If you had approached me a few months ago, and asked me, ‘Can someone believe in polygamy, and be a true Christian?’ you would have probably received a straightforward, ‘no’.

In fact, I probably rather naively wouldn’t have thought any genuine Christian would even consider it a possibility.

Apparently, that’s not so.

I read an article a couple of months ago which sort of caught me off guard. The author, Rick, (as much as can be known from the linear communication of the Internet) is a legitimate Christian. Yet, he is suggesting that the Bible sanctions multiple wives if men should decide it’s right for them.

After discussing his post back and forth a few times, I decided I should write on what I’ve learned, and expose you to this topic.

So, below I briefly state, 6 Reasons ‘Christian polygamy’ is not the will of God…

1. God’s order in Creation reveals the divine principle

God created a perfect world in six literal days. On the sixth day, He created man, and then woman out of the man to be a help for him.

God’s thoughts on all this? “Very good”.

With God revealling His desire that man should be fruitful and multiply, He could have speeded things up considerably by giving Adam more than one wife.

But, He didn’t.

2. It’s God’s way to aid raising a godly offspring

In Malachi 2:15 we read, “And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed.”

What’s the prophet recording? I’ll paraphrase it like this, ‘Didn’t God make one? Yet He had power to create more. So why one? For the purpose of raising children who fear and love God’.

Read the passage surrounding the verse for further clarity.

3. The Mosaic Law does not sanction it

One of the arguments used by those who may argue in defense of polygamy, is that it is not condemned anywhere in the Mosaic Law.

This appears to be true. But, neither is it sanctioned.

However, it is regulated, which, I confess, is rather interesting.

4. The marriage can be efficiently conducted with one wife

A man has no need for multiple wives. If man needed more than one, God, who was to give Adam a “help meet”, would have made him more than one wife.

The reasons for marriage can all be properly satisfied with one wife.

5. No man can hold office with multiple wives

If a man takes more than one wife, he immediately disqualifies himself from ever holding office in the church. An elder is to be the husband of one wife.

6. The picture of Christ and the Church teaches monogamy

Lastly, the theology and teaching of Eph 5 doesn’t match with having multiple wives, if it’s properly understood.

There is one head, and one body. There is Christ, and the Church; and it’s represented in marriage with man as the head. Should he have multiple bodies?

Also, that passage tells us that men are to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. How did Christ love the church? Sacrificially and particularly. You cannot properly sacrifice yourself to one wife, without minimising the sacrifice made to the other(s). Impossible. Neither can you love each one particularly as Christ loved the Church.

It’s a taboo and touchy subject, but I’m interested in your thoughts.

I’m sure you’ve wondered in the past why God blessed men who had multiple wives and concubines. Have you ever given it serious study?

• What Bloggers Need To Learn
• How to Witness to a Close Family Member
• Halloween - Trick Or Treat?

With the continuing trend of fruitless Christianity, more of God’s discerning people are realising that something isn’t quite right.

People “get saved”, and after a short period of keen interest in Christian living, they revert back to living a clearly unsanctified life.

What’s wrong?

Well, I don’t profess to know the answer, but I am always reminded of the parable of the sower in such scenarios.

Christ told us clearly, just because someone may find great joy in the hearing of the Word, (and i suppose they may even pray ‘the sinners prayer’) doesn’t mean they’ve been regenerated. Remember what Christ said, “he hath not root in himself” and the evidence is clearly seen when “persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended”.

A true story…

I told my mum recently, (hypothetically) if from this day forward for the next ten years I lived in rebellion against God, and I died, I would not have any right to be buried as a Christian.

Inspite of having sought to walk with Christ for seven years, I think too highly of what God says He will do when someone is regenerated, to think that one whom He has indwelt with the Spirit would rebel against Him for an extended period of time.

According to Phil 1:6 that’s just not going to happen.

What’s happening today…

What we’re finding today is that, as long as little Jonny has prayed a prayer asking Jesus into his heart, then he is a Christian. He’s saved.

This, I propose, is turning the supernatural into the superficial.

I’m not making light of little Jonny praying a prayer to God to save him. Rather, I’m saying the Christian’s around him have no right to pronounce him as a Christian when his life would show otherwise.

Suppose I did die ten years from now, and the last decade was spent living for self, rather than God. Living in rebellion against His clear commands, and doing that which was right in my own eyes. What message is the church sending out, if I’m buried as one who had passed into the immediate presence of Christ?

It’s not Arminian…

I don’t believe for one second that you can be saved and lost. The idea is preposterous, flies in the face of scripture, and is the apex of humanism conveyed as Christian doctrine.

However, just as strongly, I do not believe one can experience the miraculous work of regeneration, and live for years in rebellion against God, and die unrepentant.

Yet, this is what’s being taught (perhaps unawares). This is what the Average Joe in the pews of evangelical and some reformed churches believes. There is a chance that it’s just what I keep hearing, but I’m inclined to think it’s fairly common. Much too common.

