8 Important Series to read on Narrow is the Way!


A few of you here are new. You’ll notice I sometimes use an odd structuring of English when I speak. Kind of a throwback to growing up in New England, and also a throwback to growing up speaking Yiddish. Mostly that. A Little.

Anyway, many of you who are new aren’t familiar with some of my earlier articles. I thought I’d give a list to the ones I thought were the most important.

  1. Evolution. My series on Evolution was the liveliest one I ever did. Atheists flocked to it, and we actually had some good exchanges. One thing I found in this series was many Atheists don’t like being called atheists, they prefer agnostic. I told them over and over again their definition of their beliefs was not agnostic, and they’d get upset. But it was a surprisingly respectful conversation with many of them. A couple of really insulting and aggressive ones popped in, but for the most part, really good responses. I was proud of this series, because I really hammered Evolution in many ways, including ways most other people have never brought up. I don’t think anyone else really ever dealt with the Warm Little Pond theory before I did, and I destroyed that one. I actually visited a link back someone placed on an article in this series, and it was an atheist telling others to go read my description of Hell “if they could take it”, so they could know what Christians really believe. To know my less than vivid descriptions of Hell were having an effect on Atheists means a lot – I pray the Lord some of these smart and yes, sometimes very funny men get saved. Atomic Mutant, still praying for ya, buddy!

  2. Jehovah’s Witnesses
    . This one I was REALLY proud of. I love how it turned out. I had a few nasty comments, including some from a Christadelphian who was incensed that I called Russell a Seventh Day Adventist. I wish I’d had Evernote back then, because I found an official SDA webpage where they’d admitted they consider Charles T Russell to be a Seventh Day Adventist, which was why I put the comment up. Once my article hit the web, suddenly that SDA page was edited to remove the admission. But on the whole, I dealt with every aspect of their theology and debunked it. For over two years, someone was coming back every day and re-reading the articles. Then suddenly three or four a day. I only hope I  meet just one person, just one in Heaven, who says “I left the Watchtower Society because of your blog.” Everything will be worth it to hear that.
  3. Roman Catholicism. This one produced a lot of hate. Funny how I’m Catholic bashing, but they’re not Baptist Bashing. And one of them responded in anger how offended he was that I claimed to be Jewish. So I answered him with some Yiddish, and he was perplexed. I guess his assumption was that if he was a catholic, he was a Jew. Mine is the only series I’ve ever seen where anyone dealt with the Magisterium first. A Catholic apologist once left a comment on my web site he wanted to see someone answer Rome without using the “same old defeated arguments”. I reposted the entire series and he said not a word. One that gave me the most trouble was so nice – but to no avail. He simply would not listen to reason, and I cut the whole exchange off.
  4. Word Faith/Charismatic. Surprisingly, this still remains one of the top draw items to my blog – not the entire series, just article #10, where I present a timeline people can download. Despite EVERYTHING I wrote in this series, a Charismatic came on to the blog and proceeded to tell me I was studying the Bible too much, and needed to let go, let this be my moment of desperation, my moment of expectation, and I would begin speaking in tongues… needless to say, after a couple of exchanges, she left, and I still don’t speak in tongues.
  5. Church Planting. I sincerely hope that since bloggers consider this kind of in depth series an “evergreen” article, that someone out there uses it to start a church plant. I got right into naming the church, starting it, materials, church covenant, statement of faith and by-laws, etc. If you feel called to the ministry, here you go – I’ve done EVERYTHING for you!
  6. Messianic Judaism – the series that started a thousand angry responses… on other websites. To my knowledge, I’m one of the only blogs ever to take on Messianic Judaism. There’s another I’ve seen, but as far as I know.. That’s it. Everyone else is just content to sit back and let them lead people astray with nary a comment. Read this, borrow the principles I’m using, and write your own articles on why Messianic Judaism is heresy. Most of the responses I got was people on their own websites challenging me to debates, resorting to straw man arguments, then knocking those down. In reality, my arguments were on my website, and.. They never addressed the points I raised, merely repeating their own flawed and overly circular reasoning. This one I may end up re-doing!
  7. Textual Criticism series. Good series. I made a number of people angry with this one, though, and it eventually led to my decision to stop allowing comments.
  8. Seventh Day Adventist series. Also very good. I was happy with this one, but got nary a comment except from an Adventist over 18 months later, who wouldn’t admit he was an Adventist – which of course a quick internet search revealed the fact that not only was he SDA, but his family heralded back to those who knew Ellen G. White. His technique was the tried and true method of repeat yourself until we both get annoyed and you leave. I put the entire comment exchange online.

