dscheer – Page 19 – Scripture Thoughts

Author: dscheer (page 19 of 33)

How Old is the Earth/Universe?

A good Christian friend of mine named John casually mentioned that the earth/universe is billions of years old as part of a message on other info he sent me. So I commented on the age of the earth saying that many unprovable assumptions are at work here, and there is more that we do not know than what we know about matter, time, and creation history in scientific terms. For example, the speed of light used to be thought of as constant, but not now.

John’s Response – True, David. I’m working on the Vernon McGee assumption that there was an enormous period of time involved at the beginning of creation. His hypothesis is basically, that there was creation of the universe, some enormous cataclysm (probably connected with the fall of Satan), then the rest of creation. You can either agree, or not. It seems to be upheld because of… well, I’ll send it to you and let McGee explain it.

As I told you, I believe all parts of the Word are important, but God has not given me a consuming interest in the parts that don’t center on salvation (I’ll blame Him). He has obviously made that part important to you, perhaps partially so that you can teach me! : )

True also that “billions of years” cannot be proven. The flip side of that is that neither can it be disproven. That brings me to consider that really this argument about the length of time that passes in the course of “creation” is based on speculation from both directions. God wrote perhaps several hundred times more about the last 8 days of Christ’s life than he wrote about the creation of the universe. I take that as a significant clue that He prefers that we concentrate on salvation over speculation. I suppose I do throw in speculation, but I don’t insist that that speculation is right.

Vernon McGee (1904-1988) stated his old-earth views quite plainly: The first eleven chapters [of Genesis] cover a minimum time spans of two thousand years – actually, two thousand years plus. I feel that it is safe to say that they may cover several hundred thousand years. I believe this first section of Genesis can cover any time in the past that you may need to fit into your particular theory, and the chances are that you would come short of it even then.

Who created the universe? God did. He created it out of nothing. When? I don’t know, and nobody else knows. Some men say one billion years ago, some say two billion, and now some say five billion. I personally suspect they are all pikers. I think God created it long before that.

In the enclosed audio file, listen from 2:00 – 8:00 of file 01002. McGee thinks that Moses would be amused at people “missing the point”. In file 01005, listen from 9:30 to maybe 12:00.

There’s another file that explains the actual original wording, which is a very compelling argument to make me believe that McGee’s interpretation is right. I’ll send that along when I find it.

Now, please understand that I converse with people who have the most bizarre views of God and the universe. As with you, all those years ago at Camp Kenan, I gently begin with salvation and hope the seed lands in fertile soil. In the meantime, with the help of you, Franklyn, Vernon, and… oh, yeah – God, I try to improve my understanding. I feed that to others at the fastest rate that I believe they can receive it. I make it fairly clear that I believe with all my heart, but that I also have SO much to learn.

Regards, John P.S. This is not in any way to refute. It is only to explain.

Dave’s Response – I appreciate your sensitivity on this issue of age of the earth and universe. I certainly agree with you that the answer does not determine salvation. The young-earth creationists claim the same. What deeply bothers the young-earthers is that the only driving force compelling the old-agers belief system is because evolution, in order to be true, MUST have billions and billions of years to do its “magic.” In other words, evolution theory is causing this error. Error causes further error. When science bases its beliefs on a foundational error, how can one trust its off-shoots?

If evolution was not in the minds of scientists and Bible believers, a plain reading of Genesis makes the earth thousands, not billions of years old. James Ussher (1581-1656) was Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland between 1625 and 1656. He was a prolific scholar, who most famously published a chronology that purported to establish the time and date of the creation as the night preceding Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC, according to the proleptic Julian calendar. Although mocked in arrogant evolutionist circles, Ussher was no quack and his research was excellent. The conclusion is that there is simply no room in human history for billions of years. When we especially realize that the Bible is emphatic concerning there was no death before sin, an evolutionary history is totally incompatible with Holy Scriptures. In other words, as soon as a Christian believes in billions of years of history, then death and suffering had to have begun BEFORE Adam and Eve sinned. It is HERE where the slippery slope to undermine the authority and accuracy of Scripture begins. If you can resolve this conflict, then I may be partly open to the idea of billions of years of history.

Dr. Russell Humphreys is a brilliant scientist who has formulated complicated theories asserting a young earth and universe. Humphreys graduated B.S. from Duke University and was awarded his Ph.D in physics from Louisiana State University in 1972. He has worked for General Electric and Sandia National Laboratories in nuclear physics where he received a patent and a science award so he is far from being some quack. He has offered a Young Earth Creationist cosmological model to deal with the distant starlight problem and has answered well criticisms from those who attack him. His book is entitled, “Starlight and Time.”

The truth is that science, because it has grown in knowledge so fast in modern times, has become arrogant with this knowledge and has closed its mind to alternative thinking, the one thing this discipline should NEVER do. That said, I still agree with you about not emphasizing all this when witnessing because our culture has been too evolutionized and this would be “casting peals before the swine” type of thing. If the age of the earth comes up, I simply say there are different views that can be defended. But for the Christian who really trusts the Scriptures, they need to look harder into this issue. It is slippery slope when people start treating Genesis as non historical.

Here is a list of just some of the many scientific problems with the earth being billions of years old:

Helium rises from under the earth’s crust and continues to leak out of the atmosphere. By now there should be none left but there is a lot still in the earth.
The oceans gradually get saltier, but they are only 3.6% salt today. If earth is real old, that percentage
should be much higher.
Oil under the earth;s crust is still under too much pressure. If earth is really old, that pressure would
have relieved itself long ago.
If old, the sea floor should have much more sediment built up.
The moon is gradually moving away from earth. if this rate of distance change has been constant (as all evolutionist bet on), then billions of year ago it would have been too close to earth and would have caused multiple problems resulting in killing of all life. In addition, the moon should be much farther away by now.
If old, human populations should be much more advanced by now. Have you ever wondered why the native American Indian population was not as dense as in the Middle East and Europe? I think it is because the first humans came from the Fertile Crescent area some 6,000-10,000 years ago and migration and population increase takes time.
The magnetic field is getting weaker at a rate that can be measured. Assuming this has been a constant rate which evolutionists assert, it would be too weak by now to protect life.
Earth’s rotation is slowing which means it used to be faster. If we go back thousands of years there is no problem because the speed of rotation would only be slightly faster. But go back billions of years, we have earth spinning so fast that no life could exist.
Top soil forms slowly and we have only a handful of inches. If older, we should have much more.
Ice core rings are not annual rings. Warm-cold changes form them so one year could have multiple rings. Therefore, we cannot determine age by simply counting rings.
Oldest tree is the Bristle Cone Pine and dates only 4300 years. If earth is older, why aren’t there trees
older? Noah’s Flood happened about 4500 years ago where all the trees were wiped out (but not there
seeds).
Stalagmites and stalactites form quickly under the right conditions – several feet in a few years.
These are not proofs of an ancient earth.
The Radio Isotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) research group excavated many organic samples from various levels within the earth’s crust, some very deep while other not so deep and many in between. They sent different samples to different labs to be carbon dated. They did not tell the labs they were creation scientists fearing non cooperation or fudging the results due to deeply held biases. Carbon-14 is constantly entering any living thing (plant or animal) but as soon as the life dies, the carbon-14 ceases to accumulate. Instead it decays into Nitrogen-14. The half-life of C-14 is 5,730 years. This means that in that amount of time, half of it has changed over to N-14. After, say, 30,000 years, scientists will not be able to detect it any longer. Certainly if something died millions of years ago, no traces of C-14 could ever be found. The RATE results provide scientific proof that all samples studied died only thousands of years ago and at about the same time in history due to the residue of C-14 remaining in all the samples! The results also indicate they died at about the same time. Since this evidence contradicts evolutionary theory, evolutionists who have commented on this say that there must have been a contamination of the samples. While this is always a possibility in this kind of study, it is remote due to special care the scientists take to prevent it. So far as I know, critics have simply stated their problem with the RATE findings rather than attempting to duplicate the study. Any open-minded researcher would be motivated to try to replicate this. RATE published its findings in November 2005. They also now suspect that decay rates have not been constant. Specifically, they think that before Noah’s Flood, due to severe differences in atmosphere and other factors, these rates were much faster than what they are today which could explain false old-age readings based on modern day assumptions (uniformitarianism) concerning all decay rates.

Why haven’t evolutionists ever Carbon-14 tested samples found buried deep? Their “geologic column” rules their minds. In other words, they view the age of a sample by how deep it is found. Simply put, they judge the age of the sample by what layer it was found in and they judge the age of the layer by what samples were found in them. If this isn’t circular reasoning I don’t know what is. In their minds it is a waste of time and money to Carbon-14 test a sample that “obviously” died millions of years ago. Just some food for thought.

I listened to your first file from Vernon McGee. All is arguments against evolution were good except the info about the Puluxy River Valley that supposedly had human and dinosaur footprints together. Dr. Carl Baugh first reported this info. According to Answers in Genesis, this is not a credible report for various scientific reasons. One good thing about AIG is that they stay up on latest facts, criticisms, and theories about origins and history.

I just finished your second file on Divisions, but it stopped after 9 minutes 30 sec and did not continue on. I thought that there might be more. In any case, from what I did hear, he never dealt with the death before sin problem of old-earthers. By the way, young-earthers realize what the emphasis is with Christianity and the Bible. McGee implies that we don’t.

John’s Response – I agree that the slope is slippery. I think many learned Christians contend that even if the McGee thoughts are correct, that it opens the door to evolution. My thought is that God knew all of this would happen and He could have ended the controversy by a couple sentences in Genesis. He chose not to. If I adopt the young earth theory, it would be against my judgement at this point. Since I know that it is a possible stumbling block for others, I just tend to stay away from it. Because of my background of the last 10 years, people like to draw me into these conversations, so I neither confirm, nor deny, and revector them into the salvation story. The best explanation I’ve read/heard is McGee’s, but I keep an open mind, but not so open that it allows my brains to fall out.J

There is far more evidence to support the existence of our saving God than there is to support evolution. I believe the hand of Satan guided the pens of Darwin, Mohammad, … My stumbling block is that God’s story has always been so obvious to me that it’s hard for me to understand why it is so confusing to others. Frankly, I can’t fathom the motivation for people who seemingly prefer to walk around blind.

I appreciate your patience with me, and the part you have played in my eternity, my friend. We have forever to chat, and that’s kinda nice.

Feedback:

Dave W (4/26/13) – Nice Job Dave.

Bible Versions

January 8, 2018 / dscheer / 0 Comments

I have done lots of reading about the different English versions of the Bible. There is much to be said, but I wish to keep this brief and fair. There are two categories of Bibles: 1) Literal and 2) Dynamic.

Literal = Word-for-word translation. Although accurate it may not flow well. Good for determining doctrine. When translating any language, meaningful flow is a problem. Examples = King James, New King James (which changes only words from Old English to equal in meaning words of modern English), American Standard, New American Standard, Revised Standard.

Dynamic = Thought-for-thought (paraphrased). In other words, a sentence or paragraph is read, the main gist is determined, and then re-written in words that are easily understood by the targeted culture. It flows well and is easier to understand but lacks accuracy at times, therefore it is not good for determining doctrine. Examples = New International Version, New English, Phillips, Living Bible, Good News for Modern Man.

What should we use? There are many factors which go into the choice of which Bible you buy, including what your church uses, layout, and font size. Whatever translation your church uses is another factor, since it is often a good idea to get a copy of whatever translation they use in order to make group study easier. If you want a study Bible rather than an easy reading one, make sure it has a good concordance. This is a list of key words and their locations throughout Scripture so you can find verses quickly. Cross-references are a must as well. These are small-cased letters next to key words or phrases telling you where to find a similar passage or word in the Bible. Bible dictionaries also come in handy for study because they list people, places, and things, and tell you relevant information about them from the Bible and history.

Because of the manner in which the King James Version was translated and put together, many believe it is the most accurate. Some disagree. For information on the impressive formation of the KJV, go to

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/dr_fuller-versions.htm

I started with the Living Bible as a new believer, but as time went on, I needed something closer to the Hebrew and Greek. Today, I use a couple of literal types and once in a while use the Living Bible. Sometimes it has helped but other times I did not agree with author Ken Taylor’s choice of words. I think it is important that we use a version that helps us understand and motivates us to read. Anytime there is a question about the meaning of a verse or a single word, I always go with the KJV.

The Roman Catholic Church used to have only one official Bible – the Douay-Rheims Translation. Today, however, there are a variety of other versions sanctioned by that church. The major difference is the “apocryphal books” which are contained between the Old and New Testaments. They were added by the Catholic Church in the mid 1500s, but were rejected by the Protestant Reformation movement because they believed those books were not inspired by God. If you would like to see those reasons, go to

http://carm.org/why-apocrypha-not-in-bible

There is one Bible that I cannot recommend reading: The New World Translation (I’ve only seen it in green color). This is the Jehovah’s Witness Bible. Their “Greek scholars” were bogus and they changed key words to fit their pet doctrines. For example, John 1:1 states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Theirs is changed to, “…and the Word was a god” because they deny that Christ is God in the flesh. They believe He was Michael the archangel in the flesh and therefore is a created angel lower than God. After talking with them, they have no good explanation concerning the first chapter in Hebrews that reveals their error.

Another version I have a major problem with is the Scofield Bible because it was translated by a staunch dispensationalist Cyrus Scofield and he allows his biased view of End-time prophecies cloud his decisions. For example, the phrase “the great tribulation” never appears in the King James Version. What does appear are the phrases “great tribulation” in Matthew 24:21, “immediately after that tribulation in those days in Matthew 24:29 (most likely referring to the destruction in 70 AD), and “in those days after that tribulation” in Mark 13:24 (again 70 AD). One obvious unfair move by Scofield is found in Revelation 7:14 where the KJV states, “they that came out of great tribulation” which leads me to interpret as referring to souls over the centuries who had it especially tough, not just one little group that will exist just prior to the Second Coming. True to his dispensational bias, Scofield inserted the word “the” before “great tribulation” which signifies that this versed is singling out that one group of people that somehow is going to have it worse than any other group of believers, which makes no sense when we consider what horrors many Christians from different time periods have experienced throughout the Church Age. The bottom line point here is that the concept of one, special great tribulation that has a great special reward for those who go through it is a myth. The Bible never teaches this. When the Scofield Reference Bible was published in 1909, it unfortunately quickly became the most influential statement of dispensational premillennialism. Scofield’s notes teach futurism and dispensationalism, a theology that was systematized in the early nineteenth century by the Anglo-Irish clergyman John Nelson Darby, whose attitude toward thinking he was right bothers me. I say “unfortunately, because this teaching has snuffed out other valid views of End-Time interpretation. All should be taught allowing individuals to believe as they wish (without leading to division within the Church).

A more recent version, The New Living Translation (NLT), has some Christians objecting because they perceive a liberal, politically correct approach to interpreting. Other believers have told me that they like the NLT. The following list will give you an idea of what this involves:

Gender inclusive language (God is not a “He” for just one example).
Downplaying the existence of Hell and God’s judgment.
Downplaying the deity of Jesus.
Downplaying the power of the Holy Spirit.
Denying the prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus.
Downplaying the sin of homosexuality.
Downplaying the differences between men and women.
Pro-abortion slant (“with child” is changed to “pregnant” for example).

I’ve been taught that there was a lot of prayer and fasting to determine correct translation by several devoted scholars when questions arose when forming the KJV that came out in 1611. After each time they prayed, they would agree in a certain decision. I have no idea how The NLT was formed. Was there much prayer/fasting to seek God’s Truth? How about the quality of Greek and Hebrew scholarship? What degree of reverence did the people have toward the Bible in general? If man’s reasoning alone dictated changes in the Bible, I tend not to trust that wisdom. One should not simply “mess” with the Word of God.

In summary: Ideally, all people should know Hebrew and Greek fluently and read the Bible in those languages. Realistically, this isn’t going to happen and God knows it. Therefore, for lay people most versions work just fine. The Holy Spirit is fully capable of revealing what you need to know. I recommend, however, the use of at least one literal type and at least one dynamic type. I often use “The New Layman’s Parallel Bible” which offers four versions in one book with the KJV used as the base. Each page has each version side by side for easy reference. For those who want more or those who prepare teachings, they should use a good Bible commentary or two (but try to find one that shares various viewpoints rather than from one viewpoint). There are dispensationalists (premillenialists), amillennialists, pre-tribulation rapture folks, post-tribulation rapture folks, old-earth creationists (progressive creationists), and young-earth creationists, Calvinists, and others. The point is, these viewpoints (do I dare say biases?) can influence commentary. They certainly sway translators, but that is another AT ISSUE.

I hope this essay was clear and helps people decide on what version(s) to use. It’s always good to seek the Lord on matters such as this. Remember, this was not an in-depth report on this subject, but rather a brief overview of key points.

Feedback So Far:

Raj – I have to disagree on your comments about the NLT version. The first bible I ever read was an NLT and have since bought a NLT study bible. I never felt the NLT downplay anything or even deny as you have listed. I would like you to prove it. Now I do find “the message” bible version to be like your description of the NLT. I do agree with the use of multiple bibles.

Dave – After doing some more research, I may agree somewhat with your disagreement. I now do not think the NLT does all those things that I accused it of doing. I also see your point about “The Message.” However, versions like NLT and others may be the beginning of a slippery slope to PC-ness. Here’s a portion of what I did find online:

Gender-Neutralism and Egalitarianism.

In line with the recent trend in Bible and book publishing, the NLT carefully avoids the use of “male-oriented” language. In Bible translations this involves a suppression of the male-oriented language in the original text by means of various circumlocutions and paraphrases. We may suppose that in the NLT this was done in a late editorial stage of the version’s production, because it is evident from the press release quoted above that it was done without the cooperation or approval of some of the scholars who worked on the version. Bergen, at least, did not agree with the use of gender-neutral language:

Bergen noted that in the Hebrew society, men were dominant, thus biblical writers employed male language. In Bergen’s translation of the book of Exodus, he retained the original language. “I’m not going to recreate ancient Israel into a sexless society,” he said.

Nevertheless, the finished product was made to be thoroughly genderless by Tyndale House editors. They seem not to have paid any attention to the Hebrew and Greek texts in this editing, because early printings of the New Living Translation gave unisex renderings for the Greek word ανηρ (which corresponds to the English word “male”), as in Acts 1:21, “So now we must choose someone else to take Judas’ place.” In later printings this particular blunder was corrected to read, “So now we must choose another man to take Judas’ place.”

The preface of the NLT is less than frank about the reasons for this gender-neutral language. It claims that this style is necessary “to make the translation clear to a modern audience that tends to read male-oriented language as applying only to males” and that it is “driven by the concern to reflect accurately the intended meaning of the original texts.” As one example of the style it cites Proverbs 22:6, “Train up a child in the way he should go,” which in the NLT reads, “Teach your children to choose the right path.” But it is hard to see how the literal rendering here (or anywhere) could possibly be misunderstood as applying exclusively to males. Who would ever interpret “train up a child in the way he should go” as if the instruction were only for boys? The fact is, most people have no trouble at all with generic masculine pronouns. The gender-neutral language policy is not driven by any legitimate requirement of “dynamically equivalent” accuracy or by any desire to help people understand the text. It is driven by the usual desire of commercial publishers to avoid offending feminist sensibilities.

In connection with this we notice that in the “Tyndale Bible Verse Finder,” included in most editions of the NLT, the editors have carefully avoided the subject of womanly submission, despite the fact that this is a “hot topic” and highly interesting to most of the people who will be using such a topical index. We would expect to find under a suitable heading references to the pertinent verses, such as 1 Corinthians 11:3-16, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Ephesians 5:22-24, Colossians 3:18, 1 Timothy 2:11-15, and 1 Peter 3:1-6. But under the headings “Family,” “Marriage,” and “Women” there is no mention of this topic at all, and under the heading “Submission” we read, “Marriage calls for mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21-33).”

While the above paragraph makes clear that the NLT’s actual verses about women submitting are maintained, the add-on called the “Tyndale Verse Finder” did NOT contain those important verses that do indicate that a husband has authority over his wife and that women should not have authority over men in the church. Again, the spirit behind some of these modern translations may be off and the plan is to pervert the Word slowly. My point is, let’s all keep up our awareness to this possibility.

As I stated above, these are the areas we need to be alert about to make sure these are not “tweaked” by modern folks who think they know better:

Gender inclusive language (God is not a “He” for just one example).
Downplaying the existence of Hell and God’s judgment.
Downplaying the deity of Jesus.
Downplaying the power of the Holy Spirit.
Denying the prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus.
Downplaying the sin of homosexuality.
Downplaying the differences between men and women.
Pro-abortion view (“with child” is changed to “pregnant” for example).

Blessings in Him,

Dave

Can a Christian Lose Salvation?

January 8, 2018 / dscheer / 0 Comments

Solid Christians are on both sides of this issue. Historically, John Calvin (1509-1564), believed that you cannot lose it. Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609) disagreed and believed that one can lose salvation. My opinion? Not sure, but if we can lose it, it must be rare because God does not let go of His kids easily (if at all). The upside of believing in eternal security is that blessed assurance (peace of mind). The downside is there may be a greater tendency to sin and/or to develop a lack of motivation to serve Jesus. The upside in believing in conditional salvation is developing an attitude of being careful how one lives, while the downside is perhaps drawing wrong conclusions about individual souls and giving up on them.

Scriptures that lead one to believe in eternal security:

Ephesians 1:13-14: “In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”

John 10:28-29: “And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.”

Others include: 2 Corinthians 5:5; John 6:37,39; Romans 8:28-29; 2 Timothy 2:19.

Scriptures that lead one to believe salvation can be lost:

Hebrews 6:4-6: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.”

Hebrews 10:26: “For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins….”*

Others include: Matthew 5:13; John 15:6; 2 Peter 2:20-22; Matthew 7:21-22; Matthew 12:31-32; 2 Peter 1:10.

*Comment on Heb. 10:26: Since we believers know the truth, we usually know full well what the sin is that we are about to commit. I know for a fact that every believer has sinned willingly. We knew before we did it that is was wrong, yet we still wanted to do it and we did it. This is sinning willfully. Therefore, taking Hebrews 10:6 at face value, all Christians have lost salvation, but we know that this is not true. So, we must look at this verse with a different perspective. Perhaps it simply means if we hear the truth and continue to reject it, there is no covering for the person’s sins. Or, that it refers to people who have heard the Truth but refused to admit that something is sinful, and they continue to do it without any remorse, regret, or regard for God and what He says. A third possibility is that a Christian can expect nothing but God’s judgment for that sin, since they haven’t brought it to the cross, in fact, have RESISTED the cross.

What about believers repeating the same sins? I think Paul covered this well in Romans 7:14-8:1.

In Summary: Those who believe the Bible teaches “once saved always saved” can assert that anyone who falls away was never saved to begin with. This, of course is something that can never be proved, but that does not eliminate it from the possibility that it is true. The important point that people may miss in this debate is that if/when a believer sins repeatedly or once in a while, that if they are repentant and still desire to follow Jesus, then they must be in good standing with God since it is He that GRANTS repentance (Romans 2:4, 2 Cor. 7:9, 2 Tim. 2:25). If a person has truly lost salvation, their lifestyle would most likely reflect that. The grace and mercy and longsuffering patience of God goes longer and deeper than most fallen humans think. Therefore, I think it would be a bit presumptuous to conclude that a certain believer has crossed some line with God and now has lost salvation. Though I have not answered this difficult question, perhaps the emphasis should be on not judging others and being content that as long as we care about being in His will, that we are in still the palm of His hand.

Another question I have is “Just what difference does knowing the answer to this question really make?” No matter which one is true, all believers need to love Him, tell others about Him, and live righteously. Anyone can do these things without knowing the truth about this issue. Furthermore, anyone from any viewpoint should and can also do these things. This issue seems to me to be more of a divisive issue among believers rather than something that inspires us to do right. If we know someone who claims to be a believer and is not living properly, all we can do is pray and help them change using Biblical guidelines. We will not know for a fact whether or not they have lost salvation, so whether we are a Calvinist or an Arminian, we should react the same…so what real difference do these doctrines make??

Feedback:

Anon #1: My husband and I have always disagreed about this issue–he believes in eternal security, I believe we have free will and can choose to turn our backs on God and throw His gift back in His face. Admittedly, it only matters if you fall away–which our daughter has now done. She ‘believes’ there is no God at all, and the times in her youth when she heard from Him were all in her head/psychological wishful thinking. So I am in agony wondering what will happen if anything happens to her before she repents and returns. It may be less emotionally painful to believe eternally secure, but I would have to KNOW, and I don’t. Honestly, it feels like she died and this nice young woman who I don’t really know well took her place. I still grieve her loss. It’s painful. God has given me some verses in Jeremiah that lead me to believe she will return, and I cling to them when I start to worry too much, but it’s not easy. My husband doesn’t see it quite the same, though I think he would agree that this “new daughter” is not our old one. A book that I am copying for our pastor at work (I’m the church secretary) teaches you can lose it, and I am a sobbing wreck by the time I finish a paragraph, as it describes our daughter to a T. Some things I wish we could really know before we die…

Dave: I know exactly what you are experiencing. But one thing I’ve had the Lord tell me recently is that Christian authors, though most mean well, are NOT the Word of God. The Word of God is not clear on this topic. Therefore, I conclude that we cannot know, and therefore our role is to trust Him. How can any human judge correctly that another human has just stepped over that invisible line (if it exists for believers) where God will not take them back? With all due respect to your pastor, do not let a book written by a fallible human plummet your faith in God’s mercy and faithfulness. I am convinced that His mercy goes farther and deeper than any human thinks.

Over the 44 years of knowing Christ, I have heard hundreds of testimonies of people falling completely away from the faith only to return later (and they went FAR away). In the meantime, praying and fasting for important outcomes always helps. If your faith wavers on this situation, just simply be honest with our Abba Father and tell Him about that, and ask Him to help you trust and believe. This is every believer’s battle. God has blessed you with a fantastic mother’s heart, so be encouraged in Him.

Anon #2: Whether or not a Christian can lose his salvation hits home at a very personal level regarding my wife’s sister whom you’ve known for years. She and her son moved from the Rochester area a few years ago and began attending my church. They were both baptized, became members and were active in the church. The son graduated from one of the finest Christian schools and began to attend a Christian college. Then he announced to the family he was gay and had been living a secret lifestyle for years. As you can imagine this was a shock to everyone and what happened later became even worse. After one of our pastors counseled his mom (our church regularly counsels gender confused teens), she left the church, walked out of her executive job, moved to another city and completely supports her son’s gay lifestyle. Worse, most of her family supports her and her son, and believe homosexuality is something he was born with and consider him still a Christian.

I had no other choice but to lovingly confront the family about the sin of homosexuality assuring them God loved him just as much as He loves me and wants the best for everyone, but also made it clear in Scripture that homosexuality is a sin and separates one from God just as any other sexual sin like adultery and sleeping around. I gave the best counsel I could drawing from a Christian book (Sex and the iWorld-Khune) regarding homosexuality. Since then the family has made distance from me and his mom refuses any more contact.

I have never seen so much turmoil in a family, but what bothered me the most was the compromise and abandonment of the Christian faith by those who call themselves Christian. Perhaps what I have written here can also lead to some more questions in your study. Any Biblical counsel would be most appreciated at this end.

Dave: Wow, sad news…but not beyond the reach of our heavenly Father. You did well to share truth in love with your wife’s sister. The best Christian ministry for gays is L.I.F.E. Ministry in NYC. You can find it on-line. I encourage you to contact them and they can help. It is run by ex-gay Joanne Highly who married ex-gay Ron Highly many years ago. Ron has died, but Joanne is still doing a great job at the helm. Their insights into homosexuality such as its causes and effects go beyond all other Christian info I’ve ever seen. LIFE = Living In Freedom Eternally.

That sudden abandonment of the “Christian faith” stems from them never bonding to God’s Word, and, perhaps, God is using this controversy to expose this (and hopefully repair it). At present, I cannot pronounce any of these people as “non-Christians” or ones who have lost salvation. They are in danger, however.

I can understand the mom’s reaction (note to readers: I know her personally). After experiencing a horrible dad (years of sexual abuse), then losing a husband to divorce, she seemed to pour all of her love into her son. Her son was her light and joy in her rough life. It was her and him against this cruel world and they survived. Her son probably gave her a sense of purpose and meaning to her life. Then to see him being “attacked and condemned” (from her perspective), she predictably ran to his defense and away from Christians. She needs counsel to unravel her past. At this point, I am not sure what role you can play other than praying and seeking help from LIFE since she won’t talk with you.

I reject any notion that someone is born gay. The media slants reports to convince people that science has proven this. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many gay men have had poor father figures in their life – neglect, abuse, lack of closeness. I’m not saying this is THE cause, but it probably contributes to it from the environmental category of thought (as opposed to the genetic theory). I would guess that the son was not close with his dad, and that his mom doted much on him. It is reasonable to assume that he has had a longing in his heart to be close to a male figure. All this, of course is speculation by me, a non-expert in this field. And I do not mean to blame the mom at all. Her love toward her son is most understandable, even commendable. Both of them may need special prayer to rid themselves of demonic oppressions – in God’s timing, however. Hope this will help in a most difficult and sad situation. I will pray as well.

Anon #2: Thanks for your good counsel Dave, I will visit the sites you mentioned. I believe you are right about her going through so much and in her relationship with her son. I do keep them in prayer and hope someday to make things right between us. Sometimes I wish I had not been so direct with her, but she was so fixed on his gay lifestyle as being OK she had really influenced the family to question their beliefs and side with her. God will have to take hold of this one for sure to make a difference.

Linda P (10/21/13) – I was introduced to Christ by Dave Scheer as a a sophomore in high school. I believed. I was the seed that fell on the rock. I grew quickly, then withered. It took me 40 years of being lost in the desert before I finally looked up again. I was baptized in July 2010. I am a disciple, a work in progress. I am learning, and praying, and living and sharing my faith. I sure hope that those of us that haven fallen away and come home aren’t lost to the Kingdom. I believe we are not. God used all the bad boys and girls to prove a point, as far as I’m concerned.

If we choose to sin rather than take the high road, we lose out in many ways, but can we still be saved? End up in the same heaven as one who is, say, heterosexual but cheats on their spouse? abuses their babysitter? secretly lusts for their sister-in-law? has been married and divorced 3 times? and on and on…

I know sexual sin is a bad one, but sin is sin. I believe God looks at our hearts more than our actions and measures out rewards accordingly.

Quite frankly, as long as I get there and can drag some with me, I don’t care where I land in the pecking order!

My daughter is 25 next month. She learned to live a secular life from me. I never gave her a solid foundation in Christianity. As least yours has been there and will most likely return. Take comfort in knowing that. I am at fault for my daughter’s lack of faith. You are not.

Dave to Linda – Thanks for the feedback and insights. About your daughter, while it would have been better that your life was a Christian example for your daughter’s formative years, it is not your fault if she never repents and gets saved. Many believers had non-Christian parents but still found the need to repent and believe. With or without you, your daughter needs to realize her spiritual need. So do not be too hard on yourself. And, don’t forget that she has seen that great change in you and I’m sure she knows your “sea shell” story! She must know that you are better today than during your backslidden years. You are a fantastic witness to her now.

We walk by faith not sight, and live by grace not human effort. Romans 8:1 is always a great reminder when we look down on ourselves.

Linda to Dave – And thank you for your feedback. I know it’s not my fault that my daughter is my clone, and we all have to come to our own realization of where we stand with God. I also know she does see a change, and she is a typical, 25 year-old, secular, materialistic female who looks at it like she has all kinds of time to be good, she’s going to be bad while she’s young and free.

As my elderly friend says, “Stop worrying about your daughter. You said she’s just like you, and YOU came around! She will, too!” Then she said, “And don’t preach to her or you’ll just alienate her! Pray and set a good example. That’s all you can do. Someone else will bring her to Christ. God hears praying mothers.”

Scripture Thoughts

Author: dscheer (page 19 of 33)

How Old is the Earth/Universe?

Bible Versions

Can a Christian Lose Salvation?

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts