God Is Not Mocked

Just a couple things that come to mind regarding the recent decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the newfound institution of gay mirage (no, that's not a misprint).

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Galatians 6:7

Embracing gay mirage is not something for which this nation will be judged; it IS the judgment.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  Isaiah 5:20

Being included in any group of whom the LORD says "Woe unto them" is not a good place to be.

And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.  And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.  And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.  And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.  Revelation 20:11-15

Because in the end, God is not mocked.

One King, One Kingdom

In one of my recent posts, I ventured to state that I had found the answer to a minor point of curiosity on my part dealing with the presence of two similar terms used in the Bible, those terms being "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God". My answer, based on two verses in the Gospel of Matthew was that they are the same.  A reader was quick to point out to me that there is indeed a distinct difference between them in that the kingdom of heaven is a literal physical kingdom that the Jews will inherit while the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom that the Church will inherit. In this post I would like to attempt to imitate those of Berea and search the scripture to see if this is so.

As we look at the occurrences of the two terms, it becomes evident that if they are not two names describing the same kingdom, then at the very least both kingdoms share a number of striking similarities.

For instance, from Matthew 13:10-11 and Mark 4:10-11, we can see that truths about both the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God were revealed by Jesus in parables so that only those who were chosen to understand, would understand. In fact from these verses we also must conclude that the same parable of the soils can be used to reveal the same mystery regarding each kingdom.

Matthew 13:31-32 coupled with Mark 4:30-32 inform us that both the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God are like a grain of mustard seed.

Mark 10:14 and Matthew 19:14 together inform us that both kingdoms are made of those who share the characteristics of little children.

From Matthew 11:11 and Luke 7:28 we may glean that he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the baptist, ...and that so is he that is least in the kingdom of God.

Now, the fact that the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God share these four characteristics does not by itself prove that they are one in the same, but it should at the very least make one take it into consideration.

If one were to take the position that the kingdom of heaven is to be the inheritance of the Old testament Jews and the kingdom of God will be made up of New Testament saints, then one must consider that Jesus, as recorded in Mark 1:14-15, preached repentance and that the kingdom of God was "at hand." But John the baptist, in Matthew 3:2 preached "repent" for the kingdom of heaven is "at hand." This poses a bit more of a problem for the two kingdom view. It is easy to see a spiritual kingdom as being at hand (or "drawn near", as some translations put it), but how would one apply being "at hand" to a literal physical kingdom for the Jews. If anything concerning such a kingdom was at hand, it was its destruction by Titus in 70 A.D. The absence of anything resembling a Jewish kingdom for nearly 1900 years can hardly be something easily reconciled with "at hand." Was John mistaken or could both he and Jesus have been describing the same kingdom with different words?

Perhaps just as puzzling would be the conversation between Jesus and Niccodemus as recorded in John chapter 3. In verse 3 Jesus says "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Okay, if there are two kingdoms, that tells us that the spiritual kingdom occupied by the New Testament believers can only be seen by those who are born again. That is all well and good, but a few verses later Jesus expresses surprise saying "Art thou a master (teacher) of Israel, and knowest not these things?" Well, ...at least I guess you could read that as surprise. I personally don’t believe that Jesus was ever surprised; I see that statement as more of a chastisement. But either way, why should a teacher in Israel be expected to know about a new kingdom that was just coming into existence? Odd.

Another piece of scripture that does not quite seem to fit in with a two kingdom view can be found in Matthew 16:19 where Jesus announces that he will give the keys to the kingdom of heaven to the disciples. Now this verse has often been used (and too often abused) to assert power given to the church. But was Jesus real purpose to teach that the church will have power over the physical kingdom occupied by Old Testament saints?

In my original post on this subject, the scripture that I presented in support of my understanding of the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God being one in the same was Matthew 19:23-24. Here is what my argument consisted of: In verse 23 Jesus exclaims how hard it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, and then in verse 24 he goes on to say "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Emphasis mine). I postulated that by using the term "again" Jesus made the terms interchangeable, else he would have used the world "also." Of course this argument rests on the reliability of the translation of the Greek word "palin" which it appears could in some cases be translated as "furthermore" instead of "again." However, I am not aware of any translation which uses any word except "again" in this verse. I am pretty sure the translators are smarter than I am and very likely got it right.

The objection I received to my use of this verse to support my case was that one should not build a doctrine on a single verse. I agree completely; thus the study that went into this post. I do have one more argument to offer though, and I believe it to be the strongest one, when taken in conjunction with what I have already presented here. That argument comes from Matthew 8:11 "And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven." Now consider Luke 13:28 which says: " There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out."

The fact that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are said to be in the kingdom of heaven and in the kingdom of God, taken alongside everything else I have presented here, leads me to the inevitable conclusion that those kingdoms are one in the same. One King, One Kingdom.

I am thankful for the "nudging" which I received to search the scriptures for a proper understanding, but I must add that much more than that, I rejoice that I will someday be able to sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.

Kaya on Job

Recently my granddaughter Kaya was presented with the task of completing a written essay test for her freshman Theology class at Southwest Christian High School.  The following is what she wrote.  Keep in mind that this was a classroom test, not a homework assignment.  I am very proud of her!