AW Tozer said,

“It is my opinion that tens of thousands of people, if not millions, have been brought into some kind of religious experience by accepting Christ, and they have not been saved.”

Was he right?

The term, “accept/ask Jesus into your heart” is often used as the gateway into assurance of eternal life. I don’t mean to be overly meticulous over what may be regarded as mere semantics, but the scripture doesn’t command anyone to ask Jesus into their heart. Rom 10:9 uses the phrase, “believe in thine heart” which is an entirely different thing. It is instructing that the sinner must believe with all of his being, so much so that the inevitable outcome is confession (Rom 10:10).

So, how do I know I’m saved?

The only way to be absolutely sure of where you stand with God today, is to consider what you think and how you relate to Christ today. Are the two pillars of salvation, faith and repentance, still to be found in your life?  Do you love and fear Him, and does that love and fear lead you to obedience?

If you love and fear, but do not obey, you have no right to be assured of your salvation (1 John 2:3), no matter how sincere your prayer for salvation may have been. Likewise, if you obey His commands, but you have no love or fear of Him, then there’s a good chance you’re living as the Pharisse’s did.

I recall to my mind a profound statement I heard Dr. Alan Cairns say. I may have this slightly incorrect, so instead of quoting I’ll paraphrase.

God has never failed to sanctify those whom He justifies.

Think on that. If anyone professes to be justifed/born again/saved then it is impossible for there to be no fruit of sanctification. Impossible!

I leave you with a quote from Paris Reidhead:

“If I had my way, I would declare a moratorium on public preaching of ‘the plan of salvation’ in America for one to two years. Then I would call on everyone who has use of the airwaves and the pulpits to preach the holiness of God, the righteousness of God, and the Law of God until sinners would cry out, ‘What must we do to be saved?” Then I would take them off in a corner and whisper the gospel to them. Don’t use John 3:16. Such drastic action is needed because we have a gospel hardened generation of sinners by telling them how to be saved before they have any understanding why they need to be saved.“

I’d love to elaborate on Mr. Reidhead’s statement, but I’ve said enough for now.

Are you seeing anything wrong with much of the current day presentation of the Gospel? If so, what do you feel is the problem?

• Faith Alone: Never Alone!
• Drive-in churches - Are they biblical?
• Calvinism vs. Arminianism

Nevertheless, when I was informed from the pulpit during the Sunday morning sermon, that Woolworths was one of the first businesses to push for Sunday opening in the UK, it was a stark reminder that when individuals or collective bodies scorn the moral law of God, there will always be a price to pay; sooner or later.

A year ago, over 800 stores were trading in the UK. Today, none.

If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it. Isaiah 58:13-14

[Image courtesy of Gerry Balding]

• My first post!
• Weekly Open Blog
• Video Intro Test

Of course there were reasons for it, but that’s neither here nor there now.

The relevant thing is, it’s back. I’m back, and with purpose too.

Many people informed me that they wanted this site back. But, that’s not why I brought it back.

I loved communicating my experiences in Australia, but now that I’m in Northern Ireland again it’s clear that’s not the reason to bring it back.

The reason I’ve brought this site back is because it’s a place of contact for people to reach me.

Now that I’m living in Northern Ireland and no longer preaching full-time, I need a means to pay the bills, and I intend to do that online using (primarily) my abilities as a designer.

Of course, I will write here when I get time. But, at least now when getting a business card done, I’ll be able to use the armenthomassian.com domain as the primary medium of contact and for seeing my work (portfolio to come).

Anyway, if you need a website, or if you know of anyone who needs a website, you can point to me

Lastly, thank you for all your support and prayers. It means a lot.

• A Little South Australian Wildlife
• The Big Adventure Begins…
• Blogging Brethren Highlights

I’ve spoken about Australian words in the past, but this is going to be a bit different. Initially, it was only going to be about how to pronounce a particular word that was annoying me, but then it developed into a fully fledged post. Enjoy!

1. Questionable Pronunciation

Is there a correct pronunciation for ‘neither’? Is it nigh-ther or nee-ther?

It’s the kind of thing that doesn’t bother a regular person, but when you’re a public speaker you want to be getting it right.

In the past, I’ve always said ‘nigh-ther’, but hearing some educated men say ‘nee-ther’ I gave it a trial. To be honest, it felt totally weird, and mispronounced. What’s your take?

I’ve had to be very careful with pronunciation since coming to Australia. Northern Irish people say some things pretty weird, like ‘immediately’ pronounced ‘im-mege-itely’, or ‘film’ pronounced ‘fil-im’.

Also, why do we say, Amen as Ay-men rather than Ah-men? My Bible pronunciation shows that the ‘A’ is the same as in the word ‘father’, and not like the word ‘tame’.

2. Bizarre Phraseology

There’s also some ‘Ulster preacher phraseology’ that I’ve become aware of. Like, “We’ll begin reading at the verse…”. Why do we stick ‘the’ in there? It doesn’t really need to be there, does it?

You also hear Northern Irish preachers on about, “the land of….[insert foreign country]” which I find rather amusing.

