Sovereign Grace as the Only Rational Basis for Assurance

"Let your souls be filled and enlarged with everlasting admirings [sic] of that grace (that sovereign grace) which has so impregnably secured the salvation of His chosen, that no manner of thing, whether within them or without them, shall be able to defeat it or hinder them of it. No, not the gates of hell. Nay, not so much as one of the stakes thereof shall be removed, and that forever. Shaken you may be, and tossed with a tempest, but not overturned, because ye have an eternal root. Electing love is of that sovereignty that it rules and overrules all, both in heaven and in earth." -Puritan Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" 

In this paragraph, Coles paraphrases and summarizes several passages of Scripture, primary of which is Romans 8:38-39: "I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present,nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." 

The point of both Apostle Paul and Coles is that the assurance of the Christian is secure, not because of the power of the believer to maintain his spiritual condition, but because he is sustained by the same sovereign grace which saved him in the beginning. For, as Paul also says, "I am sure of this, that He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6: see also 2:13). 

Does any Christian believe that God is unaware of our weakness, of our frailty, of the strength of the opposition (I Peter 5:8)? If He weren't, then we could have no rational basis for our assurance of eternal life. When Satan assails us with accusations of our unworthiness, he merely throws in our faces what is absolutely correct! However, Satan will never go to the next step, telling us of the grace and power of God the Son, our Redeemer Jesus Christ, because that would defeat all of Satan's designs against us. It is only in the Word of God that we are blessed with this promise: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand" (John 10:27-29, emphasis added). Our security is assured, not by any strength that we have, for we have none. Rather, it is guaranteed by the strength of the One who holds us.

Faith a Gift, Not a Work

"It has been granted to you that, for the sake of Christ, you should not only believe in Him, but also suffer for His sake" (Philippians 1:29). 

Arminians assume that Jesus did half of the work of salvation for every single person who has existed or ever will exist. Then some are saved when they match what He did with the work of faith on our part. And I do not choose that phrasing haphazardously; that is how I have had it stated to me. Thus, men are saved, not through faith, but by faith, as the completion of all that God could do on our behalf. 

In contrast, the Calvinist teaches, on the basis of what Scripture says, that faith is the means, not the basis, by which the atonement is effectually applied to everyone for whom it was purchased (see John 6:37-39). That purchase included the gift of faith, so that it is not a work, not a contribution, by the believer to complete the work of Christ on the cross (I Corinthians 2:2). In fact, the Calvinist considers the Arminian view on this subject to be a scandalous aspersion on the blood of Jesus, as if it is unable to save to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25). 

Notice the verse at the top, Philippians 1:29. Paul tells the Philippian Christians that it has been granted to them to believe, not that salvation has been offered, contingent on their completion of it by working faith in themselves. We see the same thing in Ephesians 2:8, where the same Apostle told believers that God gave them their saving faith. 

The essence of this principle is that the atonement was sufficient for every person for whom it was intended, because it purchased everything necessary and sufficient for the salvation of that person. He need not, indeed cannot, add anything to what Jesus did on the cross and for him in Heaven: "He is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through Him, since He ever lives to make intercession for them" (Hebrews 7:25).

Following Paul to Righteousness by Faith

 

"Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh— though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For His sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith." 

- Philippians 3:2-9

The Apostle Paul gives us a list of things here which might have been considered grounds for a righteousness before God based on his own qualities. As righteousness was understood by his judaizing opponents, Paul had all of the qualifications of birth, of training, and of works. If anyone could be justified by his own qualifications, then that person could be none other than Paul. 

Yet, what does that same Paul say about his qualifications: "I count them as rubbish" (verse 8). What men would count as shining qualities, Paul calls garbage. And I don't think that Paul is referring here to God's point of view (Isaiah 64:6). Rather, he is telling us what was his own attitude to those things that he, too, in a previous life, counted as glorious. They were garbage, not because they were rejected by God, though that is true, but rather because they had blinded him to true righteousness, that which comes by faith alone in Christ alone. It is as if some prospector had been so in love with his lump of coal that he had ignored a streambed next to him littered with gold nuggets. 

This is why Christians should feel such sorrow for those trapped in pseudo-Christian sects. I have spoken to Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Oneness Pentecostals who were so proud of their chunks of coal - such as baptism or organizational position - while they are blind to the gold of true righteousness, such as Paul had found, by faith in Christ alone.

Calvinism and the Gift of Faith

One of the fundamental differences between Arminianism and Calvinism is their view of faith. In Arminianism, Jesus died equally for every man in the world, making the offer of salvation, receipt of which is conditioned on a response of faith. In Calvinism, in contrast, Jesus died for a particular mass of men, exclusive of others, and His death provided for every grace required by those men, including the faith to receive that salvation.

So, to the one, faith is a condition on man's part, while, for the other, faith is a means purchased in the atonement, and given by God.

There are several places in Scripture in which faith is descried as given by God, such as Romans 12:3: "By the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned." And in Ephesians 2:8: "By grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God." And negatively in II Thessalonians 3:2: "Not all have faith." It is given to some, and not to others.

But the one that I especially want to consider here is Philippians 1:29: "It has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in Him but also suffer for His sake." Faith is granted, not something created by men. That is why Jesus could say, "No one can come to Me unless it is granted him by the Father" (John 6:65). Contrary to the claims of the Arminian, no man grants his faith to Jesus. Rather, faith is granted to everyone for whom Jesus died.

The Golden Chain to Eternal Life

We find what the Puritans called "The Golden Chain of Salvation" in Romans 8:29-30: "Those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified."


One thing evident in that process is that each step is done by God. No man predestines himself, calls himself, justifies himself, or glorifies himself.

One thing that Paul doesn't include in his list is regeneration. Why? I have no idea. But it would fall between the steps of calling and justifying. At that point, in response to the external call of the Gospel (Romans 10:14), the elect sinner is given a new heart: "I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey My rules" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). Notice that, while we experience regeneration as our response, it is actually the work of the Holy Spirit. Every step to belief and sanctification is done by God (Romans 9:16, Philippians 2:13, etc.). That is why the chain can never fail to achieve its purpose (Romans 8:38-39, John 6:39, 10:27-29, 17:2, etc.)

"That life which is implanted in the soul in regeneration, which is developed in sanctification, and completed in glory, is what the Scriptures call 'eternal life,' and it is called 'eternal' because, by the grace of God, it is absolutely imperishable" (James Henley Thornwell, "Election and Reprobation").

The Canons of Dort versus the Haters of God's Sovereign Grace

In the Canons of Dort (First Head of Doctrine, Article 7), the Synod, the first and only universal council of the Reformed Protestant churches, defines election in this way: "Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He hath, out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen, from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect, and the foundation of salvation. This elect number, though by nature neither better nor more deserving than others, but with them involved in one common misery, God hath decreed to give to Christ, to be saved by Him, and effectually to call and draw them to His communion by His word and Spirit, to bestow upon them true faith, justification, and sanctification; and having powerfully preserved them in the fellowship of His Son, finally, to glorify them for the demonstration of His mercy and for the praise of His glorious grace..."

I love the doctrine of election. I know my own wayward heard (Jeremiah 17:9), so I am conscious of the fact that I would never have submitted to God out of any original motion of my heart. It took the sovereign intervention of God to change my heart (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and will (Philippians 2:13) to save me from the dominion of sin and Satan. "So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy" (Romans 9:16).

Yet, there are men who hate the doctrine of election. They hate it so much that they make up evil caricatures of it, because their biblical arguments are so unconvincing. I have had anti-Calvinists tell me that the doctrine of election means that people can plead with God to save them, but He will shut them away because they aren't elect. Really? Where does the Bible describe any such person? Rather, the Bible asserts just the opposite: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one" (Romans 3:10-12). So, the Bible says that not even one person, of himself, seeks after God. Jesus also addressed this subject: "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (John 6:44). So, this hypothetical situation invented by the anti-Calvinist is something that the Bible says is impossible. Yet, the same caricature is repeated ad nauseum.

However, what these verses do tell us is that there would be no one saved without election. That is the world preferred by the anti-Calvinist. Better that no one be saved than that God choose those who will be saved. 

To my mind, that makes the anti-Calvinist evil, not the sovereign God described by the Canons.

The Synod of Dort

Does the Bible Allow for a Doctrine of Reincarnation?

In Hebrews 9:27, we get this simple declaration from God: "It is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment." Here is a totally unambiguous description of our personal eschatology, i. e., the events that will happen to each of us individually in the hereafter, as opposed to the big events that will affect the whole world.

It will be the normal event for every individual to die, and to be immediately judged. We get a similar indication in John 3:18, where Jesus tells us, "Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." The key term here is "already," indicating that it is not something waiting for the future.

While there is a future Judgment, these verses tell us that it will be a judgment of ratification. Knowledge of our eternal state is not waiting for that day.

However, another implication of the Hebrews verse is something quite contrary to any Christian version of reincarnation. If the person is judged already, then he cannot have second, third, fourth, etc., chances in additional lives. Rather, we are explicitly told that both the godly (II Corinthians 5;8, Philippians 1:21-23) and the wicked (II Peter 2:9) are already spiritually present in their ultimate destinations, whether Heaven or Hell, awaiting the resurrection, not to learn their fates, but rather to have their bodies join their spirits in their designated abodes. There is nothing to indicate a return to this world for rebirth! Any assertion to the contrary must deny either the inerrancy of the Scripture or the judgment, turning a profession of Christianity into a baptized form of Hinduism.

Sanctification: We Shall Be Like Him

"The justification of a sinner introduces him into a state in which he can no more be left to the dominion of sin and the possibility of the curse than Christ can lose His glory or God be unfaithful to His promises and oath" (James Henley Thornwell, "The Necessity and Nature of Christianity").

In its simplest, justification in Scripture refers to the declaration of "Not Guilty" on the sinner redeemed by the blood of Christ, applied through faith alone: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9). Look also at verses 4-5: "God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved." See also Acts 15:11 and Romans 3:24. These references are far from exhaustive. However, Thornwell's point above is that our justification is the beginning of God's work in us, not the totality. And the Apostle Paul gave us the same assurance: "I am sure of this, that He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6).

The problem with modern Christians is that we talk about being saved from the wrath of God. And that is, indeed, a wonderful thing which is taught in Scripture: "Since, therefore, we have now been justified by His blood, much more shall we be saved by Him from the wrath of God" (Romans 5:9). Jesus by His blood has brought us into peace with His Father, who had been offended by our sin (Romans 5:1). But that was never intended to be the end of His work.

What were we told when Jesus was born among us? "She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21). This was the promise given to Joseph about the unexpected pregnancy of his betrothed wife. Notice the promise. It is not just that Jesus would save His people from the curse for their sins, as glorious as that is, but from the sins themselves!

We know that this is a gradual process in this life. We grieve as we find in ourselves attitudes of wickedness that are inconsistent with our profession of Christ. Yet, we are also encouraged by the promises of Scripture that we are no longer possessed by sin, and someday, when we see Him face to face, we shall finally be as sinless as our Savior is: "Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when He appears we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is" (I John 3:2).

Sovereign Grace, the Trinity, and the Christian Life

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the

sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with His blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you."

- I Peter 1:1-2 

This is the opening salutation from Peter's first epistle. Notice that it is not written to men in general but specifically to Christians, whom he identifies as the true Israel (compare Romans 9:8, Galatians 3:7, 6:16, etc.), gathered by the sovereign grace of God. 

