Notice how all the corrupt teaching the "Church" embraces was first taught by Augustine, quite often in contradiction to that which was taught, practiced, and believed for the first 300 years? Ponder that point promptly.) Not only were there no "sermons" back then, but a "sermon" was not the central focus of the assembling of the saints as it is today. They came together around a feast, in which they partook of the Lord's Supper.

The early New Covenant congregations (A.D. 30-300) did not listen to a 30-60 minute "sermon" based on a couple verses ripped out of their immediate context, with every word scrutinized for its potential meaning (and then choose the one that best fits with their beliefs and agenda), and a preacher spewing his opinion of what the section was teaching. It is important for us to remember that the early Christians shared the same languages, the same customs, and the same culture as that of the apostles. Being of the eastern mindset, they understood precisely what was spoken and written to them. Most of our preachers, having the mark of their particular seminary stamped upon them, engage in proof text methodology, eisegesis, and Scripture twisting when they attempt to convey the Word of Yahweh to the members of their particular organized religious institutions.

The "sermon" detracts from the actual purpose for which Yahweh designed the congregational assembly, and it has nothing to do with genuine spiritual growth. The New Covenant letters demonstrate that the ministry of Yahweh's Word came from the entire congregation in their regular gatherings (1 Cor. 14:26, 31; Rom. 12:4ff; Eph. 4:11ff; Heb. 10:25). From Romans 12:6-8, 15:14, 1 Corinthians 14:26, and Colossians 3:16, we see that it included teaching, exhortation, prophecy, singing, and admonishment. These gatherings were also conversational (1 Cor. 14:29) and marked by respectful interruptions (1 Cor. 14:30). They were not chaotic, as we might imagine such to be today, but were done in order. To be done in order does not mean to follow a pre-set structure that you never veer from. Exhortations from local elders (not the way we understand "elders" today) were normally impromptu, not planned out in advance.

When the saints of Yahweh assembled together, what did they do? Well, if we bother to pay attention to Scripture, it tells us in the plainest words possible. They read!

"Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!"" Exodus 24:7

"when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place which He will choose, you shall read this law in front of all Israel in their hearing." Deuteronomy 31:11

"Then afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessing and the curse, according to all that is written in the book of the law." Joshua 8:34

"Then Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the scribe, "I have found the book of the law in the house of the LORD." And Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan who read it." 2 King 22:8

"Moreover, Shaphan the scribe told the king saying, "Hilkiah the priest has given me a book." And Shaphan read it in the presence of the king." 2 Kings 22:10

"And all the people gathered as one man at the square which was in front of the Water Gate, and they asked Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses which the LORD had given to Israel. Then Ezra the priest brought the law before the assembly of men, women and all who could listen with understanding, on the first day of the seventh month. He read from it before the square which was in front of the Water Gate from early morning until midday, in the presence of men and women, those who could understand; and all the people were attentive to the book of the law." Nehemiah 8:1-3

"He read from the book of the law of God daily, from the first day to the last day. And they celebrated the feast seven days, and on the eighth day there was a solemn assembly according to the ordinance." Nehemiah 8:18

"While they stood in their place, they read from the book of the law of the LORD their God for a fourth of the day; and for another fourth they confessed and worshiped the LORD their God." Nehemiah 9:3

"On that day they read aloud from the book of Moses in the hearing of the people; and there was found written in it that no Ammonite or Moabite should ever enter the assembly of God," Nehemiah 13:1

"So you go and read from the scroll which you have written at my dictation the words of the LORD to the people in the LORD'S house on a fast day. And also you shall read them to all the people of Judah who come from their cities." Jeremiah 36:6

"Baruch the son of Neriah did according to all that Jeremiah the prophet commanded him, reading from the book the words of the LORD in the LORD'S house." Jeremiah 36:8

"Then Baruch read from the book the words of Jeremiah in the house of the LORD in the chamber of Gemariah the son of Shaphan the scribe, in the upper court, at the entry of the New Gate of the LORD'S house, to all the people." Jeremiah 36:10

"Micaiah declared to them all the words that he had heard when Baruch read from the book to the people." Jeremiah 36:13

"They said to him, "Sit down, please, and read it to us." So Baruch read it to them." Jeremiah 36:15

"Then the king sent Jehudi to get the scroll, and he took it out of the chamber of Elishama the scribe. And Jehudi read it to the king as well as to all the officials who stood beside the king." Jeremiah 36:21

"When Jehudi had read three or four columns, the king cut it with a scribe's knife and threw it into the fire that was in the brazier, until all the scroll was consumed in the fire that was in the brazier." Jeremiah 36:23

"Then Jeremiah said to Seraiah, "As soon as you come to Babylon, then see that you read all these words aloud," Jeremiah 51:61

"And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read." Luke 4:16

"After the reading of the Law and the Prophets the synagogue officials sent to them, saying, "Brethren, if you have any word of exhortation for the people, say it."" Acts 13:15

"For those who live in Jerusalem, and their rulers, recognizing neither Him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him." Acts 13:27

"For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." Acts 15:21

"Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching." 1 Timothy 4:13

"But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;" 2 Corinthians 3:14-15

"Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near." Revelation 1:3

If you are having a hard time with all the texts from the Old Covenant, then I suggest you pay close attention to 1 Timothy 4:13. To "exhort" is to encourage or advise. What is meant by "teaching"? Modern preachers would claim this means to dissect the Word of Yahweh into all its parts and "exposit" it. Considering "sound doctrine" (or "healthy teaching") to Paul had to do with your behaviour, your conduct (see Titus 2:1-10), and not what you believe, quite obviously "teaching" had to do with how to live rightly while sojourning in this world. Remember, we are called to be salt and light to the world around us. This is not our home, we are only passing through. Anyone who lives for this world is a fool!

In the Jewish synagogues, any member who wished could stand up and read to the people. Today, it requires a "specialist." When the early Christians assembled together, they would read an entire book or letter of the New Covenant. This exposes not only the short attention span of many members today, but also their lack of commitment to the Lord Jesus. Do you know how long it would take (on average) to read each of the books/letters of the New Covenant?

