I Did Not Sign-Up for This: The Fourth P of Pastoral Ministry - YING YEE

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-----------------------

This is an astoundingly bad teaching. There's no other way to put it. We're sorry to say so, since the author has all of the appearance of being a good-hearted, well meaning pastor. 

First problem: The author neither quotes nor references any Scripture, scriptural principle, or even something that would be edifying or instructive. Nothing. How can one teach about pastoral ministry or any Bible topic without mentioning the Bible?

Second, the author writes enviously of his friend's ministry activities: What a dream job! This is why we went into ministry. If this is indeed his calling, then why is he not being obedient? Why envy someone who is doing what you're supposed to be doing? If the author didn't sign up for what he is doing now, the obvious solution is to do something else.  

Third, it appears the author must be some sort of super-apostle, because he compares his pastoral role to the NT apostles while not seeming to do anything related to pastoring:

Like the apostles, we signed up to give ourselves fully to the ministry of the word and prayer and not to be bogged down with endless administrative matters...

Though it is certainly good for a pastor to pray, there's nothing in the Bible that indicates a pastor has a ministry in the Word, let alone any endless administrative matters. He claims that these administrative matters duties are an unavoidable part of gospel ministry. 

Apparently he doesn't understand what a gospel ministry is, what biblical pastor does, or what the Bible says about who leads the local church.

Fourth, he does concede that a pastor should delegate, but then claims that you may not have the luxury of delegation. What??? If this man is presiding over a local church body, right there in front of him every single Sunday are his delegees. If a church is in such a state that there is no one to delegate to, then the pastor is failing to train up the flock to maturity. 

Further, if there is no one to delegate to, then there can't be very much TO delegate.

Fifth, a church is not led by a pastor. There is but a single mention of the English word "pastor:" 

Ep. 4:11-12 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service...

The Greek word is poimén, a shepherd, a word that appears 18 times in the NT. A shepherd is a lowly person who tends flocks. Shepherds were among the lower strata of society. They certainly weren't standing before adoring crowds pontificating about their great insights into Scripture.

So in the local church a pastor/shepherd is down amongst the sheep. He cares for the flock. He's kind and compassionate. He's good with people and building relationships. He's protective. He's a father:

Jn. 10:13 The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.

1Co. 4:15 Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

Biblically, he is not a teacher, apostle, evangelist, or prophet, although it is possible for a him to be gifted one or more of these and/or other areas. He's not a top-of-the pyramid leader. He's not even a delegator, since a biblical pastor/shepherd has nothing to delegate. 

A pastor/shepherd is not the singular CEO leader of a church. Biblically, the leadership is a plurality of elders:

1Pe. 5:1-3 To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow-elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers — not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

It's certainly possible a pastor could be a part of the elder/leadership team, but it's not required. It would be based on the man's gifting and calling, not on titles, position, or expectation.

We are convinced that the reason so many pastors fail, stray, or burn out is because they are not embracing the biblical model. As such, they, like the author, get bogged down in things with which they should not be concerned. It's no wonder the church is in such a dysfunctional state, because the leadership is dysfunctional.

-----------------

Jesus was a refugee - hegetsus.com

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

We have seen numerous advertisements recently about how Jesus really isn't really like what people think He's like. The ads do their best to make Jesus relatable, while studiously avoiding anything that might be threatening or controversial about him. They present Jesus as plain vanilla, inoffensive, and non-threatening. The Gospel is conspicuously absent. Repentance is not mentioned, nor is sin.

Jesus is just a regular guy. He gets us...

So who's behind all this? Their website says, We’re also not affiliated with any particular church or denomination. There website also says, He Gets Us is an initiative of Servant Foundation.

So we were curious and started digging. 

According to nonprofitlight.com, the Servant Foundation is headed by Steve French, President and CEO. This non-profit is associated with and funded through The Signatry, which seems to be an organization that organizes and facilitates funds aggregation. Interestingly it also is also headed by Steve French, President and CEO. 

Turns out that we can trace it all the way back to Church of the Servant in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. So hegetsus.com IS associated with a church, and with a denomination. Church of the Servant is a United Methodist church. 

Church of the Servant seems to be a pretty conventional church, at least as presented on their website. Lots of happy, smiling people doing happy smiling things, but really nothing of substance. In particular, there is no statement of faith, which almost every church features rather prominently. The Church of the Servant's website only tells us that if one wants to become a member, that person will then receive the statement of faith. 

So it seems that the Church of the Servant is also intended to present itself as plain vanilla, inoffensive, and non-threatening, just like hegetsus.com. So if we want to get a hint of the substance of Church of the Servant, it seems safe to assume that the messages found at hegetus.com are sourced from the church. 

So the article we wish to examine makes the claim that Jesus was a refugee. First, let's read the biblical account:

Matt 2:13-15: ...an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. 'Get up,' he said, 'take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.' So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod.

Now let's define "refugee:"

A refugee, according to the Geneva Convention on Refugees is a person who is outside their country of citizenship because they have well-founded grounds for fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, and is unable to obtain sanctuary from their home country.

Refugees are part of a group that is being oppressed. They want to escape their bad situations, but they have nowhere go. However, Joseph and Mary were not part of a persecuted group. They we not being threatened. They did have a place to go. The definition simply doesn't fit. 

Therefore, they were not refugees, they were simply assassination targets. More specifically, they were warned in advance that they were going to be targeted. This makes them exiles:

1. The condition or period of being forced to live away from one's native country or home, especially as a punishment.
2. The condition or period of self-imposed absence from one's country or home.
3. One who lives away from one's native country, whether because of expulsion or voluntary absence.

The narrative of the below article is pretty conventional, until we get to the end. It says, ...the impact of being displaced always stuck with Jesus. We can see it in his compassion toward others... Is it really true that Jesus' life experience shaped His way of dealing with people? Well, it's possible, but the Bible doesn't tell us this. It's nothing more than speculation.

We think that Jesus was compassionate and merciful because His Father is compassionate an merciful:

Mk. 6:34 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd.

2Co. 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion...

Ja. 5:11b The Lord is full of compassion and mercy.

Jn. 5:19 I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

-----------------

From Rich Theology to Emotionally Charged Shallowness: The Evolution of Worship in the Modern Church - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------

This is a gigantic Appeal To History based solely on the author's personal preferences. 

"Publisher," the author, neither quotes nor even cites any Bible verse. This is astounding. He presumes to evaluate the worship of people he doesn't like, who are singing songs he doesn't like in churches he doesn't like, but cannot bring himself to explain biblical precepts, let alone quote the Bible.

If the author has a biblical case, we would love to consider it, but alas, he does not. That makes this article into nothing more than an opinion screed.

Also, we want to note that the title provides a false choice. There is much contemporary worship music that is theologically rich, and there are hymns that are theologically shallow. 

Further, upon what basis should worship be about theology? There is nothing in the Bible that tells us we must sing deep theological treatises. Worship is the bowing low before a Holy God, declaring His wonders, His mighty works, and glorifying His character. We of course must be theologically accurate in this endeavor, but nothing in Scripture demands a doctrinal tour de force.

Ps. 107:1 Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures for ever.

This simple and powerful worship statement, which does not require a Bible dictionary to decipher, was often accompanied by glorious manifestations of God's power (2Ch. 5:13, 2Ch. 20:21, 2Ch. 7:1-3). 

If it was good enough to elicit the Glory back then, we suspect that simple, honest worship should suffice today.

--------------------

Taken Captive By False Teachers & False Doctrines – 10 signs - By Rick Becker

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-----------------

This is not an explanation of false teachers or false doctrines. The author does not quote anyone, he doesn't explain anything, and her doesn't clear up any misconception. He doesn't even bother to teach what he believes to be true. All this is is a long, pedantic list of accusations and undocumented claims. Happily, he does quote Scripture, a rare occurrence among the Doctrinal Police, but for the most part he uses Bible verses as a bludgeon.

He has a bogeyman, the "NAR." He doesn't even explain who they are. But he does manage several extended tirades against them.

This man is not a teacher of the Word, he's a guns-ablazing polemicist with really nothing to say. A such, there is little to learn from this screed. If the reader wants an in-depth discussion of charismatic beliefs, he may wish to consult our cessationism series.

--------------------

Does God Change? Rethink

Recently we've been reconsidering many of the things we thought we understood regarding doctrine and faith. We have begun to question certain beliefs, church structures, and practices of the western church. Too often we have discovered what we think are unbiblical doctrines and activities. This causes us concern. We have deemed this our “Rethink.”

Our questions include, how did we arrive at our doctrines? Does the Bible really teach what we think it teaches? Why do churches do what they do? What is the biblical basis of church leadership structure? Why do certain traditions get entrenched?

It's easy to be spoon fed the conventional wisdom, but it's an entirely separate thing to search these things out for one's self. In the past we have read the Bible with these unexamined understandings and interpreted what we read through those lenses. We were too lazy about our Bible study, assuming that pastors and theologians were telling us the truth, but we rarely checked it out for ourselves.

Therefore, these Rethinks are our attempt to remedy the situation.

We should note that there is more than one way to interpret doctrine, more than one way to think about the faith, and more than one way to read the Scriptures. We would not suggest that our way is the only way, or the right way; we are not Bible scholars. But we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to rightly divide the Word of God.

Popular Rising Star in Contemporary Christian Music is Putting Out Nothing but Garbage - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------

We are not here to defend Mr. Lake. We intend to examine the author's presentation.

What Is an Apostle? - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------

This is simply bad Bible teaching. There's no other way to describe it. The author doesn't get a single thing correct. He misreads Scripture, overlooks critical concepts, and simply misrepresents what the Bible says.

--------------------

The January 6 Committee Dropped the Ball When It Failed to Call for Abolition of the Electoral College - By John Nichols

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------

The Narrative apparently has changed back to the Electoral College. This must be the new talking point sent out from Central Command to the minions on the Left. Mr. Nichols dutifully pumps out yet another article in service to the Narrative. 

Mr. Nichol's purpose is not to inform, explain, or clarify. He's not intending to impart information or understanding. This is not even written to contribute to the debate. He marches in lock-step with other leftist agitprop generators to supply the day's bumper sticker slogans.

He is simply bolstering The Narrative in order to further The Agenda. The Narrative is the Leftist talking points of the day, the factoids and topics that always appear simultaneously all over the media landscape, designed as a barrage to overcome the reader's intellect so as to facilitate The Agenda. The Agenda is the elimination of the current system to install Marxism. 

One would think that simply spouting random sentences pulled from various leftist websites would be relatively easy. Regurgitating a couple of leftist factoids shouldn't be much of a challenge, either. After all, a superficial correlation of otherwise unrelated events is what these minions do. But though the central point of Mr. Nichol's article is to establish that the Electoral College caused the supposed insurrection, he doesn't even discuss this. All he does is state it as if it were true and move on. Astonishing. 

We should also note that he is engaging in Mountain Man's Law, which is: "Everything a Leftist Democrat accuses someone of doing is actually being done by Leftist Democrats."

----------------

SBTS Dean, Hershael York, Reveals Unbiblical *Nuanced* Mindset Behind Restoring Adulterous Pastors - Paul Brown

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------

We have grown accustomed to Protestia's superficial and often errant Bible exposition. Mr. Brown, the author, does manage to quote a pertinent Scripture, which warms our heart in an era of Bible-free teaching by various "discernment" ministries. But he focuses on a single aspect, "the husband of one wife," in the narrowest possible interpretation.

While we share the author's concern when these pastors quickly re-appear in the pulpit, sometimes after very serious sin, we reject the idea that there is no possibility for restoration to the pulpit for each and every case of sexual sin. We would embrace a broader criteria, since sin of every kind is present in the Church and potentially disqualifying for every person (1Co. 9:27, Col. 2:18), not just pastors.

The church has a responsibility:

Ga. 6:1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

The word "restore" means exactly fit (adjust) to be in good working order, i.e. adjusted exactly "down" to fully function. So a leader or pastor or any Christian who sins needs to be put back to full function, if at all possible. This requires repentance, counseling, examining of subsequent fruit, and continued accountability and evaluation.

No sin should disqualify any truly repentant person to return to their God-given gifts.

We should also mention that the Bible does not teach that pastors lead churches, the elders do (1Pe. 5:1-3). We therefore think the greatest problem is not that pastors fall, it's that pastors are placed too high. They occupy unbiblical positions at the top of the pyramid. They have too much power, they are subject to too many expectations, and they carry a burden God never put on them. Of course they would tend to fail in such an environment.

Churches are to be led by a plurality of godly men, not a CEO pastor. This fact could be a least a part of the solution to pastoral missteps.

