Pagan Reset

Back in the days of the Roman Empire paganism was the religion of the day. The Romans were taken with Greek mythology and the many deities of the Greek Pantheon. As a result they took many of the Greek gods for themselves and incorporated them into the Roman form of worship. In Rome you could worship whichever deities you wanted providing you acknowledged Caesar as God and were prepared to kneel before him.

After the crucifixion of Jesus in Jerusalem around 33AD the gospel was carried by the apostles throughout the Middle East and to Asia, Greece and Rome by the apostle Paul. By the fourth century Christianity began to seriously displace paganism as the religion of prominence and with the action of the Emperor Constantine who began to institute Christianity as the state religion. This did not happen officially until sometime after after he died (337AD), in 381AD. We could say that there had been a major religious reset in favour or Christendom at that time.

This has remained the case in Europe and the West for the last sixteen hundred years but with the advent of humanism and evolution combined with liberalism and theistic evolution in the Christian Church and, including the activities of New Age Movement and Theosophical Society. We are witnessing at a situation where we could say that we looking at a Pagan reset.  In this regard we have seen a great falling away as Christ Jesus prophesied in Matthew chapter 24 verses 9 through 13.

In fact, one could look at the activities of Rome over the last five centuries, since the Reformation, through entities like the Jesuits, the Knights of Malta and the infiltration of Free Masonry by esoteric illuminism. We see a move to change society by educating the ruling elite in humanism or paganism with the intention of replacing bible believing Christianity with either esoteric New Age thinking or scientism and humanism. The result be a society based on atheism or secretly containing pagan adherents who worship the old occult deities but behind closed doors.

Either way we see a massive turning away from Yahweh Elohim in our time as Jesus prophesied. In many parts of the world believers are persecuted for their faith in Christ which is also mentioned scripture quoted above. No where is this more obvious though than in the Western World where in the last forty years Christian churches have close en-mass as a result of ageing congregants and youth taking up atheism and humanism.

An interesting illustration of this is the infiltration of Western democracy by the extreme left wing. In New Zealand we see an example of this in the person of our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who was a past President of the International Union of Socialist Youth in 2008. We are seeing society increasingly taken over by humanist groups with anti-Christian agendas. Whether it’s related to race or gender or even issues such as abortion, euthanasia and Islam. Christians are being identified as extremists and often besmirched as fascist conservatives.

After the Christchurch mosque shootings (2019), it was noteworthy to see an Interfaith group called on to pray together in the New Zealand Parliament debating chamber. This was reported in an article from Radio New Zealand entitled “Praying With Strangers In Parliament,” and this is the first time it has ever happened. Basically this is a New Age group involving Islam, Buddhism and various ecumenical Christian groups. It is also interesting that Interfaith is basically under the auspices of the Pope and thus Rome.

So what could we say as a final word about this impending World Pagan Reset. Well if we draw back to Matthew chapter twenty four and what Christ Jesus had to say then. He indicated that when we saw these things we might know that end is near and that they have to occur before He returns. So sharpen your knowledge of the word and take up the full armor of God mentioned in Ephesians chapter six. Get the gospel out there and lead as many to Christ as we can. The time is, I believe, nigh.

Reference List

Five Things You Didn’t Know About Jacinda Ardern. https://www.penguin.co.nz/articles/2566-five-things-you-didnt-know-about-jacinda-ardern 28/02/08

Greek Gods & Goddesses https://greekgodsandgoddesses.net/greek-vs-roman-gods/ 28/02/21

Pope Francis: “Interfaith dialogue an antidote to violence.” https://ing.org/pope-francis-interfaith-dialogue-antidote-violence/ 28/02/21

Matthew chapter 24 verses 9-13 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+24%3A+10-13&version=NASB1995 28/02/21

Pearson J.B. 1999. RELIGION AND THE RETURN OF MAGIC:WICCA AS ESOTERIC SPIRITUALITY https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/133457/1/11003543.pdf 28/02/21

Praying with Strangers in Parliament https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/the-house/audio/2018687276/praying-with-strangers-in-parliament 28/02/21

 

Calvinism

I was brought up as an Evangelical Christian. I was taught to believe John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. I was also taught to obey Acts 2:38 “Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” So  believe on Christ Jesus and make a profession of faith in the act of immersion baptism. Basically Christianity is not that complicated.