Matthew: 2.5 hours
Mark: 1.5 hours
Luke: 2.5 hours
John: 2 hours
Acts: 2.25 hours
Romans: 1 hour
1 Corinthians: 1 hour
2 Corinthians: 40 minutes
Galatians: 20 minutes
Ephesians: 20 minutes
Philippians: 14 minutes
Colossians: 13 minutes
1 Thessalonians: 12 minutes
2 Thessalonians: 7 minutes
1 Timothy: 16 minutes
2 Timothy: 11 minutes
Titus: 7 minutes
Philemon: 3 minutes
Hebrews: 45 minutes
James: 16 minutes
1 Peter: 16 minutes
2 Peter: 10 minutes
1 John: 16 minutes
2 John: 2 minutes
3 John: 2 minutes
Jude: 4 minutes
Revelation: 1.25 hours

The Israelites and the early Christians were more committed to the Word of Yahweh and the commandments of Jesus than most modern professing believers. Many today want out after 45 minutes to 2 hours, having done their religious "duty" for the week. They are eager to go engage in their worldly activities, affairs, and events. The early Congregation could spend the entire day with each other and they were joyful about it. They had young children, too, so that is an extremely poor excuse used by parents today. We tend to offer up a great many excuses as to why our lives are so shallow in comparison with the early Christians, or even Christians 500 years ago. Some of these Christians had 10 children and wrote volumes of Christian works, and we attempt to offer excuses as to why we don't or can't do the same as them with only two children! Even 100 years ago, they did not have the same distractions that we have today. Be self-controlled and deal with your distractions and you will find you have the same time Christians 100 years ago and more had.

If we pay close attention to the early Christians, we can witness a vacuum being created in the later half of the third century when mutual ministry faded from the Body of Christ. Members put more and more onus on their "leaders" and took less and less responsibility themselves. In such cases, abuse is bound to happen as certain types of people grab for that kind of power and influence. To fill this void, the clergy began to emerge and open meetings began to die out. The gatherings became more and more liturgical, devolving into a "service." During the fourth century, the Congregation had become fully institutionalized. As former pagan orators and philosophers converted to Christianity, rather than leave their philosophies behind, they began infiltrating the Christian community as these people became their leaders. Augustine is embraced by both Roman Catholics and Reformed Protestants alike, despite the vast plethora of false and heretical teachings he either developed or put his name to.

By the way, the concept of a "paid teaching specialist" was borne out of Greece, not Judaism. As noted Jewish rabbi Hillel said, "He who makes a worldly crown of the Torah shall waste away." It was the custom of Jewish rabbis to take up a trade so as to not charge a fee for their teaching. We see this evidence in the life of Paul. The early Christians considered it heresy to be paid to deliver the Gospel. Yet what do 99% of "churches" today do? They pay the preacher! Both Martin Luther and John Calvin vehemently railed against the idea that the Pope was the Vicar of Christ, yet both argued that the preacher is the "mouth of God." Funny how they set themselves up as their own popes over their own State religions. But I digress.

The "sermon" makes the preacher the virtuoso performer of the regular assembly, hampering or precluding the participation of other members, which stalemates spiritual growth and encourages passivity by preventing the Body from functioning as intended. If you doubt this, simply look at the scores of Christians who have been sermonized for decades are are still babes in Christ. We are transformed by encounters with the living Lord Jesus, not by information about Him. How can the preacher learn from other members of the Body when they are muted? How can the members learn if they cannot ask questions during the preacher's oration? If we pay attention to the New Covenant Scriptures, their goal is to get each one of us to function in order to mature (Eph. 4:11-16). The "sermon" lacks any practical value and does not equip the saints (regardless how much the preacher drones on about "equipping the saints for the work of the ministry," which is just empty rhetoric), but rather de-skills them. New Covenant-styled preaching/teaching equips the Congregation so it can function without the presence of a clergyman.

Being that today's "sermon" is highly impractical, how can a preacher speak as if he is an expert on something he has never personally experienced? Hearers should be put into a direct, practical experience of what has been preached. Sadly, this is rarely the case. Doctrine has to be practical: "doctrine that is according to godliness" (1 Tim. 6:3). Paul said, "let everyone that names the name of Christ depart from iniquity" (2 Tim. 2:19). Those who do not act according to this righteousness he says, "from such withdraw yourself" (1 Tim. 6:5). God cares more about our fruit than He does our particular theological dogma! As mentioned earlier, "sound doctrine" (or "healthy teaching") to Paul had to do with your behaviour, your conduct (see Titus 2:1-10). A practical "sermon" would convey as much, but more often than not they are designed to convince us to believe a certain belief the preacher holds dear, despite being unbiblical and lacking Christ.

If we rightly understood the Scriptures and the early Congregation, perhaps we would live better lives today, holy and not hypocritical. Our lives are the only 'Bible' some people will ever read, so we should live accordingly. We tend to willfully and deliberately live like the heathen and then offer up excuses as to why the power of Yahweh is not present within our lives.

"My speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's
wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: that your
faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."
—Paul of Tarsus in 1 Corinthians 2:4-5

How to Tell Time CORRECTLY!

If you want to discover just how easy it is to brainwash people and convince them of something that is 100% WRONG, look no further than telling time on digital media.

Despite modern delusion, 12:00 Noon was, is, and will always be 12:00AM, and 12:00 Midnight was, is, and will always be 12:00PM. Unfortunately, modern digital media reversed these and 99% of people have been none the wiser to it. They apparently forgot how they were taught to tell time in school. People today think Noon is 12:00PM; that you start counting with 12 and then go to 1 and 2 and 3... How retarded is that? Who counts this way?!?!?

One second after midnight was always the start of the new day (even with the 24-hour clock). For Noon, old clocks either displayed 12:00AM until the first minute after, changing to 12:01PM, or they displayed AM until 1:00, changing to PM.

Each number from 1 through 12 is the top of the hour. What this means is that when the clock turns 10:00, the 10th hour has arrived. 10:01 belongs to the 11th hour. If your brain is not able to comprehend this, think about your birthday. From the day you are born until you turn 1 is your 1st year. The first day after you turn 1 is part of your 2nd year, which culminates when you turn 2. Everything after you turn 1 is not part of your first year. Understand now?

It is the same in understanding centuries. The 1900s are referred to as the 20th century. Why? Because from 1901 until 2000 is the 20th century. From year 1 until year 100 was the first century. Are you beginning to understand?