A little over four years ago I published the first  ever "guest post" on my blog.  It was a short piece by one of my daughters called "Our Medicated Society".  As it happens, this "second ever" guest post was written by her daughter.  It would appear that she is following in her mother's footsteps in writing prowess.


Job is a book of The Bible about a man who is righteous in the eyes of God. God wants to prove Job's faith to Satan, so He allows Satan to test Job. Job loses everything he has and all of his children die. His first instinct is to praise God. It takes great faith to be able to worship right after something terrible happens to you, but that's the kind faith Job had. We should have this kind of faith too. We need to be able to stand firm in our faith when everyone and everything is going wrong around us, and that is the theme of my essay.

Standing firm in our faith is one of the most important things about our lives as Christians. If someone around us is doing something wrong we need to be able to hold ourselves accountable, and not fall into the sin ourselves. Satan will try to tempt us, and he knows exactly how to get every one of us to sin. He knows what our weaknesses are. But the difference between God testing Job, or us, and Satan tempting us is that God longs for us to pass His test. Satan desires for us to fail. Standing firm in your faith in every situation means that you don't let Satan tempt you enough that you fall. You don't give in to the sin. The definition of 'standing firm' according to dictionary.com is, "1. stand up or offer resistance to somebody or something, 2. refuse to abandon one's opinion or belief." This is what we need to do. We need to resist Satan and the human urge to sin, and we must refuse to abandon our beliefs no matter who is trying to get us to give up on them.

For Job, his friends and his wife all urged him to give up on God. Job 2:9 says, "9 Then his wife said, "Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse God and die." Job's wife was the first one who tried to get him to abandon his beliefs in God. For us it may not be a wife, since we aren't married yet, but it could be a best friend, a boyfriend, or maybe even another family member. These are some of the people that have the most influence on us, and they are the ones who may cause us to stumble in our hope of 'standing firm'. When it's someone we are close with who is tempting us, it's a lot harder to say no to them. But Job did, and I think this was a moment when his faith really shone through him. He tells his wife that what she said was not okay and she should be ashamed because of how foolish it was. Where this response is found is in Job 2:10. It says,"10 But he said to her, "You speak as one of the foolish women would speak. Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?" In all this Job did not sin with his lips." Job said these things because he was NOT going to falter in his faith, not even because that's what his wife wanted. By telling her that, and saying those things, he didn't stumble at all. He stood firm, didn't give in, and did not sin.

This theme reveals much about God's character, His eternal sovereignty, and human suffering. What it shows about God's character is that, he will test us, but since he wants us to pass the test he won't push us past what we can handle. He knows what we can handle because he is omniscient. He knows all. He knows exactly what would cause us to sin, and what our limits are, and he would never cause us to fall into sin because he loves us way too much to see us fall. What it shows of His eternal sovereignty is that, He is bigger than everything Job went through, and he ultimately has the say in what goes and what doesn't. Satan couldn't have done all this to Job without God's permission. What it shows about human suffering is that above it all, God has full control over the situation. If you stay faithful and 'stand firm' throughout the suffering He WILL reward you greatly. Job didn't ever sin by cursing God, he didn't waver in faith when his wife wanted him to or when he was with his friends. He stayed true to who he was in The Lord, and he was rewarded in the end. God restored him and rewarded him with twice as much riches, animals, and wealth as he had had before. He and his wife bore the same amount of children as they had had before. Job was fully renewed. All thanks to God's love, power, and grace in suffering.

In closing, I just want to remind everyone that this is how we should react during time of great need or suffering. We need to stand firm in our faith like Job did, no matter what is going on around us, and no matter who we are with at the moment. If we can't stay strong and true to our faith when we're with a certain friend or we're going through a tough time or situation, then our faith simply is not strong enough. We need it to be as strong as possible because we will be tempted and tested at some point if we haven't been already. God needs to be our strong foundation which will make our faith so much stronger. If you don't have a strong enough foundation on God you need to get to know Him, because standing firm and not giving in for God's glory is even greater than you can imagine.

HE IS RISEN!

Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.  And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.  And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.  And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:  And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?  He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.  (Luke 24:1-7)

HE IS RISEN!

For You Kings and Judges Out There

Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. (Psalm 2:10-12)

While these last three verses of the second Psalm are fairly straight forward and easy to understand, they contain some thoughts that are quite interesting. First of all, kings and judges are instructed to serve the LORD. And of course this speaks not of just any lord, but here "LORD" is translated from the Hebrew name Jehovah, which means self existent and eternal. While this command is certainly agreeable to any Christian, for anyone else it is by nature repulsive, and how much more so for those in authority?

Kings and judges (that is, those in authority) are accustomed to their word being supreme. Others generally serve them. Obviously monarchs from non-Christian nations will reject this command out of hand, just as they reject the living God who authored it. However, it would be no easier for the "christian-in-name-only" leader to truly bow to this greater power. After all, most of those in authority were either born into it, or worked very hard for their position, both of which tend to give one a sense of entitlement. Even the command to "be wise now" and ""be instructed" are likely to offend them. After all, what book is this that dares infer that they need to be instructed, or that they are not already wise?

And if that were not enough, here these kings and judges are told not only to serve Jehovah, but to do it with FEAR! Same issue, but now it seems that Jehovah has doubled down. Those in authority are used to being feared, or at the very least shown respect. It is a real blow to their pride to be told they need to fear someone else.

Most kings and judges will never get beyond this point without stumbling. But for those who do, they are told to "rejoice with trembling." Certainly joy and rejoicing is one of the hallmarks of true Christianity, but that joy will always be tempered with fear; at least if one has a proper view of the glory and majesty and holiness of God. Many would prefer to leave this concept in their rear view mirror, along with the rest of the "Old" Testament. They may be willing to give lip service to serving a god who loves everyone unconditionally, but to one who demands fear and trembling? No way!

About now you may be wondering what any of this has to do with you and me. After all, this is addressed to kings and judges. The answer, if you've not already guessed it, is simple. There is an old saying that every man is the king of his own castle, and there is some merit in the principle behind that. Each of us does have our own sphere of authority, whether it be in our home or work, or even just in our personal lives. Each of us is called to make judgments for ourselves each and every day on an untold number of issues. In that respect, you might say the command to "Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling" applies to us all. If that’s a thought that is foreign to your nature, then it might be time that you put your trust in the LORD: you will be blessed if you do.

"God Prefers King James Era English"

Last Friday evening, my wife and I took our '46 Studebaker downtown for a local car show. As we were relaxing on a bench, enjoying the evening, two well dressed young men wearing name tags approached us. As you have probably guessed, they were LDS, better known as Mormons.

Since we had left the house on short notice, I found myself unarmed. (That being a lame allusion to Ephesians 6:17 "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:") That, however was not a good enough reason for me to avoid talking to them, but that along with the setting did lead to an abbreviated conversation.

After establishing that I was a veteran of conversations with LDS representatives on several previous occasions, and that they had all ended in a "standoff", the inevitable question came up. Did I have any questions.

Well, actually I did. Some time ago I started to read the Book of Mormon so that I would be at least somewhat familiar with it for just such occasions. The first thing that struck me was that the language was so strikingly similar to that used in the King James translation of the Bible. That was my question. Why was the Book of Mormon, "translated" in the 1800's, translated into the language of 1600's England?

This is where the "Elder" of the pair jumped in to take over the conversation. I think that is usually a good sign that you have them off their talking points. His answer was that it was the language God chose to supernaturally guide the translation into. I pointed out that the translation of the KJV bible was not supernaturally guided by God, but he disagreed, saying that both the KJV and the Book of Mormon were supernaturally translated.

With that, I asked the Mormon Elder if God preferred King James era English . Yes, he believed that God does. So there you have it. A Mormon Elder says that God prefers King James era English to earlier and later versions. That should put an end to all the debate on Bible versions! (note the tongue in cheek here)

I suppose that would have been a good time to ask why they do not speak in that vernacular in their everyday language, but instead I moved on to a much more important point. I brought up the law and how it was there to show us how sinful we are. I pointed out that Paul said ".....that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." (Romans 7:13) Without a proper appreciation of how desperately sinful we are, we can never understand how hopeless our case is without Jesus sacrifice.

That pretty much capped off our conversation. Of course they both agreed with my statements about the law and Jesus sacrifice for sin. But it was the agreement of one speaking a slightly different language than I, and not that of one feeling the conviction of their sins. In retrospect I feel that I should have gone to specific commandments rather than a broad appeal to the law. Given the age of the young men, Jesus statements about adultery may have been just the thing.

Oh well, I will likely get another shot at it yet this summer when they appear on our doorstep!

Absalom, My Son, My Son

This past Sunday morning I had the privilege of preaching in our church because our pastor was out of town. The father son relationship between David and Absalom at first may seem an odd topic for a Father's Day sermon, but here is the shortened version.

If you are unfamiliar with Absalom, I recommend reading II Samuel, however some of the pertinent events that took place are as follows:

• David's son Absalom took vengeance on his half brother (and David's first born) by killing him.
• Absalom burned Joab's fields just to get his attention.
• Absalom "stole" the hearts of the men of Israel so that he could take David's throne.
• Absalom "took" David's concubines in the sight of the people to humiliate David.
• Absalom sought to kill David even after he had taken his throne.

But here is the point of the sermon:

We are Absalom. You and I have been not a bit better than Absalom in how we have treated our heavenly father. Any time that we put our own will ahead of God’s will, we have tried to take his place. Anytime we place our own desires above God’s desires, we attempt to sit on his throne. Which of us has not been disobedient to God our Father? Which of us has not tried to usurp his throne. Ever since Satan tempted Adam and Eve with the promise that they could be as God, every person born has likely been tempted to place themselves on God’s throne in his place.

Has not God, like any good father, set out rules for us to follow? Are we obedient?

When Jesus was asked which was the great commandment he answered:
Matthew 22:37-38 .....Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.

How many of us can say that we have even begun to keep this commandment. Any time we willfully and knowingly commit a sin, we are saying "I love myself more than I love God"! And by saying that, are we not conspiring like Absalom to sit on God’s throne is his place? This great commandment is so important, and yet so beyond our ability to keep. And if you think you fare better in keeping some of the lesser commands, you likely need to take a closer look at them. Personally, I have found myself to be guilty of all.

Which of us does not have a problem with pride? How many of us are proud of our talent, proud of the quality of our work, or even proud of our looks? Just like Absalom who loved to have chariots and horses, and fifty men to run before him, we love to get the glory for the things we do. But what do we really have to be proud of? What do any of us have in the way of talent or position or possessions that we did not receive from God our Father. And yet we seek our own glory as if we gained these on our own or by our own merit. But God says he will not share his glory with another!

"O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!" David loved his son Absalom. Loved him to the point that he stated that he wished he could have died in Absalom’s stead.

That plea of David reminds me of a passage in the New Testament where Jesus says in
Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Can’t you hear that same mournful tone in both of these. David mourning for the son who had sinned against him so constantly. Jesus mourning for unrepentant Israel who sinned against him so constantly.

So, if God mourns for those who have sinned against him, why does he not simply forgive all those who have offended him? Because he is as much a Holy God as he is a merciful God. His being a God of love is not at the expense of his being a God of justice. Because he is Holy, he cannot lower his standard of justice in order to be merciful! A perfect justice requires a penalty for lawbreaking. In order to be a loving and merciful God, it was necessary that someone pay the penalty for sins. Jesus paid that penalty for our sins. He did for us what David could not do for his son Absalom.

What a great and loving Father we have! Despite how we have treated God, and though we are no better than Absalom, he sent his son to suffer and die a cruel death on the cross. That is our Father’s love!

How to Please God

As you may have noticed, I seldom link to posts by other bloggers, but I just finished reading a post by Dennis over at The Recliner Commentaries which was one of those that I agree with completely. So completely that I wish I had written it myself. And since I so strongly agree with it, and since I did not write it, I am going to do the next best thing and link to it.

So, click here HERE for a great dissertation (don't let that word scare you off, it doesn't take that long to read) on pleasing God.

Meeting the Author

I attended a funeral this past week, but this post has nothing to do with the deceased. Rather I would like to address something I noticed in passing. Hanging on one of the walls of the church where the service was held was a "tapestry" (if I am using the word correctly). You have probably seen similar ones if you visit many churches, or may even have some on the walls of your church. Usually they have a solid colored background with some sort of images on them along with a line or two of text declaring something theological. This particular one caught my eye because it stated something to the effect of "You need to continue with bible study until the day you meet the author"

Now I know as well as anyone the danger of "bumper sticker theology". Its just too easy read into a one line text nearly any thing you want it to say. If all truth could be conveyed in just a line or two, then certainly our Lord would not have given us so many books in the Bible. And believe me, I understand what was meant by this saying. Clearly it was meant to mean that we will never know enough about God's word until the day we die. However, that didn't stop me from critiquing the saying in my mind.

I will certainly admit to the tendency of being overly critical of things spiritual that are coming from a source with doctrine that I disagree with. In many cases I do think I would do better to practice Christian charity by giving others the benefit of the doubt as to their intended meaning.

In this case though, I know that the intended meaning was right and a nice positive message, but the saying still brought a negative rebuttal to my mind; "If you haven't met the author before you die, it will be too late." You see, all that Bible study will have done you no good if you have never met the author. In Matthew 7:21-23 Jesus said; "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. "

This passage of scripture should be enough to give every one pause! Have we not prophesied in thy name? And have we not cast out devils? (actually I have done neither of those first two things) And have we not diligently gone to Bible studies? And have not we been baptized in thy name? And yet despite all these wonderful works, Jesus will say in that day that he never knew them. Are you sure that you have already met the author?

And now for the GOOD NEWS!

If you have been following this blog, you may have noticed that I stated that I had yet to post a message on the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that I intended to do so. In my post entitled First, the Bad News I told you that I believe that in order to have any kind of understanding and appreciation of the good news of the gospel, that we first needs to see that we are guilty of breaking God's laws. In my second post on the subject, Just a Little More Bad News , I attempted to explain that being found guilty, we are under condemnation, and in realty should serve out our sentence in hell. Once a person is fully convinced that they are indeed guilty and deserving punishment, it is then proper to introduce them to the good news.

What wonderful, glorious good news it is! That God would lower himself to such an extent as to take on human flesh, live a sinless life, and then be sacrificed in our place! Once we understand the terrible condemnation that we have heaped upon ourselves through our sinfulness, then Christ's payment is so much more precious!

We can find the "gospel" spelled out very precisely in Paul's letter to the Corinthians. This is probably the clearest, most "compact" presentation of the good news in the bible. 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4 says "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

CHRIST died for our sins! Christ DIED for our sins! Christ died FOR our sins. Christ died for OUR sins! No matter which word we emphasize, there are many, many sermons that could (and no doubt have) been written on each aspect,

CHRIST died for our sins. Implicit in these 5 words are the fact of who Christ is. He is a man, and he lived a perfect, sinless life. He completely fulfilled God's law in every aspect; something no man before or since has even come close to doing. If he had not done this he could not have paid the price for anyone's sin, because he would have had to pay for his own. It is also necessary that he came and did this as a man, else he would not have been a suitable substitute for any other man. Just as we learn in Hebrews 10 that "... it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins",, neither could any other creature be a substitute to pay for a man's sins. Not a lamb; not an angel; only another man. (That Christ is God incarnate is also clearly taught in scriptures, so don't get the idea that I would in any way deny Christ's deity). This explains why the bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin, that there could be no shadow of doubt cast on the fact that God was his father. But that Mary herself was a sinful human is shown in Luke 1: 46-47: " And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." A sinless person has no need of a saviour. But just as important is Mary's humanity. If she were indeed part of the godhead as some would suggest, then Jesus, being born of God the Father and Mary the Queen of Heaven, would not be a man. We would all be undone, because if Jesus was not a man he would not be a proper substitute to die for us.

Christ DIED for our sins. He suffered and died a cruel death on the cross. Worst of all he suffered the wrath of God, culminating in the declaration of Jesus just before his death "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27: 46) Jehovah is a God of justice and judgement as Isaiah 53: 11 says: " He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities."

Christ died FOR our sins. As previously mentioned, Christ lived a sinless life. He had perfectly kept all of God's laws, so that he could be the spotless lamb of God, a blood sacrifice to atone for our sins. Christ died as a substitute for us. A perfect justice demands that a payment be made for offences. God is perfect in every way, including his justice. In order to fulfil perfect justice, Christ took the punishment that we earned by our breaking of God's law. Just as Jesus lived a sinless life in our place, he died to pay for sins in our place.


Christ died for OUR sins. Christ died because of our sins. It was the only way to satisfy God's justice without sending each of us to the hell we deserve. As I tried to emphasize in First, the Bad News we need to see our sins as personal, and just between ourselves and a Holy God. We need to see our sin as exceeding sinful! Our sins demand punishment. Jesus Christ took that punishment upon himself, that we might escape the judgement we deserve.


Christ died for our SINS. We are all sinners deserving punishment. I attempted to cover that in the two previous posts on bad news. Christ died not only to save us from the penalty for our sins, but as Matthew 1:21 says; "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins." This also is part of the good news. Not only are we saved from the judgement that our sinfulness demands, but we also are made free from the slavery to sin that we are under. Romans 6:14 tells us that sin no longer has dominion over us. That too is very good news!

Going a little farther in 1 Corinthians 15, we find the fact that Christ died for our sins is all according to the scriptures. When this letter to the church at Corinth was written, we did not yet have the New Testament. When Paul says "according to the scriptures", he is referring to the Old Testament. Jesus sinless life and substitutionary death was foretold in prophecy and foreshadowed in ceremonies throughout the Old Testament. The fact that Christ died on the cross for sinners is amazing. The fact that God revealed it beforehand through his word reinforces the truth of both the prophecy and of the act itself.

Continuing in 1 Corinthians 15; "And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:" Christ's burial and resurrection too were revealed in Old Testament. Jesus himself tells us in Matthew 12:39-40: "But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

This resurrection from the dead of our Lord and Saviour is not only a glorious event, but it is our proof that God the Father found Jesus' sacrifice for sins to be acceptable. Acts 17:31 says : "Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead."

Included in the good news is the fact that because Christ died for our sins, on the last day God will raise us up also. 1 Corinthians 6:14 says: "And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power." We will be resurrected to live with and worship God throughout eternity!

Now perhaps all of this elaboration that I have attempted on the gospel as it is stated in 1 Corinthians 15 has only served to confuse the issue. The simplicity of the gospel is this: We are all sinners who deserve punishment, but Jesus Christ took that punishment upon himself, that we might escape judgement and instead have eternal life. God the Father laid all of this out in the Old Testament, and showed his acceptance of Christ's substitutionary sacrifice by raising him from the dead.

THAT is wonderful, amazing, glorious GOOD NEWS!

Just a Little More Bad News

In my last post under the label Theology , I wrote a piece called First, the Bad News , concerning the necessity of understanding the bad news of scripture, before you will be able to appreciate the good news (gospel). Unfortunately, just a realization of the bad news, that you are a dirty rotten sinner (just like me) is not the whole story.

The "little more bad news" is, of course neither little in the amount that it is news or in the amount that it is bad. It is both big news, and very bad news. The "little more bad news" is that there is a penalty for breaking the Law of God. Just as our earthly governments set forth penalties for wrongdoing, so the Almighty God also has set forth penalties for breaking his commandments. A big difference is that here in this world we often "get away with" breaking laws. Often we can break the law without anyone ever knowing. Often we are not caught "red handed" and so are given the benefit of the doubt. Often the full penalty of the law is not brought to bear on us, because we are deemed to be a first time offender, or because there are extenuating circumstances.

Not so when it comes to Jehovah's laws though. He sees all of our sins, and knows all of our sins. You are not able to slip anything past God. Even your sins that no other person on earth know about. Psalm 139:1-4 says "O lord, thou hast searched me, and known me. Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether." Each of us has been caught red handed by God!

And God, being a totally righteous judge will hand down a perfect judgement. Every sin, every transgression of his law will be punished as it deserves. And there is a judgement coming! 2 Peter 2:9 proclaims "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:"

What is this day of judgement all about? The book of Revelation gives us a pretty good description of what will happen. Revelation 20:11-15 says: "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

Does God "grade on the curve"? Can a man's good deeds outweigh his bad, thus allowing him to escape paying the penalty for his sins? Not according to James 2: 10 "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." Guilty of all! A just judge will not allow the guilty to go free. Just as we speak of paying a "debt to society", so must the sinner pay a debt to God.

No, this is the "little more bad news"; All of our sins must be payed for in full. Every last one of them. Bad news and more bad news! But if all of this bad news is causing you to despair, then maybe you really are ready for the good news. I know that I am anxious to get to the good news, and will in my next post on this subject.