Once many many years ago I remember hearing of Calvinism. It was a warning that some Presbyterian Churches followed John Calvin’s teachings from the Reformation. I didn’t know a thing about Calvin and I wasn’t too sure what the Reformation was at that time either. What I’m saying here is that I was oblivious to Reformation Theology and as there were countless denominations, and churches, that had no knowledge or concern about Calvinism. It made no difference to me or many other believers at the time.

Well things have changed. Due to the influence of secular humanism and the impact of liberalism on the Church as a whole. A large part of Bible Believing Evangelical Sector is now being slowly reabsorbed into Rome or has simply vanished as ageing parishioners have passed away.

So, we Christians who are not catered for in the Charismatic or Liberal Mainline Churches are left with few alternatives. Hence I have found myself in a Reformed Presbyterian Church and am having to come to grips with Reformed Theology, Calvinism and nuanced approaches to things like preaching style and the sacraments of baptism and holy communion.

Initially, I found it all rather strange and upsetting. I knew I needed to come to terms with the Reformed Theology or I wasn’t going to be able to stay. As always it comes down to learning about something and coming to understand it before you can finally make and assessment and a decision about it for the future.

So first I studied Calvinism. Calvinism is based on the teachings of John Calvin and speaks largely to the doctrine of Predestination and the sovereignty of God. It holds that a person is predestined by God to Salvation or Damnation. This has caused quite a controversy since the time of the Reformation with numerous proponents and opponents.

Since the time of John Wesley, Calvinism has been a minority teaching in the British Colonies. However, with the impact of liberalism and ecumenism weakening many denominations, it has made a strong resurgence. Largely it speaks to the nature of God and it can be a real bone of contention between believers with strong opinions but, it does not effect salvation and can be ignored with an attitude of love and tolerance. So it isn’t a problem unless it’s a problem.

Next is the Reformed Theology which embraces Calvinism and all things traditional to the opinions and approaches of the Reformers. So I’m talking again about sacraments like baptism and communion along with entrenched methodologies relating to issues like preaching style.

Baptism in the Reformed Tradition is focused on having congregants baptised as babies. Now the traditional thinking from Rome is baptise babies as fast as possible so they can be saved. While baptism in the Reformed Tradition does not relate to a persons salvation but when a baby is sprinkled they are considered to be baptised. Thus they do not require a further baptism when they reach the age of understanding.

My view is that a child may be dedicated or presented to the Lord as a baby and is supported by the church community but that this does not constitute baptism. It is however a very necessary and good thing. I don’t have a conflict with the Reformed Tradition here because I feel they are dedicating the child not baptising it.

Another issue in the baptism discussion is the sprinkling versus immersion debate. I believe a person is baptised at the age of understanding, or later, upon belief in Jesus work on the Cross at Calvary. I also believe that true baptism is immersion baptism where a person is completely immersed in water as John the Baptist performed it.

So, can I accept the Reformed Churches methodology in relation to baptism? In short yes I can. I don’t believe you can baptise a child but you can present and dedicate (Christen), a child. So I have not argument with what they do. In fact I applaud them that they are so fervent in this regard.

Do I accept that dedication is enough to cover a person’s baptism for life. No, not really. Baptism is not essential to salvation but it is a profession of faith and a time of beginning of ministry. As it was for Christ Jesus when He had John the Baptist perform baptism on Him. The Father said “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.” Then Spirit descended on Him as a dove. So as it says in Acts 2:38 “Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Immersion baptism then signifies repentance and baptism in the Holy Spirit. It is a time of major blessing and a new beginning. I would certainly encourage any believer to get baptised and this could bring me into conflict with the Reformed Tradition and so result in censure. However, that would be a pretty extreme situation. So again, it isn’t problem until it’s a problem.