In addition, much of the author's article is premised upon the idea that 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are pastoral epistles. There are no pastoral epistles.

Lastly, the author makes a gratuitous insulting statement regarding Hershael York. Such things are unbefitting a Christian.

-----------------------

Secret And Sinister Messages From God: Does God Speak Outside Of His Word? (part 1 & 2) - by MIKE ABENDROTH

Part one excerpted from here.

Part two excerpted from here.

We shall not consider part three, since it only deals with a particular person, and contains no Bible verses or Bible exposition at all.

Our comments in bold.

--------------------

Special revelation. Continuing revelation. Ongoing revelation. New revelation. Extra-biblical revelation. The author assiduously avoids calling prophecy prophecy, preferring pejorative neologisms. 

The author spends a lot of time repeating and repeating his conclusions, but these are for the most part not relevant to the discussion. Ultimately, he presumes the answer to "does God speak outside His word" as no, but never manages to document it.

And by the way, this question is a tautology. God speaking is God articulating His Word. He has never stopped speaking, so His Word is Him speaking. 

Further, the Son is the Word, and the Bible is the written Word of God. But the Son, the Word, and the Bible are not interchangeable. The Son exists independently from His titles. His Word exists independently from what has been written down. And what has been written down does not address the totality of what He has said.

And none of this means that He has nothing more to say.

-----------------

Guest column: Inflation Reduction Act: A win-win for your pocketbook and our climate - By Becky Edwards, Guest columnist

Found here. Our comments in bold.

------------------------

The glib talking points flow effortlessly from the writer's word processor, to the point of ridiculousness. 

It's one thing to favor a clean environment. It's another thing entirely to spout bumper sticker slogans and leftist agitprop in the name of a clean environment. And she is definitely a leftist. Since she is a leftist, we do not accept anything she writes on face value. Leftists never tell the whole truth, they always hide behind fine-sounding phrases, superficial analyses, and obfuscating rhetoric. 

And by the way, to our knowledge, the author is not an economist, ecologist, or credentialed in any field upon which she comments. We can discern no qualifications that would suggest we should accept her ideas.

Let's see what we can pull out of this article.

--------------------------

Tim Mackie of the Bible Project Denies Literal Hell, Says It’s Something That Humans Created - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------

The Doctrinal Police, ever vigilant to defend every jot and tittle of their doctrines, today bring their cannons to bear on Tim Mackie, whom they deem a false teacher. Now, it's certainly possible that this fellow has some bad doctrines. He may even teach some incorrect things. So we're not here to defend him so much as we desire to examine the writer of this article, who cowardly hides behind the moniker "publisher." 

Happily, "publisher" actually quotes a Scripture, an all-to-rare occurrence among these supposed Bible teachers. But he will make several claims without documenting them.

----------------------

The nature of sound, and the spiritual realm

Every once in a while our thoughts turn deep, and we begin to consider spiritual things we otherwise have taken for granted. This often takes the form of reconsidering the doctrines we believe (which we have deemed our rethink), the whys of what we do in church, or even, the presumptions we possess regarding how things work in nature.

Sound is one of those things that recently came to our attention. This phenomenon called sound is really an astounding feature of God's creation. The process of hearing, including the auditory apparatus and the interpretive ability of the brain, is really quite amazing from a design perspective. Because of God's infinite creativity, we possess the ability to receive and derive meaning from the sounds that fill the atmosphere.

The anti-abortion myth haunting the pro-choice movement - By Andréa Becker and Dr. Daniel Grossman

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

The title of the article promises to explain a certain myth that haunts these abortion advocates. We've read the article several times and are unable to identify this myth, repeatedly asserted as existing, yet never articulated. 

The authors are able purveyors of agitprop. They continually trumpet the dangers to women and doctors that the "born alive act" supposedly represents, but are unwilling or unable to identify a single danger. No myths. No medical misinformation. Nothing. Astonishing.

----------------------

Letter to the editor: Why not make it easier for Montanans to vote? - by Tom Stonecipher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------

The letter writer doesn't want common-sense voter ID laws. He thinks that because there isn't a present problem, there never will be. But somehow he still wants every qualified Montanan to vote, which necessarily admits there are people who are not qualified to vote. This means he favors some people not being able to vote. 

Therefore, he actually agrees with his political adversaries in principle. It's merely a matter of degree.

