Obama on the Bible

 

Someone might ask, well aren’t these valid talking points?

They are misguided. Let’s address his message and see. I will not address whether the US is still or no longer a Christian nation. Or whether or not the nation should be ruled via Christian principles. What I will address are the passages that Obama misrepresents. For some Christian, he sure doesn’t seem to have much faith in what’s written in the Bible. But that too I won’t bother to get into.

Whose Christianity would we teach? Biblical Christianity. Explain scripture with scripture, and things iron out very easily. So then it is not JtM’s Christianity or Obama’s Christianity, but Biblical Christianity that’s important.

There are some things which, with a non-seared conscience (1 Timothy 4:2), people just know inherently are either morally right or wrong.

“Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the Law, do by nature what the Law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the Law, since they show that the work of the Law is written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts either accusing or defending them. ” – Romans 2:14-15

Slavery

It really is something else that Obama would stand there and suggest that the Bible is condoning the cruel form of slavery that we know of today. If it did, then why even bother to free the Israelites from the Egyptians? Scripture makes it clear about how we are to treat others.

“And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with Him” – Ephesians 6:9

So obviously, if a passage seems to be speaking favorably of someone owning slaves, then there are also rules on how those people are to be treated. And once we understand these rules, we see Scripture is in no way condoning mistreatment of others. So the slave-master relationship, is really as we have today an employee-employer relationship.

Eating Shellfish

Back then, they didn’t have the methods of cooking or certain sciences (at least not without divine revelation) as we do now. Shellfish needs to be prepared properly.1 God wanted to prepare a healthy heap of people to bring the Messiah out of. Not a set of sickly people. Who would listen to the Gospel from a bunch of miserable looking people?

“And at the end of ten days their features appeared better and fatter in flesh than all the young men who ate the portion of the king’s delicacies. Thus the steward took away their portion of delicacies and the wine that they were to drink, and gave them vegetables.” – Daniel 1:15-16

Daniel’s testimony influenced the Babylonians. A sick looking Daniel would have hurt the mission.

Straying from the faith

Deut 21:18-21
I suppose he is referring to Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Obviously it is not referring to no light rebellion since: “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.” – Ephesians 6:4

This obviously lets us know how parents are to treat their children and how to train them up. So if a parent were to be stoning their child to death, obviously it is concerning serious matters.

In fact, Obama’s quotation of the passage is in err since the verse is not even talking about straying from the faith, though obviously someone in such rebellion has already strayed. If straying from the faith was the problem, then what’s up with the story of the Prodigal Son? Obama makes it seem as if the Bible is saying if a child decides to no longer be a Christian, they are to be stoned. Sorry Obama, but that’s Islam.2

Deut 13:6-10
If Obama is speaking of Deuteronomy 13:6-10 in regards to leading people away from the faith to worship other gods, then we know from other areas in Scripture that idol worshipping often involved human sacrifice and other forms of wickedness.

“He followed the ways of the kings of Israel and even sacrificed his son in the fire, engaging in the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.” – 2 Kings 16:3

“They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal–something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.” – Jeremiah 19:5

Even so, how could the Messiah come from a people who were busy worshipping idols? Who would even recognize Him? They struggled to recognize Him even when they were at their “best” or “most religious”.

“Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” Jesus replied, “Philip, I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” – John 14:8-9

“Then they said to Him, “Where is Your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.” – John 8:19

I don’t see anywhere in Scripture which teaches that people are to be stoned for straying from their faith; strays can be found. Stoning is the punishment for a deeper, much more treacherous kind of rebellion. Even if there were such teachings about stoning for “straying from the faith” in the Old Testament, then it is clear from the New Covenant, that Christ’s sacrifice offers mercy for the stray, which was so beautifully described from the story of the Good Father, normally called the Prodigal Son.

Summary

The Bible must be read full-circle. Can’t just pick out a bunch of passages and call it George or call it a day.3 It is very easy to fall into the lime light or same line of thinking if we are not careful to study or do the research ourselves, even if the talking points are favorable for our own worldview or ideology.

References:
1. http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/risk-shellfish-2026.html
2. http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Persecution_of_Ex-Muslims
3. https://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/let’s+call+it+a+day.html

QA: Does the Bible Teach Works Based Salvation like Water Baptismal Regeneration?

Short answer, no it does not. But what about Scripture like:
“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” – Mark 16:16

“And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” – Acts 2:38

Doesn’t that teach that water baptism is a prerequisite to salvation?

coc-doctrineAgain, no, the Bible does not teach that we need to do anything more that believing in Christ in order to receive salvation. I know, there are denominations out there like the Church of Christ1, who will preach differently. But their teaching is unbiblical. They will accuse anyone who teaches in accordance to Ephesians 2:8 to be teaching that good works are not important. Good works are certainly important! But they are not the means to salvation, but only the evidence of it.

In Scripture we see “believe and confess”, “believe and be baptized”, or “believe” by itself. Why is that? Why don’t we just see “believe, confess, be baptized…” always listed together if the sum of salvation is equal to the total of “man’s” parts? You will see as you follow below.

When the Bible says believe in Jesus and ye shall be saved, it is talking about a belief that acts. The new believer is expected to produce fruit in accordance with their repentance. Otherwise, the so-called believer’s “belief” or faith would be dead and similar to the belief of demons.

“You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?” – James 2:19-20

Understanding the differences

That doesn’t explain why Acts 2:38 is written that way you may say. But when Scripture appears to conflict, the solution is simple, find other passages in Scripture to explain the “troubling” passage.

“To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.” – Acts 10:43

So which is it, is baptism or believing the cause of remission of sins? How do we reconcile Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:43?

There is no problem at all really when we think about what baptism represents.

“Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” – Romans 6:4.

Baptism is symbolic of Christ’s work for us. We are not physically killed with Christ, obviously. Baptism is simply a public expression by the believer of where he/she chooses to put their faith in for salvation from their sins; baptism represents the person’s belief. So Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:43, are in fact saying the same thing.

Advocates of baptismal regeneration may ask, where do we get that wording from. If you are asked this, you can simply respond to them that they too must use phrases to express what they understand which are not verbatim in Scripture. Take for example the doctrine found on the Church of Christ website. Notice they say: “Though God’s part is the big part, man’s part is also necessary if man is to reach heaven.”. Where in the Bible is there this wording? There isn’t. They just believe that Scripture teaches like this, they believe this teaching is supported. So if you are ever presented this objection, remind the supporter that they too do the same.

“And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you, not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience. It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” – 1 Peter 3:21

Advocates of water baptismal regeneration will just take the first clause and say: “see, water baptism saves you”! But will ignore the rest of the verse, which explains what the verse is saying fully. It’s not saying the act of being immersed in water saves, notice “not by removing dirt from your body”, but “as a response to God from a clean conscience”. One can see that baptism is being connected with belief. In the Old Testament, we know that the blood of bulls and goats didn’t actually save (Hebrews 10:4).

The Old Testament Jew was saved before he brought the offering. That offering was only his outward testimony that he was placing faith in the Lamb of God of whom these sacrifices were a type…Water baptism is the outward testimony of the believer’s inward faith.2

Looking at the verse differences logically we see:
“They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved–you and your household.” – Acts 16:31
Here belief = TRUE, therefore salvation = TRUE
“If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” – Romans 10:9
Here confession = TRUE, belief = TRUE, therefore salvation = TRUE
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” – Mark 16:16
Here belief = TRUE, baptized = TRUE, therefore salvation = TRUE
In all cases, salvation is the result/sure/true. We see belief appearing on its own, and salvation is still true.

In Mark 16:16, notice even the next part of the verse says:
“but he who does not believe will be condemned”
Emphasis is on belief. Assuming Mark 16:16, is referring to water baptism, if it was necessary unto salvation, then the clause would have been:
“but he who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned” Yet, we know that’s not what Scripture says.

Advocates of baptismal regeneration and works based salvation for the matter, simply add the works together to produce salvation. They view the works as supplements to produce the whole salvation. But it seems the Bible teaches about a kind of belief with by-products or belief that produces fruit in keeping with repentance.