Another difference relates to the Reformed Tradition and the approach to the nature of the sacraments. Of which baptism as described above is one and the Lord’s Supper is another. With Holy Communion I would say the Reformed Tradition lies between Rome and the congregational churches approach. Rome holds that the priest is re-crucifying Christ each and every time the sacraments are given and the congregational approach is that the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper only symbolise the body and blood of Christ. I gather and I will stand corrected that the Reformed Tradition holds that bread and wine are more than just symbols of the body and blood of Christ and that there is a spiritual element to the performance of this sacrament and the nature of the bread and wine when it is employed.

This could be the case if you read what Christ Jesus said in Matthew 26: 26-28 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the new covenant... However I would still tend to lean toward the congregational opinion that it is purely symbolism and not more than that. Although a very necessary part of Christian life.

Now another issue and the last I will discuss in this article that is different is the way preaching is handled in the reformed church. Whereas, preaching in congregational churches is topical and largely left to the preacher to decide on the issue to treat with a selection of scriptures applied during the sermon. In the reformed church preaching is performed using a scripture focused verse by verse and chapter by chapter methodology. Although this is limiting some latitude is given to the preacher to address issues in the church and to tie in other scriptures. It is different but it seems to work quite well and I wouldn’t say it’s a deal breaker. Although it can be a bit overwhelming if you take it as another part of the whole Reformed Theology which takes some adjusting too. Yet again, it isn’t a problem until it’s a problem.

So, as you can see there is definitely a need to understand what the Reformed Churches believe if you intend to join one of them. There are, I believe, real advantages to belonging to such a church. For a start the members of a reformed church are very earnest and search the scriptures. They hold strongly to the Reformed Tradition and can, and will, mount a defence of those doctrines. I can also state that if you join one of their congregations you will learn a lot more about church history, doctrines and traditions than you would have thought possible when you started the journey. You will be challenged and these caring and loving Christians will expect you to flourish and to grow.

The Tension Around Calvinism

I don’t doubt that a good number of believers will disagree with what I am about to say. I believe there is a tension around the nature of God and what Christians, and Calvinists, feel the nature of God is really like. Is God all powerful, prone to fits of anger, vindictive or is He loving, patient, kind and compassionate?

In the Old Testament the Israelite's knew God to be a someone who didn’t mess around and was to be feared. The Lord makes no bones about the consequences to people for disobeying Him. In Exodus Thirty Two we read of the consequences when Israel worshiped the calf that Aaron made for them while Moses was talking to God on the mountain. As soon as he returned, Moses called those still faithful to him and instructed them to strap on a sword. They were then to go back and forth from the gate of the camp and to slay their brother and their friend. This was a commandment from the Lord and three thousand men of Israel died that day

Another instance is described in Numbers Twenty One where the people of Israel were headed for Mount Hor in order to avoid Edom. They spoke against God and he sent snakes against them. He then instructed Moses to construct a bronze serpent and to attach it to a pole. Those who looked at it would be saved. God seemed to be both swifter to judge and to punish in the Old testament than we find in the New Testament
Now these are two well known instances and there are very many similar occurrences in the Old Testament. However, if we look at the people in the Old Testament of whom it says they were anointed of God and I assume it is fair to say they were filled with the Spirit of God. Their experience seems to more closely match that of the New Testament saints. People like Samson and Saul struggled even with their anointing but there are many Christians who struggle with their anointing as well. There are also Christians today like King David in the Old Testament who could relate to his descriptions of a benevolent creator who loves His children. A compassionate being who wants only the best for them. A God who is loving, patient, kind and compassionate.

In the New Testament we are under the New Covenant and are dealing for the most part with Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The relationship the saints of the New Testament have through the Spirit and in Christ Jesus is much more loving and personal. As I mentioned before it much more closely matches the relationship that David presents to us in the Psalms or for that matter that many of the Old Testament saints, prophets and judges had with the Lord in that they were anointed and received the Spirit of God as do we.