So we wonder what the big problem is in ensuring only legally able citizens cast a vote, since he otherwise supports the concept. He pretends (without evidence) that anti-fraud legislation will disenfranchise certain groups, but that is just a red herring. People who are motivated to vote will ensure their eligibility to vote, and people who can't be pried from their couches will not vote. 

There's not a thing wrong with that.

He can't come out and say what he really wants, because it's extremely unpopular: He wants anyone to vote. No standards. No voter rolls. No residency requirements. No legal status ascertained.

--------------------

What Jesus Meant by “Water and the Spirit” - by John MacArthur

Found here. Though we've often taken issue with Dr. MacArthur's teaching, the below article is on the whole very good.

-------------------

This post was first published in December, 2018. —ed.

There’s nothing we can do to earn our way into God’s kingdom. We need God to do something to us.

That truth demolishes every religious system outside of Christianity. And that is the sobering reality Jesus used to initiate His evangelistic encounter with Nicodemus—a man who had devoted his whole life to earning favor with God through his own pious efforts.

To anyone who lacked Nicodemus’s familiarity with the Old Testament, Christ’s words in John 3:5–7 would have created confusion.

Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, “You must be born again.” (John 3:5–7)

In fact, many Bible students who examine this passage are confused by it. Some have suggested that when Jesus spoke of “water,” He was speaking of baptism—and some of them then interpret this to be a statement about the necessity of water baptism as a prerequisite for regeneration. But John’s baptism could not have been a means of regeneration, because it signified an already-repentant heart, which is a fruit of regeneration. Christian baptism (likewise a symbol, not a means, of regeneration) had not even been instituted yet. So the idea of baptism is utterly foreign to this passage.

Trump Isn't Our Biggest Problem: It's the Authoritarian Fascist Movement He Launched - By Thom Hartmann

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------

The Narrative for the last few weeks is Trump/fascist. This is the talking point that went out from Central Command to the minions on the Left, so Mr. Hartmann dutifully pumped out yet another article. Mr. Hartmann marches in lock-step with other leftist agitprop generators to supply the day's bumper sticker slogans.

Therefore, Mr. Hartmann's purpose is not to inform, explain, or clarify. He's not intending to impart information or understanding. This is not written to contribute to the debate. No, he is simply bolstering The Narrative in service to The Agenda. The Narrative is the Leftist talking points of the day, the factoids and topics that always appear simultaneously all over the media landscape, designed as a barrage to overcome the intellect so as to facilitate The Agenda. The Agenda is the elimination of the current system to install Marxism. 

And ironically, Mr. Hartmann is really bad at it. One would think that simply spouting random sentences pulled from various leftist websites would be relatively easy. And regurgitating a couple of leftist factoids shouldn't be much of a challenge. A superficial correlation of otherwise unrelated events is what these minions do. So, the central point of Mr. Hartmann's article is to establish that Trump started an authoritarian fascist movement. But  doesn't even discuss this. All he does is state it as if it were true and move on. Astonishing. 

We should also note that he is engaging in Mountain Man's Law. Everything he tells us about the Republicans, conservatives, and Trump, is something the Left is actually doing and in many cases have been doing for decades.

Lastly, Mr. Hartmann seems incapable of writing a paragraph that develops an idea. That's the purpose of a paragraph. His paragraphs are mostly a single sentence, which we suppose is because the average leftist cannot be counted on to pay attention. We have found this lack of intellectual depth to likely be deliberate, although in Mr. Hartmann's case it might be because of his own limits.

---------------------------

Anna: The Prophetess from Asher - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

----------------------

Before we begin, we shall quote the whole passage to which Dr. MacArthur will frequently refer:

Lk. 2:36-38 There was also a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, 37 and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the temple but worshipped night and day, fasting and praying. 38 Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.

Oddly, he never quotes more than a couple of snippets from it, and in fact, never quotes any more than a phrase from any Bible verse. It is astonishing to us that a supposed Bible teacher cannot quote the Bible.

Lastly, we wonder about the purpose of this article. It is ostensibly intended to teach about Anna, but there seems to be an underlying agenda to diminish her and every woman in the Bible, especially those who prophesied. We don't know what that agenda is, but we will be on the lookout for clues.