One series I wasn’t happy with was the Mormonism series. It was correctly deduced by one Mormon that I had never read the book of Mormon. However, I just don’t have the time to engage in a lengthy study of the BoM, PGP and D&C to refute them – so this series never really lived up to its potential (I should mention that it was enthusiastically received by other Mormon apologetic sites at the time). It will have to wait until I retire to fully deal with this series.

Advertisements

Sad Note to the Jehovah’s Witnesses series


Right now, I’m feeling a need to go back through all my Christian videos on my hard drive, and enjoying it. I’d used some of Ex-Gilead Missionary’s videos as research for the Jehovah’s Witnesses series., and downloaded one or two more of them for study.

There’s a lot of information on there I never used. I did use his information on Paradise Earth, and combined it with my own research on it, and he’s effective in what he does (after all, he knows how JW’s think)…

But the sad part was getting the last video he put up. He’d abruptly stopped his videos, and the last video was “what do I believe after leaving the Watchtower society?”

Sadly, it was something of a mocking video, where faith in God is ridiculed. I was heartbroken, hoping that he’d have made the logical leap from JW to Christian. However, he allowed hurt and anger to rule him, and he is now an atheist.

This means he’s never truly studied and settled within himself the existence of God. Since there’s no way to exponentiate on WordPress, I’m unable to post the exact mathematical formula for God.

But it’s like this, expressed long form. X to the Zero Power Equals One.

Newtonian physics prove it to me – every item set in movement has a force that set it in movement. The Big Bang is exceptionally lacking in explaining the universe (notice I didn’t capitalize the U – Atheists do it unconsciously because the universe is their idol), and I’m afraid I just don’t have that much faith to believe in Atheism.

The issue of God was settled by Neal Armstrong in the 1960’s. A Russian Cosmonaut had made headlines by announcing on TV that he did not see God when his capsule broke the earth’s atmosphere. Armstrong’s response when they went into space was to say, “I do not see God, but I see the wonders that He has made.”

Ex-Gilead Missionary, the problem is this – you’re not looking at facts. You’re looking at rhetoric and half baked theories.

Something set the planets in motion. Observing the pellets in a shotgun blast show you that the Big Bang cannot explain planetary orbits, planetary creation, stars, comets, atmospheres, and life on the planets. The warm little pond hypothesis relies on so much chance that it literally statistically is magnitudes beyond the point mathematicians declare something to be impossible – even if it did work, and the Urie experiments yielded ooze, not life.

Statistically speaking, there’s no way that life could have arisen by chance.

My final point is – there’s an empty tomb in Jerusalem.

You enjoyed reading your Bible, and that got you out of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Now it’s time to face that Bible, and understand that unlike Evolution and atheism, the Bible is truth. It’s history. It’s facts.

Read it, seek the Lord, pray. You’ll find your answers.

Reasoned Atonement


What do I mean by Reasoned atonement?
Simply, that you can actually reason your way through the problem logically without resorting to tracts or a witness from everyone.
Quite literally, this is why the Bible says that…

“Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? ” Romans 2:1-4(KJV)

So, quite simply, what this means is, one can deduce the existence of God and the need for atonement… solely by what you see and experience around you. This is the cosmological argument.

Here we go:

We can see the universe around us is vast, that things are far too orderly to be left to chance. Universal laws such as speed of sound, electrons having a negative charge, etc., prove there is too much order to the universe. If things happened by chance – and I proved that many of the theories advanced to prove that long ago were busted – then there would not be universal rules and constants.

We also can see by observing nature that sometimes we cannot trust our senses. This means we are poor judges of what we see and experience. Optical illusions are readily available. There is too many mirage events which sometimes are the result of humidity and sunlight – such as “mysterious lights around Mexico”. Those aren’t flying saucers, they are theorized to be reflections in an atmosphere of gases vapors, etc. Auto headlights can sometimes be seen reflected great distances. One infamous mirage of a steamship sailing over a desert was reported. The steamship was real – it was just hundreds of miles away from the desert on the ocean.

