December 2013

Both moral and immoral individuals are alienated from God and are offensive to Him. This may be counterintuitive, but moral people may be lost due to their "goodness." Why? It is often the case that goodness keeps people from God. In fact, many people avoid sin and Jesus in an attempt to become their own saviors, justifying themselves. However, the gospel is not about moralism or relativism and is equally offensive to both the moral and the irreligious. Christ calls us to repent of both our good and bad works, for we have no righteousness of our own.

Jesus disapproved of people who trusted in their own morality, as shown by His statement, "If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, 'We see,' your guilt remains" (John 9:41). Those who believe that God will accept them based on their goodness only understand part of the truth. Although God loves what is good, He also loves the truth. Therefore, we must confess that, in light of God's holy law, we are not good and have woefully failed to do what is pleasing to God, replacing Him with worthless self-pleasing idol substitutes, and deserve punishment for it. Those who think they have done enough to please God have not understood the seriousness of their condition. John Calvin once said, "Man is never sufficiently touched and affected by the awareness of his lowly state until he has compared himself with God's majesty." In light of God's holiness, all individuals, even the best of us, would become undone. This was even the case with the holiest saints of the Bible, who fell at God's feet as though dead when He revealed Himself to them. God created us to enjoy and glorify Him, but humans voluntarily rebelled against Him, falling into the bondage of the self-centeredness of sin, and cannot help themselves out of it.

Those who love listening to sermons and MP3s, especially smart-phone users, check out the following page. It is a hub for MP3s on every chapter of Scripture - including only solid Reformed pastors and teachers or teachers we otherwise think are helpful. There are thousands of free MP3s here that are just waiting for you to download into your smart-phone or tablet.

This is a must see >>> Bookmark this page <<<

Without doubt, this is the single most popular verse used to dismiss the biblical doctrine of election, bar none. The meaning of the verse is simply assumed, and because of this, no time is taken to study it, which is the very hallmark of tradition. I have to admit that I did this for many years. Those most enslaved to tradition are those who think they do not have any.

First of all then, let us read the verse in its context:

2 Peter 3:1-9––“This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.’ For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.”

The following is an excerpt from From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective by David and Jonathan Gibson

Is definite atonement actually taught in the Scriptures, or do prejudiced interpreters read it into biblical texts? I. Howard Marshall asks the right question: “Is it possible to interpret the election statements in such a way as to be consistent with the universal statements without twisting the meaning of either? I will argue here that supporters of definite atonement can answer that question in the affirmative. A number of texts in the Pastoral Epistles, the Petrine Epistles, and Hebrews that speak to the issue of definite atonement will be considered. Many of the texts examined here are part of the arsenal of those who defend unlimited/general atonement. In this chapter, I will argue that (1) understanding some of these texts in a way that supports definite atonement is more persuasive exegetically and theologically; and (2) those texts which do concern God’s salvific stance to all kinds of people (1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10) or to everyone (2 Pet. 3:9) do not in fact disprove the doctrine of definite atonement—God’s desire for people to be saved and his intention to save only the elect are compatible elements in biblical soteriology.

Read More ...