If water baptism and other works were necessary prior to salvation status being reached, then someone who only ever heard or read verses like John 3:16 would be in trouble. Soldiers who believed in Christ on the battle field and died there without getting baptized with water, or confessing publicly with their mouth to others about their faith, would still go to hell.

Again, when the Bible says believe and you will be saved (Acts 16:31), it is talking about a special kind of belief. Just like Galatians 5:22-23 is speaking of a special kind of fruit.

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.”

Notice it says “fruit”, singular. That suggests the items in the list are things that encompass one another. For lack of better words, they are one in the same or by-products of one another.

If salvation is the sum of parts as stipulated by doctrines like from Church of Christ, then such supporters can never claim to be saved or be a Christian. By their own false doctrine, their salvation is not sure and Jesus is a liar because He said whoever believes has eternal life (John 3:36). For works based salvationists, it is only after they have lived out their total lifespan and completed all parts (hear the Gospel + believe + repent + confess + get baptized with water + live out a Christian life = salvation) will the sum of the parts make the whole salvation. Otherwise, if such supporters can claim that they are saved at the time of any just 1 or some of those parts, then salvation cannot be equal to the sum of all the parts as listed in the doctrine of denominations like Church of Christ. Again, what about people who die soon after believing in the Lord? What if they never got to share their new faith with others, or never got the opportunity to be water baptized?

Case of past historians/preachers

Advocates of works based salvation may even try to argue on another angle. They may ask you if you disagree with all the people from the past who taught works were necessary prior to salvation. Don’t get into that argument, because you must stand on their false premise when you answer. The answer to that objection is simple: since the idea is understood differently from Scripture initially from each party, then looking at the the teachings of others, we will continue to understand the idea the way in which we first understood if from Scripture. Say for example:
If A sees a particular colour as dark green and B sees the same colour as light green, then no matter when they see that colour again, they’ll continue to see it as they saw it initially. Basically, we do not need to get into the believe or believe not preachers from the past debate; it is irrelevant and advocates of works based salvation use it to trap you into making you feel that you are placing your understanding above great preachers from the past or making yourself out to be smarter than they are.

Case of the thief on the cross

You may be tempted to bring up the case of the thief on the cross. After all, only thing he did in regards to his salvation that we see from Scripture was believe in Jesus. Advocates of works based salvation may respond that the command of baptism came after, that the thief got saved by Old Testament terms3. However, Hebrews 11 doesn’t appear to draw any contrast between faith of believers after Jesus’ resurrection and before that time. Some may actually say that we don’t know if he didn’t do anything before that time; I say we don’t know that he did!

Case of Jesus’ Baptism

You may even be tempted to bring up the case of Jesus being baptized with water though He was/is sinless. Advocates of works based salvation will simply claim that Jesus was baptized for a different cause. And of course agreed (Matthew 3:13-17), but they are the ones claiming that water baptism is necessary for the remission of sins.

Case of Cornelius (and his household)

Also, you may be tempted to bring up the case of Cornelius; believing that he was already saved before getting baptized. They will claim that the Holy Spirit had not touched down and opened for Gentiles as yet. They don’t believe Cornelius was saved prior to being baptized, though there is better support for him being saved since Acts 10:1-3, rather than later after Peter’s preaching. The event in Acts 10:44, suggests the outpouring was for the Jews’ understanding, not that God hadn’t already accepted the Gentiles and was in that moment now accepting the Gentiles.

“Then Peter opened his mouth and said: In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.” – Acts 10:34-35

Cornelius was already fasting and praying to God before the event in Acts 10:44, and God heard him. Which suggests some kind of proper communion with God.

“So Cornelius said, ‘Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing’, and said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard, and your alms are remembered in the sight of God’.” – Acts 10:30-31

“We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does His will.” – John 9:31

In this case, the deeper we go into studying works based salvation, we see how it makes man dependent on other man for salvation. What if Peter didn’t understand the vision, or worse didn’t go to meet Cornelius? Poor Cornelius would be doomed to wait on some other preacher. In order for this false teaching “to stand”, other Scripture must be twisted or ignored.