We have universal senses of right and wrong. Although it angers people for me to say it, we all know that taking something that does not belong to you is wrong. We all know that murder is wrong. If you’re going to try to tell me that you have no inner sense of right and wrong, I’m going to advise you see a professional for possible diagnosis as a sociopath.Indeed, the existence of Sociopaths proves to us that if something in them is not functioning correctly, there is an innate sense of right and wrong.
Before you rush to harass me…Sorry. I don’t allow comments.

Anyway, proceeding on (it’s too late – you’re going to be judged by God, so might as well read this!) if there is a sense of right and wrong, this means that someone put that there. There’s no “Evolution” – no proof for it and tons against it. And that sense logically would not be a product of evolution. It’s the product of that which is perfect Good programming us.
So, if so, then we have a problem, since man is incapable of being good. The Atheist campaign a couple of years ago “be good for goodness sake” resulted in zero permanently changed lives! We cannot be good. Give us a law, we’ll break it. Give us a rule, we’ll try to get around it.

So, what then? If we break the laws programmed into us by this supreme Good being, then what is that? Your hands now are polluted. “Well, I’ll work my own salvation by doing nothing but good deeds.”
Won’t work. Your hands are now polluted. You have no way to atone for your sins.

So it requires a man without sins to atone for your sins, since you can’t.
So, how can we find a man without sin? He would have to be God!
Very well. Name me one person, just one, who claimed to come to die for everyone, because He was without sin, and God.
I can think of only one name.

Jesus Christ.

There you go. Reasoned atonement. Want me to prove everything? Easy.
Go to any bookstore and buy a King James Bible.

Hey, meet any of the readers of my blog and ask them for one, and I’ll just bet they FESTER to give you one.

I’e got entire article series’ on these subjects. Historical proofs for the Bible. Inerrancy of the Bible. Proofs of Jesus Christ. Answering evolution. Answering the cults.

So here’s my final point. You can have atonement by accepting through faith the atonement of Jesus Christ. What do you have to do? Repent, and believe.

That’s it!

So, what if you DON’T accept the Jesus of the Bible, but instead a Jesus of the cults, the brother of (l’havdil) satan, the good man Jesus, then eastern mystic Jesus, the aquarian conspiracy Jesus, the archangel Michael Jesus. None of these are the Jesus of the Bible.

Then you have no atonement.

So if those who have atonement go to heaven, where do the rest of humanity go?

Where are you going?

Think on these things.

Settled A Long Time Ago!


“Again, an allegation may be made in negative form, and he who asserts a negative must prove it; as when the atheist asserts that there is no God he is logically bound to make good his assertion—if he can. But it is evident that he cannot do this; because, as John Foster pointed out, it would require universal knowledge to make good such an assertion, for, otherwise, somewhere beyond the bounds of the atheist’s knowledge might be proof that there is a God.”

Why? Why is it the Atheists burden?

” In controversial sermons it is essential that we should clearly perceive where lies the burden of proof, and sometimes in the statement of propositions and questions it may be well to make this formally clear to the hearers; and in general for clearness of discrimination and logical accuracy in argument the underlying principle of the burden of proof should be understood. This principle is well stated in the Roman legal formula: Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the proof lies upon him who affirms, not who denies). That is to say, He who alleges anything must prove his allegation; and, conversely, no man is required to prove the negative of another man’s assertion.”

John Albert Broadus, A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, ed. Edwin Charles Dargan, New (23d) ed. (New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1898), 174.

Ways in which Fundamentalists are discriminated against


I’m often astounded when I hear Evangelicals call themselves Fundamentalist. They have no idea that in many ways, they are so NOT Fundamentalist, it’s crazy.

But what I see is the rabid anti-Fundamentalism sweeping Christianity – the same ideology the Lord decries in the letter to the Laodecian church in Revelation 3. “Be lukewarm, like us!” They cry. And many of them resort to calling Fundamentalists “Pharisees.” Good to know that not only are you Biblically ignorant and PROUD of it – but you’re also Anti-Semitic.

A Pharisee is an enemy of Jesus Christ. A Fundamentalist is not. Fundamentalists stand for the Christian faith, a literal belief in the Bible – and usually God’s Bible, not rejected and heretical texts which the unBelieving and unSaved “scholars” prefer.