So how does this relate to the tension between Calvinism and Arminianism. Calvinists believe that those who believe on Jesus Christ are predestined and everything that they do is also foreordained. This is also the Calvinist view of the wicked and the lost. That they are equally predestined to eternity in hell fire. How does this reconcile with the biblical view of a loving God who so loved the world that He gave his only Son that whosoever believes on him shall not perish but will inherit eternal life?

Why do Calvinists have such a stern view of God despite the way He is portrayed in the New Testament? I tend to think it has much to do with a tendency of the Church to misunderstand the relationship with God under the Old Covenant in contrast with the complete reversal of fortunes through Christ’s redemptive work on the Cross and under the New Covenant. Under the Law man was constrained by an inability to abide by the Law in any state approaching perfection which was the standard that God required.

Whereas, Christ as the Son of Man completed a life that was perfectly without sin and became the sacrifice necessary as the only begotten Son of God to pay the price for all who would believe on Him. Thus the requirements of the Law are fulfilled in Christ Jesus and the price of the sins of mankind are paid by for those who attain salvation through Him.

Matthew 5:17-18 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one dot or one mark will pass from the law until all be fulfilled. MEV

The New Covenant as described in Jeremiah chapter Thirty One and restated in Hebrews Eight verses Eight through Twelve tells of the New Covenant that Jesus spoke of in Matthew Twenty Eight before He ascended. It tells of the relationship we have under Christ where the Holy Spirit indwells us and writes the Law on our hearts. In this way the Law is fulfilled in us as we by faith on Christ Jesus are justified and through the indwelling of the Spirit we are sanctified.

Jeremiah 31: 31-34 Surely, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, because they broke My covenant, although I was a husband to them, says the Lord. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law within them and write it in their hearts and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They shall teach no more every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.MEV

Now a point I would make here is that the prophet Jeremiah is speaking to the people of Israel. All the people of Israel not just those who are predestined. When Jeremiah prophesied this he believed God was speaking to all of Israel and those who heard this message of Israel down through the centuries have believed this message was for all of Israel not just some Israelites. Am I saying all Israelites will repent and be saved? No but all have the opportunity of salvation in Christ in the Gentile Church. All receive the message of the New Covenant through the Cross and grace is available to all. Will all repent and be saved? No, but all have the opportunity.

To make this point a little more explicit we can look at Moses bringing the Law to the people of Israel in Exodus Chapter Twenty. Now the whole nation were assembled waiting for Moses and Aaron while they went up the mountain to speak with God and to get the Law. They came back down to meet the priests and the people. The people asked for Moses to speak to them because they feared the Lord and what would happen to them if God spoke to them. We can see from this they were all earnestly attentive to God as one people. The Law was given to the people of Israel and applied to all of them. None were expected to disobey but all were expected to repent and obey as God instructed them through Moses.

So it is with all mankind today. We have the Word of God and it is expected that all will obey the Word. So it is intended for all men and women to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ and to repent but grace is applied only to those who do repent. Provision is made for all but applied to the elect.

Another area of tension around Calvinism and Arminianism is the contention that God is Love. Being fairly conservative by nature many Christians and in particular males tend to be uncomfortable with the idea that God is Love. But the bible supports this notion and it tends to raise questions among those who prefer a more authoritarian stereo type for God.

1John 4:16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.MEV

1John 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God.MEV

Zephaniah 3:17 The Lord your God is in your midst, a mighty one who will save; he will rejoice over you with gladness; he will quiet you by his love; he will exult over you with loud singing.MEV

So, if God is Love and if we abide in love we abide in him. Is it not fair to say that God would allow His children some choice in the decision to follow Him and believe on His Son. In fact doesn’t it go hand in hand with the idea that Satan rebelled against God and led one third of the angels against God and from that time God has desired a people who love Him and seek to follow Him of their own volition. Such that, they believe the love that God has for us. They understand that God is love. And whoever abides in love abides in God and God abides in Him. And also as the scripture says:

Romans 8:29 For 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. NASB

Yet another concept that is an important one in the tension around Calvinism is found in Colossians 3:3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. Earlier in this article I mentioned that God is seen to be all powerful, prone to fits of anger, vindictive. This is particularly so in the Old Testament. Yet Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit are much more focused on love, forgiveness and compassion for the lost.