-------------------

Who Were the Magi, and Why Did They Worship Jesus? (Matthew 2) - by Dan Doriani

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

The author never fully admits that the Magi actually did worship the baby Jesus. They bowed before Him, he says, but then he asks:

But do the magi fully comprehend Jesus’ identity?

Who can know the answer to such a question? No knows another's heart. We can only judge by the words before us: 

11 ...and they fell down and worshiped him...

The author will make a distinction between two Greek words, proskyneō (to bow or prostrate one's self in the presence of a superior, to worship) and piptō (to bow in respect). Both look the same to an observer. Are they worshiping, or just bowing in respect? 

Note that the verse we just quoted contains both words. The Magi both fell down in respect, and they prostrated themselves in humility, i.e., they worshiped.

So why does the author wonder about the Magi?  

Proskyneō is the same word Jesus uses here:

Jn. 4:23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks.

So Jesus explains true and spiritual worship, and tells us this is what the Father is looking for. If the author wants to discuss worship, why does he take us on a rhetorical journey about astrology, Herod, the gifts from the Magi, etc, but never gets around to discussing worship itself? 

Implied in the author's remarks is that a certain amount of knowledge is required to truly worship: 

If the magi do not know enough to worship in the fullest sense, they at least move in that direction...

What is this "fullest sense?" What knowledge is required? How do we know we are worshiping adequately? He never tells us.

And why did the Magi worship Jesus? This is one of the questions in the title. The author never answers the question. He instead abruptly concludes his article with a statement about how Herod was duped. 

What Is the Perseverance of the Saints? - by Danny Myers

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------

The author of this article wastes our time by mentioning many things but explaining few if any of them. We had hoped for an explanation of his doctrine, but he doesn't bother. It's a truly strange and unenlightening presentation.

-----------------------

The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, sometimes referred to as “eternal security,” speaks to questions such as “Can I lose my salvation?” or “How do I know that I will remain a Christian to the end?” Isn’t that what Jesus says in Matthew 24:13—“The one who perseveres to the end will be saved” (BSB)? (The author never explains this Scripture.)

These are real questions that pose real challenges to many people.

When studying salvation, it is always helpful to consider the context. The doctrines summarized in the acrostic TULIP outline the condition of man, and God’s loving work and answer to man’s greatest problems. (The author mentions TULIP as if we should know what it is. He doesn't explain it or discuss it, nor does he tell us its source. Strange.

TULIP is a rough summation of certain doctrines of Calvinism:

• Total depravity
• Unconditional election
• Limited atonement
• Irresistible grace
• Perseverance of the saints

It is the last one the author intends to explain. Let's see how he does.)

The story of redemption shows that man’s condition is that he is totally sinful (Total depravity. No Scriptures cited, however.)

—yet God intervened. It is important to stop and emphasize for a moment that the rest of the story of redemption unfolds from the foundation of “yet God.” In other words, we are the object of salvation, not the subject. (What does this mean? Why is this important?)

Salvation was accomplished and applied by God. What this tells us is that when we ask the questions: “Can I lose my salvation?” or, “How do I know whether or not I will remain a Christian?”, we cannot forget who the object of salvation is (man) and who the subject of salvation is (Jesus Christ). (He repeats the equation, adds to it the parties involved, but still doesn't explain.)

The word perseverance might be somewhat confusing because it could seem to communicate that God has started something, and now it is your turn: you must persevere. The biblical teaching, however, is that God has done something; God is doing something; and God will do something. The God who starts is the God who finishes. (The author offers an explanation that does not address the question. How is it that we do nothing in perseverance?)

That is what Paul says in Philippians 1:6: “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” (The good work to which Paul refers is the Philippian church's partnership in the Gospel from the first day until now... [vs. 5].)

The historic Westminster Confession of Faith reminds us of this doctrinal truth when it says, “They, whom God has accepted in his Beloved [Jesus Christ, His only Son], effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally, fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved” (17.1). (A statement of faith is not the biblical case.)

Notice the repeated pronoun “His,” for it tells us who is the subject of salvation (This is the third time this has been mentioned, but still no explanation regarding what it means.)

is and how certain the results are. The reason that this doctrine at times creates tension and opposition is that the Bible reveals that not everyone who claims to be a Christian is in fact a Christian (Matt. 7:22). (This is the only reason for tension and opposition? What about the tension and opposition of other Scriptures that seems to say the opposite?

Why is it relevant that some people who claim to be Christian are not? Will the author explain anything?)

As difficult as that is to hear, is it not also a greater comfort to those who are in fact, followers of Christ?

As He is circled by enemies, Jesus reminds us in John 10 of the confidence and comfort we have in being united to Him in salvation. John records for us that Jesus is the Good Shepherd and that He knows His sheep, and they know and follow Him (John 10:1–16). Jesus provides a striking and clear statement on our security in salvation. Jesus says, “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand” (John 10:28). (Oh, my. The author rips this passage from its context. Jesus was actually speaking judgment against the Pharisees [Jn. 9:4-41, 10:31-34] by way of explaining His sheep.

The Pharisees had just finished their hostile interrogation of the man who Jesus healed of blindness, and he worshiped Jesus [9:38]. Jesus responded to this with a statement about those who see will become blind [vs. 39], and the Pharisees understood Jesus was speaking about them. "Are we blind too?" [vs. 40].

This is the basis for Jesus explaining the sheep. The Pharisees are blind and do not recognize the voice of the Shepherd. In fact, they did not even understand the parable [10:6], so He even explained it again [vs. 7]. But Jesus knows his sheep, and they know Him [vs. 14]. 

Jesus was speaking against the Pharisees, who cannot hear Him and refuse to be His sheep. Jesus was speaking to Jews about Jews. Therefore, the sheep are the saved Jews. How do we know this? Because Jesus said,

Jn. 10:16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

These are the gentiles who will come to believe later. Salvation is for the Jews first, and then the gentiles [Ro. 1:16]. 

The author is misinformed.)

This is a claim worthy of consideration because Jesus is making a promise of eternal life, not simply temporal life. What hope is there apart from the promise Jesus makes? If Jesus doesn’t give eternal life, then the best perseverance we can have is a present effort in this present life. (Why? Why is this present life the only possibility we have in perseverance? Again, the author explains nothing.)

The teaching of Jesus is further explained by the Apostle Paul. The comfort that we derive from reading Romans 8 would be ruined apart from the promise of eternal perseverance. If there is a chance that Christians might not totally and finally (WCF 17.1) be saved, then we would need an adjustment to such claims. As one author suggests, Jesus would have to say: “No one will snatch them out of my hand . . . although they might snatch themselves by a failure to persevere” (see John 10:28). Or imagine Paul saying, “Nothing in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord . . . except for our own weakness”1 (see Rom. 8:38–39). (The author might wish to explore who is "us" in this passage. We think Paul is pretty clearly talking about "us" as being himself and his fellow Jews who believe. We know that Paul was writing to Jewish Christians in Rome [Ro. 2:17], and explaining in great detail the nature of the Jew and the law as compared to the gentile and grace. 

We must be careful to read in context, and not put ourselves into the narrative when we should not.)

The promise of perseverance, if not eternal, would provide a cruel and false hope of an impossible reality. (Why?)

The truth of the matter would be that we are sovereign rather than God. (Why? Why doesn't the author explain these things?)

Yet, the song that Scripture sings is that Jesus paid it all and upholds it all by the word of His power. Peter’s life gives us an example of this hope. Having put his trust in Christ, we see it waver over and over throughout the earthly ministry of Jesus. Yet in the end, we learn that Peter doesn’t persevere because he tried harder or had more passion, but rather, because he was always held tightly by His King. The one who was saved by Jesus shows that in the end, he is sustained and secured by Jesus. The one who was sifted by Satan, yet secured by his Savior, says, “Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” because “the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you” (2 Peter 3:18; 1 Peter 5:10). To Him be the dominion forever and ever, amen. (Sigh. There are so many missed opportunities to explain. The author could have spent some time explaining certain Scriptures that might be contrary to his doctrine [He. 6:4-6, Ph. 2:12, 1Jn. 5:16, etc.]. He could have explained any of the several points he raised, using Scripture and a logical procession of ideas. He could have even explained his theological base of understanding, i.e., Calvinism, and how it comes to bear on his thought process.

Nope.)

1 Paul D. Wolfe, “Perseverance: The Hope-Full Gospel that Encourages Abiding Faith” in Theology for Ministry: How Doctrine Affects Pastoral Life and Practice, ed.s William R. Edwards, John C.A. Ferguson, and Chad Van Dixhoorn. (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2022), 307.