So, let’s say you discover overnight, that the Bible is God’s word, inspired, inerrant, preserved. Now, there’s a lot of “Christians” who call the Bible “Inspired” the same way you’d call Mozart’s music “inspired”. When I say inspired, I mean, we believe God dictated the Bible to men who wrote it down.  Many “Christians” claim Fundamentalists don’t believe that anymore.

Huh.

No, that’s an article of faith that Fundamentalists will not let go of. When they say, “Luke wrote the book of Luke”, they’re saying “It might have errors because Luke wrote it, and Luke was a man.” I say instead, “God wrote it and gave Luke the words to write down. It has no errors – God wrote it.”

So, if you became a Fundamentalist, you’d find yourself having problems with a LOT of Christian materials. Commentaries that question God’s word. Bible dictionaries that try  to present the unSaved “Scholar’s” view of things – which usually is their wish or pet theory being passed off as truth to unsuspecting Christians. You’d have to reject a lot of Greek handbooks, because many of them ascribe to “Textual Criticism”, which is Atheism passing itself off as Christians. If you’re trying to tell me Mr. Aland or Mr. Metzger are saved, you’re going to have to cite some serious evidence, because based on their testimonies, I’m going to come out and say – no, they can’t be.

You’re going to have trouble with a lot of Sermon starter books, that have little “tidbits of the Greek” because they push – again – a heretical manuscript instead of God’s Bible. You’re going to end up rejecting most materials on Revelation because – let’s face it – most of them are written by persons who allegorize the Book of Revelation, or accept the heretical manuscripts instead of God’s Bible. I have a commentary on Revelation that seems really good, but I’m having to wade through a lot of “the scholars now say…”. I’m sorry Mr. Seiss, but had you any idea they were lying to you?

You’re going to have a lot of trouble with pre-printed Sunday School materials. I’ve found so many elementary doctrinal errors and “Scholars say” references, I don’t know what to do.

You’ll grit your teeth over the way people praise Billy Graham, ignoring his outright heresies. Yes, he used to be great. But once he started promoting Baptismal Regeneration, there’s a problem.

So… is this Hypocrisy? No. I don’t quote from heretical greek texts. I quote from God’s Bible. When I refer to the Greek, I refer to the Textus Receptus. When I look at “The hebrew”, I’m looking at the Hebrew Masoretic Txt, the Ben Chayim text. When I give my opinion on the Bible, it is “The Bible says…”

So, I’m not a “Pharisee.” I promote the Bible as the word of God, not the Talmud. I promote only one way to heaven through Jesus Christ, certainly not a trait associated with Pharisees.

So… what does that leave the people who question the word of God? Who promote other ways to be saved? Who refuse to disassociate with heretics and false teachers?

What does that imply about them?

First Principles 3


Why do we accept that his righteousness passes to us by Eating his Flesh and Drinking his Blood symbolically or otherwise?

I’m answering these not to fight with you – indeed, I’m not striving with you. I’m answering gently, understanding the pain of indecision.

His righteousness does not pass to us by the Last Supper at all. It passes to us by belief.

By acceptance.

Abraham believed by faith, and it was reckoned him as righteousness.

And that’s how God set it up.

It’s so easy, we instinctively believe it can’t be right. We WANT to be able to do it our way.

Why? Pride.

If I can earn my righteousness somehow, by crawling to the Ganges river on our knees, we can stand with pride, “I did it.”

Christians say, “I didn’t do it. Jesus Christ did it, and offered it as a free gift. I just took it.”

Why is pride wrong?

Becuase, as I heard in a sermon today, pride made a Satan out of Lucifer. Your hands are polluted, dripping with the bloddguiltiness of your own sin. Everything you put your hands to take that, like the leper in the Torah who had to cover his lip and call out, “unclean! Unclean!” His house bacame unclean. His clothes became unclean.

Everything I touched became unclean by my sin. So any deed I did, such as spinning a thousand prayer wheels like the Tibetan Buddhists, is unclean as well. “Our righteousness as as filthy rags.”

So, you are powerless to save yourself.