Works based salvationists cannot explain the reason for the differences in the verses throughout Scripture

Besides for the response of Jesus’ baptism, the other poor exegesis result because they started out falsely to begin with. And so they will jump around Scripture to “explain”, even appearing to make a different form of salvation for Old Testament believers. Yikes. Yet, in all this “explaining”, they cannot come up with a reason (even a false one) for the differences in Scripture; like when we see “believe” appear on its own and other times when it appears with “confess” or “be baptized”. Works based salvationists simply try to add works/parts/catalysts together and create their own standards for salvation. And some may be sincere, and some perhaps stubborn to change. God alone knows their motives. Yet we know:

Jesus replied, “This is the work of God: to believe in the One He has sent.” – John 6:29

There is only one kind of work we have to do in order to be saved, and this is not talking about any dead kind of belief or faith. Support of that is seen in James 2:19-20, Matthew 3:8, John 14:15 and other verses which makes it clear that true faith in Christ results in obedience.

Summary:

Argument by works based salvationists Response
If you don’t believe salvation is obtained by man having done these things, then you teach good works is not important. This is false, and a cop-out. Because even they will argue that water baptism etc are not works, but in the same breath, they will accuse you of teaching against good works. I think they very well know that many of us who disagree with their teaching, absolutely believe good works to be important, just that we believe good works are the result of true faith/belief.
The Bible does not teach water baptism, confession, repentance etc to be works. In order to harmonize their teaching with Ephesians 2:8, they will claim that water baptism etc are not works, and may say they are parts of the process or catalysts. Whatever wording we use, whether we say “work”, “catalyst”, “part” does not matter because even John 6:29 calls believing a work.
Are you making yourself out to be smarter than those from the past who taught this doctrine? Don’t get into that argument. It is based on a false presupposition, a false start. If they understand from Scripture the colour dark green, and we understand light green, then no matter who follows after we will see as we did initially.
You are not relying on the Bible alone. Lots of people when they don’t hear what they want to hear will say this. Particularly when you are trying to explain your understanding of what Scripture is teaching. But in reality, everyone when explaining themselves,
use words or phrases which are not verbatim in Scripture. You can always point the person back to their doctrine and point out words which are not found in the Bible but used in their doctrine. Obviously they believe what is written in their doctrine is supported by Scripture, and same for your own statements of faith. If they are honest, they won’t argue on this.

 

Disclaimer:
1. Not claiming that water baptism is not important, you should be baptized at the earliest opportunity. Baptism is very significant. Your faith should bear good fruit in keeping with repentance.
2. Times above we have just automatically assumed that when baptism is mentioned, it is referring to water baptism. But it really doesn’t have to be, and that is a discussion for another topic. Taking a deeper look and not automatically assuming water baptism when Scripture is silent, further irons out the clear teaching of faith alone salvation, that obviously is evidenced by good works.

References:
1. http://church-of-christ.org/how-does-one-become-a-member-of-the-church-of-christ.html
2. https://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-1Peter-3-21.html
3. https://www.gospelway.com/salvation/thief_cross.php

Comparing the Bible to the Koran?

bible-koran

Some in order to defend the Koran will run to the Bible. Notice, when we need to defend the Bible, we use the Bible to defend itself. But almost every other literature wants to defend itself by the Bible, and sometimes they do so by means of “selective reasoning”.

I have heard many try to justify the passages of violence in the Koran by pointing to passages in the Bible. Why can’t the Koran justify its war without pointing to the Bible?

The reason for war in the Bible was always a case for dealing with sin. Moreover, each time there was war it was with a specific nation, closed commands leaving no room for acting on those commands today. And if that isn’t enough, when the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, Peter drew his sword to fight. Jesus rebuked Peter and told him “put your sword back in its place, those who live by the sword will die by the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Even when it appeared most justified (defending the Lord Jesus) to fight or war, Jesus didn’t allow it. Instead, the Bible says things like “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12) So senseless violence, like the Crusades, that would have claimed to be in the name of Christianity would be in direct violation with what the Bible teaches.