I wonder if perhaps that vengeful God of the Old Testament is based on the actions of God the Father who abhors sin and won’t tolerate it. But He so loved us that He gave His only Son that whosoever believes on Him shall not perish but inherit eternal life. Such that, we have been baptized into the death of Christ Jesus and to sin and through Him into the resurrection and newness of life. Finally then hidden with Christ in God so when the Father looks upon us He sees the Son, Christ Jesus. Could that be the reason we no longer hear of a vengeful God but rather a loving Father who desires a people who will follow him of their own accord. Of free choice?

The Five Articles of the Remonstrance

 Attending a Reformed Presbyterian Church I am subject to a considerable amount of Calvinist dogma. While I accept the scriptures about Predestination I tend to have grave doubts about the way in which these scriptures are interpreted. I also have reservations about the implications of the Calvinist perspective on the individual believer’s relationship with God and perception of God’s attitude toward them.

I have even heard folk describe how when they first accepted Calvinism they wept. I assume that this is because where they had believed God to be a loving Father who rejoiced in the salvation of His children and delighted in their every interaction with Him. Apart from anything else this sounds like a conversion experience and if you are already converted to Christ Jesus who are you now having a conversion experience with?

In any case, it seems they now have to accept that God is fickle. He saves whom He chooses and condemns others to eternal fire on a whim. Even the rebellion of Lucifer and the war in heaven was scripted by God. Those angels including Lucifer who rebelled against Yahweh were mere puppets going through the motions of an existence apparently foreordained by God.

According to the proponents of Calvinism, from the book of Genesis on through to Revelation. T hose who are redeemed and those who will perish have no choice in their eternal destiny. God has decided this from the beginning of time. This is the Calvinist outlook. This is the perception of the nature of God that those adherents of Calvinism purport to the world. A view that has been endorsed with extreme prejudice on more that one occasion since the times of John Calvin and other Reformers.

Today with the advent of Social Media. Calvinism has made a strong re-emergence onto the stage of evangelical Christianity. Ultra Calvinists have even been known to threaten with violence those who would seek to debate the issues along the traditional lines of Calvinism versus Arminianism. Such is the fanaticism and strength of emotion held about subject.

If you read the Five Articles of the Remonstrance written by the followers of Jacob Arminius after his death in 1609. They really seem quite gentle and perfectly biblical. Nothing there to get worked up about. Yet the Synod of Dordrecht in 1618 rejected the Remonstrance, branding the articles as heresy and dismissing the Remonstrant ministers instructing them to desist from all forms of ministry and writing about the teachings of Arminius.

The question I would ask is what could there be that really would cause any issues in the Five Articles of the Remonstrance. Essentially they just expound a fairly accurate New Testament view of the mechanics of salvation through a loving savior and a gracious God. The worst that could happen is that the gospel would be preached and the lost would be found. I’ll leave it to you the reader to digest the five articles as they are represented below.

Five articles of Remonstrance

The Five articles of Remonstrance refers to the document drawn up in 1610 by the followers of Jacobus Arminius¹ (1560-1609). A "remonstrance" is literally "an expression of opposition or protest," which in this case was a protest against the Calvinist doctrine of predestination contained in the Belgic Confession. Consequently, those followers of Arminius who drafted this protest were given the name "Remonstrants."

This document was condemned as heresy by the reformed churches at the Synod of Dort, 1618-1619. [1]

Article 1

That God, by an eternal and unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ his Son, before the foundation of the world, hath determined, out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ’s sake, and through Christ, those who, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to condemn them as alienate from Christ, according to the word of the Gospel in John 3:36: “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him,” and according to other passages of Scripture also. [2]

Article 2

That agreeably thereunto, Jesus Christ the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” And in the First Epistle of 1 John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” [3]

Article 3

That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving faith eminently is); but that it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will, and all his powers, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5, “Without me ye can do nothing.” [4]

Article 4

That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following and cooperative grace, can nei­ther think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements, that can be conceived, must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. but respects the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible; inas­much as it is written con­cerning many, that they have resisted the Holy Ghost. Acts 7, and else­where in many places. [5]