Caiaphas examined Jesus Christ and pronounced him fit to die for the nation. Since prophecy included the Gentiles in with the Jews, and since a mixed multitude went up out of Egypt and recieved the Law along with the Jews… Gentiles too are included in this Jewish religion.

Christ died for your sins. All you have to do, like Abraham… is believe.

You’re in agony over this. I understand. When I was in Judaism, I knew it couldn’t help me. I begged God for a way, I rejected the faith of my people, walked away, and began a search through every religion I could find out about in the books.

I became convinced that Jesus Christ was the only way. But I couldn’t wrap my head around the Trniity. Once I was able to do that, I was able to cry out, “Abba! Father!”

And Jesus Christ saved me.

My salvation night was horrific. I wept for hours. I begged for forgiveness for what seemed like hours. And then I reached a point where I could no longer strive with God all night, like Jacob. And like my great great grandfather Jacob, I too said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me!”

And He did.

Stop striving. Accept. Repent.

Believe.

And be free.

First Principles 2


If the bible says in several places that no one person can be punished for another’s sins, and that the sins debts of the father cannot be passed to the son, as the righteousness of the father doesn’t either…

Logical, but not what the Bible says.

Let’s review two of the fundamental laws on how to interpret the Bible.

  1. We must compare spiritual with spiritual – all scripture on a topic must be compared before we derive our doctrine
  2. Less clear passages give way to more clear.

These are well established rules of Biblical Interpretation, and the person speaking who I’m adressing is well acquainted with them.

Here’s what to take away from the passage in Ezekiel you’re reading. Part of what you’re struggling with is this – you keep talking about sin. Think about that.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:12 (KJV)

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. Romans 5:15 (KJV)

The issue is, the existence of sin and the curse of death entered by Adam. However, Ezekiel, the passage you’re referring to, says you will die for your own sins.

4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezekiel 18:4 (KJV)

You are asking in effect, “Can I not then atone for my own sins?”

How?

22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. Hebrews 9:22 (KJV)

Without blood, without something dying in your place, your sins cannot atone for.

23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23 (KJV)

That’s why you cannot atone for your sins.

Then why do we believe in The Indwelling Sin Curse of Adam that passes to all humanity from birth?

That part already I’ve answered. I think what it is, is that you’ve had an incorrect understanding of atonement, redemption, propitiation, and sin. You’ve had, rather, the Roman Catholic understanding that we all are corrupt and will go to hell for Adam’s sin. Rather, the Bible says “…by one man sin entered the world.” This is the curse of sin, and the penalty of. Death. All will die, now that death has entered the world. And all will go into Hell, without forgiveness, atonement, and propitiation.

It sounds like semantics, but it’s not.

Why do we accept that our sins can be laid on another and paid for?

Why is it that in the OT the accepted sacrifice was fully consumed by either fire or eating, but christ was allowed to be resurrected and his body not destroyed?

You’re misunderstanding the offerings. We do not eat the sin offerings. THe blood of the sin offering, and certain parts of the sin offerings, were poured out onto the altar, and the fats burned. THe blood atoned for the sins, and the fats were as prayers, as God said it was a sweet smelling savour unto Him.

The offerings we ate were festival offerings. It was a communal meal, one with another.

Now, here’s the part that I never noticed while I was in Judaism. The blood atoned for the sins… but the Bible did not say “the blood of the bull will atone for the sins.”

The Bull or the goat died in your place. THe lamb died in your place. One offering could not, once and for all, take away all your sins. else the High Priest would have offered them once and for all. Indeed, before Aaron and his sons could function as priests, THEY had to be atoned for! So their ministry obviously was not a perpetual one. Their offerings were temporary.

Our sins can be laid on another because God said so. Your hand was placed upon the offering’s head, a prayer was said so that it was an effectual transfer, and then the animal died in your place.

Now, here’s what you’re asking.

“Jesus Christ was a man, so how could he die in my place?”

The obvious answer is – he wasn’t a man. He was fully man and fully God.

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:6-11 (KJV)

Jesus Christ is both the party aggrieved, as He is God… and He is the atonement, the offering, the perfect man without sin. Thus, He was not only the perfect sacrifice, being utterly without blemish…

…but the High Priest even examined him, and pronounced Him fit for the sacrifice.

49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, 50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. John 11:49-50 (KJV)

We’ll finish this up tomorrow.