Infant Rebellion, Sin, and the Judgment of God

I continually run into folks who deny that children are sinners, or that they are accountable for their sins. Most of those people claim that there is an "age of accountability," below which there is no judgment for sin. Yet, when I challenge them to show where the Scriptures say any such thing, the response generally boils down to, "Well, I just know it!"

The amazing thing is that these people will hold on to their assertions, even when confronted with the biblical evidence to the contrary, such as Psalm 51:5 or Psalm 58:3. See here and here. Yet, I will continue my fight with yet one more Bible verse.

"I knew that you would surely deal treacherously, and that from before birth you were called a rebel. [Yet] for My name’s sake I [God] defer My anger; for the sake of My praise I restrain it for you, that I may not cut you off" (Isaiah 48:8-9).

This passage is God's speaking to Israel, represented as a collective person. That person, God says, was a rebel from birth. Furthermore, that rebellion, He says, was properly subject to His wrath, though He has chosen to defer it. This deferment is an act of grace, for the sake of His covenantal reputation.

Some will say that, since God is speaking to the whole nation of Israel, this passage doesn't apply to the matter at hand. However, since He is speaking to the nation by analogy to a single person, does not logic require that His analogy also means that what He says would apply to a single person? There could be no analogy if the application didn't go both ways.

This would seem to completely obliterate any case for an age of accountability, because it both calls a newborn a rebel, a form of sin (I Samuel 15:23), and says that the rebellious newborn is properly subject to His wrath. Thus, both assertions of the supporters of infant innocence and the age of accountability are refuted.

The Example of Jesus for Our Apologetic

My objection to classical apologetics is that its proponents believe in finding a common ground with their anti-Christian opponents. Part of that is that they do not use Scripture as their evidence, because the unbeliever doesn't consider the Scriptures to be authoritative. Therefore, the apologist claims, he must appeal to the unbeliever on the basis of something that unbeliever considers authoritative. 

Do you see a problem with that principle? To the Christian, God and His word are authoritative. Of course the unbeliever rejects that authority, because he is an unbeliever! Therefore, when the Christian seeks an authority that the unbeliever accepts, he is accepting the very premise of unbelief, that God is not the ultimate authority (Genesis 3:5). In order to defend Christianity, therefore, the classical apologist starts by accepting the worldview of the unbeliever. That is to surrender before joining battle!

We must, in contrast, use the Bible exactly because it is the highest standard, the word of God Himself. If we turned to another standard, then we would be adopting the worldview of the atheist. It is illegitimate for the atheist to expect us to adopt HIS worldview in order to discuss worldviews. In fact, THAT would be circular reasoning. It is legitimate, however, for us to argue from our own worldview. Would an atheist allow us to forbid him to argue from a secular source? Obviously not. So, his assertion would be the application of a double standard, and should be labeled as such. 

Ask this question: When confronted by unbelief, what apologetical standard did Jesus apply? Look at His confrontation with Satan, the highest standard of unbelief, in Matthew 4:1-11, Mark 1:12-13, and Luke 4:1-13. In the face of each challenge, His response was, "It is written..." If Jesus, God incarnate, depended on Scripture for His apologetic, how can men do less? And let us not forget that it is only His word that God promises to empower: "So shall My word be that goes out from My mouth; it shall not return to Me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it" (Isaiah 55:11). 

Abortion: The Abomination of Shedding Innocent Blood

There are topics over which Christians disagree, whether God approves or disapproves of something. The use of alcoholic beverages comes to mind. However, when God says that He hates something, there is no room for disagreement.

"There are six things that the Lord hates,
     seven that are an abomination to him:
haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
     and hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked plans,
     feet that make haste to run to evil,
a false witness who breathes out lies, 
      and one who sows discord among brothers." 
- Proverbs 6:16-19

So here the Holy Spirit gives us a list of things which God not only hates, but which are abominations to Him. That is the strongest term used in Scripture for something which God opposes. Some of them might surprise us, such as lying. However, the part I want to emphasize is "hands that shed innocent blood." And it is key to notice that it is innocent blood, so we aren't talking about self-defense, or enemies killed in war, or the perpetrators of crimes deserving capital punishment. Rather, it is about murder, the killing of an innocent party.