Can we say the same for the Koran? I tend to try to avoid these conversations, it is better to let the Muslims use their Koran to defend their Koran. But I will say this much however. We cannot use part of Surah 5:32 (like some only take part of the verse) as a synonym in application to the Bible’s Exodus 20:13. Why? Because Surah 5:32 says “Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely…”

The verse from the Koran was given to the Children of Israel, the Jews, not to the owners of the Koran, the Muslims. Therefore, a jihadist or muslim extremist can deem himself justified when he kills because the verse was directed to the Jews. That is not to say the verse is not a universal one, being applicable to even the Muslims (it could be or could not), but as it is written currently, having the Israelites as the subject, a jihadist can ignore the verse and not apply it to himself. Unless there are other verses in the Koran to defend itself, the Koran leaves open interpretation as to how Christians and Jews are to be treated.

“Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.” – Surah 2:190
“And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.” – Surah 2:191
“And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” – Surah 2:192
“Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.” – Surah 2:193

Muslims claim that Surah 2:191 is taken out of context by critics. But Surah 2:193 shows otherwise. Notice that the condition to stop fighting INCLUDES worship to Allah. It says “there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah”. The important logical operator here being AND. So fight them until they submit or worship Allah. Some have said that these verses are of the past. Well, that’s wonderful if they are, we should cease all this senseless violence now. Moderates, please show the muslim extremists the passages that prove these verses are within a historical timeframe and no longer applicable for today.

I believe it is good to strive for peace. Unfortunately, it will not happen in the way that we are striving for now. Sin is very real, and there are real spiritual forces out there meaning to cause harm. The final war until real peace is recorded in the Bible, a time well known as “armageddon”. Jesus will one day return to throw the devil into the Lake of Fire. Jesus will judge the living and the dead. All those who have accepted His free gift of salvation will live in eternal peace, but to those who have rejected Him will be separated from Him forever in torment by all that is not good.

There is a lot of debate about whether Islam is a religion of peace or not. It is actually irrelevant whether Islam means peace or not. The Koran contradicts itself since even by its standards Jesus is very special. “And [mention] the one who guarded her chastity, so We blew into her [garment] through Our angel [Gabriel], and We made her and her son a sign for the worlds.” – Surah 21:91 Can you really trust a book that declares Jesus to be born of a virgin, yet in the same breath declare that He is not the Son of God? If He was born of a virgin, then exactly of who could He be begotten of if He’s a good prophet? Must He not be begotten of God, hence the Son of God? In the self conflicting Koran, Jesus is more highly spoken of than Muhammad, subjectively speaking of course; depending on whether one would find a miracle birth and miracles more appealing than the legacy that Muhammad left behind.

Dear friends, do not be left behind trying to defend and indefensible cause. Come to Jesus. He has declared that He is the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by Him. (John 14:6) Jesus loves you very much. Can you find any where in the Koran where Allah declares his unfailing love for his people? On the contrary, you can find it in the Bible in so many places, and the word of His love is backed with many actions of sacrifice, forgiveness, mercy and grace. What’s there to choose but Jesus? No comparison at all, Jesus forever the eternal Word of agape love and goodness.

Historically Accurate

The Bible is historically accurate. Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, historians were able to compare Biblical writings of what we have today with that of the manuscripts found. The scrolls prove that the Bible have been extraordinarily preserved.

Contrary to the teaching of a certain religious ideology whose scriptures were written after the Bible, Jesus was certainly crucified and not evicted from the cross as their scriptures would like to claim.

To be unbiased in judgement on the Bible’s credibility means applying the same rules of acceptance as one would for other historical topics. To dismiss the Bible based on reason that the evidence is not convincing would call for equal judgement of other historical topics since the Bible’s historical backings far surpasses theirs in number and or witnesses.

So I was reading an article and the writer penned “that doesn’t mean the original copy was history…”. As I understand, his point is that even though we have these scrolls, doesn’t mean they are true or the accounts were actual events. True. But he forgets or ignores the Bible contains a lot of prophetic writing. So if we have writings predating the fulfillment of prophecies, then certainly we can credit the manuscripts to be authentic and accounting for actual events!

Some would claim that people can just read a prophecy and purposely make it happen. Okay then, what a stretch! Here’s a list of fulfilled prophecies. Isaiah is well documented from the Dead Sea Scrolls. So looking at that alone would suffice. It would take some superb directing to orchestrate a betrayer, the crucifixion between thieves, the beatings, and Jesus miraculous healings during His ministry etc to make this all believable. Not even Steven Spielberg could pull it off. What a challenge it would be for those who like to claim that people of the past were simple minded!

I am excited about the Bible. Are you? I trust that the reader will do a quick search on the topic and find for themselves the stats associated with the discovery of the scrolls. Don’t take my word for it.  Look it up and see, and while you are at it, if you’re not saved consider trusting in the Lord today. 🙂

Be blessed!

Blasphemy

“You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.” – Exodus 20:7

This command does not end just at using God’s name in the form of a curseword. But this command includes any atrocious misuse such as cold blooded murder in the name of God.

I read a news article whereby a man killed a woman all the while screaming “Get out, devils! I cast you out, devils! In the name of Jesus Christ, I cast you out!”

This is disgusting. The murderer, essentially put God’s name with evil. Complete blashphemy of the Holy Spirit; associating what is holy with the unclean.

If you’re a skeptic, or an unbeliever, look at Jesus, and compare such actions with the teachings of the Bible. Please do not commit a double standard in judging things of God.

Many skeptics will try to claim that such atrocities are supported in the Bible. Then they will take OT scripture out of context to support their claim.

When God judges, He judges in righteousness. The whole earth was flooded and every human flesh, except Noah’s family in the great boat, were wiped out because of their evil and unbelief (Genesis 6:5). Further in the OT, we see God never left an open ended war against nations (contrary to the religion of Islam). He specifically mentioned the nation by name and called them out for their evil. Judged nations were wiped out for burning their children to idols, sexual immorality and other wicked things. To those He judges, He issues prior warnings, prior commands of what is acceptable. God can see to the heart of man. Take for example Pharoah, Pharoah was rebellious, though God warned. God eventually, removed His hand from Pharoah’s heart. This is what is meant by “God hardened Pharoah’s heart”. We know this by using other scripture. Scripture says God does not tempt anyone (James 1:3), and those who insist on choosing the evil way are given over to a depraved mind (Romans 1:28).

When an atrocity in the name of Jesus is committed, it is easy to dismiss because such actions do not fit with the teachings of YHWH God.

We see how God deals with sin. He has said that the reward for sin is death (Romans 6:23). God is 100% against evil (1 John 1:5). If He supported it in anyway, He would dethrone Himself as God, because He’d no longer be perfect, holy and set apart to be called God. Satan, since pride entered his heart, has been trying to dethrone the name of God. He put God’s character on trial from the time he began to think that he is worthy to be God. Obviously, if we desire someone else’s position, what we are really saying is that we are better suited for the position. Satan was claiming to be worthy to be called God, and God not worthy. So blasphemy is an evil of old.

Woe to those, who misuse the name of Jesus and die in their sin. Since all sin must be accounted for, woe to anyone, who dies in their sin having rejected the regenerative power of the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 12:31, Mark 3:29) Such a person would have sealed their doom. As once you die without Christ, there is no more hope left for you.

I pray that we will look to Jesus.

As Christians, we look and immitate through obedience. Our obedience is our act of love.

Those who claim to be Christians all the while living and delighting in sin to the point that no one knows they are a Christian, no one can see the fruit of Christ, also commit blasphemy. As they misuse or misrepresent Christ’s name. God will not hold them guiltless. Such folks need to truly repent and turn from the path of sin.

As skeptics, please look at Christ and see for yourself that you have not been deceived into judging God under the guise of blasphemers’ behaviour. By doing so, you are essentially in the same camp with them. And God will not hold you guiltless. Please look at Jesus, see His goodness remembering that whatever sin you’re guilty of (Romans 3:23), you too are in need of His forgiveness.

Friends, the verse below identifies our hope, our promise. Christ our hope, eternal life our promise. Do not let defiance against God to be what lingers on your lips, on your heart at the time of natural death, but let it be a surrender to Him, and a declaration of faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and life eternal.

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.” – John 3:16-17

Be blessed, in Jesus’ name.