Modern digital media royally screws this up. They have each 12-hour period start counting with 12:00, moving to 1, then 2, then 3... Who counts this way?!?!? They attempt to begin with the top of the hour rather than to end with it. When stores say they're open until 12:00PM (mistakenly thinking this means Noon), they are actually saying they are open until Midnight!

Think of the 24-hour clock. From Midnight on is 00:## until the top of the hour, when it changes to 01:00. This tells you how many hours have passed since the start of the day. Modern digital media wants us to believe that 12:00 Noon begins the 13th hour culminating with 1:00 (or 13:00 on the 24-hour clock). It is called AFTER-Noon for a reason. Noon is the culmination of the 12-hour count from the beginning of the day. Ergo, as it has always been, Noon is 12:00AM!!! 12:01 belongs to the first hour of the afternoon, which culminates with 1:00PM. Midnight is the top of the hour for the 12th hour of the afternoon, which means that as it has always been, Midnight is 12:00PM!!!

12:00 Noon has always been 12:00AM. The top of the first afternoon hour culminates with 1:00PM. We start counting with 1, not with 12!!!

Even Paul Brians' 'Common Errors in English Usage' acknowledges this modern error in the ability to tell time correctly:

"AM/PM
"AM" stands for the Latin phrase Ante Meridiem—which means "before noon"—and "PM" stands for Post Meridiem: "after noon." Although digital clocks routinely label noon "12:00 PM" you should avoid this expression not only because it is incorrect, but because many people will imagine you are talking about midnight instead. The same goes for "12:00 AM." you can say or write "twelve noon," "noon sharp," or "exactly at noon" when you want to designate a precise time.
It is now rare to see periods placed after these abbreviations: "A.M.," but in formal writing it is still preferable to capitalize them, though the lower-case "am" and "pm" are now so popular they are not likely to get you into trouble.
Occasionally computer programs encourage you to write "AM" and "PM" without a space before them, but others will misread your data if you omit the space. The nonstandard habit of omitting the space is spreading rapidly, and should be avoided in formal writing."

The Christian Era

"The Christians Era should properly begin with the year Christ was born; and in devising it, the intention was to have it begin with that year. By the "Christian Era" is meant that system upon which calendars are constructed, and by which historical events are now dated in practically all the civilized world. But the originator of the system made a miscalculation as to the year (in the calendar then in use) in which Christ was born, as the result of which the year A.D. 1 was fixed four years too late. In other words, the Lord Jesus was four years old in the year A.D. 1. [This explains the grave error and colossal blunder of Christians who mistakenly claim that Jesus was crucified in A.D. 33, despite all the evidence. So today's correct year based on this is not 2024 but 2020!]

"The mistake came about in this way: The Christian Era (i.e. the scheme of dates beginning A.D. 1) was not devised utnil A.D. 532. Its inventor, or contriver, was a monk named Dionysius Exiguus. At that time the system of dates in common use began from the era of the emperor Diocletian, A.D. 284. Exiguus was not willing to connect his system of dates with the name of that infamous tyrant and persecutor. So he conceived the idea of connecting his system with, and dating all its events from, the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. His reason for wishing to do this was, as he wrote to Bishop Petronius, "to the end that the commencement of our hope might be better known to us, and that the cause of man's restoration, namely, our Redeemer's passion, might appear with clearer evidence."

"For the carrying out of this excellent plan, it was necessary to fix the date of the Incarnation in the terms of the chronological systems then in vogue. The Romans dated the beginning of their history from the supposed date of the founding of the city (ab urbe condita or A.U.C. as usually abbreviated). Dionysius Exiguus calculated that the year of our Lord's birth was A.U.C. 753. He made his equivalence of dates from Luke 3:1, "now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar" etc., at which time Christ was 30 years of age according to Luke 3:23. But it was ascertained later that a mistake of four years had been made; for it clearly appears by Matthew 2 that Christ was born before the death of Herod, who died in 749 A.U.C. Tiberius succeeded Augustus, Aug. 19, A.U.C. 767. Hence his 15th year would be A.U.C. 779; and from those facts Dionysius was right in his calculation. But it was discovered in later years that Tiberius began to reign as colleague with Augustus four years before the latter died. Hence the 15th year mentioned by Luke was four years earlier than was supposed by Dionysius, and consequently the birth of Christ was that many years earlier than the date selected by Exiguus, which date has been followed ever since. This must be allowed for in any computation of dates which involves events happening before Christ.

"We have now found, according to our reckoning, that Christ was born An. Hom. 4041. Therefore, His crucifixion, when He was in His 34th year, would be 4041+34=4075. This is equivalent to 30 A.D.; and to get the true measure of years of any event in our era from the Incarnation it is necessary to add four years to its accepted date. [That would put us at ~6069 A.H. (Anno Hominis, year of man or year of humanity).]

"To get the corresponding date in terms of B.C. for any event of Old Testament history, it is only necessary to deduct the years An. Hom. from 4046. For the birth of Christ being 4041 An. Hom. and the Christian era four years later, then B.C. 1 would be equivalent to 4045 which is 4046-1."

—Philip Mauro, The Wonder of Bible Chronology

Christians Do Not Celebrate Christmas!

Kirk Cameron can ignorantly attempt to defend his idolatry of Christmas by engaging in proof text methodology, eisegesis, and Scripture twisting, but biblical Christians know better.

Let those outside of true and spiritual Israel have their Winter Solstice and Saturnalia back, which still includes the date of its celebration, the evergreen tree, holly and ivy decorations, yule logs, wreaths, mistletoe, orb decorations, candles and lights, human-shaped cookies, singing from house to house, and gift giving.

Is it not funny how this passage sounds an awful lot like a description of the pagan celebration of Christmas?

"Thus says Yahweh, "Do not learn the way of the nations, and do not be terrified by the signs of the heavens although the nations are terrified by them; for the customs of the peoples are delusion; because it is wood cut from the forest, the work of the hands of a craftsman with a cutting tool. They decorate it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers so that it will not totter. Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field are they, and they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot walk! Do not fear them, for they can do no harm, nor can they do any good."" Jeremiah 10:2-5

Jeremiah wrote in the 7th century B.C. Note that cutting down and setting up a tree is termed "the way of the nations [heathen, KJV]." Note also how Yahweh commanded that we are to "not learn the way of the nations." No matter how you attempt to dice it, this is idolatry, which violates the commandment against idolatry.