When we’re going on holiday, we say, “We’re going to Spain”. But, when someone is going as a missionary, they go to, ‘the land of Spain’.

3. Clichéd Prayer

I remembering reading Spurgeon discussing the problem of clichés in prayer. He didn’t like them at all; particularly when they were misquoted passages of scripture.

Things like, ‘where two or three are gathered together, there you are in the midst‘, leaving out the critical “in thy name”. Or, “eye hath not seen, nor ear heard…” being used to refer to Heaven, when it’s not really about Heaven at all.

Granted, it takes deliberate effort to avoid falling into clichés. We’re creatures of habit, and that doesn’t help. However, if we conversed with God with an open heart, it might help us.

To help me, I try to talk to God like He’s a person, because — shockingly — He is!

We were reading Psalm 38 in our congregation yesterday, and it’s the perfect example of a man pouring out his heart honestly to God. Preachers should discourage clichés as it kills public prayer meetings. That’s why it’s so refreshing to hear a youth pray, because they’re less likely to string the same old phrases together.

Away with the clichés, and talk to God dear Christian!

Final notes…

1. I added a script which gives you the verse to scripture references. So, if I write John 3:16, or even Jn 3:16, you should be able to hover over it to get the verse as found in the Authorised Version. The same goes for references you may give in your comments.
2. You may have noticed that I’ve added a Sermon Audio script to the top of the sidebar. I’ll change this each time the audio people at church put up my latest message.
3. A blog I came across recently, just posted an article about a translation matter in the TNIV. I’m not linking to it because of the discussion, but because the Bible quotation had me laughing quite hard. The passage quoted is Col 4:10-14 from the NLT, but it was v14 that tickled me, where it says, “Dear Doctor Luke…”. It’s probably just my archaic mind, but I found it amusing.

• A Letter From Whitefield
• Series - What If…?
• Prayer Requested For South Korean Believers

In fact, the doctrine of our union with Christ cannot be separated from any study of Christ’s redemptive work for His people.

What do I mean?

For clarification, Christ’s redemptive work is His necessary work in order to accomplish redemption. Christ’s redemptive work applied is that which brings about our justification, sanctification, etc.

Each of these occur at a certain point and time, and there is a sense in which our union with Christ begins at a certain time, that is at our regeneration. It is by virtue of our union with Christ from regeneration on, that the believer actually experiences the application of the benefits of Christ’s work for him.

In other words, the believers union with Christ, stretches farther than the actual experience of being saved. It is indeed the root source of every blessing which is passed to the believer.

In another sense though - which is what I want to point out in this article - the believers union with Christ has no beginning and no end.

1. Union with Christ is in view from all eternity

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love” Eph 1:3-4

Here we have a powerful statement. Paul declares that God has blessed His people with all spiritual blessings, in accordance with the union that was in place before the foundation of the world!

He says God has “chosen us in him”. In other words, God’s decree of election was not severed from Christ. Those who were chosen, were chosen with Christ in view, and without Christ, obviously there would be no election.

When did this happen? Never!

God’s eternal purposes are just that, eternal. They never ’sprung to mind’. This of course is impossible for us to grasp, because our minds are bound to time, but it’s there nonetheless. Since God is eternal, so is everything about Him.

2. Union with Christ is in view TO all eternity

“According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love” Eph 1:4

Reading the commentaries, it is clear that people are divided as to whether the latter part of this verse is referring to sanctification or glorification. However, I don’t see the point in debating the matter. God’s purpose for His people to be holy, does not commence when we get to Heaven, but as soon as we become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4), and the purpose remains through the rest of time, and all eternity.

So, in one short verse, Paul takes us from eternity past, to eternity to come. Why? Because the believers union with Christ is from eternity past to eternity to come - from election to glorification!

3. Union with Christ is possible because He becomes the Federal Head of the Elect

God’s dealing with men, has always been on a federal (representative) basis, and there have been only two representatives for man - Adam and Christ.

Adam was the representative for man in the Covenant of Works, and Christ is the representative for the Covenant of Grace.

“The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [Christ] was made a quickening spirit.” 1 Cor 15:45

Why is Christ called the “last Adam”? Simply because, like Adam, He in a representative role.

“For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” 1 Cor 15:21-22

v21 has the same idea as the previously noted statement in v45. But notice the wording of v22, Paul again speaks of union with Christ, that by that union (in Christ) we shall all be made alive, but he uses the same same phrasing when referring to Adam, “in Adam”.

Is Paul suggesting that man is in union with Adam? Precisely!

[Incidently, I find it interesting that for those who have a problem with the word 'all' not always meaning absolutely everybody, unless you believe in Universalism (everyone will be in Heaven), then the latter all in v22 cannot mean absolutely everyone].

“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” Rom 5:12

When Adam sinned, we sinned in him. That is why we are all worthy of death (spiritual, physical, and eternal). He was the federal head of mankind.

It’s not by mistake that Paul uses the terms ‘in Adam’ and ‘in Christ’ together. The terms are the same to show that they are both federal representatives. So, as Adams sin is imputed to us, so is Christ’s merit imputed to His people.