Article 5

That those who are in­corporated into Christ by true faith, and have thereby become partakers of his life-giving Spirit, have thereby full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory; it being well un­derstood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Ghost; and that Jesus Christ assists them through his Spirit in all temptations, extends to them his hand, and if only they are ready for the conflict, and desire his help, and are not inactive, keeps them from falling, so that they, by no craft or power of Satan, can be misled nor plucked out of Christ’s hands, according to the Word of Christ, John 10:28: “Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” But whether they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking again the first beginning of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world, of turning away from the holy doctrine which was deliv­ered them, of losing a good conscience, of be­coming devoid of grace, that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scripture, be­fore we ourselves can teach it with the full persuasion of our mind. [6]

Resources

• Phillip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Volume 3, Baker Books, Grand Rapids, MI: 1996. Pages 545ff.

1James Arminius (Jacob Harmenszoon). Arminius was born in 1559 in Oudewater - a small city in the province of Holland.

A Tale of Two Blokes

Calvinism Versus Arminianism – A Brief Comparison

Gods Sovereignty

This debate that has ranged wide among Christians for the last five hundred years. Calvinism holds that a person contributes nothing to their individual salvation and that includes choice. In the opinion of Calvinists God chooses the believer and applies everything the believer needs to become a Christian. This includes the ability to decide to believe on Jesus Christ, to have faith and everything required to make that decision possible. This is based on the doctrine of Predestination which is underpinned in the teachings of the apostle Paul.1 They have an acronym called TULIP which states that a person has nothing that they can contribute because they are totally depraved and have nothing in themselves capable of even thinking about accepting Christ as their savior. They are unconditionally elected meaning the believer is chosen by God to be saved or to be lost and, has no choice. There is limited atonement meaning God’s grace in Christ Jesus is applied only to those who believe and become Christians. There is irresistible grace meaning that Grace in Jesus Christ cannot be resisted so that again there is no choice for the believer to make as grace is not able to be resisted. There is perseverance of the saints meaning you are chosen of God and cannot lose your salvation. You cannot choose to reject Christ Jesus at a later date.

Man’s Freedom of Choice

Arminianism holds that while there is much that only God can do to enable a person to believe on Jesus Christ that He leaves the ultimate decision to that person to make. 2A similar acronym to TULIP that some Arminian’s hold to is ROSES. This states that a person is radically depraved meaning that before God we are fallen but not completely wicked. That God’s grace is overcoming meaning that the grace in the form of the gospel is heard but can be resisted by person who chooses not to believe. That rather than unconditional election. Sovereign election is a better fit in that they see God foreknew those who would choose him and he then elected them to be Christians. Eternal life is used instead of perseverance of saints meaning that you can lose your salvation if you choose to reject God. Singular redemption is used instead of limited atonement meaning basically that Christ’s redemptive work on Cross was for everyone but is applied to those who choose to believe on Him. Thus Freedom of Choice is implicit in the gospel for the Salvation of those who believe on the Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Because, Yahweh Elohim has always sought a people who will follow Him of their own volition from the time of the beginning in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve.

Is there Freedom of Choice - Genesis: Cain and Seth – The Good and Evil Lineage

In this vein it could be argued that right from the beginning of creation there have been those who when given the choice either believed in Yahweh Elohim and worshiped Him. Or, who rejected Yahweh Elohim and worshiped idols and either directly, or indirectly, Satan the devil.

The book of Genesis describes the Son’s of God and the Daughters of Men. There is much debate as to what the bible is saying here. Are Son’s of God fallen angels? Did they breed with the daughters of men and create a race of mighty warriors – The Nephilim? Are the Son’s of God a kingly race of warriors. Or, are the Son’s of God the descendants of Seth and the Daughter’s of Men the descendants of Cain. Or, are the Son’s of God merely men and the Daughters of Men simply women made of the rib of man?

