Friday, December 23, 2011
Christmas: Christian or Pagan? (Jim McClarty of GCA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtuIqFZOXBY in this video Pastor Mcclarty explores the origins of some of our Christmas traditions and its pagan influences that modern Christianity has adopted.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Debate with a Seventh Day Adventist on Predestination Christopher Cunningham VS Don De Bono
Recently I was challenged on Facebook by a Seventh Day Adventist to debate on the issue of Predestination and the bible the following is the exchange that took place. There were brief moments were I became agitated with my oponent and lost my temper but I feel I was able to position soundly.
Don De Bono (Negative)
Christopher Cunningham (affirmitive)
Don De Bono Calvinists use the absence of freewill to justify their love of sin, so they can listen to music and watch movies that depict sin, grow their hair, live like the world. i have the freewill to turn the TV off!
Christopher Cunningham no don that’s a straw man argument. First off you stated Calvinism denies man hope of salvation this is false. God draws people to salvation via his son Jesus John 6:37-44 all the father draws will come to repentance and saving faith Ezekiel 36:-26 and he uses the foolishness of preaching to do it. Also show me one Calvinist who is happy to be in sin sanctification is a process Phil 1:6 we make mistakes along the way but God grows us and we put these things to death Colossians 3:5.
Don De Bono if they're predestined then there’s no hope who those are predestined for hell
Christopher Cunningham There is no hope for us who are saved if it was not for God's mercy Romans 9:21 says God will have mercy on whom he has mercy. Why did not God spare the 7 nations in Duet 7 or the Canaanites who were exterminated?
Christopher Cunningham The bible says in Romans 9 the Israel of God is like the sands of the seashore who God has called out a remnant who will be saved.
Christopher Cunningham Let me ask you this does God know all things beforehand?
Christopher Cunningham Famous Calvinist have preached the gospel whom God used to bring salvation Spurgeon, Tope lady, Whitefield etc.
Christopher Cunningham Unregenerate man will not hear the gospel apart from God he is dead to sin and the wrath abides on him Ephesians 1 Romans 3:9-19 it is God who must transform him to be made willing John 3:5-6 6:37-44 and verse 65.
Don De Bono just cause he know it beforehand done mean he predetermines it. slice n dice it anyway you like, if predestination is true then god has created most people for no purpose other than to send them to 'eternal hell' with no chance of salvation
Christopher Cunningham Man by his carnal mind and heart must be soft to open his eyes to the gospel. It was God who opened the eyes of Lydia in Acts who heard Paul's preaching.
Christopher Cunningham again you have skipped over my argument .Further you said he does not predetermine well the problem is God predetermined to send his son to die before the foundation of the world as it says in Revelations long before man was created.
Christopher Cunningham your argument makes the mis application of Fatalism which is an event that has no purpose or cause. God is the cause and he does have a purpose all his divine glory is shown in the mercy of his people and administrating justice in punishing evil.
Christopher Cunningham That’s in Romans 9:20-23. The riches of his glory is made known in full.
Christopher Cunningham Don I don’t care for philosophical presuppositions as an objection to the doctrine of election the bible is the final authority on the matter. Just cause you don’t like it and see it as unfair does not negate the bible teaches it.
Christopher Cunningham God is sovereign in all things weather nations and kingdoms Daniel 4:35 or salvation Jonah 2:9 Ephesians 2:8-10
Christopher Cunningham you also skipped over Duet 7 and God's dealing with the pagan nations in regards to election and his divine wrath.
Christopher Cunningham God also chose Israel beforehand as a nation set apart out of all the nations around them. So your saying he can choose Israel out of his own will but he can’t do so in salvation of man?
Don De Bono say what you will, all his purpose is according to you is sending people to hell with no chance of escape.
Christopher Cunningham Don you have not address my arguments and putting words in my mouth by strawmaning and misrepresenting what I said.
Don De Bono I’m not putting words in anyone's mouth im talking about Calvinism as a whole
Christopher Cunningham Yes you are you stated I believe God sends people to hell with no escape and thats not my position or anyone who is a Calvinist would say.
Christopher Cunningham And I gave you biblical evidence to show it. So dont assume and make claims without biblical evidence.
Christopher Cunningham Merely saying I said something is rhetoric and circular reasoning.
Christopher Cunningham You claimed I had no evidence for my position.
Christopher Cunningham Now stop dodging my arguments and try to address them.
Christopher Cunningham an your whole tirade on hell is addressed in Romans 9:21-23 among other passages.
Don De Bono it’s not the Calvinist position? tell me than simply, how can a person who has been 'predestined to hell' have a chance of escape? and enough of the 10 replies in a row hey?
Christopher Cunningham Your claims were addressed in the passages I posted Don in the previous statements please address those I will not post anymore till you give counter argument.
Don De Bono it’s based on common sense. the bible teaches of a just God of love. This is the God whom Christ revealed. 'Predestined to hell' is a direct contradiction.
Christopher Cunningham God is love yes but you forget he is wrathful and full of anger with the wicked everyday Psalm 5:5 Psalm 7:11 and in vengeance on his enemies 2 Thess 1:8-9. Will he pour out. Isaiah 14:24 Jehovah of hosts hath sworn, saying, surely, as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand. So we see God has a purpose for their destruction even before the foundation of the world if God had his son prepared before the world then his wrath was as well, you cannot get around that.
Don De Bono Yes I do, god is love. God is just. God sent Christ so that whosoever believes... we can play whose verse wins till the cows come home but it’s the overall theme of the NT that takes precedence.
Christopher Cunningham Don you have not answered my scriptures which I believe proved my point Don emotional rhetoric and simple labeling true sound biblical doctrine of predestination as fatalism and hyper Calvinism is not a defense. all I hear is that’s not fair and oh that’s not loving.
Don De Bono no not not fair, just an understanding of the true character of god, which Calvinism misrepresents.
Don De Bono Calvinists makes the mistake of using flawed human reasoning when interpreting the Bible (such as texts like Rom 8.7 Eph 2:1. Col 2:13) which I know are Calvinist cliché verses. Calvinism, I feel, turns faith into a work, which it is not. Romans 10:13 says "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Don De Bono It stands to reason than that whoever is calling on God and is being saved, must have been given the ability to respond to the call from God. The Holy Spirit brings certainty to the soul and supernaturally enables man to respond. God knows who will respond, this doesn’t mean he ‘predestines it’ Verse 17 of the same chapter says “"So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. “So obviously when a person hears the word of God, the Lord makes it possible for him to believe and accept it. This does not mean that man is contributing to his own salvation by agreeing to the truth that the Holy Spirit has enabled him to understand.
Christopher Cunningham Don you cannot defend your position and have not. you may claim victory for the mere fact of non-participation but the fact of the matter is you have only proved my point in that man cannot submit in full to God because his flesh and carnal mind do not want to be subjected to it Romans 8:7 so he creates the idol of his freewill that he may boast in his righteousness but as Paul says when the flesh comes under God's control and spirit takes control that is removed and transformed Ezekiel 18:21-31 36:25-26.
Christopher Cunningham Don I have not used human reasoning but have allowed the text to speak for themself. You quote Romans 10 which actually refutes you because God through preaching draws his people to him it does not refute me it actually proves my point that apart from the working of God in declaring the gospel his people cannot be saved whom he will draw.
Christopher Cunningham The same type of phrase is used with Paul preaching to Lydia in which her eyes were opened because God drew her by his spirit and gave her the fullness of truth. Once more Don ad hominems and straw man are not a defense.
Don De Bono If God has already elected those who are going to heaven, then why evangelize, seek to be saved, or even follow God's path?Your traditional Calvinist would proclaim, "Because God told us so!" But if God has already elected those who will be going to heaven, no amount of influence from Christians will change who is elected or not. Evangelism may be the means of how God saves the elect, but our conscience decision to not evangelize will not affect the elect.The interesting counter-argument would be when Calvinists say to non-Calvinists, "But why bother evangelizing... God already knows if a particular person will ever accept the message or not." But, as will be discussed below, this is argument is a fallacy due to the lack of comprehension of time.
Christopher Cunningham I already addressed your argument multiple times over and over with scripture concerning this and anyone else can see I have given evidence. You keep attacking straw man arguments red herrings and attacking me personally. Now are you going to give scripture and not philosophical objections parroted by a typical Arminian?
Don De Bono I have just shown you scripture that refutes you.
Don De Bono If God predestined everything, and then God created sin.
This is where Calvinists disagree among themselves. There are several camps; some that believe every little detail has been predestined, those who believe that God predestined all major events (including salvation), and those who believe that God only predestines those who will be saved. I suppose this point would address the first camp; If indeed God did predestine every little thing, then God did create sin. He caused man to act a specific way knowing in advance what it would lead to.
Christopher Cunningham You gave me one proof text is all. Don I’m not interested in copy and paste from something you found. Engage and defend your position.
Don De Bono what specifically do you want me to defend
Don De Bono it’s not like i could convince you anyways your minds made up, no one convinces anyone on here it’s not the right format for it’s just a soap box
Christopher Cunningham Don you made the charge if you cannot back up your statements with evidence which is what the group is about do not make them as proverbs says those who bring charges without reproof will be as a fool.
Don De Bono really because I find it a poor argument against the whole theme of the bible.
Christopher Cunningham Don what bible evidence did you bring?!
Christopher Cunningham Don since you have nothing worthy to say further in this debate we are finished and I will allow the viewers to decide and read the post.
Don De Bono (Negative)
Christopher Cunningham (affirmitive)
Don De Bono Calvinists use the absence of freewill to justify their love of sin, so they can listen to music and watch movies that depict sin, grow their hair, live like the world. i have the freewill to turn the TV off!
Christopher Cunningham no don that’s a straw man argument. First off you stated Calvinism denies man hope of salvation this is false. God draws people to salvation via his son Jesus John 6:37-44 all the father draws will come to repentance and saving faith Ezekiel 36:-26 and he uses the foolishness of preaching to do it. Also show me one Calvinist who is happy to be in sin sanctification is a process Phil 1:6 we make mistakes along the way but God grows us and we put these things to death Colossians 3:5.
Don De Bono if they're predestined then there’s no hope who those are predestined for hell
Christopher Cunningham There is no hope for us who are saved if it was not for God's mercy Romans 9:21 says God will have mercy on whom he has mercy. Why did not God spare the 7 nations in Duet 7 or the Canaanites who were exterminated?
Christopher Cunningham The bible says in Romans 9 the Israel of God is like the sands of the seashore who God has called out a remnant who will be saved.
Christopher Cunningham Let me ask you this does God know all things beforehand?
Christopher Cunningham Famous Calvinist have preached the gospel whom God used to bring salvation Spurgeon, Tope lady, Whitefield etc.
Christopher Cunningham Unregenerate man will not hear the gospel apart from God he is dead to sin and the wrath abides on him Ephesians 1 Romans 3:9-19 it is God who must transform him to be made willing John 3:5-6 6:37-44 and verse 65.
Don De Bono just cause he know it beforehand done mean he predetermines it. slice n dice it anyway you like, if predestination is true then god has created most people for no purpose other than to send them to 'eternal hell' with no chance of salvation
Christopher Cunningham Man by his carnal mind and heart must be soft to open his eyes to the gospel. It was God who opened the eyes of Lydia in Acts who heard Paul's preaching.
Christopher Cunningham again you have skipped over my argument .Further you said he does not predetermine well the problem is God predetermined to send his son to die before the foundation of the world as it says in Revelations long before man was created.
Christopher Cunningham your argument makes the mis application of Fatalism which is an event that has no purpose or cause. God is the cause and he does have a purpose all his divine glory is shown in the mercy of his people and administrating justice in punishing evil.
Christopher Cunningham That’s in Romans 9:20-23. The riches of his glory is made known in full.
Christopher Cunningham Don I don’t care for philosophical presuppositions as an objection to the doctrine of election the bible is the final authority on the matter. Just cause you don’t like it and see it as unfair does not negate the bible teaches it.
Christopher Cunningham God is sovereign in all things weather nations and kingdoms Daniel 4:35 or salvation Jonah 2:9 Ephesians 2:8-10
Christopher Cunningham you also skipped over Duet 7 and God's dealing with the pagan nations in regards to election and his divine wrath.
Christopher Cunningham God also chose Israel beforehand as a nation set apart out of all the nations around them. So your saying he can choose Israel out of his own will but he can’t do so in salvation of man?
Don De Bono say what you will, all his purpose is according to you is sending people to hell with no chance of escape.
Christopher Cunningham Don you have not address my arguments and putting words in my mouth by strawmaning and misrepresenting what I said.
Don De Bono I’m not putting words in anyone's mouth im talking about Calvinism as a whole
Christopher Cunningham Yes you are you stated I believe God sends people to hell with no escape and thats not my position or anyone who is a Calvinist would say.
Christopher Cunningham And I gave you biblical evidence to show it. So dont assume and make claims without biblical evidence.
Christopher Cunningham Merely saying I said something is rhetoric and circular reasoning.
Christopher Cunningham You claimed I had no evidence for my position.
Christopher Cunningham Now stop dodging my arguments and try to address them.
Christopher Cunningham an your whole tirade on hell is addressed in Romans 9:21-23 among other passages.
Don De Bono it’s not the Calvinist position? tell me than simply, how can a person who has been 'predestined to hell' have a chance of escape? and enough of the 10 replies in a row hey?
Christopher Cunningham Your claims were addressed in the passages I posted Don in the previous statements please address those I will not post anymore till you give counter argument.
Don De Bono it’s based on common sense. the bible teaches of a just God of love. This is the God whom Christ revealed. 'Predestined to hell' is a direct contradiction.
Christopher Cunningham God is love yes but you forget he is wrathful and full of anger with the wicked everyday Psalm 5:5 Psalm 7:11 and in vengeance on his enemies 2 Thess 1:8-9. Will he pour out. Isaiah 14:24 Jehovah of hosts hath sworn, saying, surely, as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand. So we see God has a purpose for their destruction even before the foundation of the world if God had his son prepared before the world then his wrath was as well, you cannot get around that.
Don De Bono Yes I do, god is love. God is just. God sent Christ so that whosoever believes... we can play whose verse wins till the cows come home but it’s the overall theme of the NT that takes precedence.
Christopher Cunningham Don you have not answered my scriptures which I believe proved my point Don emotional rhetoric and simple labeling true sound biblical doctrine of predestination as fatalism and hyper Calvinism is not a defense. all I hear is that’s not fair and oh that’s not loving.
Don De Bono no not not fair, just an understanding of the true character of god, which Calvinism misrepresents.
Don De Bono Calvinists makes the mistake of using flawed human reasoning when interpreting the Bible (such as texts like Rom 8.7 Eph 2:1. Col 2:13) which I know are Calvinist cliché verses. Calvinism, I feel, turns faith into a work, which it is not. Romans 10:13 says "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Don De Bono It stands to reason than that whoever is calling on God and is being saved, must have been given the ability to respond to the call from God. The Holy Spirit brings certainty to the soul and supernaturally enables man to respond. God knows who will respond, this doesn’t mean he ‘predestines it’ Verse 17 of the same chapter says “"So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. “So obviously when a person hears the word of God, the Lord makes it possible for him to believe and accept it. This does not mean that man is contributing to his own salvation by agreeing to the truth that the Holy Spirit has enabled him to understand.
Christopher Cunningham Don you cannot defend your position and have not. you may claim victory for the mere fact of non-participation but the fact of the matter is you have only proved my point in that man cannot submit in full to God because his flesh and carnal mind do not want to be subjected to it Romans 8:7 so he creates the idol of his freewill that he may boast in his righteousness but as Paul says when the flesh comes under God's control and spirit takes control that is removed and transformed Ezekiel 18:21-31 36:25-26.
Christopher Cunningham Don I have not used human reasoning but have allowed the text to speak for themself. You quote Romans 10 which actually refutes you because God through preaching draws his people to him it does not refute me it actually proves my point that apart from the working of God in declaring the gospel his people cannot be saved whom he will draw.
Christopher Cunningham The same type of phrase is used with Paul preaching to Lydia in which her eyes were opened because God drew her by his spirit and gave her the fullness of truth. Once more Don ad hominems and straw man are not a defense.
Don De Bono If God has already elected those who are going to heaven, then why evangelize, seek to be saved, or even follow God's path?Your traditional Calvinist would proclaim, "Because God told us so!" But if God has already elected those who will be going to heaven, no amount of influence from Christians will change who is elected or not. Evangelism may be the means of how God saves the elect, but our conscience decision to not evangelize will not affect the elect.The interesting counter-argument would be when Calvinists say to non-Calvinists, "But why bother evangelizing... God already knows if a particular person will ever accept the message or not." But, as will be discussed below, this is argument is a fallacy due to the lack of comprehension of time.
Christopher Cunningham I already addressed your argument multiple times over and over with scripture concerning this and anyone else can see I have given evidence. You keep attacking straw man arguments red herrings and attacking me personally. Now are you going to give scripture and not philosophical objections parroted by a typical Arminian?
Don De Bono I have just shown you scripture that refutes you.
Don De Bono If God predestined everything, and then God created sin.
This is where Calvinists disagree among themselves. There are several camps; some that believe every little detail has been predestined, those who believe that God predestined all major events (including salvation), and those who believe that God only predestines those who will be saved. I suppose this point would address the first camp; If indeed God did predestine every little thing, then God did create sin. He caused man to act a specific way knowing in advance what it would lead to.
Christopher Cunningham You gave me one proof text is all. Don I’m not interested in copy and paste from something you found. Engage and defend your position.
Don De Bono what specifically do you want me to defend
Don De Bono it’s not like i could convince you anyways your minds made up, no one convinces anyone on here it’s not the right format for it’s just a soap box
Christopher Cunningham Don you made the charge if you cannot back up your statements with evidence which is what the group is about do not make them as proverbs says those who bring charges without reproof will be as a fool.
Don De Bono really because I find it a poor argument against the whole theme of the bible.
Christopher Cunningham Don what bible evidence did you bring?!
Christopher Cunningham Don since you have nothing worthy to say further in this debate we are finished and I will allow the viewers to decide and read the post.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Is speaking in tongues proof one has the Holy Spirit? a Biblical examination
In this video I discuss if Speaking in Tongues is proof one has the Holy Spirit and if it is proof one is saved.
Daily Devotional
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.-1st Corinthians Chapter 13:1-2
When Paul speaks of tongues of men and angels in 1st cor 13:1-2 he speaks of the challenges of the christian walk and commands us that through these challenges that we continue to walk in the spirit of Christian love despite them.Galatians 5:22-27 commands this through the fruit of the spirit.
When Paul speaks of tongues of men and angels in 1st cor 13:1-2 he speaks of the challenges of the christian walk and commands us that through these challenges that we continue to walk in the spirit of Christian love despite them.Galatians 5:22-27 commands this through the fruit of the spirit.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Lies that create Cognitive dissonance: A Critique of straw man arguments against Reformed Theology a response to Facebook user Nathaniel Green
I will be reviewing an article by a person named Nathaniel Green. He has proceeded to write an article against Reformed Theology which I feel is nothing more then the usual straw man arguments as presented by all Arminian Free will theists. His first tirade against the doctrines of grace proceed as follows:
“I know people won't totally understand how wrong anything is until they first realize that it is wrong in the first place. Many people have already shown the evidence, Matthew 23:37. But it's like this, you'll see at least 2 groups; each of them claiming that their position is backed up by the Bible”(1)
He first quotes Matthew 23:37 which reads as follows:
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! “(2)
This passage is speaking of God wanting to draw the unbelieving Jewish leaders’ (Jerusalem’s) children (Jewish people) to salvation but they (the leaders) were not willing that, the children be drawn. How this proves his point, we are not told, for he does not elaborate. The point of Christ’s statements is to show that the unbelieving Jewish leaders were so corrupt that they were not willing that the people come to him do to the sin of unbelief that is in their hearts. Paul confirms this in Romans 8:7 and attested by Jeremiah 17:9-10 which read as follows:
“Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." (3)
The prophet Jeremiah confirms the wickedness of man’s heart in the following verse of chapter 17:9-10:
"The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?
I the LORD search the heart, [I] try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, [and] according to the fruit of his doings." (4)
However, this doesn’t mean Jesus’ will was stopped for, “who can resist His will?” (Rom. 9:19). Moreover, everyone the Father gives to Christ will receive Christ and be saved (John 6:37). Therefore, everything that happened in Matthew 23:37 was part of God’s sovereign or decretive will, although it went against His prescriptive will which is that all men be saved. The great Reformed scholar John Calvin had this to say in his following Commentary on Matthew 23:37:
"The ones the Lord desired to gather are not the ones who "were not willing"! Jesus speaks to the leaders about their children that they, the leaders, would not allow Him to "gather." Jesus was not seeking to gather the leaders, but their children. This one consideration alone renders the passage useless for the Arminian seeking to establish freewillism. The "children" of the leaders would be Jews who were hindered by the Jewish leaders from hearing Christ." (5)
As seen above White confirms the fact that this passage is referring to the unbelieving Jews hindering those under them from hearing Christ.
Mr. Nathaniel Green then goes on to claim in his article:
“We will go into the evidence in a moment but first let’s say you realize that Calvinism is wrong or that evolution is wrong. 1 side says again and again that God died on the cross for us while making it impossible to be saved. While the other side will show verse after verse from the bible to show that this is wrong. But the Calvinist return to repeat the same story.”
He states that Calvinists believe Christ died on the cross making salvation impossible but this is a straw man and not what Reformed Theology teaches. Reformed Theology teaches that due to depravity no one seeks to receive what Christ did on the cross and so therefore it is God who must first draw us to the knowledge of that salvation through regeneration as a gift. The Old Testament confirms this in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and Jonah 2:9 which State:
"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them]." (6)
"…Salvation [is] of the LORD." (7)
These are two of many passages of Scripture which demonstrates that God is in control of the ends and means of salvation. You can also find similar statements in places such as Daniel 4:35,Proverbs 16:33 Deuteronomy 7:6, Phil 1:6, Jeremiah 10:33 among a host of other passages. The Scriptures indeed teach that the Holy Spirit is the only source that brings us to this wonderful revelation. The fact remains is that he accuses us of not having any text to back up our position which I have demonstrated is absurd and dishonest.
Mr. Green goes on to state in his article:
"Remember Calvinism is like any other Roman lie just like Evolution. There are many degrees of Evolution and Calvinism the slightest difference doesn’t matter it only matters that the mission is accomplished."
This statement is an equivocation fallacy Mr. Green is trying to compare Calvinism to Evolution and Roman Catholicism when these two areas are completely foreign to the subject having nothing to do with the discussion. Mr. Green has committed a red herring here by diverting from the subject. This is mere accusation without evidence. Rome teaches the concept of free will as opposed to the Biblical doctrine that men are bound by sin and can only be brought into subjection to God by God’s own mercy and grace.
An example that the doctrine of free will can be found within the roots of Romanism is the historical account in the fact that Rome had commissioned Erasmus a Roman Catholic to debate Martin Luther on the will of man. Luther argued that man’s will was in bondage to sin and Erasmus argued that the will of man is free much like Arminians, Pelagians and Open theists teach today. So if anyone is holding onto the beliefs of Roman Catholicism it is the freewill theists like our friend Mr. Green.
Mr. Green’s final argument comes to a close with this last statement:
“Remember Calvinism is a make believe story! The lies are so wrong and bizarre. The idea that they claim that the God has died for them has made it impossible for many to be saved. They take Yahshua and try to make him into a Roman or Greek God."
Mr. Green claims Calvinism is a make believe story. However it was never a story to begin with but is in fact a mere nickname used to separate the truth from the false man-centered free will theology. He pits sound Biblical teaching of Reformed Theology against Hyper-Calvinism which is in fact mere fatalism and not even Scriptural as it denies the essence of the preaching of the Gospel. He then post a you tube video about mind control as if it is relevant and proceeds to quote 2nd Timothy 2 as a supposed refutation when it in fact confirms the Calvinist position that man is bound to sin and only God can save them out of it. God has indeed made salvation possible and Mr. Green is right but this salvation can only come by God drawing us to that knowledge which leads to justification - Scripture confirms this:
"He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken." Isaiah 53:8(8)
"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins." Matthew 1:21(9)
"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." John 6:44-45 (10)
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned." 1st Corinthians 2:14 (11)
Who is it that overcomes the world? Only the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God. 1st John 5:1 (12)
In conclusion as you can see this young man has actually proved the Scriptural teaching that salvation is of God and not of ourselves. The evidence shows that God shows mercy and saves- men do not save themselves nor do they have the capacity. It is for this reason people reject the truth: they create the idol of free will making the creator bow to our demands instead of listening to the words of Jesus Christ who said in Matthew 26:42:
"He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done." Matthew 26:42 (13)
I pray this article has been helpful in refuting the misconceptions about the doctrines of the precious faith we hold so dearly – Biblical doctrines that so many are fighting against. I leave you with this final statement which is summed up by the great preacher Charles Spurgeon:
"No doctrine in the whole Word of God has more excited the hatred of mankind than the truth of the absolute sovereignty of God." (14)
Footnotes:
1.http://www.facebook.com/#!/notes/nathaniel-green/lies-that-create-cognitive-dissonance/168834236496234
2.Matthew 23:37
3. Romans 8:7
4. Jeremiah 17:9-10
5. James R. White, Potter's Freedom, 2nd ed, p. 138
6.Ezekiel 36:25-26
7. Jonah 2:9
8. Isaiah 53:8
9.Matthew 1:21
10. John 6:44-45
11.1st Corinthians 2:14
12. 1st John 5:1
13.Matthew 26:42
14.http://www.spurgeon.us/mind_and_heart/quotes/g.htm#sovereignty
“I know people won't totally understand how wrong anything is until they first realize that it is wrong in the first place. Many people have already shown the evidence, Matthew 23:37. But it's like this, you'll see at least 2 groups; each of them claiming that their position is backed up by the Bible”(1)
He first quotes Matthew 23:37 which reads as follows:
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! “(2)
This passage is speaking of God wanting to draw the unbelieving Jewish leaders’ (Jerusalem’s) children (Jewish people) to salvation but they (the leaders) were not willing that, the children be drawn. How this proves his point, we are not told, for he does not elaborate. The point of Christ’s statements is to show that the unbelieving Jewish leaders were so corrupt that they were not willing that the people come to him do to the sin of unbelief that is in their hearts. Paul confirms this in Romans 8:7 and attested by Jeremiah 17:9-10 which read as follows:
“Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." (3)
The prophet Jeremiah confirms the wickedness of man’s heart in the following verse of chapter 17:9-10:
"The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?
I the LORD search the heart, [I] try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, [and] according to the fruit of his doings." (4)
However, this doesn’t mean Jesus’ will was stopped for, “who can resist His will?” (Rom. 9:19). Moreover, everyone the Father gives to Christ will receive Christ and be saved (John 6:37). Therefore, everything that happened in Matthew 23:37 was part of God’s sovereign or decretive will, although it went against His prescriptive will which is that all men be saved. The great Reformed scholar John Calvin had this to say in his following Commentary on Matthew 23:37:
"The ones the Lord desired to gather are not the ones who "were not willing"! Jesus speaks to the leaders about their children that they, the leaders, would not allow Him to "gather." Jesus was not seeking to gather the leaders, but their children. This one consideration alone renders the passage useless for the Arminian seeking to establish freewillism. The "children" of the leaders would be Jews who were hindered by the Jewish leaders from hearing Christ." (5)
As seen above White confirms the fact that this passage is referring to the unbelieving Jews hindering those under them from hearing Christ.
Mr. Nathaniel Green then goes on to claim in his article:
“We will go into the evidence in a moment but first let’s say you realize that Calvinism is wrong or that evolution is wrong. 1 side says again and again that God died on the cross for us while making it impossible to be saved. While the other side will show verse after verse from the bible to show that this is wrong. But the Calvinist return to repeat the same story.”
He states that Calvinists believe Christ died on the cross making salvation impossible but this is a straw man and not what Reformed Theology teaches. Reformed Theology teaches that due to depravity no one seeks to receive what Christ did on the cross and so therefore it is God who must first draw us to the knowledge of that salvation through regeneration as a gift. The Old Testament confirms this in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and Jonah 2:9 which State:
"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them]." (6)
"…Salvation [is] of the LORD." (7)
These are two of many passages of Scripture which demonstrates that God is in control of the ends and means of salvation. You can also find similar statements in places such as Daniel 4:35,Proverbs 16:33 Deuteronomy 7:6, Phil 1:6, Jeremiah 10:33 among a host of other passages. The Scriptures indeed teach that the Holy Spirit is the only source that brings us to this wonderful revelation. The fact remains is that he accuses us of not having any text to back up our position which I have demonstrated is absurd and dishonest.
Mr. Green goes on to state in his article:
"Remember Calvinism is like any other Roman lie just like Evolution. There are many degrees of Evolution and Calvinism the slightest difference doesn’t matter it only matters that the mission is accomplished."
This statement is an equivocation fallacy Mr. Green is trying to compare Calvinism to Evolution and Roman Catholicism when these two areas are completely foreign to the subject having nothing to do with the discussion. Mr. Green has committed a red herring here by diverting from the subject. This is mere accusation without evidence. Rome teaches the concept of free will as opposed to the Biblical doctrine that men are bound by sin and can only be brought into subjection to God by God’s own mercy and grace.
An example that the doctrine of free will can be found within the roots of Romanism is the historical account in the fact that Rome had commissioned Erasmus a Roman Catholic to debate Martin Luther on the will of man. Luther argued that man’s will was in bondage to sin and Erasmus argued that the will of man is free much like Arminians, Pelagians and Open theists teach today. So if anyone is holding onto the beliefs of Roman Catholicism it is the freewill theists like our friend Mr. Green.
Mr. Green’s final argument comes to a close with this last statement:
“Remember Calvinism is a make believe story! The lies are so wrong and bizarre. The idea that they claim that the God has died for them has made it impossible for many to be saved. They take Yahshua and try to make him into a Roman or Greek God."
Mr. Green claims Calvinism is a make believe story. However it was never a story to begin with but is in fact a mere nickname used to separate the truth from the false man-centered free will theology. He pits sound Biblical teaching of Reformed Theology against Hyper-Calvinism which is in fact mere fatalism and not even Scriptural as it denies the essence of the preaching of the Gospel. He then post a you tube video about mind control as if it is relevant and proceeds to quote 2nd Timothy 2 as a supposed refutation when it in fact confirms the Calvinist position that man is bound to sin and only God can save them out of it. God has indeed made salvation possible and Mr. Green is right but this salvation can only come by God drawing us to that knowledge which leads to justification - Scripture confirms this:
"He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken." Isaiah 53:8(8)
"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins." Matthew 1:21(9)
"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." John 6:44-45 (10)
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned." 1st Corinthians 2:14 (11)
Who is it that overcomes the world? Only the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God. 1st John 5:1 (12)
In conclusion as you can see this young man has actually proved the Scriptural teaching that salvation is of God and not of ourselves. The evidence shows that God shows mercy and saves- men do not save themselves nor do they have the capacity. It is for this reason people reject the truth: they create the idol of free will making the creator bow to our demands instead of listening to the words of Jesus Christ who said in Matthew 26:42:
"He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done." Matthew 26:42 (13)
I pray this article has been helpful in refuting the misconceptions about the doctrines of the precious faith we hold so dearly – Biblical doctrines that so many are fighting against. I leave you with this final statement which is summed up by the great preacher Charles Spurgeon:
"No doctrine in the whole Word of God has more excited the hatred of mankind than the truth of the absolute sovereignty of God." (14)
Footnotes:
1.http://www.facebook.com/#!/notes/nathaniel-green/lies-that-create-cognitive-dissonance/168834236496234
2.Matthew 23:37
3. Romans 8:7
4. Jeremiah 17:9-10
5. James R. White, Potter's Freedom, 2nd ed, p. 138
6.Ezekiel 36:25-26
7. Jonah 2:9
8. Isaiah 53:8
9.Matthew 1:21
10. John 6:44-45
11.1st Corinthians 2:14
12. 1st John 5:1
13.Matthew 26:42
14.http://www.spurgeon.us/mind_and_heart/quotes/g.htm#sovereignty
A Response to Top Ten Signs you’re a Fundamentalist Christian by Evilbible.com
If you’re familiar with common militant atheist rhetoric and have spoken with people of that persuasion you may be familiar with the Top Ten Signs you’re Fundamentalist Christian(1) which consists of numerous claims about Christianity – all of which are not factual. They are based on straw man arguments. In this article I will be addressing these claims and debunking them one by one. The author’s statements will appear in bold.
10. “You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.”
Biblical Christians don’t feel outraged when other religions deny the existence of the God of Scripture. It is the essence of total depravity and it is thus understandable. Natural unregenerate man denies his creator and will naturally make gods in their own likeness:
“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.” Romans 1:21-23
9. “ You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.”
Biblical Christians don’t feel insulted or dehumanized to know that they are created by God. They reject evolutionary naturalism on the bases of scientific evidence that goes against its premise. Further, a question that the naturalist must answer is: how can evolution account for morality? According to evolutionary theory man is just a breed of animal that evolves to further the human genome according to natural selection. But this is problematic. The animal kingdom engages in rape and eating of their young to benefit the propagation of its genes. Should humans therefore engage in similar behavior? If not, why not? Is there an objective and truly meaningful reason that the atheist world views can offer? Finally, nowhere does it say in Scripture we are created from dirt. Scripture teaches that the first man was created by God from the soil of the earth. Although the term “dirt” has adopted negative connotations throughout time there is nothing wrong with affirming that a Holy loving God used soil to fashion the first man. It is not nearly as bad as asserting that slime on a rock randomly evolved into ape like creatures over time and then into humans eventually. There is no comparison. Moreover, again, Scripture states that only Adam was created from dirt and through the propagation of his genes we became his descendants.
8. You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
This is an argument from the fallacy of equivocation. The author seems to have no understanding of the Triune nature of God, let alone polytheism. Polytheism is the belief there are multiple gods. Christianity believes there is one God that coexists in three persons but is unified in essence as defined by the Westminster Confession of Faith:
“In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost: the Father is of none, neither begotten, not proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.”(2).
Christians affirm that there is one God – one being, nature, or essence of God. Being is “what you are.” Christians also affirm that there are three persons. Person is “who you are.” The three persons are unified in their being - “what they are” but distinct in their personhood “who they are.” The three persons make up the one being of God, the one God. Therefore, the only way Christians could be accused of polytheism is if they asserted that there were three gods – three natures, essences or beings. This is not the case in Trinitarians and therefore this atheist shows himself to be ignorant of Trinitarian theology in confusing “being” with “person.”
7. Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!
This is a straw man as well. Christians do not believe that Allah, the god of Islam, exists. Rather, he is an imaginary person and/or a deceitful system perpetuated by demonic forces that is foisted on deceived people. Imaginary gods and deceitful systems do not have the moral authority to justifiably execute such actions as killing people. I am, however, unaware of the Quran ascribing any redemptive typology to such endeavors, especially since redemption is a specious idea within Islam. Finally the author argues from mere outrage at the site of Yahweh using Joshua to destroy the inhabitants in the land of Jericho in Joshua 6:21. The account reads as follows:
“So the people shouted when [the priests] blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.” Joshua 6:21
However the author fails to bring about the immediate context of what happened afterwards in verses 22-23 which speak of Rahab and her household being saved:
“But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot's house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her. And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and all that she had; and they brought out all her kindred, and left them without the camp of Israel.” Joshua 6:22-23
As we can see from the context not everyone in Jericho was destroyed by Joshua and his army. This demonstrates that the language of “utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword” is not literal. It can be further demonstrated that many of these cultures were engaging in child sacrifice to the false Canaanite gods of that region which Yahweh warned his people of Israel not to follow after. It can also be shown that God even gave such nations plenty of time to repent before he brought his wrath upon them:
“Only unto the land of the children of Ammon thou camest not, nor unto any place of the river Jabbok, nor unto the cities in the mountains, nor unto whatsoever the LORD our God forbad us.” Deuteronomy 2:37
“And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through [the fire] to Molech , neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I [am] the LORD.” Leviticus 18:21
“And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.” Leviticus 20:3
“But I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age. And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete." (Genesis 15:14-16)
Moreover, in the Christian perspective, God, as the author and giver of life, has the authority to take it back to himself when He pleases. Plus, Christians aren’t objecting to “atrocities from Allah” as this atheist asserts. Christians are objecting to the fact that the false prophet Muhammad told his followers to kill Jews and Christians in the 7th century as a final marching order that is still valid today (S. 9:29) even though in the 1st century Jesus established universal peaceful teachings that Christians and people of God ought to be subject to for the betterment of humanity. Muhammad ignored these universal teachings of peace that new covenant people of God are to be under and instead commanded his followers to fight and kill unbelievers.
6. You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
What problem does the author have that God’s Holy Spirit entered into Mary? There is no parallel between Greek gods having physical sex with humans and the Holy Spirit of God miraculously forming the nature of Christ in Mary’s womb. As the noted Hebrew and Greek scholar John Gill in his commentary on Luke 1:34-25 states:
“The words, "upon thee", are left out in the Syriac and Persic versions; but are retained in others, and in all copies: the formation of Christ's human nature, though common to all the three persons, yet is particularly, and most properly ascribed to the Spirit; not to the first person, the Father, lest it should be thought that he is only the Father of him, as man; nor to the second person, the Son, since it is to him that the human nature is personally united; but to the third person, the Spirit, who is the sanctifier; and who separated, and sanctified it, the first moment of its conception, and preserved it from the taint of original sin. His coming upon the virgin must be understood in consistence with his omnipresence, and immensity; and cannot design any local motion, but an effectual operation in forming the human nature of her flesh and substance; and not in the ordinary manner in which he is concerned in the formation of all men, Job 33:4 but in an extraordinary way, not to be conceived of, and explained. The phrase most plainly answers to le ab, in frequent use with the Jews.”(3)
The author insinuates that the widely rejected pre-Christian dying and rising God theory is true. However this is historically inaccurate. The earliest evidence of an explicit dying and rising God is Adonis which appeared around A.D. 150 in response to Christianity.(4) Therefore, who is copying who?
5. You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
This argument begs the question. The age of the Earth is debatable. The author relies on the laws of science as if they are free from error and the ultimate source of truth. The other problem with this assertion is the author never mentions that there are Christians who hold to an old earth view of creation and still believe in the existence of Adam and Eve. I personally hold to a young earth view of creation but that can be debated. The author also asserts the Bible is written by Bronze Age tribesmen. However, only part of the Bible was written in the Bronze Age. Moreover, the atheist is presupposing the erroneous naturalistic world view again and will not even accurately represent the Christian view. If one allows the Christian to have the couresy of explaining his own beliefs, one would realize that it is irrelevant if part of the Bible was written by people in the Bronze Age period. Christians affirm that the creator of the universe spoke through prophets and apostles with regard to these issues and has provided many proofs affirming His word and existence. Therefore, the only way that it would be meaningful to point out that some of the Biblical authors wrote in the Bronze Age period is if the critic presupposes naturalism to begin with. However that is an untenable position. Christians affirm that the creation itself gives evidence of God’s existence upon the conscience of all people.
“… The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” Psalm 19:1
“For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” (Romans 1:19-20)
“For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” (Colossians 1:18)
As to the claim that the Bible was written by Bronze Age tribesmen – this is absurd. The Apostle Paul for example was a highly educated scholar who studied under Gamaliel. This is post-Bronze Age. We read about this in Acts 22:3:
“I am verily a man [which am] a Jew, born in Tarsus, [a city] in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel [and] taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.” Acts 22:3
Moreover, Luke, the author of the Gospel of Luke and Acts was an excellent and qualified historian. So, for this atheist to assert that the Bible was written by uneducated Bronze Age tribal men is without basis in reality. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay was an atheist archeologist and scholar who set out to prove that the Bible was wrong but he ended up converting to Christianity after seeing the Bible’s accuracy as well as how great of a historian Luke was. Of Luke the historian he came to believe the following:
“Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians.”(5)
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
Does the author have any evidence against this? It would seem the author is making a moral absolute judgment against God but according to Atheism morality is subjective and so why does the author seem so outraged at the thought of eternal punishment? What is the author’s definition of tolerance and love? He gives no objective basis or measure by which to judge good and evil. In fact, he refutes himself by making a statement about tolerance when he is expressing intolerance towards those he wishes to be tolerant. Secondly, God is sovereign and can do with his creation as he wishes:
“The LORD hath made all [things] for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” Proverbs 16:4
“The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof [is] of the LORD.” Proverbs 16:33
“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he harden.” Romans 9:18
“Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?” Romans 9:20
“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Romans 9:21
I would also argue based upon Romans 9:22-23 that punishing sinners in hell is a loving act as well because in doing so God is giving the Christians a gift in showing them all of his attributes when he doesn’t have to do so – attributes such as wrath, justice, power. I would also challenge the atheist about how his objection presupposes that there is a moral standard of what is loving and not loving when the atheist world view doesn’t allow for a real standard of right and wrong. Christians have never said God tolerates other beliefs, but, since he is God, he alone has the authority and right to destroy and punish those who rebel against him.
3. While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
This is a mere assertion without evidence and assumes Christianity does not study these fields which is a straw man. Christian Theologians have studied these areas for years within the field of Apologetics. Archeology has confirmed many accounts in the Scriptures. Biology and Physics help us to study Cosmology. Has this atheist heard of the Kalam argument or Anthropological argument for God’s existence? Further, many influential scientists of the past have believed in God from Nicholas Copernicus to William Kelvin.(7) The author also attempts an appeal to ridicule by equivocating Christianity with the fringes of the Charismatic Movement as if that is Christianity in a nutshell. That is a new minority movement, not historic Christianity.
2. You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
According to Christianity’s source of authority, the Holy Scripture, God’s answer to prayers is not always in our timing and sometimes God’s simple answer is no. And sometimes He refuses t hear the prayers of the wicked. It should also be established that proper prayer is not about fulfilling the will of man, rather for the will of God to be fulfilled. Jesus confirms this in the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 26:39 and 42.
“And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O , my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will but your will.” Matthew 26:39
“He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O , my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me except I drink it, your will be done.” Matthew 26:42
The Bible is also very clear that God will not hear or grant the prayer’s of the wicked because they refuse to repent and turn from their wickedness:
“And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.” Isaiah 1:15
“Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.” Jeremiah 7:16
“I spake unto thee in thy prosperity; [but] thou saidst, I will not hear. This [hath been] thy manner from thy youth, that thou obeyed not my voice.” Jeremiah 22:21
Moreover, not everybody who claims to be Christian is a Christian accord to Scripture. Therefore, this explains why prayer is not always answered:
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21)
Therefore this objection presupposes that Christianity teaches that God is bound to answer or grant all prayers.
1. You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.
I assume the author thinks he knows more about the Bible and church history than Christians do but that of course is an illogical assertion that cannot be proven. He would have to personally know everyone who read his piece to be able to logically assert that atheists know more about the Bible than they do. Moreover, there are millions of atheists who know nothing about theology. This is by far the most illogical of the 10 points.
Has the author asked every Christian about their knowledge on the topic? I can say I know much about Christian history as it is been my field of study for many years. Another point must also be made. While these things academic theological issues are useful to study, where does it state in Scripture that studying or knowing these issues saves us? The answer is nowhere. Should Christians have a basic knowledge of Apologetics and study up on the topic? Of course. But the thing that makes someone a Christian is their understanding of the Gospel – that is what benefits people salvifically. Who brings salvation? What is the state of man and what is his relation to God? These are fundamental questions every Christian should know and understand. Therefore, it is fine for people to call themselves Christians and not have a detailed knowledge of history or non-essential theological points. The atheist demonstrates that he doesn’t understand what qualification one needs in order to justly call themselves a Christian according to Christianity.
Conclusion
In conclusion I have demonstrated that these questions and statements addressed in this list show that this particular Atheist lacks a basic understanding of Christian principles. This atheist cannot accurately represent Christian views or theology. I have shown how this atheist’s own presuppositions refute his statements and show how inconsistent he is. This Atheist, in his rebellion against his creator, will go to great lengths to deny God’s existence. However, his attempts fail horribly and make him look foolish.
Jesus is Lord Amen!
Footnotes:
1. http://www.evilbible.com/Top_Ten_List.htm Evil Bible’s Top Ten Signs you’re a Fundamentalist Christian.
2. Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 2 of God and the Holy Trinity:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/
3. John Gill’s commentary on the Gospel of Luke 1:34-35 http://www.freegrace.net/gill/
4. James Patrick Holding, "Shattering the Christ Myth" p.231
5. Ramsay, William M. "The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament" (1915)
10. “You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.”
Biblical Christians don’t feel outraged when other religions deny the existence of the God of Scripture. It is the essence of total depravity and it is thus understandable. Natural unregenerate man denies his creator and will naturally make gods in their own likeness:
“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.” Romans 1:21-23
9. “ You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.”
Biblical Christians don’t feel insulted or dehumanized to know that they are created by God. They reject evolutionary naturalism on the bases of scientific evidence that goes against its premise. Further, a question that the naturalist must answer is: how can evolution account for morality? According to evolutionary theory man is just a breed of animal that evolves to further the human genome according to natural selection. But this is problematic. The animal kingdom engages in rape and eating of their young to benefit the propagation of its genes. Should humans therefore engage in similar behavior? If not, why not? Is there an objective and truly meaningful reason that the atheist world views can offer? Finally, nowhere does it say in Scripture we are created from dirt. Scripture teaches that the first man was created by God from the soil of the earth. Although the term “dirt” has adopted negative connotations throughout time there is nothing wrong with affirming that a Holy loving God used soil to fashion the first man. It is not nearly as bad as asserting that slime on a rock randomly evolved into ape like creatures over time and then into humans eventually. There is no comparison. Moreover, again, Scripture states that only Adam was created from dirt and through the propagation of his genes we became his descendants.
8. You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
This is an argument from the fallacy of equivocation. The author seems to have no understanding of the Triune nature of God, let alone polytheism. Polytheism is the belief there are multiple gods. Christianity believes there is one God that coexists in three persons but is unified in essence as defined by the Westminster Confession of Faith:
“In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost: the Father is of none, neither begotten, not proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.”(2).
Christians affirm that there is one God – one being, nature, or essence of God. Being is “what you are.” Christians also affirm that there are three persons. Person is “who you are.” The three persons are unified in their being - “what they are” but distinct in their personhood “who they are.” The three persons make up the one being of God, the one God. Therefore, the only way Christians could be accused of polytheism is if they asserted that there were three gods – three natures, essences or beings. This is not the case in Trinitarians and therefore this atheist shows himself to be ignorant of Trinitarian theology in confusing “being” with “person.”
7. Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!
This is a straw man as well. Christians do not believe that Allah, the god of Islam, exists. Rather, he is an imaginary person and/or a deceitful system perpetuated by demonic forces that is foisted on deceived people. Imaginary gods and deceitful systems do not have the moral authority to justifiably execute such actions as killing people. I am, however, unaware of the Quran ascribing any redemptive typology to such endeavors, especially since redemption is a specious idea within Islam. Finally the author argues from mere outrage at the site of Yahweh using Joshua to destroy the inhabitants in the land of Jericho in Joshua 6:21. The account reads as follows:
“So the people shouted when [the priests] blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.” Joshua 6:21
However the author fails to bring about the immediate context of what happened afterwards in verses 22-23 which speak of Rahab and her household being saved:
“But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot's house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her. And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and all that she had; and they brought out all her kindred, and left them without the camp of Israel.” Joshua 6:22-23
As we can see from the context not everyone in Jericho was destroyed by Joshua and his army. This demonstrates that the language of “utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword” is not literal. It can be further demonstrated that many of these cultures were engaging in child sacrifice to the false Canaanite gods of that region which Yahweh warned his people of Israel not to follow after. It can also be shown that God even gave such nations plenty of time to repent before he brought his wrath upon them:
“Only unto the land of the children of Ammon thou camest not, nor unto any place of the river Jabbok, nor unto the cities in the mountains, nor unto whatsoever the LORD our God forbad us.” Deuteronomy 2:37
“And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through [the fire] to Molech , neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I [am] the LORD.” Leviticus 18:21
“And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.” Leviticus 20:3
“But I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age. And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete." (Genesis 15:14-16)
Moreover, in the Christian perspective, God, as the author and giver of life, has the authority to take it back to himself when He pleases. Plus, Christians aren’t objecting to “atrocities from Allah” as this atheist asserts. Christians are objecting to the fact that the false prophet Muhammad told his followers to kill Jews and Christians in the 7th century as a final marching order that is still valid today (S. 9:29) even though in the 1st century Jesus established universal peaceful teachings that Christians and people of God ought to be subject to for the betterment of humanity. Muhammad ignored these universal teachings of peace that new covenant people of God are to be under and instead commanded his followers to fight and kill unbelievers.
6. You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
What problem does the author have that God’s Holy Spirit entered into Mary? There is no parallel between Greek gods having physical sex with humans and the Holy Spirit of God miraculously forming the nature of Christ in Mary’s womb. As the noted Hebrew and Greek scholar John Gill in his commentary on Luke 1:34-25 states:
“The words, "upon thee", are left out in the Syriac and Persic versions; but are retained in others, and in all copies: the formation of Christ's human nature, though common to all the three persons, yet is particularly, and most properly ascribed to the Spirit; not to the first person, the Father, lest it should be thought that he is only the Father of him, as man; nor to the second person, the Son, since it is to him that the human nature is personally united; but to the third person, the Spirit, who is the sanctifier; and who separated, and sanctified it, the first moment of its conception, and preserved it from the taint of original sin. His coming upon the virgin must be understood in consistence with his omnipresence, and immensity; and cannot design any local motion, but an effectual operation in forming the human nature of her flesh and substance; and not in the ordinary manner in which he is concerned in the formation of all men, Job 33:4 but in an extraordinary way, not to be conceived of, and explained. The phrase most plainly answers to le ab, in frequent use with the Jews.”(3)
The author insinuates that the widely rejected pre-Christian dying and rising God theory is true. However this is historically inaccurate. The earliest evidence of an explicit dying and rising God is Adonis which appeared around A.D. 150 in response to Christianity.(4) Therefore, who is copying who?
5. You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
This argument begs the question. The age of the Earth is debatable. The author relies on the laws of science as if they are free from error and the ultimate source of truth. The other problem with this assertion is the author never mentions that there are Christians who hold to an old earth view of creation and still believe in the existence of Adam and Eve. I personally hold to a young earth view of creation but that can be debated. The author also asserts the Bible is written by Bronze Age tribesmen. However, only part of the Bible was written in the Bronze Age. Moreover, the atheist is presupposing the erroneous naturalistic world view again and will not even accurately represent the Christian view. If one allows the Christian to have the couresy of explaining his own beliefs, one would realize that it is irrelevant if part of the Bible was written by people in the Bronze Age period. Christians affirm that the creator of the universe spoke through prophets and apostles with regard to these issues and has provided many proofs affirming His word and existence. Therefore, the only way that it would be meaningful to point out that some of the Biblical authors wrote in the Bronze Age period is if the critic presupposes naturalism to begin with. However that is an untenable position. Christians affirm that the creation itself gives evidence of God’s existence upon the conscience of all people.
“… The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” Psalm 19:1
“For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” (Romans 1:19-20)
“For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” (Colossians 1:18)
As to the claim that the Bible was written by Bronze Age tribesmen – this is absurd. The Apostle Paul for example was a highly educated scholar who studied under Gamaliel. This is post-Bronze Age. We read about this in Acts 22:3:
“I am verily a man [which am] a Jew, born in Tarsus, [a city] in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel [and] taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.” Acts 22:3
Moreover, Luke, the author of the Gospel of Luke and Acts was an excellent and qualified historian. So, for this atheist to assert that the Bible was written by uneducated Bronze Age tribal men is without basis in reality. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay was an atheist archeologist and scholar who set out to prove that the Bible was wrong but he ended up converting to Christianity after seeing the Bible’s accuracy as well as how great of a historian Luke was. Of Luke the historian he came to believe the following:
“Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians.”(5)
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
Does the author have any evidence against this? It would seem the author is making a moral absolute judgment against God but according to Atheism morality is subjective and so why does the author seem so outraged at the thought of eternal punishment? What is the author’s definition of tolerance and love? He gives no objective basis or measure by which to judge good and evil. In fact, he refutes himself by making a statement about tolerance when he is expressing intolerance towards those he wishes to be tolerant. Secondly, God is sovereign and can do with his creation as he wishes:
“The LORD hath made all [things] for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” Proverbs 16:4
“The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof [is] of the LORD.” Proverbs 16:33
“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he harden.” Romans 9:18
“Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?” Romans 9:20
“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Romans 9:21
I would also argue based upon Romans 9:22-23 that punishing sinners in hell is a loving act as well because in doing so God is giving the Christians a gift in showing them all of his attributes when he doesn’t have to do so – attributes such as wrath, justice, power. I would also challenge the atheist about how his objection presupposes that there is a moral standard of what is loving and not loving when the atheist world view doesn’t allow for a real standard of right and wrong. Christians have never said God tolerates other beliefs, but, since he is God, he alone has the authority and right to destroy and punish those who rebel against him.
3. While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
This is a mere assertion without evidence and assumes Christianity does not study these fields which is a straw man. Christian Theologians have studied these areas for years within the field of Apologetics. Archeology has confirmed many accounts in the Scriptures. Biology and Physics help us to study Cosmology. Has this atheist heard of the Kalam argument or Anthropological argument for God’s existence? Further, many influential scientists of the past have believed in God from Nicholas Copernicus to William Kelvin.(7) The author also attempts an appeal to ridicule by equivocating Christianity with the fringes of the Charismatic Movement as if that is Christianity in a nutshell. That is a new minority movement, not historic Christianity.
2. You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
According to Christianity’s source of authority, the Holy Scripture, God’s answer to prayers is not always in our timing and sometimes God’s simple answer is no. And sometimes He refuses t hear the prayers of the wicked. It should also be established that proper prayer is not about fulfilling the will of man, rather for the will of God to be fulfilled. Jesus confirms this in the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 26:39 and 42.
“And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O , my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will but your will.” Matthew 26:39
“He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O , my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me except I drink it, your will be done.” Matthew 26:42
The Bible is also very clear that God will not hear or grant the prayer’s of the wicked because they refuse to repent and turn from their wickedness:
“And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.” Isaiah 1:15
“Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.” Jeremiah 7:16
“I spake unto thee in thy prosperity; [but] thou saidst, I will not hear. This [hath been] thy manner from thy youth, that thou obeyed not my voice.” Jeremiah 22:21
Moreover, not everybody who claims to be Christian is a Christian accord to Scripture. Therefore, this explains why prayer is not always answered:
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21)
Therefore this objection presupposes that Christianity teaches that God is bound to answer or grant all prayers.
1. You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.
I assume the author thinks he knows more about the Bible and church history than Christians do but that of course is an illogical assertion that cannot be proven. He would have to personally know everyone who read his piece to be able to logically assert that atheists know more about the Bible than they do. Moreover, there are millions of atheists who know nothing about theology. This is by far the most illogical of the 10 points.
Has the author asked every Christian about their knowledge on the topic? I can say I know much about Christian history as it is been my field of study for many years. Another point must also be made. While these things academic theological issues are useful to study, where does it state in Scripture that studying or knowing these issues saves us? The answer is nowhere. Should Christians have a basic knowledge of Apologetics and study up on the topic? Of course. But the thing that makes someone a Christian is their understanding of the Gospel – that is what benefits people salvifically. Who brings salvation? What is the state of man and what is his relation to God? These are fundamental questions every Christian should know and understand. Therefore, it is fine for people to call themselves Christians and not have a detailed knowledge of history or non-essential theological points. The atheist demonstrates that he doesn’t understand what qualification one needs in order to justly call themselves a Christian according to Christianity.
Conclusion
In conclusion I have demonstrated that these questions and statements addressed in this list show that this particular Atheist lacks a basic understanding of Christian principles. This atheist cannot accurately represent Christian views or theology. I have shown how this atheist’s own presuppositions refute his statements and show how inconsistent he is. This Atheist, in his rebellion against his creator, will go to great lengths to deny God’s existence. However, his attempts fail horribly and make him look foolish.
Jesus is Lord Amen!
Footnotes:
1. http://www.evilbible.com/Top_Ten_List.htm Evil Bible’s Top Ten Signs you’re a Fundamentalist Christian.
2. Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 2 of God and the Holy Trinity:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/
3. John Gill’s commentary on the Gospel of Luke 1:34-35 http://www.freegrace.net/gill/
4. James Patrick Holding, "Shattering the Christ Myth" p.231
5. Ramsay, William M. "The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament" (1915)
Video Series on the cult of Spiritualism and its history
A video I uploadad on the history and roots of the spiritualistic movement and a biblical refutation of many of its claims:
Wisdom of the Day
If you believe what you like in the gospels and you reject what you don't like, It is not the gospel you believe but yourself-Saint Augustine
Daily Devotional
1st Timothy 1:18 this charge I commit to you my son Timothy according to the prophecies that went before on you that by them you will fight a good warfare.
As the beloved Apostle states in his letter to Timothy we as soldiers in Christ must pick our fights wisely and not be so quick to the sword but we must exhibt the fruits of the spirit we indeed must be on the offensive and be ready to defend the truth of the gospel, but we must be patient and humble and submit to the soverginty of God and not as a fierce tyrant ready to draw blood when the battle rages.
As the beloved Apostle states in his letter to Timothy we as soldiers in Christ must pick our fights wisely and not be so quick to the sword but we must exhibt the fruits of the spirit we indeed must be on the offensive and be ready to defend the truth of the gospel, but we must be patient and humble and submit to the soverginty of God and not as a fierce tyrant ready to draw blood when the battle rages.
Welcome to the Reformation Theology!
Welcome to Reformation Theology a blog that discusses Theology, Culture, and Government from a Reformed perspective. I will be regularly updating this blogs to other Reformed websites,Articles I have written in the past, Devotionals and words of wisdom.
Sola Dei Gloria!
Sola Dei Gloria!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)