First, the Bad News

It has occurred to me that this blog is more than a month old now, and I have yet to post a message of "the gospel". This post will not be a gospel message either, because I am a firm believer that before you hear the good news (and "gospel" means "good news"), you need to hear the bad news. One will not have much appreciation for having a life preserver tossed their way until he realizes that he is drowning. A person will not have much use for a pardon until he realizes he is under a death sentence.

And so it is with the gospel of Jesus Christ. How can a person possibly understand the glorious good news, if he is not even aware that there is any bad news? That is why this post will not speak of the gospel, but instead will attempt to address the reasons for the need of the gospel.

Sin! Just a simple little three letter word, and yet it is the destruction of so much of mankind! Yet so little of mankind has a realization of sin, at least to the depth the bible teaches. A man's conscience may point out sin to him, but the conscience is so easily silenced, that it cannot be depended on to be a consistent witness. Indeed, all it takes to quiet the conscience is consistent repetition of sin! No, the only real guide to help us realize our sin is the law of God as layed out in the bible. 1 John 3:4 says: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. "

If we know that sin is the transgression of the law, then would it not be prudent to know what the law says? In one of its most basic forms, God's law can be found in the ten commandments. By that I mean that there are many more commandments to be found in the bible, but certainly there are enough contained in the ten commandments to condemn every man to hell! In America today about the only attention the 10 commandments receive are in regards to whether or not monuments containing them are allowed on government property. It is likely that relatively few people can name more than a couple of the commandments, and probably even fewer can tell you where to find them in the bible! And yet they are undoubtedly among the most important of God's revelation to us.

Paul said in Romans 7:7 "What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." You see, if sin is what sends a man to hell, and the law is what shows our sin to us, then it is imperative to know what the law says!

The first place we find the 10 commandments listed in the bible is in Exodus 20: 1-17
"And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
(1) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
(2) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
(3) Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
(4) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
(5) Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
(6) Thou shalt not kill.
(7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
(8) Thou shalt not steal.
(9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
(10) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's."

Even a quick reading of these should open one's eyes to at least one area of sin in their life. A closer reading will likely expose others. I can remember thinking when I was young Christian (not young in physical years, but young in time as a Christian), that I had broken every commandment except one, in that I had at least never killed anyone. Of course I soon found that according to 1 John 3:15 "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him."

I freely admit that I have been guilty of breaking all of the commandments, but how are you doing? Do you think that you are "a pretty good person"?

How about commandment number 5? Have you always honored your father and mother? Always been obedient to them, even when you thought they were wrong? Have you never done anything that would bring dishonor to their name?

I have already related what I learned about hating your brother being like murder in God's eyes, and how it brings the same condemnation. Have you never had even a moment of hatred for your brother? (and if you are trying to justify yourself by questioning whether they are your brother or not, well that would make a whole post in itself)

What about number 7....adultery? Few in this country could claim to be innocent of this in any respect, but Jesus said in Matthew 5:28 "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." If you are a man can you really make the claim that you have not broken this commandment, the way Jesus defined it?

Have you ever stolen anything? Even something small? Have you ever had a job working for someone else? If so did you ever give less than a good effort for your pay. Did you ever "goof off" during business hours? If so, it is just as if you took money out of your employers pocket.

I have only highlighted a few of the commandments that deal with man's actions toward his fellow man. The first four commandments, which deal with man's actions towards God, are even more difficult to keep, and likely deserve a greater condemnation. Do you claim to be innocent of all of these commandments? If so, I would remind you of Revelation 21:8 which says: "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

Are you starting to see yourself as a sinner yet? "But I only broke that commandment once" you say. Or, "that was a long time ago." Do you think God has a statute of limitations? "But I told God that I was sorry!" How well would that work in a human court? Man's justice is flawed, like everything we attempt. God's justice is perfect! Perfect justice calls for a penalty for breaking of the law.

At some point sin needs to become personal, just between you an a Holy God. For several years I was involved in going door to door handing out the books of John and Romans, and attempting to witness to people. Invariably, if the conversation got that far, the person would acknowledge that they were sinners. But it always struck me that it was is a rather flippant admission. I feel that many, if not most would have become offended if we had discussed specific sins. There seems to be a tendency to feel that there is safety in numbers where sin is concerned. It is not so scary to see ourselves standing in a crowd of millions of other sinners before God.

It is something quite different to see yourself standing alone in front of a Holy God, with all of your sins exposed. Just you and the God that you have sinned against! Yet I believe that this is how we need to see our sinfulness. We need to see sin for what a serious matter it is. We cannot just write sin off as human nature. We need to see it for what it really is. A personal crime against the God of all creation. I think Paul said it best in his letter to the Romans. In chapter 7 verses 12-13 he says: "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful."

If you have come to understand the exceeding sinfulness of sin, then you know that you deserve whatever punishment God sees fit. If so, then you know the bad news. Perhaps you are ready to hear the good news.

Love the Brethren

Proverbs 24:17 Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth

I had not planned, when I started this blog, to comment on current events as many bloggers concentrate on. Recently though, I came across something that I feel the need to address. It seems that a prominent creation science evangelist by the name of Dr. Kent Hovind has been sentenced for tax evasion. I don't know many of the details of the case, except that from what I gather he had a long running battle with the IRS over whether or not his "ministry" and himself were required to pay taxes. This apparently was no small misunderstanding , as he has now been sentenced to 10 years.