In alignment with the doctrine of predestination I quite like the idea of the Son’s of God being descendants of Seth and the Daughters of Men being descendants of Cain. I feel myself that the Son’s of God ought to have married righteous women but saw the daughters of Cain’s descendants, that they were desirable and were tempted to make the wrong choice. In so doing they took on the worship of idols and essentially doomed mankind to judgment and the Great Flood.

How does this fit in with the great Calvinist and Arminian debate. Well I think it fits rather nicely and probably supports the idea of God allowing man freedom of choice. Seth loved God and was obedient to him whereas Cain rebelled against God and hated him. When the Sons of God took the Daughters of Men as their wives they also compromised their faith and obedience to God. They chose to turn away from God and that caused them and their descendants to die in their sins. Noah and his family were the only ones left on Earth who worshiped God and God chose Noah as a type of Christ to deliver the human race. Freedom of Choice has been a theme throughout scripture. 

Meritocracy – Does Our Decision to Accept or Reject God Impact Society

Government in Western Democracies is seen as being, for the most part a Benevolent Meritocracy. We are encouraged to believe that we have freedom of choice providing we don’t impinge on the freedoms of other citizens.

Most citizens would agree that despite the best efforts of government and the citizenry. Daily life equates to more of a benign meritocracy than a benevolent one. It doesn’t seem to matter how hard we all try, despite our best work we can’t meet the needs of everyone in society.

In fact, life in our society seems to be pointed downhill and with gathering speed is becoming a Malevolent Meritocracy. Where only those with wealth can afford a good life and the rest of society are becoming increasingly disenfranchised and, impoverished.

Where does this fit in with Calvinism and Arminianism? Well the closer a society is to God generally the closer they are to a benevolent meritocracy. If we look at the nation of Israel God actually told them that when they followed Him he would bless them and when they turned away He would deliver them into the hands of their enemies3. So if Israel chose to follow God they had blessing and if they turned away they were punished and delivered into the hands of their enemies.

While there is no doubt about God’s sovereignty. God’s blessing would seem to be contingent on man exercising the choice to accept Him and not to reject Him. So in believing on Jesus Christ in our era we are blessed with a benevolent meritocracy but when a society rejects the Son of Man in favor of idols and worldly pleasures. That society rapidly begins to feel the spiritual burn that rejecting God can produce. It would also seem that the decision is allowed to us by God.

 
Did God Build Freedom of Choice into Creation for a Reason

It is my belief that God made the Angels a perfect race. Each one created without blemish or any sign of imperfection. However, it seems that even so, Lucifer was able to become corrupted by the sin of jealousy over the position of God himself. Seeking to elevate himself above the Lord of all Creation.

Now here is a puzzle. God is without doubt the Sovereign Lord, Yahweh Elohim. But if we postulate that everything that happens is designed by Yahweh. Are we saying he designed Lucifer to fall into temptation and to rebel against Him becoming Satan in the process. Not only that but leading one third of the other angels in a revolution against the Creator as well. It doesn’t seem likely that God would do that and rather, it seems much more likely that Lucifer had the free will to make the choice to rebel against God himself.

In fact, it seems much more likely that the whole theme of the bible is to show how much Yahweh Elohim loves His creations. So much so that He wants them to have the choice to follow Him. To take it a step further Yahweh has always insisted on Free Will. Adam and Eve were given Free Will to decide to accept Yahweh or to reject Him. They decided to reject Him by disobeying a direct instruction not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. Mankind before the flood had the choice to follow Yahweh or to reject Him. In the end only Noah and his family decided to follow Him.

Abraham had the choice to obey God and leave Ur or to stay there. He obeyed God and also was obedient to the point of giving God his only son, Isaac, as a sacrifice. So it was with Jacob, Joseph and Moses. All followed and obeyed God and this resulted in the deliverance of the descendants of Abraham and the formation of the nation of Israel. A people called by Yahweh to follow Him of their own Free Will.

Joshua led Israel into Canaan of his own free will. This after the people murmured and complained against God of their own Free Will. That generation never saw the promised land except for Joshua and Caleb. God gave Israel judges and blessed Israel when they repented and followed Him and gave them into the hands of their enemies when they chose to disobey. Samuel judged Israel righteously all of his days, of his own free will, and brought them Saul and David as their kings. God allowed Israel to choose for themselves a king of their own Free Will.