Can there be anyone more innocent than an infant in the womb? Yet, we in America kill three thousand preborn infants every day. In God's eyes, that makes us guilty of innocent blood, and, therefore, abominations in His sight, apart from forgiveness by faith in Jesus Christ. This guilt applies to the mothers, the fathers, the doctors and nurses, and to the political leaders who stand by while the genocide continues.

The Polytheism and Self-Deception of Mormons

I interact often with Mormons on the question of whether they are polytheists. They deny it, though they willingly say that they believe that there is an unknown number of gods in addition to their god. However, they say that doesn't make them polytheists because they only worship one god. In support of their profession, they refer to the frequent biblical references to the gods of the nations, and even of pagan gods worshiped by Israel.

Of course, they ignore such sceptical references to gods as Deuteronomy 32:21: "They have made me jealous with what is no god; they have provoked me to anger with their idols." And I Corinthians 8:5: "Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth..." In other words, biblical references to "gods" don't refer to actual deities, but rather to the idols of the pagans. It is a form of sarcasm.

And what does the Bible say about those idols? "[They] have cast their gods into the fire, for they were no gods, but the work of men’s hands, wood and stone" (Isaiah 37:19). The idols of the pagans have no divine power, but are only the artifacts of men's hands, empty wood and stone. The one real God ridicules such foolishness: "They know not, nor do they discern, for He has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their hearts, so that they cannot understand. No one considers, nor is there knowledge or discernment to say, 'Half of it I burned in the fire; I also baked bread on its coals; I roasted meat and have eaten. And shall I make the rest of it an abomination? Shall I fall down before a block of wood?' He feeds on ashes; a deluded heart has led him astray, and he cannot deliver himself or say, 'Is there not a lie in my right hand?'" (Isaiah 44:18-20).

The point of the biblical references to "gods" is not because there are actually other gods, but because there aren't. The belief in other gods is presented as foolishness and self-deception. Yet these are the very references that the Mormons use to maintain their claims. 

Further Biblical Testimony Against "Soul Sleep"

I have covered the issue of soul sleep before. One version is held by Seventh-Day Adventists and teaches exactly that, that the spirit of the dead is asleep in the grave, waiting to be revived at the Second Coming. The Jehovah's Witnesses hold a different version, according to which the spirit of the dead disintegrates, and is recreated at the Second Coming.  Either way, the doctrine is unbiblical.

First, consider Acts 7:59: "And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, 'Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.'" The context is the account of the martyrdom of Stephen. Just as he is about to die, he proclaims the words recorded here. The verb "receive" is a present tense imperative. Present tense, not future tense. He expects to pass in the coming seconds from his current circumstances into the waiting arms of Jesus. He expected no intervening period of two-thousand years - so far - before that meeting. Unlike the members of the Watchtower, he expected that blessing now! 

Next, look at Hebrews 12:23: "[You have come] to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect." Here the author describes the Heavenly Jerusalem, the glorified church, sometimes called the Church Triumphant, which consists of "spirits made perfect." Notice again the present tense. These spirits are the saints already in Heaven, in their glorified state. They are not spirits in the author's far future, as the Watchtower and SDA's claim. 

On top of the proofs I have given in the past (use the "soul sleep" tag at the bottom), these verses easily demonstrate that the soul sleep doctrine, whether of the Seventh-Day Adventist version or of the Jehovah's Witness version, is a manmade doctrine, invented in spite of the biblical testimony, not derived from it. 

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. 