But the justice, or injustice of that sentence is not what I wish to speak to. Though I have seen Dr. Hovind speak on two separate occasions, and attended one of his debates vs. an evolutionist, he is not someone whose ministry I follow closely. Dr Hovind is someone who I guess would be referred to as a fundamentalist. Doctrinally he would be toward the far end of the spectrum from me in regards to Calvinism. However, he gives every appearance that he loves the Lord, and has served him for many years to best of his ability. While I may disagree with the stand he chose to make in respect to taxes, I cannot help but admire him for dedicating his life to evangelism.

What I find most troubling about this whole story is that I came across it while reading another blog. This blogger, who will remain nameless here, wrote about Dr. Hovind's sentencing with an all too obvious glee! Reading some of the comments and following some of the links revealed this to be a quite common attitude. Now if this had been a "secular blogger" I would not have given it a second thought. Anyone who holds the theory of evolution dear would have cause to count Dr. Hovind as an enemy. But no, this was a blog that in every way presents itself as a Christian blog (which is why I was reading it in the first place). The blog author's major quarrel with Dr. Hovind appear to be that "he is a self-taught amateur" in the field of creation science. Equally as damning in the authors view, seems to be the fact that Dr. Hovind actually defends the King James version of the Bible.

Using that criteria, the author of that particular blog would likely hold me in contempt also. After all, I have no degrees or formal training in theology, and yet I have the impudence to make a feeble attempt at declaring the Gospel. Some readers may have noticed that I too use the KJV exclusively. I have even been guilty of defending the biblical account of creation both among friends and while preaching , without any scientific training beyond high school. Does that make me an enemy to some that claim to be Christians?

The above admonition that we have from the book of Proverbs obviously would not trouble most secular evolutionists. It is however, something that should cause a Christian to take pause. Most of us here in the "west" would acknowledge one such as Saddam Hussein as an "enemy." No one that I know was grieved at his execution. In fact I would say that many that I know were closer to rejoicing than to grief. According to the passage in Proverbs that is something we should guard against, although I do believe that a hearty Amen may be the proper response to the justice of his execution.

But, if you are a Christian, of whatever persuasion, do you count Kent Hovind as an enemy? This is what I find really troubling about the glee with which this Kent Hovind story was reported. 1 John 3:14 says: "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death." So here is the kicker. If love of the brethren is one of the proofs of salvation given in the Bible, then someone needs to be concerned. I would not be so bold or so foolish as to claim that anyone who "piles on" Kent Hovind is not saved. I do not even know them personally. Neither do I know Dr. Hovind well enough to be very sure of his salvation (If misunderstanding of a bible teaching is a proof that one is not saved, then surely none of us will enter heaven; show me a man who thinks he has never been wrong on any doctrine since salvation, and I will show you a man who the Lord will soon humble.)

My question is: if you are celebrating Dr. Hovind's fall, are you bold enough to claim that he is unsaved? If so, I suggest you re-read Proverbs 24:17 above. If not, then I suggest you consider the state of your own soul in the light of 1 John 3:14. Either way, would not the proper response be to pray for Dr. Hovind?

Lest Any Man Should Boast

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Lest any man should boast! If any man is a saved, born again believer in Christ, he should understand that he has no reason to boast. He should understand that it is nothing that he has done that has earned him his salvation. In fact there is nothing he could have done to gain God's favor. This verse is one (of many) of the reasons that the system of theology that I hold to makes me what may be called a "Sovereign Grace Baptist" as opposed to a "Free Will Baptist". Sovereign Grace Baptists, of course, are those who agree with the "Doctrines of Grace", more commonly called Calvinism.

Calvinism! That name is certainly one that will get a reaction from nearly anyone who calls himself a Christian! Often the reaction may go something like this: "those Calvinists are so arrogant that they think God chose them and no one else; what makes them think they are so special?" In truth, I am sure that there are some who call themselves Calvinists who probably do have such an attitude to some extent. Some of those may just misunderstand the doctrine, some may just misunderstand the Bible, and I fear some of them are just not even really Christians. But that is fair, because I am sure that there are as many that would say that they believe in "Free Will" occupying those same boats.

No Calvinist that properly understands the doctrines of Grace would argue that God chose to save him because of any good he saw in him. Just the opposite, in fact. They would argue that God chose them despite what he saw in him! This passage in Ephesians clearly states that no man has any reason to boast of salvation. If this is true (and it is, because the Bible says it) then whichever of these two doctrines allows room for boasting must have a problem.

When I was saved I fully believed that I had "made a decision" to "accept Christ". As I came to understand the Doctrines of Grace, I saw that if that had been true, then the only difference between myself and someone else who heard the same gospel yet did not get saved, was that I "made a decision". Would that not give me something to boast of? Even if I were just as vile and wretched a sinner (or worse) than the other, could not I boast that at least I could see my need of a savior? Would that not set me apart as in some measure better than the other?

I realize that this can be hard to get your mind around. If God chooses to save one and does not chose another, it is tough for us to grasp that it has nothing to do with him seeing something good, or lovely, or desirable in the one he "elects" to salvation. Perhaps that is because we, by nature, use such criteria when we chose who we will love.

Romans 9:11-14 reads thus: "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid." For the most part, I think most who believe in free will (in regards to salvation) would explain that in election (choosing), God looks forward in time and "elects" to salvation those who of their own free will, chose to accept Christ. If this be true, doesn't Jacob have somewhat to boast of? After all, by that reasoning, he had enough good in him to "make a decision for Christ," when his brother Esau was so rotten that he didn't. Is not "accepting Christ" a good work? I cannot think of anything that one could do that would be better. Yet this portion of scripture states that election is not of works.

So why does God choose to save one and not the other if its not based on "accepting Christ". Romans 9:15 says: "For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." Simply put, it is God's will that determines the matter. He will do whatever pleases him. That's not fair, you say? Do you really want fair? Do you really want justice? Justice would demand that each and every one of us go to hell, because we are all guilty.

We are all guilty, all made from the same sinful flesh. There is nothing in us that recommends us to God, not even the recognition of our guilt. Romans 9:21-23 says: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory"

Now if you happen to be reading this and you have not been born again, you may find this doctrine revolting and "mean spirited" or perhaps even depressing, but keep in mind that you can never know till the day you die that you are not of God's elect. Remember that God did not save the thief on the cross until he was dieing along side Jesus.

As for me, I certainly have nothing to boast of. Well, that's not really true. I can boast of the wonderful mercy of God!

By Grace

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2: 8-9)

This is one of my favorite verses in the bible. It seems like one could never run out of messages to write (or preach) on this verse alone. OK, that is an exaggeration. But the limiting factor would be the preacher, and not the depth of the scripture itself.

In years past I would use this verse to try to show people that grace was a gift of God and couldn't be earned by what we do. Of course that is true, but now I will more often use the verse to show that faith is a gift of God. That faith is the gift of God is what the verse actually states, though for years I had read it without realizing that. I came to the conclusion that this verse taught that faith is a gift of God using the logic that if grace was something that you received as a result of faith, then grace was no longer a gift, but the payment for your faith. Grace and faith must both be the gift of God, or else neither of them were, I thought. I still see that reasoning to be correct. However that truth is much simpler than my reasoning made it out to be. I had come to the right conclusion, but when I heard a preacher with a little better grasp of English explain it, I felt silly. The word "that" in the phrase "and that not of yourselves", refers to faith. One could paraphrase the verse like this: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that faith is not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Thus it takes no reasoning to get "faith is a gift" from this verse, it only takes an understanding of basic English. In my defense though, it has been about 35 years since high school English classes for me.

What does it matter, you ask? Grace is, I believe, THE defining difference between Christianity and every other religion in the world. As near as I can tell, all other religions teach that it is your good works that earn you a place in heaven. If you believe that the Bible is God's inspired word, then you have plenty of proof of exactly the opposite. In fact the Bible tells us that "all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags" (Isaiah 64: 6) Our "righteousnesses" (right acts) are in fact our good works. How many people in the world today are trusting in their "filthy rags", when the only thing that can help them on judgement day is Christ's righteousness?

The understanding of grace is, I believe, also one of the defining differences between all those who call themselves Christian, yet hold to such different doctrines. These differences in understanding of grace run the gamut from the belief that one is saved by faith plus works, to the belief that one is saved by baptism, to the belief that God saves anyone who will cooperate with him by accepting Jesus, to the belief that God does it all. I subscribe to the last view. I believe that the Bible teaches that God chose those who it pleased him to save, (despite their unworthiness and not due to anything they do), gives them faith and changes their hearts so that they desire to repent and live a changed life with Jesus Christ as their Lord.

Holy, holy, holy

God is a HOLY God. And just to be sure we are talking about the same God, I mean the Creator; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the God and Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; Jehovah; Yaweh . That is who I mean when I say that God is a Holy God. Websters defines holy, as it is applied to God, as perfectly pure, immaculate and complete in moral character. But do any of us really grasp the true holiness of God?

Isaiah 6:1-4
1: In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2: Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3: And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4: And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

Notice that the door posts shook at the voice of the seraphim. These were not just door posts as we have in our houses. I have to think that the door posts in the temple of God are pretty substantial! And the seraphim is merely a creature created by God. Can you imagine how much more powerful the voice of God himself is! Notice also that the seraphim says; "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts". I have heard it preached that since this is the only time that one of God's attributes is declared 3 times in a row, it means that holiness is his over riding attribute. I am not sure that is true, but neither would I argue with it. God's holiness certainly does help us understand some things about him.

Is it not God's holiness that demanded the substitutionary death of Christ? After all, if God's perfect love were to overshadow his perfect justice, could not he have forgiven us our sins without anyone paying the penalty. But that would have compromised his holiness, would it not? And conversely, if God's perfect justice was a stronger attribute than his love, he needn't have sent his son to pay the penalty of sin, he would have required us each to pay our own debt. But that too would have compromised his holiness as he would no longer then be a God of mercy!

I once had a man tell me that he believed that God is most of all merciful and that he would give everyone one last chance to be saved after they died. But where do we find that in the Bible? The Bible shows that he is a God of justice and judgment. Revelation 20: 12 tells of judgment.

"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. "


The only way any of us can escape the judgement that we deserve is through the perfect justice of a holy God being satisfied by Christ taking our place in judgement! His suffering and death on the cross to pay the penalty that we earned with our sin!

Do any of us really grasp the holiness of God? I think not, or we would each day fall on our faces and say as Isaiah did when he saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up:
"Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts."