Blaspheming the Holy Spirit

“Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matt. 12:31-32).

The primary subject of these verses is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, also known as the unforgivable sin, since Jesus said that this was the one sin that would not be forgiven. There are four views on what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is:

  1. You permanently reject the testimony of the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus Christ. This is blasphemy because in essence you are calling the Holy Spirit a liar.
  2. The work of the Holy Spirit is to lead you to Jesus Christ. Hence, you blaspheme the Holy Spirit when you die without receiving Jesus Christ as your Savior.
  3. We do not know what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is since Jesus did not specify what it is.
  4. You blaspheme the Holy Spirit when you say (out of an evil heart, not out of ignorance) that the work of the Holy Spirit is in fact the work of Satan or of a demon.

As we study this passage, we will determine which of these views is correct. However, let me say up front that this is not a salvation issue. You will not lose your salvation if you believe any of these views.

Before we get into the study, let me say this about view number 1. That view is based on John 15:26: “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.” But John is also the one who said that if we do not believe in Jesus, we are rejecting the testimony, not of the Holy Spirit, but of the Father and we are calling the Father a liar (1 John 5:9-12). That is because the testimony which the Holy Spirit gives of Jesus came from the Father. So those who reject the testimony of the Holy Spirit are not blaspheming the Spirit but the Father. And Jesus said that every blasphemy (including blasphemy of the Father) will be forgiven.

Let us begin with verse 31. Jesus said, “Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,” which raises the question, “When are sins forgiven: before or after death?” Heb. 9:27 says, “It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment.” Rev. 20:13 says that the unbelieving dead will be judged according to their works on Judgment Day. If God says to a man on Judgment Day, “You are guilty of murder,” can that man then say, “You’re right, God. What I did was wrong. Will you forgive me?” No. Once a person dies, all unforgiven sins become unforgivable. Sins can be forgiven only before death.

So, if a person commits the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit when he or she dies, why would Jesus single that one sin out as unforgivable if all sins become unforgivable upon death? What he is saying is that the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the one sin that becomes unforgivable before we die.

To better understand what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is, we need to know the definition of blasphemy. The Greek word for blasphemy in verse 31 is blasphemia (bla-sfā-mē’-a), from which we get our English word. It is ultimately derived from a combination of two other Greek words: blapto, which means “to injure,” and pheme (fā’-mā), from which we get our word “fame” and which means “news, report.” So blasphemia literally means “an injurious report.” Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines it as “slander, speech injurious to another’s good name.” It is possible to blaspheme (speak slanderously against) beings other than God (which is what Michael the archangel refused to do concerning Satan in Jude 9), but in the New Testament, blasphemy is usually directed to God.

The point is that blasphemy is spoken. In verse 32, Jesus says, “Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.” Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is speaking against the Holy Spirit.

When we place verses 31 and 32 in context and look at what follows (verses 33-37), we see that Jesus is still talking about speaking. He calls the Pharisees a “brood of vipers,” and then says, “How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.” We must remember that verses 31 and 32 are part of a speech Jesus gives in verses 25-37. And what prompted that speech? The Pharisees said something.

Most of this story is repeated in Luke 11:14-26. Luke left out the part about the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, but, according to Luke, Jesus did bring it up later, in Luke 12:1-12. Notice that in the context Jesus is again talking about speaking (“whoever confesses Me,” “anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man,” “do not worry about…what you should say”). Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is spoken.

So what did the Pharisees say that prompted Jesus’ speech in Matthew 12? In v. 22, Jesus healed a blind and mute man who was demon-possessed, presumably by casting the demon out. The multitudes in v. 23 offered an explanation for this miracle: “Could this be the Son of David?” The Pharisees could not accept this, so they offered an alternative explanation, in essence an argument to refute the multitudes’ explanation: “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.” Jesus cast out the demon by the power of the Holy Spirit, but what the Pharisees said was that Jesus actually cast out the demon by the power of Satan. This is what prompted Jesus’ speech.

Jesus’ speech consists of five rebuttals to the Pharisees’ argument. The first rebuttal is, if I am casting demons out by the power of Satan, then Satan’s kingdom is divided, which means it cannot stand.

The second rebuttal is, if I am casting demons out by the power of Satan, then your exorcists must be casting demons out by Satan’s power as well.

The third rebuttal is, “if (a better translation would be “since”) I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.” In other words, the fact that I am casting demons out by the power of the Spirit is evidence that you are witnessing, not Satan warring against his own kingdom, but the kingdom of God warring against Satan’s kingdom (v. 28). And I could not have cast out this demon unless I had first overcome “the strong man,” Satan himself (v. 29), which means that I am winning. So you had better join my side (v. 30) because if you are not with me, then you are against me.

The fourth rebuttal is, “Therefore,” since all of the above is true, since I am in fact casting the demons out by the power of the Holy Spirit, you had better be careful what you say, because if you pursue this line of argumentation, you will blaspheme the Holy Spirit, which is unforgivable. You can say what you want against me, but don’t you dare blaspheme the Holy Spirit.

The fifth rebuttal is, your argument comes from an evil heart. So repent, because you will be judged for everything you say.

In context, therefore, Jesus brings up the subject of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit because he is answering the Pharisees’ argument that he is casting out demons by the power of Satan. Mark also records this argument between the Pharisees and Jesus in Mark 3:22-30 and he specifically says that Jesus brought up the subject of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit “because they said, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’” So view 4 is the correct understanding of what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is.

This means that when the Holy Spirit performs a miracle, a blasphemer would say that the miracle was performed by Satan. A born-again Christian who is filled with the Holy Spirit would not blaspheme the Holy Spirit. Only a person with an evil heart who is in outright rebellion against God (like the Pharisees) would be capable of doing this. But this is also why we do not want an evil heart of unbelief to rise up within us or in our fellow believers (Heb. 3:12-13). We want to stay as far away from this as we can.

Posted in No Small Dissension | 1 Comment

Continue in the Faith

All of this concerns the day we got saved and where we spend eternity. How does all of this affect our lives today? What does all of this have to do with the verse I quoted at the beginning of this lesson: “The just shall live by his faith”?

Salvation, like sanctification, is a process. The Scriptures speak of salvation as a past event.

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began (2 Tim. 1:8-9).

The Scriptures also speak of salvation as a future event.

Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life (Rom. 5:9-10).

So Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation (Heb. 9:28).

That is why the Scriptures speak of us as being saved.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God (1 Cor. 1:18).

For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing (2 Cor. 2:15).

That is also why Jesus says that those who endure to the end will be saved.

“And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 10:22).

Notice that Jesus did not say this to unbelievers but to believers, his disciples.

Those who support Calvinism believe that the believer will endure to the end, that the believer cannot lose his salvation. They believe in the perseverance of the saints. Since God in his sovereignty chose who would be saved, and since the will of God cannot be thwarted, all of the chosen ones will endure (persevere) until the end and be saved. The believer’s perseverance, therefore, depends on God’s ability to make him or her persevere. Even some Arminians believe that once a person has freely chosen to be saved, God will make sure he perseveres. And there are Scriptures to back this up.

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, who also will do it (1 Thess. 5:23-24).

“This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day” (John 6:39).

“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 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 (John 10:27-30).

However, the majority of those who support Arminianism believe that the believer can lose his salvation. They believe it is possible for a believer to fall from grace. Since the believer freely chose to be saved, he or she can endure to the end only if he or she continually chooses to do so. The believer’s perseverance, therefore, depends on the believer’s ability to make himself or herself persevere. And there are Scriptures to back this up.

“Fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10:28). (Notice again that he said this to his disciples, which means that it is possible for the disciples of Jesus to end up in hell.)

You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off (Rom. 11:16-22).

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Heb. 10:26-31).

See also 2 Pet. 2:20-21 and Heb. 6:4-8.

When it comes to enduring to the end, therefore, the Scriptures teach both: God helps us to persevere but we must choose to persevere.

Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Pet. 1:10-11).

Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure (Phil 2:12-13).

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Pet. 1:3-5). (We are kept by God, but through faith.)

And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight—if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister (Col. 1:21-23).

These verses from Colossians tell us how we can lose our salvation. Eph. 2:8-9 tells us that we do not gain our salvation through works, so we do not lose our salvation by works. Those verses also tell us that we gain salvation by grace through faith. Therefore, we lose our salvation through unbelief. That is why Paul admonishes the Colossians to “continue in the faith.”  That is also why the writer to the Hebrews warns us not to develop “an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God” (Heb. 3:12-4:11).

Salvation is a process, but we can choose to drop out of the process. Suppose that you have a brain tumor and the doctor says, “I can remove it in an operation, but first you must take these medications, change your diet, and go through six weeks of chemotherapy.” If you do all of those things and you are cured of the tumor, who gets the credit? The doctor does, because he knew what to do. But if you die from the tumor because you decided that it was too much trouble to take the medications, that you weren’t going to change your diet because you really like the food you eat, and that you weren’t going through the chemotherapy because you don’t like the side effects it produces, so the doctor was unable to perform the operation, whose fault is that? It’s your fault. God has set things up so that if we make it to heaven, he gets all the credit, but if we do not make it, we get all the blame.

The point is that we should not take our salvation for granted. Salvation is a precious gift which only God can give, but we can throw the gift away. Salvation is a process which only God can accomplish, but we can choose to drop out of the process.

Let me end this with this quote from Heb. 10:38-39:

“Now the just shall live by faith;
But if
anyone draws back,
My soul has no pleasure in him.”
But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul.

Do not be one of those who draw back to perdition. Be one of those who believe to the saving of the soul. Continue in the faith.

Posted in Election and Free Will, No Small Dissension | Leave a comment

Predestined to Hell

By the same token, God, and only God, knows how to predestine people to hell without violating their free will. In the story of the plagues, the Scriptures tell us that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod. 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10). In fact, the Lord told Moses before he returned to Egypt that he, the Lord, would harden Pharaoh’s heart (Exod. 4:21), which means that God had predestined Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened. That was God exercising his choice (election). This did not preclude Pharaoh’s free will, for the Scriptures also say that Pharaoh hardened his heart (Exod. 8:15, 32; 9:34). That was Pharaoh exercising his free will. Both election and free will were working at the same time. I have heard it said that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart because Pharaoh hardened his heart, but that is not what the Scriptures say. And, as we shall see, that is not the conclusion Paul drew in Rom. 9. The Scriptures simply say that both God and Pharaoh chose to harden his heart.

We understand that people can freely choose to spend eternity in hell by refusing to receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior; however, many people balk at the idea that a loving God could predestine people to hell. Yet logic says that he does. Since there are only two places in which a person can spend eternity, if God does not predestine a person to heaven, then, by default, he has predestined that person to hell. Calvinism accepts that logic; Arminianism does not. But even if we adopt the Arminian position that God looked down through history and saw who would choose to be saved and so predestined them, does not that also mean that he looked down through history and saw who would NOT choose to be saved? So why did he create them, knowing full well that, by creating them, he was automatically condemning them to spend eternity in hell? Whether you are a Calvinist or an Arminian, the fact remains the same: God could have avoided sending anyone to hell by simply creating only those who were predestined to be saved. But he did not. Why not?

The Scriptures not only clearly teach that God predestined people to destruction, they also tell us why he did:

The Lord has made all for Himself,
Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom (Prov. 16:4)

What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens (Rom. 9:14-18).

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles (Rom. 9:22-24)?

The Scriptures say that God created the wicked for himself, meaning that he created them for his own purposes. His purposes include making known his power, his name (that is, his character), and his wrath. Christians lately have been emphasizing one facet of God’s character, his love, at the expense of another facet, his wrath. He predestined some, “the vessels of mercy,” to heaven to show everyone his mercy and his love. But he also predestined others, “the vessels of wrath,” to hell to show everyone his wrath.

He also created them to show the vessels of mercy “the riches of His glory.” If God had simply created only those who were predestined to heaven, then telling us that we could have spent eternity in the lake of fire would have been meaningless. And living a life of righteousness here on earth would also have been meaningless since everyone was going to get saved anyway. The only way to make salvation meaningful was to make the possibility of not being saved a real possibility. That meant a real lake of fire, a real outpouring of his wrath, and real vessels created to receive that wrath.

But if God predestined people to hell, why does he hold them accountable for their sins? He does so because, as we saw with Pharaoh, they can still exercise their free will. Yes, God chose to send them to hell before the foundation of the world, and yes, they freely chose to go to hell. Election and free will worked together in condemning them, just as election and free will worked together in saving us.

At least, that’s my answer to the question based on pulling some Scriptures together. The Scriptures themselves address this question head on and give us an even harder answer:

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor (Rom. 9:19-21)?

We keep forgetting that God is God and he can do whatever he wants. He does not have to answer to us for what he does. He predestined some people to go to heaven. That is his prerogative. He also predestined some people to go to hell. That is also his prerogative.

Some people, when confronted with the truth that God has predestined people to hell, either doubt God’s love or reject this truth altogether, for how can a loving God send people to hell? But that is not the Scriptural response to this truth. When we realize that God did not have to predestine us to spend eternity in heaven with him, that God could have chosen to predestine us to destruction but did not, our response should be thankfulness and praise: “Thank you, God, that you chose me even though you did not have to do so.”

Praise the name of the Lord;
Praise Him, O you servants of the Lord!
You who stand in the house of the Lord,
In the courts of the house of our God,
Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good;
Sing praises to His name, for it is pleasant.
For the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself,
Israel for His special treasure (Ps. 135:1-4).

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy (1 Pet. 2:9-10; italics mine).

To be continued…

Posted in Election and Free Will, No Small Dissension | Leave a comment

Reconciling Election and Free Will

So which doctrine is correct?

The two doctrines have existed since the first century and the supporters of the doctrines have been arguing with each other also since the first century. And so far, no one has been able to convince the other side. The problem is that both sides have Scriptures to back them up, which suggests that the Scriptures actually teach both.

In fact, there are instances where both doctrines show up in the same Scriptural passage. In Jer. 18:1-10, the Lord tells Jeremiah to go to the potter’s house. There the prophet sees the potter make a vessel, only to squash it and make it into another vessel. The Lord then says that he can do the same to Israel, that he can do whatever he chooses. That’s election. That’s God making his choice. But then, in that same speech, the Lord tells Jeremiah that if he says he is going to destroy a nation but that nation chooses to repent, he will spare that nation. Conversely, if he says he is going to bless a nation but that nation chooses to do evil, he will relent from blessing it. That’s free will.

Acts 13:14-51 tells the story of how Paul and Barnabas came to Antioch in Pisidia to preach the Gospel. They started at the synagogue of the Jews and were asked to return the following Sabbath to preach again. But the Jews became envious of all of the Gentiles who also came to hear, so they contradicted Paul and Barnabas. Paul said to them that he and Barnabas would therefore turn to the Gentiles, “since you reject it” (v. 46). That’s free will. The Gentiles were glad to hear Paul say that, and the Scriptures say, “And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed” (v. 48). That’s election.

But if the Scriptures really teach that both are true, why do we argue so much over these doctrines? We do so because, logically speaking, we cannot reconcile the two. We cannot understand how we can freely choose to be saved if God has already chosen who would be saved before the foundation of the world. We see the two as logically opposed to each other and therefore cannot reconcile them in our minds.

But the Scriptures are full of mysteries like this one. Trying to reconcile these two is like trying to reconcile how God can be one God, yet three Persons. And it is like trying to reconcile how Jesus can be both God and man at the same time. Yet, the Church stopped arguing over these truths long ago because it simply accepted that reconciling them goes beyond our limited human understanding.

So, too, reconciling election and free will goes beyond our limited human understanding, which is why the Scriptures teach both without once trying to explain how both can be true at the same time. C.S. Lewis acknowledged this decades ago. In Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer (p. 49), he refers to Pelagius and Augustine, who debated each other over this very issue in the fifth century. Pelagius supported free will; Augustine supported election. Lewis refers to them in his discussion of “the whole puzzle about grace and free will. You will notice that Scripture just sails over the problem. ‘Work out your salvation in fear and trembling’—pure Pelagianism. But why? ‘For it is God who worketh in you’—pure Augustinianism. It is presumably only our presuppositions that make this appear nonsensical. We profanely assume that divine and human action exclude one another like the actions of two fellow-creatures so that ‘God did this’ and ‘I did this’ cannot both be true of the same act except in the sense that each contributed a share.”

Perhaps an analogy will help us understand what he is saying. Suppose that I have a flat tire, but the nuts are on so tight that I cannot loosen them by myself. So you grab one part of the wrench and I grab another part. We twist it together and the nuts come off. The question then is: who loosened the nuts? You or me? The answer is, we both did.

Who chose to save us? Did God choose to save us before the foundation of the world (election)? Or did we choose to save ourselves (free will)? The answer is Yes. Yes, God chose to save us before the foundation of the world and yes, we freely chose salvation. We and God did this together.

In fact, the Scriptures teach that everything we do, we do together with God. As Jesus said, “Without Me, you can do nothing” (John 15:5). We cannot even choose to be saved without him. Perhaps we do not understand how that works, but God does.

Through the prophet Isaiah, God reminds us that he is in control of everything, including the future:

“Remember this, and show yourselves men;
Recall to mind, O you transgressors,
Remember the former things of old,
For I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like Me,
Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things that are not yet done,
Saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
And I will do all My pleasure,’
Calling a bird of prey from the east,
The man who executes My counsel, from a far country.
Indeed I have spoken it;
I will also bring it to pass.
I have purposed it;
I will also do it” (Is.46:8-11).

God sees the end from the beginning, which means that God has a predetermined plan. God is so wise and powerful that he can give all of us free will and still pull it off. His counsel shall stand. As an example, we are told that Ruth just “happened to come to the part of the field belonging to Boaz” (Ruth 2:3). We know, of course, that she did not just “happen” upon Boaz’s field. It was God’s plan for her to get to that field and he fulfilled his plan without violating her free will. God predestined us to be saved, but he did so without violating our free will. God, and only God, knows how to make election and free will work together.

To be continued…

Posted in Election and Free Will, No Small Dissension | Leave a comment

Election and Free Will

“But the just shall live by his faith” (Hab. 2:4)

In The Emperor’s New Groove, the emperor, who has been turned into a talking llama, and his peasant pal, Pacha, are being chased by his evil advisor, Yzma, and her henchman, Kronk, both of whom end up being locked in a closet in Pacha’s house by Pacha’s family. Yzma says to them, “Tell us where the talking llama is and we’ll burn your house to the ground.” Kronk says, “Don’t you mean ‘or’?” Yzma sighs in frustration, then says, “Tell us where the talking llama is OR we’ll burn your house to the ground.” Pacha’s daughter says, “That is a pretty crucial conjunction.”

It is a pretty crucial conjunction. I have entitled today’s lesson “Election and Free Will.” In most churches, the title would have been “Election OR Free Will,” because most Christians believe that the Scriptures teach one or the other and that anyone who believes the other is, at best, sadly mistaken or, at worst, a heretic.

The doctrines of election and free will are an attempt to answer two important questions: Did God choose to save us before the foundation of the world? Or did we choose to save ourselves?

Those who would answer yes to the first question believe in the doctrine of predestination (election). This doctrine has existed since the first century, but it was most ably defended by John Calvin (1509-1564), a French reformer who headed the church in Geneva, Switzerland. Because of this, the doctrine is also known as Calvinism. This is the belief held by the Southern Baptists and the Presbyterians.

Calvinism emphasizes the sovereignty of God. Before the foundation of the world, God in his sovereignty chose who would be saved and who would not be saved. That decision was not based on anything any person would do but on the purposes and will of God. People choose to get saved because God has already chosen them to be saved. Each person’s choice to be saved or not to be saved, therefore, is determined by whether God has already chosen to save that person or not. In other words, you chose to be saved because God chose you to be saved from before the foundation of the world.

There are, of course, Scriptures to support this doctrine:

The Lord has made all for Himself,
Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom (Prov. 16:4)

He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God (John 1:11-13).

“You did not choose Me, but I chose you…” (John 15:16).

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren (Rom. 8:29).

See also Rom. 9:1-21 and Eph. 1:3-11.

This is why the Scriptures sometimes refer to the believers as the elect (1 Pet. 1:1-2; Col. 3:12).

Those who would answer yes to the second question believe in the doctrine of free will. This doctrine has also existed since the first century, but it was first systematized by Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), a Dutch professor and former pastor. Because of this, the doctrine is also known as Arminianism. This is the belief held by the Methodists and most Pentecostal churches, including the Assemblies of God.

Arminianism emphasizes the responsibility of man. Each person is free to choose to be saved or not to be saved, and therefore, each person is responsible for the choice he or she makes. If a person ends up condemned to spend eternity in hell, it is because that person chose to be condemned. God certainly does not predestine anyone to condemnation. The Scriptures that speak about predestination mean that God, before the foundation of the world, foresaw who would freely choose to be saved. Those are the ones he predestined for salvation. God’s choice to save a person, therefore, is determined by that person’s choice to be saved or not to be saved. In other words, God chose you to be saved from before the foundation of the world because you chose to be saved.

There are, of course, Scriptures to support this doctrine:

“I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live” (Deut. 30:19).

“And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve…” (Josh. 24:15).

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believe in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:14-16).

And the Sprit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely (Rev. 22:17).

So which doctrine is correct?

To be continued…

Posted in Election and Free Will, No Small Dissension | Leave a comment

“I AM WHO I AM”

Moses, therefore, is not asking for God’s name because he does not know what it is. He is asking for God’s secret name. But notice that he is not wanting to learn God’s name for himself. He is picturing the Israelites in Egypt as wanting to know God’s name. He sees himself coming to the Israelites and telling them that he has met with God. He sees the Israelites as figuring this to be their golden oppor­tunity, for if Moses has really met with God, then perhaps he has learned God’s secret name. So he sees their first reaction to his news not as rejoicing that God has finally answered their prayers but as wanting to extract information so they can force God to do their bidding.

This is why God’s answer, “I AM WHO I AM,” is so appropriate. In English, it sounds like a tautology, a statement that is true but gives us absolutely no new infor­mation. Of course, God is who God is, but that does not tell us who he is in the first place. It sounds like God is trying to evade Moses’ question, even as Re tried to avoid Isis’.

But God is not Re and he is not evading Moses’ question. In Hebrew, this syn­tax is used to express determination. Thus, when Moses returns to this very moun­tain, God says to him, “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (Exod. 33:19), that is, God will determine to whom he will be gracious and on whom he will have compassion. What God is saying to the Israelites, therefore, is, “I determine who I am. I chose to have this personality and this character, which means that I chose my own name. Unlike Re, I was not given a secret name by someone else. So your attempt at manipulat­ing me through the use of my secret name will be in vain.”

His answer subtly—or perhaps not so subtly—reminds the Israelites that because he, and only he, determines who he is, he is a God who does not change.  Ever changing circumstances do not determine who he is. Fleeting emotions do not determine who he is. And certainly their puny attempts at magic do not determine who he is. Nothing can make him change except himself. This fact may cause con­sternation among some of the Israelites who think he is not moving fast enough to free them from slavery, but it should also comfort them. For a God who does not change is a God who can be counted on to be there when you really need him and who can be counted on to follow through on his promises. He is not the kind of God who one day promises to do something and the next day changes his mind. He is an unchanging God, which means that he is a faithful God.

He reminds them of all of this in the next part of his answer to Moses when he says, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.'” …”Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, “Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you” (Exod. 3:14f). He is the same God who introduced himself to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He has not changed since then. He was faithful then, he is faithful now. But this answer is also a mild rebuke, for when he answers Moses’ request to reveal his secret name by giving him the name the Israelites already knew, he is telling them, “I have already revealed to you who I really am. I have already revealed to you the deepest, innermost part of me. You should have already known that my heart belongs to you and that I would be faithful to you. You should have never doubted me.”

Thus, God recalls for the Israelites not only his chosen name but also the meaning of that name. The name Yahweh does not simply mean “He is,” but “He is unchanging and therefore faithful.” And it is his faithfulness, more so than any other aspect of his character, that he wishes everyone to think of when they think of him: “This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations” (Exod. 3:15).

This is also why in Exodus 6 (and in Genesis) he emphasizes the name Yah­weh over his other name, El Shaddai. To be sure, God is El Shaddai, the Almighty One, which means that he is capable of delivering the Israelites from slavery. But just because someone is capable of doing something does not necessarily mean that he will actually do it. What the Israelites needed to know was that God is faithful, that he can be counted on to do what he said he would do. The actual deliverance was going to be a long process, and the march across the wilderness was going to be perilous. They needed to know that he could be trusted.

And so, he emphasizes his name again and again in his speech to Moses in Exodus 6:

And God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am Yahweh, the Faithful One. I allowed myself to appear to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, for did I not let Myself be known to them by My name Yahweh, the Faithful One? I have also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, in which they were strangers. And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel whom the Egyptians keep in bondage, and I have remembered my covenant. Therefore, say to the children of Israel: ‘I am Yahweh, the Faithful One; I will bring you out from under the bur­dens of the Egyptians, I will rescue you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. I will take you as My people, and I will be your God. Then you shall know that I am Yahweh, the Faithful One, your God who brings you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. And I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and I will give it to you as a heritage: I am Yahweh, the Faithful One’” (Exod. 6:2-8, with some modifications).

There is no need to manipulate a faithful God. One can simply trust that he will do what he said he will do.

Thus, an understanding of the Hebrew (and Egyptian) culture and language reveals that the contradictions are merely illusions. There is no contradiction between Exod. 3 and Genesis or Exod. 6 and Genesis.

Posted in The Name of God | Leave a comment

The Secret Name

In the Hebrew language, the word name carries the same connotations that it does in English. It can mean the label given to objects and people (“The name of Abram’s wife was Sarai.”); a person’s reputation (“A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches.”); or a person’s authority (“And he wrote in the name of King Ahasuerus.”). But it also takes on one additional connotation: it represents the person’s character (“Holy and awesome is His name.”). In fact, a person’s name is the person himself. To blaspheme God’s name (Lev. 24:11) is to blaspheme God. To worship God’s name is to worship God.

The Egyptians took it one step further. They believed that a person’s name was an integral part of his being. Where we might say that a man consists of his body, soul, and spirit, an ancient Egyptian would say that a man consists of his body, name, and ka (double). An inscription inside the tomb of Pepi I sees the king in his afterlife going “forward with his flesh, Pepi is happy with his name, and he liveth with his ka.” Indeed, it was impossible to live without a name. They believed that “a man only came into being upon this earth when his name had been pronounced” and that “the future life could only be attained after the gods of the world beyond the grave had become acquainted with it and uttered it.”

This belief applied to the gods as well. According to one creation story, when the creator god Neb-er-tcher began to create everything, he said, “I brought (i.e., fashioned) my mouth, and I uttered my own name as a word of power, and thus I developed myself out of the primeval matter which had evolved multitudes of evolu­tions from the beginning of time.” According to The Book of the Dead, the sun god Re (or Rā) was “the creator of the name[s] of his limbs, which came into being in the form of the gods who are in the following of Rā.” As E.A. Wallis Budge, the late Keeper of the Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities in the British Museum, noted, “From this we see that all the ‘gods’ of Egypt were merely personifications of the NAMES of Rā, and that each god was one of his members, and that a name of a god was the god himself” (The Gods of the Egyptians, Vol. 2, 1904).

Conversely, blotting out a person’s name was the same as destroying that person. If anyone wished to destroy the evil power of a demon, then, in some cases, all one had to do was to make a wax figure of the demon, write its name on the figure and then destroy the figure, thereby destroying its name which was its power. To the Egyptians, therefore, the name was a real, dynamic, active, even life-giving (or life-taking) force and was thus a source of great power.

Knowing this makes it easy to see why the Egyptians came to believe that if one retained a magical or secret name, a name which no one else knew, then one retained a source of power which no one else had. However, should someone happen to learn your secret name, then that person held that power over you and could make you do whatever he or she desired. Again, this belief also applied to the gods. Each god had a secret name. Should a person happen to learn the secret name of a god, then the god would be forced by the power of magic to do whatever that person desired whenever that person spoke the name.

In a story which is a part of an Egyptian magic spell designed to counteract scorpion poison, Re is described as “abounding in names, unknown to that (god) and unknown to this (god).” Later in the story, Re himself says, “My father and my mother told me my name, (but) it was hidden in my body before I was born, in order that the power of a male or female magician might not be made to play against me.” The goddess Isis, who was especially skilled at casting magic spells, decides that she wants to know this name, and so she fashions a poisonous snake which ambushes Re and bites him. Re immediately calls upon the other gods to cure him. Isis, of course, offers to cure him, but only if he answers her one request: “Tell me thy name, my divine father.”

Viewed out of context, Isis’ request, like Moses’ question, would seem absurd because Isis obviously knows this god’s name. Even though the text does not have the words “secret” or “hidden name,” the context makes it abundantly clear that this is what she wants.

Re, too, knows she wants this name, but he is not ready to give it to her. So he recites a list of his accomplishments and then ends it by saying, “I am Khepri in the morning, Re at noon, and Atum who is in the evening.” But Isis is not fooled. She already knows those names, and besides, if his secret name had been among those he had listed, he would have recovered. But Re is still sick. So Isis says to him, “Thy name is not really among these which thou has told me. If thou tellest it to me, the poison will come forth, for a person whose name is pronounced lives.” Re finally reveals his secret name (which the author himself did not know or which he withheld from his Egyptian audience so only he would know!) and is cured.

Posted in The Name of God | Leave a comment

Asking for God’s Name

In the famous story in Exodus 3, God calls to Moses out of a bush that is on fire but is not being consumed. God introduces himself as “the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” He then commissions Moses to return to Egypt and deliver the Israelites from their slavery. Moses feels overwhelmed and tries to get God to change his mind by asking a series of questions that are intended to show God just how inadequate Moses is to the task. One of those questions is, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?” (Exod. 3:13).

God’s answer is, “I AM WHO I AM.” Then he tells Moses to say to the children of Israel that “I AM has sent me to you.” The words “I AM” in Hebrew is ‘ehyeh. The third person form of the word is yahweh, which is the name God chose for himself.

The problem with Moses’ question is that it seems to imply that Moses and the Israelites do not know God’s name. Yet Genesis makes it clear that Moses’ ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, knew that God’s name was Yahweh. Surely this name would have been passed down through the generations to Moses and the Israelites of his time. So why is Moses ask­ing for God’s name?

The answer is to be found in the Israelites’ propensity to fall into idolatry on a moment’s notice. Jacob buried the idols of his children under a tree on his way to meet God at Bethel, which shows that the Israelites practiced idolatry before they went into Egypt. The Israelites had Aaron make a golden calf which they worshiped simply because Moses had been gone for a long time, which shows that they practiced idolatry after they came out of Egypt. It is not surprising, therefore, to find they practiced idolatry while in Egypt. Near the end of his life, Joshua says to the Israel­ites, “Now therefore, fear Yahweh, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve Yahweh!” (Josh. 24:14). Ezekiel pictures Yahweh as commanding the Israelites who were living in Egypt before the exodus to avoid defiling themselves with the idols of Egypt, but they refused (Ezek. 20:7-8). Indeed, Ezekiel says the Israelites of his day will go into exile to break the influence that the idolatry their ancestors had learned in Egypt still had over them (Ezek. 23). Since the Israelites had lived among the Egyptians for over four hundred years, they had plenty of time to learn and adopt the Egyptian system of beliefs.

The Israelites had also spent most of those four hundred years crying out to Yahweh to free them from their slavery, and by Moses’ day they had become impa­tient with him. Asking him to deliver them was not producing the desired results, so they were looking for some way to force him to deliver them. The Egyptian belief in the secret name seemed to offer them exactly what they wanted.

Posted in The Name of God | Leave a comment

A Question of Translation

There are two verses in Exodus that seem to contradict what is said in Genesis and both of them center on the name of God. The first verse is Exod. 6:3. As it is usually translated, that verse states: “’I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, but by my name Yahweh I was not known to them.’” The latter half of the verse conflicts with the book of Genesis, which clearly testifies that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did know that God’s name was Yahweh.

The problem is the translation. The latter half of verse 3 should be translated as a rhetorical question, mak­ing the whole verse read as follows: “’I allowed myself to appear to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, for did I not let myself be known to them by my name Yahweh?’” The answer, of course, is yes, he did let himself be known to them by his name Yahweh. The verse now agrees with Genesis rather than contradicting it.

An objection to this translation may be that in Hebrew a question usually begins with an interrogative pronoun or adverb (such as “who” or “where;” Hebrew does not use question marks). The latter half of verse 3 has neither, which is why most scholars fall into translating the verse in the usual manner. But in the standard textbook on Hebrew grammar, Dr. Wilhelm Gesenius, a highly respected scholar, has stated:

A question need not necessarily be introduced by a special interrogative pro­noun or adverb…. So especially, when the interrogative clause is connected with a preceding sentence by וְ [a particle which is translated as and, but, or for, depending on context]…or when (as in some of the examples just given) it is negative….

One of his examples is Jonah 4:11. This verse is connected with the preceding sentence by the particle, it is negative and it is missing an interrogative pronoun. It could be translated, “’And I should not have compassion on Nineveh, the great city,’” but this translation conflicts with the context. God was obviously explaining to Jonah why he, God, should have compassion on Nineveh. This verse, therefore, must be translated as, “And should I not have compassion on Nineveh, the great city?’” Trans­lating verse 11 as a rhetorical question and not as a negative statement makes sense because the question better fits the context.

The latter half of Exod. 6:3 is also connected with the preceding sentence by the particle, it is also negative and it is also missing an interrogative pronoun or adverb. Translating it as a rhetorical question and not as a negative statement makes sense because the question better fits the context and eliminates the contra­diction.

Translating it as a rhetorical question and not as a negative statement also shifts the meaning of the sentence from denying the knowledge of God’s name in previous generations to emphasizing the importance of this name above that of his other name, El Shaddai. This emphasis is indicated in Genesis: Yahweh is used fre­quently, El Shaddai rarely. But, given the context of verse 3, why would God want to emphasize this name above the other? To answer that, we need to turn to the other problem text.

Posted in The Name of God | Leave a comment

Exalting Me

The second trend in today’s Christian worship music that I see is the increasing emphasis on me instead of on God. The worship songs may mention the names of God and Jesus, but the focus is on me and my feelings

Worship should be about God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. It should be about their great love for us and what they have done for us. It should be about their faithfulness to us. Instead, today’s Christian worship music is about me and how much I love God and what I am going to do for him. It is about my faithfulness to love him and to praise him for the rest of my days. It is about me and my feelings.

For example, the song, “I Love Your Presence,” has this line in it:

I can feel you near, God.
I believe, I believe.

It implies that I believe because I can feel him near. What happens when I don’t feel him near, which is the vast majority of the time? Do I stop believing? The song implies that our belief is based on our feelings, rather than on truth.

For the truth is our feelings are not a sure foundation upon which to build our faith. Our feelings change from day to day, even from minute to minute. If we build our faith upon our feelings, then our faith wavers when the “good” feelings disappear.

The Church has always taught that our faith is based on truth. The truth is that God is always near, even when we don’t feel his presence. He always loves us, even when we feel that he does not. He is always faithful, even when we feel that he has let us down. But today’s Christian worship music assumes that our relationship with God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is based on our feelings rather than on truth.

The song, “You Know Me,” says “Wherever I go, you find me.” That sounds so spiritual and so Biblical because the Bible does say “I will never leave you or forsake you” (Heb. 13:5). But the line actually reverses what Jesus himself said: “If anyone serves Me, let him follow Me; and where I am, there My servant will be also” (John 12:26). God is not our servant. We should not decide where we are going next, expecting God to follow us. We are called to be the servants of Jesus Christ. He decides where he is going next, and we are expected to willingly follow him. The song ignores the truth because it is really exalting me instead of God.

But that this song exalts me should come as no surprise when you learn from where this song came. It was written in 2011 by Steffany Gretzinger and William Matthews, both of whom were worship leaders at Bill Johnson’s Bethel Church at the time. My pastor once pointed out with great insight that the Word of Faith theology is an error unto itself, but it also tends to lead people further and further away from the truth. The Word of Faith theology ends up putting us in charge. We decide if we should be wealthy and we decide if we should be made well and we end up commanding God to give those things to us. God is not in control; we are. And in fact, that is precisely what Bill Johnson teaches his congregation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB1BGhvCij4). That is why his worship leaders wrote a song that pictures God following us instead of us following God.

At the same time that today’s Christian worship music teaches us that we can control our circumstances, it also teaches us that we can’t control ourselves and even that we shouldn’t want to control ourselves. The song, “Set a Fire,” was written by Will Reagan, the same person who wrote “Break Every Chain.”  The chorus says:

So set a fire down in my soul,
That I can’t contain, that I can’t control.

But this request is contrary to what the Word teaches. The fruit of the Spirit includes self-control (Gal. 5:22-23). The Word tells us repeatedly to “be sober” (I Thess. 5:6, 8; Titus 2:2, 6; 1 Pet. 1:13, 5:8). The Word says that “the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor. 14:32). The idea of losing control is a pagan idea. Satan wants us to lose control because it opens us up to demonic suggestions and can cause us to sin.

The teaching that we should lose self-control is appealing because it releases us from all responsibility for our actions. If we end up doing something wrong, well, it’s not our fault; we lost control. And yet, if we lose control and end up doing something “spiritual,” we still want the credit for it. Somehow we believe that we are better people if we love someone because we couldn’t help it, rather than choosing to love. We believe that we are more spiritual if we couldn’t help but do what is right, rather than choosing to do what is right. The Word never teaches us to lose self-control. It teaches that we are to be in full control of our faculties so that we can choose to submit them in obedience to God.

Years ago, my worship leader sang a song (I do not remember the title) in which we asked the Lord Jesus and the Holy Spirit to come fill this place and be with us. Then he prayed, “Lord Jesus, we do ask you to come fill this place.” He paused because it suddenly occurred to him what he had just requested. Then he went on: “But in fact you are already here because you said that if two or three are gathered in your name, you will be there.” This perfectly illustrates my point. So often today’s Christian worship music proclaims error because it is based on our thoughts and our feelings and our desires and, dare I say, our lusts. But the Word proclaims the truth. Our worship songs, like our teaching, should be based on the truth. Any worship song that is not is simply not worth singing.

Posted in Christian Worship, No Small Dissension | Leave a comment