And when I say God, I don't mean in a vague, generic sense. Rather, Peter identifies our election as the work of the triune God of the Bible: the foreknowledge of the Father, the sanctification of the Holy Spirit, and the obedience of the Son, applied, figuratively speaking, by the sprinkling with His blood, an image from the Old Testament sacrifices (such as Leviticus 7:2 and 14:7). Peter does not contemplate a unitary deity, whether of the Arian type or the Sabellian. 

Nor does Peter contemplate any sort of works religion, as is taught by those pseudo-Christian sects. Rather, he tells us that the Father chose us, the Holy Spirit changed us, and the Son fulfilled all righteousness for us, that it might be imputed to us. In just these two verses, Peter teaches us to see our reunion with our God as fully trinitarian and fully by His sovereign grace, which is why he could add, in verse 4, that we have "an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you." The same sovereign, trinitarian grace that saved us also keeps us secure until we reach our heavenly goal."I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6).

Peter and Paul Against Annihilationism: What of Judgment?

One thing that I have noticed when dealing with people from pseudo-Christian sects is that, when confronted with Scripture that flatly refute some peculiar doctrine of theirs, they will immediately turn to attacking me, instead of addressing the Scripture. "Do you mean you think...?" Well, what I think isn't the issue, so how about addressing what the Scripture says?

A good example is "soul sleep", the belief of Seventh-Day Adventists that the spirit of the dead remains unconscious with his physical remains, to be reawakened for the judgment. The Jehovah's Witnesses hold a related doctrine, claiming that the spirit is actually annihilated, to be recreated at the judgment. The two versions are remnants of their roots in the Millerite movement of the mid-Nineteenth Century.

The problem is that Scriptures say the opposite.

Paul addresses the destiny of the spirits of the righteous in two places. The first in II Corinthians 5:8: "We would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord." The other is in Philippians 1:21-23: "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better." Notice what he says, that absent from the body is present with the Lord, not waiting for Him. And again, to depart is to go to Jesus, not to sit in a grave for two-thousand years (so far) waiting for Him. Neither passage leaves any room for a gap between the death of the believer and his entrance into the heavenly presence of Jesus.

And what of the unbeliever? "The Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment" (II Peter 2:9). Thus, unbelievers, too, proceed immediately to their destination, i. e., Hell. There is no gap of time in which they sleep or are annihilated.

When I confront annihilationists with these verses, they usually ask, "Well, then, what is the judgment at the end of history for?" Well, Scripture answers that question, too.

"In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ" (I Peter 1:6-7). Peter describes his fellow Christians as having two seemingly-contradictory experiences in this world: they were rejoicing in their salvation even as they experienced trials in life (see, for example, the actions of Paul, Acts 8:3, 9:1). To what end? That their tested faith would be displayed for the glory of our Savior Jesus Christ. And what of the unbeliever? "Whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18). For him, too, judgment isn't waiting until the end of history. It occurs at death (Hebrews 9:27). Again, his appearance at the great judgment will be confirmatory of the judgment which has already occurred.

The Dual Judgment as a Refutation of Annihilationism

In interactions with annihilationists, I always insist that the Christian at death is immediately ushered into the presence of Jesus in Heaven (see II Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:21-23), and the wicked are immediately delivered to Hell (II Peter 2:9). Their usual response is, "Then what is the Judgment for?" And I can see why they ask.

In John 3:18-21, we have these words from Jesus: "Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But

Apostle John

whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God." Notice His words: "Whoever does not believe is condemned already." In other words, the judgment for sin occurs in life, unless atoned by the blood of Christ through faith. Judgment is not waiting for the end of history when Jesus returns. 

Does that mean that there won't be a great Judgment at the end of history? Not at all. As Paul tells us in II Corinthians 5:10: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil." See also II Timothy 4:1 and Revelation 20:12.

Is there a contradiction here? Of course not. Rather, the two passages are talking about two separate things. We are truly judged at death: "It is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment" (Hebrews 9:27). Then what happens at the final judgment is told to us in John 3:21, quoted above: "Whoever practices the truth comes into the Light, so that it may be seen clearly that what he has done has been accomplished in God." The final Judgment is public, unlike the judgment that occurs at each person's death. In it, the works of each person are revealed, so that the justice of God is revealed to all, whether men, angels, or demons. The wicked are revealed in their wickedness, so that the glory of God's justice is displayed. At the same time, the wicked acts of the godly are also revealed, so that the glory of His grace is also displayed. 

The Apostle Paul versus Catholic Saints

"For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account. Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith" (Philippians 1:21-25).

The verses above are an expression of the ambivalence that Paul felt about the approach of death. The epistle was probably written a few years before his martyrdom in 68AD. Did he know that it was approaching? We don't know. If he did, he doesn't explicitly say so, either here or in any of the other extant Pauline letters. But, at least hypothetically, he was considering a coming time when he would be spiritually absent. That knowledge produced a conflict within him. He gloried in the thought of being with Jesus in Heaven. However, he was also aware of the frailty of the churches that would be left behind, such as this one in Philippi.

The thing I want to focus on is something that Paul does not say. Even though he is concerned about the aid that will be needed by these Philippian Christians, he does not say, "Oh, well, the problem is solved, because you will be able to pray to me in heaven, and I will be able to intercede with Jesus for you, just as I do in this earthly life." Yet, that is what the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches teach about the dead saints in Heaven, especially Mary.

If their doctrine of saints were true, then Paul's dilemma would not exist. Therefore, we can know that Paul did not believe anything comparable to the Catholic/Orthodox doctrine of saints. It is just simple but necessary logic.

Predestination in the Epistle to the Philippians

"It has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in Him but also suffer for His sake" (Philippians 1:29).

There are two common arguments used by Arminians against the biblical doctrine of predestination. One is that God foresees (an inaccurate view of foreknowledge) who shall believes, and then He predestines them to all of the means to achieve that. The other is that predestination refers to national destinies, particularly of Israel, not to individuals.

Both of those arguments are refute by the verse above. How so?

First, note to whom Paul addresses his comment, "to you." "You" whom? To the saints at Philippi. That is not to Israel, or to people in general in the future. It is to a specific group of individuals at the time that Paul wrote this letter to them! Prior to his writing to them (specified as before the creation in Ephesians 1:4), God had mercifully granted that they would come to have saving faith in Christ. God's mercy was the a priori condition that induced the response of the Christians (Romans 9:16, Philippians 2:13). There is no hint that His predestination is a reaction to anything foreseen in the future. Second, Paul refers not just to predestination to salvation but to suffering. Now, it is certainly true that Israel has suffered, and continues to suffer. However, by no definition can it be claimed that they have suffered for Christ's sake. But also, if it is unacceptable for God to cause us to believe in Jesus apart from our sovereign wills, how can it be acceptable that He has chosen for Christians to suffer apart from those same sovereign wills? Does that not mean that the Arminian has rejected the sweetness of the one while he has swallowed the bitterness of the other?

The Continuing Obligation of the Law of God

Among professing Christians, there is a competition to find ways to twist the second clause of Romans 6:14: "You are not under law but under grace." For some reason, those interpretations never involve the first clause of the sentence. You will hear different versions, such as that the Law was done away in Christ, or that it was only for Jews, not Gentiles. But, in whatever way, such people think that the truly spiritual person despises the biblical Law.

I don't believe any such thing. Nor did the author of Romans, the Apostle Paul.

Consider what he said earlier in that same epistle: "Since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (Romans 1:28-32). OK, so "they" who? The context is a description of the unrighteousness of unbelievers. And to whom is the passage addressed? While the Church at Rome included Jews, it was predominantly a Gentile church, including members even of the emperor's family (Philippians 4:22). So, Paul is talking to Gentile Christians about unbelievers, and describes horrific sins that are properly subject to capital punishment. According to what? Not according to Roman law. Rather, according to God's law (compare I Timothy 1:8-11).

These verses are contrary to the whole popular evangelical theology of Law, which is properly known as antinomianism. The moral law is still in force, whether for Jew or for Gentile.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (XIX:5) correctly summarizes this: "The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation."

The Daughter of Jairus versus Soul Sleep

In Luke 8:40-42, 49-56, the Evangelist tells us the story of Jesus's healing of the daughter of Jairus, the leader of a synagogue. We aren't told what the girl's malady was. However, Jesus is interrupted on His way to her when He was distracted by the woman with the issue of blood (verses 43-48), and the girl dies. To say that He was interrupted is not to say that He was caught by surprise, of course. These events happened according to His providence.

In the case of the girl, Luke the Physician makes an odd observation: "Her spirit returned and she arose immediately" (verse 55). I don't recall a similar comment from any of His other healings or resuscitations.

I want to focus on that one phrase, "her spirit returned to her."

As is commonly known, Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-Day Adventists assert that the spirit has no existence apart from the body, commonly called "soul sleep." While the details differ, they both claim that whatever spirit there is remains in the grave with the body.

But then we have this verse. "Her spirit returned."

If the spirit of the dead is unconscious, remaining with the corpse, as SDA's believe, or obliterated, to be re-created at the Judgment, as Jehovah's Witnesses claim, then from where did her spirit return? At most, it should have remained unconscious in her body.

Of course, the orthodox view has no problem explaining this, since we understand that the existence of human spirit, while joined with the body, is distinct from it. When a believer dies, he or she is immediately ushered into the presence of Jesus in Heaven (II Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:21-23). The spirit of the unbeliever is immediately dismissed to Hell (John 3:18, II Peter 2:9). That is because each person is judged by his condition at death (Hebrews 9:27). Witnesses and SDA's (together with many misinformed Christians) wrongly believe that the judgment awaits the great Judgment at the return of Christ. Really? Are we supposed to believe that Jesus doesn't know our spiritual condition until then? No, but rather that judgment is a public display of the righteousness of God's justice.

Whether the girl was regenerate or not, we are not told. Whether she returned from Heaven or Hell, we cannot know.  Why she should want to return if she were in Heaven, we do not know. Those questions are often asked, but any possible answer would only be speculation.

Think of Pilate's judgment of Jesus. Pilate examined Him privately, and then went out to the crowd to announce his judgment. He didn't make that judgment in front of the crowd, but announced it "at the feast" (Matthew 27:15, Mark 15:6, Luke 23:13). This is the same division between the personal judgment of each person at death and the general judgment at the end of history

The Spirits of the Dead: Where Are They?

While their specifics are different, both Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-Day Adventists hold to a version of "soul sleep." That is, they hold that the spirits of the dead are unconscious (SDA's) or dissolved (JW's) from the time of death until the resurrection. This is in contrast to the understanding of orthodox Protestants that the spirits of dead pass immediately either into heaven (II Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:21-23) or into hell (II Peter 2:9). As the Scriptures say, there is no gap between death and judgment (Hebrews 9:27).

Personally, I cannot understand the interest that SDA'a and JW's have in maintaining their soul sleep doctrine. How does it contribute to the Christian life to believe it?

But, as I have said before, the psychological element is not the only one. The Scriptures are also contrary to it. Use the "annihilationism" tag below to see those other comments. Here I want to add one more.

In Romans 8:38-39, the Apostle Paul gives us a wonderful promise of God: "I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." Notice that he explicitly includes "death." Even death shall not separate the true believer from the love of God.

Is that not what the doctrine of soul sleep says, especially as the Jehovah's Witnesses teach it? They hold that the dead person spends the indefinite period of time between his death and his resurrection without any experience of God's love. Yet, that is contrary to God's promise, as given us by Paul.

Another consequence of this doctrine is the hope it gives to the unbeliever. Unbelievers imagine that death is far from them, so they can continue in their illusion of autonomy from God. If SDA'a and JW's are adding an indefinite period, even thousands of years, after death, does that not increase the illusion of freedom for the unbeliever? Surely encouraging unbelief is an offense to God: "If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand" (Ezekiel 3:18). Our duty is to warn the unbeliever, not to encourage him!

The Immortality of the Human Spirit

Both Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses have a doctrine called "conditional immortality." This is not the same thing as annihilationism, but is related to it. According to their doctrine, a man's spirit is as mortal as is his body. If he believes in Jesus, then his spirit will be made immortal at the resurrection. However, in this life, they claim, there is no difference between the condition of the believer's spirit and the unbeliever's spirit. Only the believer has eternal life (and that doesn't become effectual until the resurrection).

That is not at all biblical.

Let's start with the logical fallacy of bait and switch which underlies the doctrine. The JW's and SDA's make eternal existence mean the same thing as eternal life. That would mean that only the believer, having eternal life, therefore has eternal existence. That equivalency is false.

Every human being, since Adam, and excluding Jesus alone, has entered life with a spirit with eternal existence, but dead: "You were dead in the trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1). Contrary to the assumption of the conditionalists, men do not start in a neutral condition. They start out as spiritually dead, and enter continuing eternal death.

The unbeliever remains in his dead condition: "Whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18). Therefore, when his body dies and he enters eternity, it is not as a person who now dies spiritually. That has always been his condition! Therefore, he enters eternity dead, and continues as such for all eternity in Hell (II Peter 2:9).

The believer on the other hand, at the moment he believes, becomes alive for the first time: "You, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with Him" (Colossians 2:13). The believer has changed condition, from death to new life, what the Bible calls being born again (John 3:3-7) and new creation (I Corinthians 5:17). He doesn't begin eternal life at the resurrection. he begins eternal life at the moment that he believes! And now, when his body dies, that principle of spiritual life remains, and he is immediately taken into the presence of the ascended Jesus (II Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:21-23).

All of this goes to show that there is nothing conditional about spiritual immortality. What is conditional is whether a man will remain eternally dead, or will he become alive in the new birth by Jesus Christ. The JW and SDA doctrine has much too low a view of the new life, in my opinion.

Abandoning the Law is Abandoning Righteousness

I admit that it is chic to speak against biblical Law. Even among non-dispensationalists, the idea has become accepted that the Law was a standard of righteousness under the Old Testament, but not under the New. It is usually expressed by a perversion of Romans 6:14: "You are not under law but under grace." That it is a perversion, not a legitimate use of Paul, is evident if the reader continues to the next verse: "What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!" And, of course, none of these people ever quotes Romans 3:31: "Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Paul is addressing the question of the origin of righteousness. Can any man be made righteous by the Law? No! Righteousness comes only by grace through faith: "Not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Philippians 3:9, see also Romans 9:31-32).

This error among Christians has had a devastating effect on American society. By presupposing a false view of the Law, Christians have had no platform for addressing public wickedness. And Scripture warns of this consequence: "Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but those who keep the law strive against them" (Proverbs 28:4). The great catastrophes of today's society, such as abortion, are not the result of abandonment of biblical morality by the wicked, but by its abandonment by Christians! 

Christians hold protests, rallies, prayer meetings, in fact every variety of spiritual activity, hoping to change society. Why has our effort been such a dismal failure? Scripture answers that question, too: "If one turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer is an abomination" (Proverbs 28:9). While God's professing people are refusing to hear His word, He is refusing to hear our prayers. Immoral people are not the cause of that; the self-righteous supposed people of God are!

Jesus's words to the Pharisees apply equally to modern America's evangelicals: "You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men" (Mark 7:8). What tradition? The tradition of despising God's Law.

The Unchristian Doctrine of the Prosperity Preachers

Part of what makes the Prosperity Gospel so evil is that its purveyors teach people that Jesus doesn't allow us to suffer. They claim that the Christian should never know hardship or poverty, or the loss of a loved one. When that teaching fails, as all falsehood must, it isn't the prosperity preachers who are held to account. Rather, the Christian in misery is made to feel that his suffering is the result of his own failure of faith. That can only lead to guilt, anger, and even cursing against God.

That certainly wasn't the teaching of Jesus. Luke, the Gentile Physician, records the account of His healing of the daughter of Jairus, an elder in the Jewish synagogue (Luke 8:40-42, 49-56). Jairus pleads with Jesus on behalf of his dying daughter. Surely anyone can empathize with a father's fear and desperation under such circumstances. Yet, Jesus turns away from Jairus to heal the woman with a twelve-year hemorrhage (verses 43-48). That delay proves fatal for Jairus's daughter, as a messenger arrives to inform him of his daughter's death.

Notice how contrary this story is to Prosperity teaching. Here is a man who believes in Jesus and comes to Him for help. Yet, Jesus attends to other things for a time too long for the little girl to hang on. What suffering this must have brought to this father's heart! What we see, though, is that his suffering is not the last word in the story, because Jesus does, indeed, meet his desperate need.

Why the wait? Well, we know that part of Jesus's timing is so that He could address the need of the woman with the hemorrhage. Also, we (and His Palestinian audience) see His power, not just over illness, but over even death itself!

The Apostle Paul also lived with deprivation, even as he was doing the greatest ministerial work that history has known. "I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content. I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me" (Philippians 4:11-13). He testifies that he has had high points and low points, and known both plenty and hunger. Surely this Apostle should have known perpetual prosperity if anyone should. Right? Well, no, not right. The problem with someone who knows no hardship is seen in the last sentence of these words from Paul: "I can do all things through Him who strengthens me." How could Paul have learned that dependence on God if he had never experienced need? And that is where the Prosperity Gospel fails. It teaches, not dependence on God, but rather dependence on belief. Belief in belief. And there can be no assurance when ones faith is in the wrong object.

Jairus Pleads With Jesus

Thank God for Unconditional Election!

You will commonly hear someone claim that God has given us "free will," whatever that means, and will not, therefore, make anyone love Him. What you will never hear is any Scripture cited to maintain that series of propositions, because they are the premises of humanism, not biblical Christianity.

Instead, we see the Bible make assertions such as this one (Psalm 119:49): "Remember Your word to Your servant, in which You have made me hope." "Made me hope" certainly sounds like plain speech for overcoming the author's "free will." And furthermore, it is an expression of thankfulness for that act.

Why might that be?

Someone who knows God and the Scriptures knows that "the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick" (Jeremiah 17:9). The significance of that is that "none is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God" (Romans 3:10-11). Here is the problem with the humanistic concept of free will. "Free" doesn't mean "able to do anything possible." Rather, it means "free to act according to its nature." Since the heart is naturally wicked, it is free to commit wickedness. Since spiritual good is contrary to its nature, the unregenerate heart can no more freely choose to do it than it can freely choose to fly. 

That is what makes the Psalmist glad of God's sovereign grace. While God could have left him in unbelief, with the spiritual consequences thereof (John 3:18), He chose, instead, to change the hearts of His people. He chose to change our wicked hearts into hearts capable of good (Deuteronomy 30:6, Ezekiel 36:26-27). Then He bends our will to obedience and good works (Philippians 2:13).

The argument between Calvinists and Arminians over free will is not really over whether anyone can or cannot be saved by free will. Really, considering what the Bible says about the heart, the debate is between the Calvinistic view that salvation is certain for the elect, and the Arminian view which logically requires that salvation is impossible for anyone!