Closing thoughts…

As Adam stood as our head in the Covenant of Works and failed, so Christ stood as the Head of His people in the Covenant of Grace and succeeded! The effect of Christ’s substitutionary death, was to reverse the consequences of Adam’s disobedience, dealing with the power and fruit of sin.

What a glorious thought believer. Rejoice in Him who is our Head, because all the blessings of God are ours in Him, and are guaranteed by virtue of our union with Him. 

• The Blessing Of Being In A Universal Family
• Christian Polygamy: Is it Sanctioned?
• 5 Profound Implications Of Praying In His Name

It’s a term which is often used hand-in-hand with what’s known as the Pre-Tribulation Rapture of the Church, and is often focused upon prophetic things.

When searching Google for a definition of Dispensationalism, and for a summary of its general teachings, I came across this page. It appears to be concise enough to be understood by all, and a fair representation of what most Dispensationalists hold to. Admittedly, the writer is not dispensational himself, but he appears to have put together the material from the writings of a key, and highly respected Dispensational theologian, Charles Ryrie. You might like to check it out before reading on.

I want to deal with Dispensationalism with you. There are countless millions of Christian’s throughout the world who hold to it as their biblical hermeneutic (science of interpretation), and although it primarily influences prophetic views, its teaching goes much deeper than simply how the future is going to pan out.

So let’s look at it, try to understand it, and see if it has any biblical warrant.

1. Dispensationalism is a recent departure from historic Christian beliefs

As some of you will be aware (and most honest dispensationalists will admit), Dispensationalism is a comparatively modern approach to Bible interpretation. Traditionally, the Bible was always seen as a harmonious unit - one Bible, one Gospel, one People. However, this is not how the dispensationalist approaches the scriptures. Instead, the Bible is divided, and various ‘groups’ of God’s people are seen in different ‘dispensations’.

The 1800’s were difficult years for many churches. Rationalism began to infiltrate the church, and preachers were beginning to doubt the Bible, and rationalise passages which couldn’t be fully explained by science (Genesis 1-11, miracles, etc).

The result was, when a man came asserting authority in the scriptures, and teaching in a dogmatic manner, many people followed after them. Such was the case with Charles Russell of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Joseph Smith of the Mormon Church, Ellen White of the Seventh-Day Adventist’s, and also John Darby (an ex-anglican who joined himself to, and eventually took over the Plymouth Brethren movement).

John N. Darby is the individual who is credited with the forming of the basic structure of Dispensational Theology. To cut a long story short, Darby found it difficult to reconcile the promises of the Old Testament age, with the spiritual standing of New Testament believers.

Although this had never been a problem to theologians for over 1800 years, Darby wasn’t able to see it, and so his solution was to assert that Israel and the Church are two different groups; and so Dispensationalism began.

This is vital to understand. Many come to a belief of dispensational theology because someone shows them the Pre-Tribulation Rapture from the scriptures, but this wasn’t how it originated.

In order to remain consistent with his new-found hermeneutic, Darby had to develop the idea of the rapture of the Church, but I don’t want to get into that now. What we must be clear on is, if you lift any of the historic Christian confessions, the saints in the Old and New Testaments are always viewed as one body, and what Darby began to assert was entirely new.

2. Converted Gentiles become part of a body which started in the Old Testament

Dispensationalism’s primary tenet is the distinction between Israel and the Church. If it can be proved that the saints of the Old and New Testaments are of one body, the whole system inevitably crumbles.

So what do the scriptures teach? I advise you to read Ephesians 2:11-22.

Speaking to this Gentile church, Paul writes in v12-13, “That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.”

There are two questions that must be asked here;

1. From what are they no longer ‘aliens’ and ’strangers’?
2. What have they been ‘made nigh’ to?

What is Paul saying to these Gentiles? The blood of Christ has brought them into something, something which they were once aliens and strangers to; what is it? Clearly, it’s ‘the commonwealth of Israel’ and the ‘covenants of promise’.

Doesn’t that make it clear that Paul believed New Testament Christian’s became part of something which already existed?

The question is, what precisely is this ‘commonwealth of Israel’ and how did it exist before?

3. The apostle Paul taught that there are two ‘types’ of Jews

In Romans 2:28-29, Paul writes, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

So, a man can be a national Jew and circumcised (outwardly), and yet not be a true Jew, which is one which has been inwardly circumcised. In other words, there are national Jews, and there are, what we might term ’spiritual’ Jews.

Is this what Moses taught? Has this always been the case?

Deut 30:6, “And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.”

That text is interesting, because Paul talked about this very thing to the Gentiles at Colosse; Col 2:11, “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands”.

Seeing the parallel between Deuteronomy and Colossians, you’d imagine that the great Jewish apostle to the Gentiles was teaching that converted Gentiles had experienced the same thing God said He would do for His people thousands of years before!

Knowing that the Gentiles needed to experience the new birth, Paul must have believed the same experience was what was needed to become a true Jew.