Jesus Our Surety, and the Threatenings of God's Justice

There are terrible warnings in Scripture: "I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done" (Revelation 20:12). Some cults like to refer to such verses to support their belief in salvation based, even if just partly, on works. That is, they take such warnings to mean, as the Muslims believe, that each person's works in his life are read out, and if they fail to meet some threshold, then that person goes to Hell. Yet they can never tell us what that threshold is. 

There is a serious problem with such an assertion: "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). And even more disturbing: "We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment" (Isaiah 64:6). So, if all men are sinners, and our best works are no better than filthy rags, how can any man be saved? And, indeed, if we stopped here, and all men were condemned to Hell, then God would be perfectly just. 

However, for the true believer, there is a solution: "O LORD, You will ordain peace for us, for You have indeed done for us all our works" (Isaiah 26:12). The works that God requires from us He has imputed to us. "Imputed" means that something we have not done is credited to us as if we had done it. Imputed from where? From the perfect works of Jesus: "Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen" (Hebrews 13:20-21). Jehovah, the preincarnate Jesus told us what would happen, and the Epistle to the Hebrews tells us the same thing that had happened. Jesus lived perfectly, God and man in one Person, so that His perfection could be imputed to every Christian by means of faith alone. 

Justifying Faith Is a Working Faith

In my day to day ministry, I confront many sectarians who hold to some version of works righteousness, Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals. They hate the doctrine of justification by free grace. Why? Part of it is the remainder of Adam in each of us, that seeks to be justified by the broken covenant of works. However, there is also a part which is bondage: the man who is free in Christ has no loyalty to organizational hierarchies. They simply have no hold over him.

These organizations point to the commands in Scripture to live holy lives. And those commands are truly there, and should be in the mind of every Christian. That isn't the problem. The problem is that they claim that those works commanded by Scripture are commanded in order to gain the favor of God, though they may phrase it in different ways. That is, they claim that justification is, in part, the result of these works. And that destroys the true doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone, apart from works (e. g., Romans 3:28). That is, they put the result for the cause, and, thus, destroy assurance of salvation.

In every discussion on this issue, we can expect these works-mongerers to refer to James 2:24: "You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." They consistently block out the context of the paragraph that includes that verse, which is about the demonstration of justification before men, not justification before God.

Then they will bring up the accusation against the biblical Christian that "faith alone" means that works are irrelevant, allowing the Christian to live wickedly, and yet go to heaven. That is a caricature, which has been answered repeatedly down through history. Yet the works-mongerers consider themselves very clever to repeat it, regardless of the answer. What is that answer? "Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love" (Westminster Confession of Faith XI:2). True faith will necessarily result in good works.

The New American Babel: Humanism

I love America. It is my homeland, and the home of my ancestors for three hundred years, not even counting my American Indian ancestors. It is as a patriot and a believer that I recognize that she is currently dominated by secular humanism, the religious view that holds that the intellect of men is the standard of morality. Even most professing Christians are actually humanists, judging all things according to whether those things make them feel good.

However, the Bible gives God's answer to humanism: "The LORD of hosts has purposed it, to defile the pompous pride of all glory, to dishonor all the honored of the earth" (Isaiah 23:9). the more that men lift themselves up, regardless of the Christian terminology they put on it, the more they are setting themselves up to be overthrown. What effect that will have on the nation as a whole, I don't know.

What I do know is that this is not a new problem. it is exactly what happened soon after men started to rebuild after the Flood: "Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. And they said to one another, 'Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.' And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. Then they said, 'Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth'" (Genesis 11:1-4). So soon after godly Noah, his descendants were pursuing their own glory, just as their predecessors had. However, God witnessed their conspiracy: "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. And the Lord said, 'Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.' So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth" (Genesis 11:5-9).

The Tower of Babel represented the decision of men to glorify themselves as men. However, God saw and confounded their plans. The issue is that men may reject our place as creatures, and thus God's place as Creator. However, God never does either.

Now, my fear is what God will do to America, when He wearies of her tower of humanism. Every prior empire has been cast down violently. I pray they He will bring repentance before He brings judgment.