God gave His only Son, Jesus Christ of His Free Will and as sacrifice for all sins. Just as Abraham had been prepared to give Isaac, his only son and a type of Christ, as a sacrifice for sin and in obedience to Yahweh. There is a constant theme in the Holy Bible of Freedom of Choice. This freedom is given by God because He desires a people of His own possession who love, obey and follow Him of their own Free Will.

And so it is with the Church Age. Yes it is true our Lord and God, Yahweh Elohim, is the Sovereign Lord. There is no doubt but it is also true that he gives man the right to freewill when it comes to following Him. It is our choice to accept or reject Jesus Christ. Yahweh does not desire a people who follow him but not of their own freewill. Freedom of Choice is essential with Yahweh and the single most important difference between resurrected man and the angels will be that resurrected man will have chosen to follow God of his own freewill.

1 Romans 8:29

2 Five articles of Remonstrance | Theopedia

3 Deuteronomy 28:1-67

Nary a Soul

 

I’ve been a Christian since I heard the gospel as a child. I was walking down a tanker track with my Dad and my brother Douglas listening to them talk about the gospel and other doctrines in the bible. It wasn’t the first time but I asked my father if he believed in Jesus? He said that he did and I answered “I do too.”

Events took a real turn as I grew up. Within three years of that moment Dad was taken with a heart attack, two of my brothers became Christians, my sister went to boarding school and Mum remarried. After that, we moved into town for year, I didn’t get on well with the step father and I was sent off to boarding school for two years at age nine. One of the best things that happened to me by the way.

The Principal was an Anglican Canon and one of the strongest Christian men I have ever met. We had chapel six days a week, had chores to perform and got a lot of character developed. I was there for two years and though I didn’t realize it then. I received a lot of training in a basic bible based faith where the gospel was central. A living faith where sharing Christ was part and parcel of daily life.

Had I stayed at boarding school for four years I would probably have insisted on going to secondary school as a boarder as well. Who knows but God, I could have ended up running the country but that was not His plan. I was at boarding for two years and then Mum’s second marriage ended so I returned to the family.

The family rather rapidly became Christian and some of my brothers and my sister attended Capernwray Bible College and started their walk with Christ in fairly formal way. Another brother became a Christian in the early seventies while the last one held out until around 1978. There were seven Gibbs children and we all achieved salvation in Christ Jesus

Sadly, the Charismatic Movement divided the family to some extent but as the years rolled by things settled down and, some tolerance of others views developed. There were other challenges. The King James Bible fanaticism swept through at one point. Some of us were devout End Times Apocalypse proponents focused on the New World Order and conspiracy theory. Not that any of that is particularly wrong. It just tends to distract from the real focus that a Christian should hold.

The Great Commission of Matthew 28 verse 19-20 says “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I commanded you. Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

It is only my opinion but I feel it to be true to say, that you can’t win souls to Christ by preaching a gospel other than that “Jesus Christ bore our sins on the Cross, died and was raised on the third day.”

For instance, sharing that the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York was a conspiracy and perpetrated by the New World Order. While it may be true, will not necessarily draw a soul nearer to Jesus Christ. Railing against the great moral issues of our time, again, may be important but won’t win a single soul to Christ.

So what am I proposing here? That we say nothing of the great sin of our nation. By no means! We should point out the sins of the nation and oppose them at the highest level. But please realize that fighting with secular New Zealand on Social Media will win nary a soul to the Lord. If you aim to promote revival then you will achieve that from your knees before the Almighty in fervent prayer.

Pray then, that God will raise great men and women from the younger generation to lead our people into repentance and back to the Father in Christ Jesus. That he will pour out our Lord the Holy Spirit upon our nation that they might repent and He will heal the land. Do this yourself and lead as many other Christians as you can to live their faith in Christ Jesus. To lead other saints to fall to their knees and in prayer cause this country to turn back to the Lord our God in Christ Jesus.