He makes it clear in Romans 2:28-29 that not every Jew was a true Jew, even if they have been physically circumcised, so therefore, the spiritual circumcision which Paul talks about in the New Testament (Col 2:11), is the same which God required in the Old Testament (Deut 30:6).

So clearly there are two types of Jews. But, what about this ‘commonwealth of Israel’?

4. The apostle Paul taught that there are two ‘types’ of Israel

If there is a a national Jew and a spiritual Jew, is there a national Israel and a spiritual Israel? And, can a Gentile become part of this spiritual Israel?

In Eph 2:11, Paul writes, “Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh…”

Notice those words, “in time past”. Paul is referring to what they were before they became Christian’s. What were they? “Gentiles in the flesh”. What are they now? Well, tie it in with v12-13 and you’ll see that he is clearly teaching that they are now of this ‘commonwealth of Israel’, or what we might term, ‘Spiritual Israel’.

Paul talks about this spiritual Israel in Rom 9:6, “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”.

If you take the time to understand the passage, Paul is saying, ‘not everyone is of spiritual Israel, which are of national Israel’. It’s the only way to understand what he’s saying. If ‘Israel’ means national Israel in both cases, what he says makes no sense at all!

This spiritual Israel Paul terms as the “Israel of God” in Gal 6:16.

Conclusion

The alternative to Dispensational Theology is Covenant Theology, which teaches that God progressively revealed the covenant of grace through various means throughout the ages, and in Old Testament times they did not possess the full revelation that we have since the dawn of the New Testament period.

This is the very thing Paul teaches in Eph 3:5-6, “Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel”

God’s plan of salvation for one elect people (’fellowheirs of the same body’) in all ages has been revealed progressively (’as it is now revealed’). Paul, clearly, was not a dispensationalist. Therefore, though one may be a genuine Christian and hold to this system, careful study should bring every sincere believer to a recognition that its main tenet of distinction (dichotomy) between Israel and the Church, is irreconcilable with scripture.

• Romans 9 - Unconditional Election
• The Christian Sabbath
• Our Eternal and Federal Union with Christ

Now during the mission, a number of young people professed faith in Christ. But some weeks after, my friend told me about an incident that had just occurred the previous evening. He told me that he had been chatting to one of the young guys who had sought Christ during the mission. He asked him how he was getting on, and the young guy replied, ‘I’m not saved anymore’ and gave the impression that he wasn’t interested in following Christ at all. After that, my friend said to me with a big grin, “He doesn’t realise that he’s still saved”.

I was horrified, and upon further consideration I realised that the young guy understood Christian doctrine better than his Christian youth leader!

The reality is, this easy-believism is rampant, and it all stems from an ignorance of the Gospel. The problem is two-fold;

• i) Through a misunderstanding of ’simple faith’, preachers all over the world are now (increasingly over the past century) trying to press people into the kingdom by ‘making a decision for Christ’. The idea is, if they pray the sinners prayer and exercise ‘faith’ then they are saved; and of course, ‘once saved, always saved’.
• ii) This ‘only believe’ gospel makes no mention of the necessity for repentance, and therefore the ‘decisions’ tend to be entirely in vain. The Westminster Confession of Faith states, “Although repentance be not to be rested in as any satisfaction for sin, or any cause of the pardon thereof, which is the act of God’s free grace in Christ; yet is it of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect pardon without it”. Therefore, when these decisions are made for Christ without repentance, usually it is with an eye to possess eternal life without the demand of holy living, which is utterly impossible.

So, let’s look at a few vital points concerning true biblical faith:

1. Faith is not sourced in man

As much as the words of scripture concerning salvation are very plain and simple, many preachers today mistaken this simplicity for ease. Citations such as, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31) are used to teach us that the sinner must ‘just’ believe.

The idea that a sinner can make the decision to believe, the same way that they might decide to have their lunch at noon, is utterly unscriptural. True saving faith is not something a sinner has the power to exercise of himself, but as is revealed in the scriptures, it is a gift from God (Eph 2:8-9).

What we must be clear on, however, is that there is nothing in faith which justifies a sinner.

There is this idea in many minds that faith is the be-all-and-end-all, which is, in essence, like having faith in faith. This is wrong. True saving faith is not only something which God gives to the sinner, but it is given in order for them to exercise it in accepting, receiving, and resting upon the Lord Jesus Christ.

2. Because faith is not sourced in man, it is never alone

I stated the phrase ‘once saved, always saved’ above in a rather sarcastic manner. To make sure I’m understood by all, I should clarify that I believe the scriptures teach eternal security for those in Christ. The reason I mocked it a little, is because of how this doctrine is often misrepresented.

Faith, as we’ve already established, is a gift from God. It is sourced in God, and is a grace which He gives to the elect, which they in turn exercise in Christ.

Contrary to popular belief, this faith - if it is genuine saving faith given by God - is never alone. The Bible teaches, “faith, if it hath not works, is dead” (James 2:17). There is therefore as a matter of necessity, a need for evidence of the profession made, and that evidence is a holy life. A life of obedience.