Not only was Jesus not born on December 25th, but the early Christians of the first three centuries never celebrated Jesus' birth; only His resurrection (which has nothing to do with the pagan celebration of Easter). After the false conversion of Emperor Constantine and his subsequent turning Christianity upon its head, many errors were introduced and pagan practices were adopted by the "Church" in an attempt to "Christianize" them. The idea to celebrate Jesus' birth was first birthed (no pun intended) during the 4th century by Pope Julius I, and was done in an effort to adopt and absorb the traditions of pagan festivals such as Saturnalia. Pagan elements were supposed to be renounced entirely when people came to Jesus, but the Catholics retained them, and their attempted defenses of this are illogical and weak.

In the Middle Ages, Christmas (Christ Mass) celebrations were rowdy and raucous, a drunken carnival-like atmosphere similar to today's Mardi Gras. In the 17th century, religious reform in Europe and America cancelled and outlawed Christmas. Are you aware that until the 19th century, Christmas was mostly observed by Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, and Episcopalian congregations? Americans began to really embrace Christmas in the 19th century, Christmas first being declared a federal holiday on June 26, 1870. To fill the cultural needs of a growing nation, Americans re-invented Christmas by changing it from the raucous carnival holiday it had been and turning it into a family-centered day of peace and nostalgia. As Americans embraced Christmas, old customs were unearthed. Christmas is now widely celebrated by all denominations, and even by atheists and followers of other religions. Its modern popularity is due to its worldly seductions, pleasures of gifts, and entertaining symbols. Let me be clear: The adoption of this practice has nothing to do with the worship of King Jesus!

As someone who professes to be a follower of Christ Jesus, if you are celebrating Jesus, ask yourself why you are doing so by use of pagan elements. Why would you want to associate Jesus with pagan festivals and celebrations? Why would you want to participate in the same decorations that are clearly associated with these pagan festivals and celebrations? Is this how you learned Christ? Is this what you think of Jesus? You are engaging in idolatry and are not even aware of it. Ask yourself if fellowship, prayer, and instruction consume the majority of the holiday for families who celebrate this pagan holiday, or if presents and worldly conversations do.

If you claim to hold to "sola Scriptura," I challenge you to find the word "Christmas," or even the occasion of the celebration of Christmas, in the Scriptures. You will find no such thing! Professing Christians who pose ridiculous questions such as "What could possibly be wrong about celebrating Christ? Isn't it great to want to celebrate Him? Who wouldn't want to do that?" are clearly ignorant of Yahweh's Word and His Commands. They likely do not even know Him. Yahweh determines when and how we worship and celebrate Him. For you to associate Him with pagan festivals and celebrations and engage in the same decorations is to marry Him to pagan practices.

'Christmas' might begin with 'Christ,' but keep Christ out of Christmas as Jesus is not the reason for the season. He was never in Christmas to begin with and it has nothing to do with Him nor His birth!

Two Great Eras

Yahweh's holy Word, the Bible, does not distinguish seven "dispensations," as the cult of Dispensationalism teaches, but two great eras. This is seen in a number of ways:

First, the Bible is split into two great divisions: the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Why did I say 'Covenant' and not 'Testament'? Because not only does the word "testament" never occur even once in the Old Covenant, but also because the correct interpretation for the Greek diatheke (διαθηκη) is "covenant." It should always be translated as "covenant."

Second, a period of 400 years separates these two great divisions, between the last book of the Old Covenant and the first events recorded in Luke 1.

Third, Yahweh's dealings with men in two great eras is clearly witnessed in a number of passages of Scripture. "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached" (Luke 16:16). "For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ" (John 1:17). "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2).

From the last passage, it is clear that there are two different eras: (1) "in time past," and (2) "in these last days." This is verified further from the writings of the New Covenant authors. Observe:

"'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says, 'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND; AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY, AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS, AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;'" Acts 2:17

"Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come." 1 Corinthians 10:11

"But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come." 2 Timothy 3:1

"Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure!" James 5:3

"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you." 1 Peter 1:20

"Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts," 2 Peter 3:3

"Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour." 1 John 2:18

We have been in the "last days" for the past 2,000 years. The next event to occur is the Second Coming of King Jesus. There will be no "Millennial Kingdom." Everything about this nonsensical belief, and Jewish myth, is illogical. Not to mention that 2 Peter 3:10 completely obliterates the possibility for this belief. When Jesus returns, everything is going to be burned up. So where does it leave this seventh "dispensation"? When Jesus returns to judge the world in sin and righteousness, eternity begins.

As if that was not clear enough, it is acknowledged in Hebrews 9:26 that the period of Jesus' First Coming and of His sacrifice belongs to "the end of the ages": "Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation [end] of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." Dispensationalists place in the "dispensation" of law so that they can separate His words (particularly His Teaching on the Mount) from us, Yahweh's children. Perhaps this is why they believe that the believer does not have to repent or be obedient, attempting to label them as "works" because, like most believers, they have no clue what Paul was addressing.

It is time believers started acting like the Bereans and searching the Scriptures, paying attention to what is actually said—in context, rather than blindly believing what some preacher behind a pulpit, or a "study" Bible, has to tell them. Stop outsourcing your intellect and faith and start proving yourself "a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth."

Jesus on Non-violence

From the very beginning, Christians had always renounced war, violence, and killing of every sort. However, from the fourth century onward, and especially within American "Christianity," men opposed the teachings of Jesus and attempted to use Scripture to justify their perverse and godless thinking and behaviour. One ignorant clown, Jeffrey Mann, attempts to argue that it is a "myth" that Jesus taught and practiced non-violence. Anyone who thinks this has never read the Scriptures and quite obviously refuses to submit to and be obedient to Jesus' commands.

Jesus said that Christians are to be peacemakers. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God" (Matt. 5:9) But He does not stop there. "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kings of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you" (Matt. 5:10-12). How were the prophets persecuted? They were violently assaulted and/or put to death! Followers of Jesus are to be peacemakers, following the path of peace (Rom. 12:18; Heb. 12:14; cf. 2 Cor. 13:11; Gal. 5:22; James 3:17).

Jesus' position on non-violence was made abundantly clear in His Teaching on the Mount. "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you" (Matt. 5:38-42). This was not just about one's honour being assaulted. Paul explained this further when he said, "Never pay back evil for evil to anyone" (Rom. 12:17), and then quoted from the Old Testament: "But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heap burning coals on his head" (Rom. 12:20).

Jesus went even further: "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:43-48).

Why were you commanded to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"? The answer is crystal clear: "So that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven." Scripture reveals that Jesus did not just teach these things, but practiced them (Matthew 10:23; 26:51-53; Luke 4:28-30; John 8:49; 10:39). This operates on the principle found in Romans 13:10: "Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."

Jeffrey Mann ignorantly argues, "This sweet sentimental notion of love would surely denounce locking people in cells for decades. We could never imprison murderers. Should we all simply forgive them when they do awful things? This clearly cannot be what Jesus intended." This demonstrates his vast ignorance of reality, and of Scripture. He makes a great many assumptions and conclusions drawn from assumptions. Yes, Christians are to forgive. See Matthew 18:21-22. The government, however, is to met out justice. That is their role. The government puts people in prison according to their laws. If someone murders a member of a Christian's family, the Christian is to forgive them while the law is to judge and condemn them. There is no opposition or contradiction here, save for the ignorant and unlearned.

Jesus also said, "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell" (Matt. 5:21-22). Jesus expanded the meaning of this command by revealing the spirit of the law against taking human life. He showed that it is not just the physical act of murder that breaks the command, but inner anger and hostility toward others also breaks it. The apostle John made clear this teaching: "Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him" (1 John 3:15; cf. 1 John 2:9-11).

When Jesus was going to travel through Samaria on His way to Jerusalem, a route that would typically be avoided by Jews, the Samaritans refused to receive Him. "When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, "Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?" But He turned and rebuked them, and said, "You do not know what kind of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." And they went on to another village." (Luke 9:54-56). Jesus rebuked His disciples because violence was to have no place in their practice or in their hearts.

On the night of His arrest, "Simon Peter then, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's slave, and cut off his right ear; and the slave's name was Malchus" (John 18:10). What was Jesus response? "Put the sword into the sheath" (v.11). "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword" (Matt. 26:52). He then healed the man's ear.

Jesus taught how to prevent violence and cut it off at its origins by teaching His followers to love their enemies (Matt. 5:43-45). By refusing to see anyone as an enemy, the violence that begins in the heart is stopped before it can fester. If and when violence should break out, Jesus taught how to use practical transforming initiatives that intervene and stop the escalation of violence (Matt. 5:38-42). Jesus taught how to attack and overcome the causes of violence through civil resistance—non-violent direct action. Jesus taught and modeled the way to reconcile a community after it has been ravaged by violence and division in order to bring the community back together again (Matt. 18:15-17, 20; 18:21; Luke 23:14). Jesus demonstrated how to defend both the innocent and guilty with non-violent action instead of violence (John 8:4-10). Jesus taught how to build a community and culture of non-violence as an antithesis to regimes of domination through violence. He taught and modeled how to live a life of non-violence to the full, and to the end. If you love your neighbour and your enemy, you will do nothing but good to him. No matter what he might do to you, you are commanded to love him.

Out of his ignorance, Jeffrey Mann argues, "While the idea of Jesus as the paragon of niceness and non-violence sits well in our imaginations, it is not true to the historical individual; it is not fair to those who serve in our militaries; and it is not helpful in working through the complex ethical questions that we must struggle with in a violent world."

Jeffrey Mann knows nothing of the historical individual of Jesus. Yes, the teaching of non-violence is fair to those who serve in our militaries because those who profess to be Christian should not be doing so! At least not in a capacity where it involves taking the lives of others. The early Christians lived in a world that was more violent than our own and yet they obeyed the teachings of Jesus and did not seek violence against those who sought to violently assault them. Nowhere in the New Testament or the first three centuries of the early Christians will you find advocacy for "self-defense"! Jesus does not differentiate between "being persecuted for your faith" and "being violently assaulted," and neither did the early Christians. All violence was repudiated: "Never pay back evil for evil to anyone" (Rom. 12:17). Jeffrey would do well to educate himself on history instead of spewing his perverse anti-Christ nonsense.

Jeffrey would do well to not only read the Scriptures and pay attention to the teachings of Jesus, but also to pay attention to the first three centuries of Christian believers who took Jesus' teachings literally. Christians refused to serve in the military, and if they were already serving in the military when they got saved, they sought another position within it so that they did not have to violate their consciences. Until the heretic Augustine, biblical Christians who were obedient to the teachings of Jesus would rather suffer a harm than to harm another individual. "Self-defense" was not a legitimate argument! Ignorant people attempt to dismiss the legitimacy of non-violence by asking a person who believes in such ridiculous questions like, "What would you do if someone broke into your house and wanted to rape and murder your wife or daughter? To do nothing makes you worse than the perpetrator, does it not?" They erroneously assume that the only way to protect someone threatened with violence is with intervening violence. They neglect to explain Jesus' intervening for the woman caught in adultery and the multitude that wanted to stone her to death. Jesus did not respond with violence in order to protect her.

Augustine, the Roman Catholics, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the like are not the authority on this issue. If you desire to understand the biblical truth, you must pay attention to the teachings of Jesus and the actions of His disciples who were the recipients of those teachings. Out of his sheer ignorance, Jeffrey Mann (and those like him) references where Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers in the Temple as his "proof" that Jesus engaged in violence. When Jesus did this, He alluded to Isaiah 56:3-8 to remind the leaders that the Temple was meant to be the city on the hill whose light would reach all nations, and added an allusion to Jeremiah 7:1-14 (itself delivered from the gate of the Temple) to warn against relying on ritual purity if accompanied by social injustice.

Maybe Jeffrey should learn how to read Scripture in context when it is addressing those who wield the sword and met out the justice of God. Paul is writing to Christian believers and telling them to submit to the secular authorities because God has instituted them. People like Jeffrey read into this text what is not there and impose their own godless ideas upon it.

Both the early Christians of the first three centuries and the Anabaptists taught and practiced non-violence, and their numbers grew as a result of the persecution they endured. If you are a Christian, American, America is not your home. You are a stranger and a sojourner here. Your citizenship is in Heaven, and as such you should be behaving in a manner that is reflective of being an ambassador thereof.

Let us review what the early Christians had to say on the issue, shall we:

"Christians … love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life.  They are poor, yet make many rich;  they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonored, and yet in their very dishonor are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless;  they are insulted, and repay the insult with honor; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life. They are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred." —Letter to Diognetus

"We who formerly murdered one another now refrain from making war even upon our enemies" —Justin Martyr

"For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more" [Is. 2:3]. And that this did come to pass, we can convince you. For from Jerusalem men went out into the world, twelve in number and these illiterate, of no ability in speaking; but by the power of God they proclaimed to every race of men that they were sent by Christ to teach to all the word of God. Now we who used to murder one another do not only refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ. For that saying, "The tongue has sworn but the mind is unsworn" [a justification for lying used in Justin's time], might be imitated by us in this matter. But if the soldiers enrolled by you, who have taken the military oath, prefer their allegiance to their own life, parents, country, and all kindred, though you can offer them nothing incorruptible, it would be truly ridiculous if we, who earnestly long for incorruption, should not endure all things in order to obtain what we desire from him who is able to grant it." —Justin Martyr

"We who were filled with war, mutual slaughter, and every wickedness have each, through the whole earth, changed our warlike weapons—our swords into ploughshares and our spears into implements of tillage. In their place, we cultivate godliness, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father himself through the One who was crucified." —Justin Martyr

"We have learned not to return blow for blow, nor to go to law with those who plunder and rob us. Instead, even to those who strike us on one side of the face, we offer the other side also." —Athenagoras

"For when they know that we cannot endure even to see a man put to death, though justly; who of them can accuse us of murder or cannibalism? Who does not reckon among the things of greatest interest the contests of gladiators and wild beasts, especially those which are given by you? But we, deeming that to see a man put to death is much the same as killing him, have abjured such spectacles. How, then, when we do not even watch, lest we should contract guilt and pollution, can we put people to death? And when we say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder and will have to give an account to God for the abortion, on what principle should we commit murder?" —Athenagoras

"For we are not to delineate the faces of idols, we who are prohibited to cleave to them; nor a sword, nor a bow, since we follow peace." —Clement of Alexandria

"The Christian does no harm even to his enemy." —Tertullian

"God puts His prohibition on every sort of man-killing by that one inclusive commandment: 'You shall not kill.' " —Tertullian

"They will inquire concerning the works and occupations of those who are brought forward for instruction. If someone is a pimp who supports prostitutes, he shall cease or shall be rejected. If someone is a sculptor or a painter, let them be taught not to make idols. Either let them cease or let them be rejected. If someone is an actor or does shows in the theater, either he shall cease or he shall be rejected. If someone teaches children (worldly knowledge), it is good that he cease. But if he has no (other) trade, let him be permitted. A charioteer, likewise, or one who takes part in the games, or one who goes to the games, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. If someone is a gladiator, or one who teaches those among the gladiators how to fight, or a hunter who is in the wild beast shows in the arena, or a public official who is concerned with gladiator shows, either he shall cease, or he shall be rejected. If someone is a priest of idols, or an attendant of idols, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. A military man in authority must not execute men. If he is ordered, he must not carry it out. Nor must he take military oath. If he refuses, he shall be rejected. If someone is a military governor, or the ruler of a city who wears the purple, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. The catechumen or faithful who wants to become a soldier is to be rejected, for he has despised God. The prostitute, the wanton man, the one who castrates himself, or one who does that which may not be mentioned, are to be rejected, for they are impure. A magus shall not even be brought forward for consideration. An enchanter, or astrologer, or diviner, or interpreter of dreams, or a charlatan, or one who makes amulets, either they shall cease or they shall be rejected. If someone's concubine is a slave, as long as she has raised her children and has clung only to him, let her hear. Otherwise, she shall be rejected. The man who has a concubine must cease and take a wife according to the law. If he will not, he shall be rejected." —Hippolytus

"To those who inquire of us from where we come, or who is our founder, we reply that we have come agreeably to the counsels of Jesus. We have cut down our hostile, insolent, and wearisome swords into plowshares. We have converted into pruning hooks the spears that were formerly used in war. For we no longer take up 'sword against nation,' nor do we 'learn war anymore.' That is because we have become children of peace for the sake of Jesus, who is our Leader." —Origen

"Who among the believers does not know the words in Isaiah? "In the last days the mountain of the Lord shall be revealed, and the house of the Lord on the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills. All nations shall come to it. Many people shall go and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us his way, and we will walk in it." For out of Zion shall go forth a law, and a word of the Lord from Jerusalem. He shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people. They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more [Isa. 1:2-5]." —Origen
[The early Christians used Isaiah 1:2-5 so regularly that every Christian was familiar with it, believing this passage to be fulfilled by Jesus and His apostles who brought the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem to the entire world, creating a kingdom that lived in peace and refused warfare.]

"Christians do not attack their assailants in return, for it is not lawful for the innocent to kill even the guilty." —Cyprian

"The whole world is wet with mutual blood, and murder, which in the case of an individual is admitted to be a crime, yet is called a virtue when it is committed wholesale. Impunity is claimed for the wicked deeds, not on the plea that they are guiltless, but because the cruelty is perpetrated on a grand scale." —Cyprian

John 6

Here are a Calvinist's favourite verses from John 6:

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out." (v.37)

"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day." (v.44)

"And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."" (v.65)

The problem here is that the Calvinist is proof-texting, eisegeting, and twisting Scripture with these verses, forcing them to say and teach something they simply do not. If you have read some of my previous blog articles, you know that I used to use these verses out of context as well, having been seduced and convinced that Calvinism was "biblical."

So what is the context? Well, the audience to whom Jesus is speaking is a group of unbelieving Israelites looking for free food (vv.25-31), and the twelve apostles (v.70). Jesus provokes the Jewish religious leaders with extremely difficult teachings, telling them to eat His flesh and drink His blood (vv.51-58), without so much as an explanation or any clarification. Verses 60 and 61 indicate clearly the difficulty of these teachings for His audience. Verse 66 even records for us that "many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore" because of these difficult teachings. Jesus does not attempt to persuade them to stay. Instead, He provokes them purposefully. All this contextual information aids the reader of John 6 in the correct interpretation.

Calvinists fail to consider the first-century context and meaning of Jesus' words, instead imposing upon His words their already preconceived idea of unconditional, effectual salvation of pre-selected individuals. They over-emphasize verse 37 as it relates to verses 39-40, arguing that God has pre-selected a particular number of people to draw irresistibly while leaving all others without any hope of responding to His appeals for reconciliation. They miss the vital contextual clue provided in verse 38: "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." And what is the will of Him who sent Jesus? "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

What was Jesus to do while He was "down from heaven"? What was God's will for Him to accomplish, other than to die for us? God's will was not for Him to be a great evangelist and win thousands to faith (as Peter would at Pentecost), but for Him to train a select group of Israelites in order to carry the Gospel to the rest of the world and establish His Congregation after He had risen from the dead. Jesus was teaching this group of men how to love one another, live in community with each other, and have unity in all things. He was teaching them to imitate Him.

God had selected the Jews to carry the Word of God to the nations (Is. 49:6; Rom. 3:2; 9:5). Jesus, in fulfilling God's will, had entrusted the truth to a select few from Israel while the rest were being hardened in their already-calloused, self-righteous, stubborn condition.

Nowhere is there mention of an inward, irresistible calling or work of regeneration to convince the apostles to remain faithful. In fact, after the other disciples walked away, Jesus turned to the twelve and asked them, "You do not want to go away also, do you?" (v.67). The twelve had been with Jesus every step of the way, witnessing the miracles, having the parables explained to them, etc. They were already well-convinced of who Jesus was, which is why Peter said, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God" (vv.68-69).

If John 6:44 means what Calvinists claim it means, especially individuals like James White who argues that the "him" who is called is the same "him" who is raised, then how do they explain John 12:32, without trying to explain it away? "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself."

Ephesians 1

Ephesians 1 is another favourite passage of the illiterate Calvinist where they focus too much attention on the first twelve verses. The very first verse tells us that Paul's audience was "the faithful in Christ Jesus." The "in Christ" theme introduced in the opening sentence continues through this entire section of the text, repeated ten times in thirteen verses. The Calvinist contends that pre-selected individuals were chosen before the foundations of the world and predestined to become believers. However, that is not what the text says.

Does Paul ever actually say that certain individuals were predestined to believe in Christ?

Does Paul ever actually state that God chose particular individuals to be effectually placed in Christ?

Does Paul ever actually state that Christ redeems individuals so they might irresistibly be placed in Him?

Of course not! So what does the text say? Paul speaks of what "the faithful in Christ" (v.1) have been predestined to become—not about God pre-selecting certain individuals before the foundations of the world to be irresistibly transformed into believers. Paul teaches that those "in Him" have been predestined to become "holy and blameless" (v.4) and "to be adopted as sons" (v.5). Paul is speaking of what the believer is chosen to become. "He predestined us ["the faithful in Christ" (v.1)] for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ" (v.5). In other words, whoever believes in Him is predestined to become "holy and blameless in His sight" (v.4), which parallels Paul's teaching in Romans 8:29, which states, "He also predestined ["those who love God" (v.28)] to become conformed to the image of His Son."

"Just as" (v.4) means "to an equal degree; in the same way; at the same time." To an equal degree, in the same way, and at the same time, what is said in verses 3, 4, and 5 are all true. They are conditioned upon being "in Christ." This is what was determined for those who are and remain "in Him."

According to Paul, believers "wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies" (Rom. 8:23), because that is what believers have been predestined to become, provided we abide in Christ. If we continually remind ourselves that the "us" being referenced through this chapter are "the faithful in Christ" (v.1), then the apostle's intention, and the context, becomes quite clear. Before the foundations of the world, God has predestined us, the faithful in Christ, to become holy and to be adopted. That is all the text says! Anything else is being imposed upon it through eisegesis.

Believers are not fully adopted until they take up residence in the home of the one who has adopted them. This is where most professing Christians confuse the future with the present in their bankrupt theologies. Until such a point, believers look forward with great anticipation to their adoption (as seen from Romans 8:23).

When Paul speaks of "we" and "us" in the first 10 verses, he includes all Christian believers. Verses 11-12 apply to the people of Israel, whom Paul identifies himself with, being a Jew. This is in distinction from the "Gentile" believers ("you also") to whom he speaks of in verse 13. Calvinists should pay attention to this verse in particular: "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation." Were individuals included in Christ before the foundation of the Earth? No! Paul said it was "after listening to the message of truth."

Paul continues, "having also believed, you were marked in Him." Were individuals marked in Him before the world began and without regard to their response to the Gospel? No! Paul states clearly that they were marked "in Him" when they believed the message of truth.

Ephesians chapter 1 is not about God predetermining which individuals will be in Christ; this passage is about God predetermining the spiritual blessings for those who are in Christ through believing the word of truth (vv.1-3). Romans 8:29 says that God "also predestined ["those who love God"] to become conformed to the image of His Son." It says nothing about predetermining who will believe! Calvinists need to learn how to read. If they did, they would not be embracing and teaching the heresy that was first taught by the Gnostics and rejected by the early Christians (A.D. 90-300).

Romans 8:28-9:33, Part 1

This is by far the Calvinist's favourite passage to use to shore up their theological beliefs. Context is important. Therefore, it is important that we examine the verses leading up to this passage as they reveal that Paul is reflecting on the problem of evil and suffering in our world since the beginning.

"For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now." Romans 8:20-22

Paul is not talking primarily about salvation in this passage, as Calvinists have interpreted it. Rather, he is talking primarily about the way in which God is healing the whole creation. By approaching this passage the way the Calvinist has, they end up skipping over Romans 8:18-27, which is about the renewing of creation. Again, context is important. The Calvinist needs to learn this important lesson.

In Romans 8:28, the Greek verb οιδα ("we know") is a perfect active indicative form of the verb, which indicates a knowledge gained by observance or remembrance of the past. Paul is saying that believers know, from God's past dealings with those who love Him, that He has a mysterious way of working things out for the greatest good. As Hebrews 12:1 tells us, "we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us." By observing the stories of the saints of old, we can rest in the knowledge that this is true. For example, consider Joseph. What his brothers meant for evil, God was able to take and redeem for good. God has been doing this for generations, so we can take comfort in this. We (believers) know what is true of God because we can observe it from the past for those who have loved Him.

Verses 28 and 29 shift the focus to providing comfort for those in suffering by reminding them to observe God's faithfulness to those who have loved God throughout history. This truth is not applicable to everyone, but an observation for "those who love God," those who are "in Christ."

According to heretic John Calvin, God is the author of evil deeds:

"...how foolish and frail is the support of divine justice afforded by the suggestion that evils come to be, not by His will but by His permission...It is a quite frivolous refuge to say that God otiosely permits them, when Scripture shows Him not only willing, but the author of them..."

God does not cause occurrences of evil for His purposes. "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone" (James 1:13). Rather, God redeems occurrences or moral evil for a good purpose, just as He did with Joseph. Calvinists should really learn how to read and pay attention to language. "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive" (Gen. 50:20). This agrees with the proverb: "The mind of man plans his way, but Yahweh directs his steps" (Prov. 16:9). God redeemed their evil intentions and used them for a good purpose. God did not determine their evil intentions and then determine to clean up His previous determination. That is nonsensical and utterly ridiculous.

Observe this correct statement from Calvinistic preacher John MacArthur:

"But God's role with regard to evil is never as its author. He simply permits evil agents to work, then overrules evil for His own wise and holy ends. Ultimately He is able to make all things—including all the fruits of all the evil of all time—work together for a greater good."

The focus of Paul's observation is on the saints of old, those from the elect nation of Israel who were called to fulfill God's plan to redeem His creation from its groans and sufferings. This does not mean that the truth being revealed is not applicable to those of other nations. It simply means that what is proven to be true of God by observing His dealings with those called out from Israel throughout history will also be true of anyone who follows and loves the God of Israel. By reflecting on God's past dealings, we can know what to expect in His future dealings.

"Those God foreknew" is not talking about knowing something ahead of time. This reveals Paul's focus on the saints of old: those saints God knew previously. Paul is seeking to provide evidence of what he has just said, and this focus continues for the next three chapters. Calvinistic preachers like John Piper are dishonest regarding the various options for the meaning of προγινώσκω:

Option #1: God foresaw our self-determined faith. We remain the decisive cause of our salvation. God responds to our decision to believe.

Option #2: God chose us—not on the basis of foreseen faith, but on the basis of nothing in us. He called us, and the call itself creates the faith for which it calls.

These preachers ignore and overlook the most basic meaning of this word, which means "to know previously." The same Greek word is used by Paul and Peter in the following passages:

"So then, all Jews know my manner of life from my youth up, which from the beginning was spent among my own nation and at Jerusalem; since they have known about me for a long time, if they are willing to testify, that I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion." Acts 26:4-5

"You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness." 2 Pet. 3:17

Clearly this word can be (and is) understood simply as knowing someone in the past, as in knowing those saints of old previously. God "foreknew them" or "knew them of old" or "knew them previously." Why do Calvinists insist on playing mental gynmastics and avoiding the simple context? Paul is telling the Christian believers he sent to Rome to plant a congregation that because we have seen how God worked all things to the good for those whom He knew before, we know that He will do the same for those who love and obey Him now. Paul is simply referencing those saints from the past whom God had known and faithfully cared for throughout the generations.

"Paul was not referring to some prior knowledge in the mind of God before creation. Nor was He speaking about predetermining their fate. He was referring to those whom God knew personally and intimately, men like Abraham and David.

The term 'foreknew' does not mean to have knowledge of someone before they were conceived. The verb προέγνω is the word for 'know' (in an intimate sense) with the preposition προ (before) prefixed to it. It refers to having an intimate relationship with someone in the past... Literally, we could render Rom. 8:29 as follows: 'For those God formerly knew intimately, He previously determined them to be conformed to the image of His Son.

The individual saints of old, with whom God had a personal relationship, were predestined by Him to be conformed to the image of Christ. That is, God predetermined to bring their salvation to completion by the sacrifice of Christ on their behalf." —Tim Warner

Paul began speaking about the futility and suffering that has come into the world due to the fall of humanity into sin (vv.20-22). He then comforts the lovers of God in his audience by reminding them of God's trustworthiness for those who have loved Him throughout the generations. Paul reminds his readers that God will redeem the suffering an evil for a good purpose in their lives just as He has done in the lives of those known previously. It is these people (Israelites who loved God in the past) who were predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ.

N. T. Wright states:

"Here is the note of hope which has been sounded by implication so often since it was introduced in 5:2: hope for the renewal of all creation, in a great act of liberation for which the exodus from Egypt was simply an early type. As a result, all that Israel hoped for, all that it based its hope on, is true of those who are in Christ."

In verse 30, Paul explicitly uses past tense verbs. When writing these words, Paul and his readers (including you and I) had not yet been glorified. Paul clearly does not have in mind the future glorification of all believers. The past tense suggests Paul is referring to former generations of those who loved God and were called to fulfill His redemptive purpose. Calvinists must explain away the use of past tense verbs: "Glorified is in the past tense because this final step is so certain in God's eyes it is as good as done."

This is known as reaching, because in Romans 8:17 Paul does not speak of glorification as a past and completed action in reference to the believers in his day. Contrary to what many Christians believe today, our glorification is qualified upon the conditioned of our perseverance until the end, which numerous passages express. If it was "as good as done" due to God's predetermination, then why would Paul (or Jesus, or the rest of the New Testament) make such a qualification and use the future tense of the same verb? Moreover, Paul speaks of our eager expectation of glorification in verses 22-25. Are we to believe that Paul shifts from speaking of glorification as a future hope for those who persevere to speaking of it "as good as done" for those who have not yet been glorified?

If you, as a Calvinist, object to προγινώσκω referring to the saints of old who loved God, then you should consider Paul's use of the same word three chapters later:

"But as for Israel He says, "ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE." I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew." Rom. 10:21-11:2a

Paul continues to make his case:

"Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? "Lord, THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE." But what is the divine response to him? "I HAVE KEPT for Myself SEVEN THOUSAND MEN WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL."" Rom. 11:2b-4

Nothing in this or any other text supports the concept of God in eternity past pre-selecting certain individuals out of the mass of humanity for irresistible and effectual salvation. Since Romans is written to veteran "Gentile" Christian believers Paul had selected from the various congregations he had planted and sent to Rome in order to establish a congregation there, it would make sense for him to comfort them by referring to the faithfulness and trustworthiness of God with regard to the saints of old (i.e., men like Abraham and David).