Under grace…

To think that, because we are ‘under grace’ that we don’t need to live a holy life, is not only unbiblical, but an absolute abomination, and something which should be regarded with nothing but disgust! Indeed, I cannot use language strong enough to dissuade anyone who holds to this idea.

Some think, because Christ has fulfilled the law in our behalf (Rom 5:19), and there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ (Rom 8:1), there is no need to obey the moral law. God doesn’t see our sin, He sees the righteousness of Christ, so it matters little how we live.

Often “ye are not under the law, but under grace” (Rom 6:14), is the text used to argue such a view. The thing is, that text, and indeed the whole chapter, is so far removed from thinking we can live how we please, it’s quite unbelievable that anyone could think it teaches freedom from holy living.

When Paul says, “ye are not under the law, but under grace”, he cannot mean that we can live how we please. I am not even going to use this space to prove it to you, just read the passage surrounding the text and you’ll see clearly that Paul was in fact arguing that a holy life is a must!

When we get to Romans 6, Paul is dealing with the topic of the believers sanctification, and in v14 his argument is that sin will not have dominion over the believer because they are no longer under the curse of the law, but living by the power of grace. In other words, he was basing his argument for sanctification upon the truth of our justification. But, does that remove the Christian’s duty to obey the moral law? Paul says in v15, “God forbid”.

It’s logical, that if faith is a gift from God, it should follow that God would set in order that which proves the faith is real. Having already quoted James 2:17, he continues in v18 “I will shew thee my faith by my works”.

Again, the WCoF says, “These good works, done in obedience to God’s commandments, are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith.” The man who is a Christian, will, because he is the product of God’s grace, undoubtedly have a desire to do good works, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph 2:10).

Therefore, because faith is the gift of God, it is never alone, but its existence is always proved by a holy life.

3. Because faith is not sourced in man, it will never cease

It is common to hear the question asked, ‘Can a person lose their salvation?’ However, I’m inclined to think that it’s usually the wrong question, and when it’s answered, it usually gives the wrong impression.

The idea behind asking if one can lose their salvation, presupposes that the one asking the question has experienced a professing Christian living in an ungodly manner. Seeing the contradiction, they wonder if it’s possible that such sinful living can be acceptable to God. So when a Christian replies to the question ‘No, a Christian can’t lose their salvation’ then the person assumes that you can become a Christian, live how you please, and then go to heaven at the end of it all.

Of course, this brings about horrible consequences, and we’re seeing the fruit of it all the time.

A better question to ask would be this, ‘After having performed such a miracle to bring someone to repentance, and give to them the gift of faith to believe in Christ, do you think God is going to leave them and let them live how they please, or do you think He’s going to persevere in their lives to make them more holy and like Christ day by day?’

The answer to that question is obvious. The fact is, God is going continue the work He has begun in the life of every genuine believer, and He is never going to stop (Phil 1:6). Therefore, true saving faith, is a faith which will guarantee that God will transform the life of the individual to become more like Christ (Rom 8:29).

Lack of assurance…

The Bible nowhere does what many modern preachers and Christian’s do. People who are in doubt about their salvation come for counseling, and what they’re told is, ‘Did you ever pray and ask for pardon, and ask Jesus into your life? If you did, then you’re saved.’ That is utterly unscriptural!!

The Bible’s answer to lack of assurance is;

• i) the witness of the Spirit (Rom 8:16)
• ii) the desire and performance of obedience (1 John 2:3)

If you’re not living a holy life today, then there’s no reason to suspect that you’re a Christian. I’ve been a Christian now for 6 years; if I was to live the next 6 years living in sin and doing as I please, what reason would I have to believe I’m on my way to heaven? To assume upon grace which appeared to be in effect in the past, but is not evident now, is to corrupt the grace of God! If I truly possess saving faith, then I shall believe to the very end!

Temporary faith…

I think it’s only wise to point out that there is such a thing as temporary faith. The parable of the sower makes this clear (Matt 13:20-21). It is a living reality that one may make a profession of faith, shows all the signs of enjoying Christian things, and experience real joy in Christ, (all for a time) and yet they are not truly saved. John speaks of such (1 John 2:19), Peter mentions it (2 Peter 2:20-21), and Paul solemnly declares it (Heb 6:4-6).

Conclusion

It is clear that we need to possess a true understanding of what genuine faith really is. A lot of what is allowed to pass as ‘faith’ is nothing of the sort. Faith is a gift from God, therefore it is never alone, and it will never cease!

“Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Phil 2:12-13

• How Do I Know I’m Saved?
• 5 Profound Implications Of Praying In His Name
• "Is anything too hard for the LORD?"

And yet, I’m convinced that although the message of Christ is spreading and is proving victorious in many parts of the world, all the ‘trappings of Christianity’ which we see in the US, UK, Oz, and a few other places, is nothing more than the church in Sardis, “thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead” (Rev 3:1).

Dead? That’s a bit harsh, isn’t it? You might be able to say that about the conservative reformed/evangelical churches, but look at the mega churches which draw thousands, they are full of life! Our local charismatic/pentecostal church has loads of life in it. They are experiencing revival!!

I’ll not name any names, but I was handed a leaflet recently which was advertising:

“Glory Harvest Springtime Revival Healing Meetings!
Revival meetings that will impact your life!”

Then on the back there were various testimonies;

“Epilepsy completely healed after prayer!”
“A tumor the size of a grapefruit disappeared during praise and worship.”
“Jaw and Gum denture problem healed by the power of God.”

…and on and on it goes.

The claim of such charismatics is that ’sickness is not God’s will’ and therefore prayer offered in faith will remove the ailment, whatever it might be. In most cases they will also state that sickness is the result of sin, so repentance is necessary as well as faith.

Now, I’m not denying that God answers prayer, or that He delivers people from sickness and ill-health at times, or that He inflicts sickness due to sin sometimes. However, what I am going to show, is that the extent to which the charismatic churches take it is not only unscriptural, but downright heresy!

1. The Teachings of Christ Contradict the Charismatics

The gospel of the charismatics is primarily healing rather than redemption! Deny it though they may, this is their message of outreach.

On numerous occasions I have been handed tracts which have made no mention of the Cross, of sin, of repentance, or any sort of message which would lead a soul to faith in Christ. They always emphasise healing, their respective healing services, and the testimonies of the healed.

The argument for this is that this is what Christ did; He used healing miracles to show people the power of God, which in turn brings them to faith in Christ. But this is entirely wrong.

1. Christ’s miracles where not to show how mighty He was, but was to authorise that He was sent by the Father as the Messiah (John 5:36).
2. Christ’s miracles were just another part of His ministry, but were not any more effective at producing genuine disciples than His preaching (John 2:23-25). In fact, they were generally more of a curse upon the people than a blessing (Matt 11:20-23).
3. Christ taught clearly that miracles were not more powerful than the word of God, in fact probably less so (Luke 16:30-31).
4. Christ taught that sickness is not necessarily a result of sin (John 9:3).

2. The Teachings of the Apostles Contradict the Charismatics

Many charismatics still believe that there are apostles today, not realising that the requirement for being an apostle includes visibly seeing the risen Christ (Acts 1:22), and receiving the commission for being an apostle from Him directly (Luke 6:13; Gal 1:1).

But, in spite of that, do the apostles validate the ideas of the charismatics, particularly in relation to healing?

1. The message of the apostles was never one of healing! They never preached ‘healing’. Their message was constantly and consistently one of calling people to repentance from sin, and faith in Jesus Christ (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 20:21).
2. When they healed it was never advertised, but was completely spontaneous as they were moved by the Spirit. (Acts 3:1-8; 14:8-10).
3. On occasions when many were healed, it was completely sovereign, during a time of spiritual awakening (Acts 5:12-16; 28:7-9).
4. Even the apostles couldn’t heal who they wanted, when they wanted (2 Tim 4:20).
5. The apostles also believed in the proper use of medicine (1 Tim 5:23) and doctors (Col 4:14).

3. The Teaching of Scripture Concerning Sickness and Healing

Due to the Fall, we all are subject to the afflictions that it has brought, including bodies which are far from perfect.

However, just because they are not perfect, it doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be taken care of. Indeed, the scripture is clear that those who follow the conduct of life as it indicates will know good health (Prov 4:20-22).

It’s easy to see how this is true. The Bible teaches proper hygiene, discourages gluttony, condemns sexual sins which are more likely to lead to disease, and much more.

Nevertheless, sometimes we fall sick so what are we to do?

1. Start with yourself, and that which lies in your power and responsibility. It is clear that sometimes sickness is due to sin (1 Cor 11:28-32; Psalm 119:75). Therefore, a period of searching to discern inward or outward sin should be engaged in, and we should not stop until the sin is discovered and repented of, or we are brought to the conviction that it has nothing to do with disobedience (Prov 3:7-8).
2. Assuming we’ve discovered it’s not due to our sin, we should request (pray) its removal and deliverance (James 5:15; Isaiah 37:5).
3. After much seeking after God without success, we may have to resign ourselves to the fact that our sickness is for the glory of God (2 Cor 12:8-10). This is a stern reality which all Christians must be prepared to accept without complaint.

It is clear that Epaphroditus had resigned himself to the will of God, and that both he and Paul were convinced he was going to die before God delivered him (Phil 2:26-28), and we’ve already mentioned Trophimus who suffered sickness which not even Paul could remove by his spiritual power. God exercised His sovereign will in these cases (as in all) and that will was that they should suffer their afflictions for a time.

4. The Differences Between the Apostolic Age and the Present Day

Whether we like it or not, there are some differences between the apostolic age and the events which occurred then, that are not going to happen today, nor do they even need to happen today.

One of those things is the extent of divine healing. During the apostolic age, they were not only able to heal the sick, but also the blind, deaf and dumb. This is not so for today. James 5:14-15 shows that it’s the “sick” who should call for prayer.

Also, a list of the supernatural gifts which were obtained during the apostolic period is found in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. They were designed chiefly for the authenticating of Christianity and to confirm it in heathen countries. Their purpose, then, was only a temporary one, and as soon as the canon of Scripture was closed they were withdrawn. This is most likely why Paul couldn’t heal Trophimus, as it was near the end of the apostolic age.

Conclusion

There is much more which could be said on this topic. It’s a huge issue of which there is much confusion and distorting of the scriptures. But, it’s worse than that.

The modern charismatic idea which enforces that God will heal every ailment if you only believe, is not only a lie, but places people in bondage. What happens when there is no deliverance? The individual is left distraught, feeling that it’s their fault.

On top of that, if what the charismatics say is true, we need never die! Therefore, we must realise that even the teaching of James 5:14-15 is indefinite. It is always subject to the will of God, and one day we will all die, whether we like it or not, and even before then it may please God that we endure sickness.

• Who Are They?
• How To Pray Under Persecution
• Faith Alone: Never Alone!

During his time in Potiphar’s home and in the prison, the scripture is clear to point out that the LORD made what he did to prosper, and in conjunction with that statement, it says, “the LORD was with Joseph” (Gen 39:2-3, 23).

For that reason, I believe that the mark of true prosperity is knowing the presence of God. This is further borne out in the law of the first mention, where we first read the word ‘prosper’ in Gen 24:40 “The LORD, before whom I walk, will send his angel with thee, and prosper thy way”. But, this inevitably raises a few questions.

What it is to know the presence of God

What is the ‘presence’ of God? Have you ever known the presence of God, and if you have, how do you know that it was the presence of God and not something else? Is it something we can sense, or is it just seen in its effects?

These are questions which in various forms haunt me, both in a personal level, and in a corporate level when we meet together with other believers for meetings. I mean, is the presence of God something we can simply presume on, or is it something we are to know, or is it both?

The first text which comes to mind in every Christian is, “I will never leave thee nor forsake thee” Heb 13:5

But, is that a promise we should presume on, and then live happily in the knowledge of it?

What about corporately? Ah, yes of course, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” Matt 18:20

Surely we can assume that is for us? I mean, we mention the name of Jesus in our prayers, singing, and in our preaching, so surely He is with us? Surely God’s presence is known?

Learning from the mistakes of others

I wonder if the Laodiceans assumed Gods presence was with them too? I mean, inevitably God was with them, was He not? He had blessed them with heaps of money, and isn’t that a sign of Gods blessing? That’s what we say, isn’t it? God has blessed us with this wonderful building, and with a wonderful program for the children, and with talented musicians, etc.

The reality is, the sign of Gods blessing is His presence (as we have already noted), and the Laodicean church was without Gods presence, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.” Rev 3:20

Imagine that, Christ isn’t in the church, and they didn’t notice. He knocks on the door, and they didn’t notice, and so He had to send a letter to tell them He wanted back in if they were willing to have Him!

Purging the sham

I don’t know about you, but I feel most of the time that I don’t really sense the presence of God. In my own quiet times it often feels like mere humbug. There’s no awe. There’s no fear. There’s no reality. My Saviour wants to manifest Himself to me (John 14:21), but often I leave without sensing that I’ve really met with God.

It’s the same in corporate worship. I’m not looking for fire from Heaven, or for the sick to be healed, and I’m definitely not looking for people in the congregation to fall backwards, or laugh uncontrollably or bark like dogs.

I suppose my desire is like that of David’s, “Bow thy heavens, O LORD, and come down” (Ps 144:5) or “that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come down” (Is 64:1).

Maybe it’s just me, but I feel that almost every day of my existence is a grievance to the Lord. Where is the glory of the Lord? Where is the right hand of the Almighty? Where is the majesty of His presence?

Alas, perhaps “Ichabod” (1 Sam 4:21) should be written over my life! Perhaps it should be written over the church of the western world?

Hope

Is there any hope for us? Yea, there is but one way of hope, “Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works” (Rev 2:5).

Wouldn’t it be glorious to know the presence of God each day, abstaining from “all appearance of evil” (1 Thes 5:22) and experiencing “the Lord working with them” (Mark 16:20)?

With this in mind, here is my prayer;

Father, thou who art full of grace and mercy, deliver me I prey thee from religious hypocrisy, and from having lips which praise thee, yet a heart which is far from thee. Grant that this unprofitable servant might know a fresh dawning of light which shall drive all darkness away, giving me deliverance from all known and unknown sin. Be pleased, I prey, to bless my soul with a fresh revelation of thy holy child Jesus, who is the Author and Giver of life.

Lord, strengthen me with all might, by the Spirit in the inner man, and fill me with all the fullness of thyself. I prey also that thou mayest anoint me with the Holy Ghost, that day by day I might make known the mystery of the gospel, and preach boldly Christ, and Him crucified. This I prey in Jesus’ name, Amen!

• Dawkins Defines God - What Saith The Scriptures?
• The Result of Not Acknowledging The Lord’s Day?
• Biblical Forgiveness