Conversations

     Conversations.  Communication.  Exchanges.  Discussions.  Are they valuable?  Most would say yes.  I would say generally...but it depends on what we're talking about, and where we go from there.  A discussion is only as good as where it gets you.  Discussion for discussion's sake is pretty useless if it doesn't lead to answers.  

     I have noticed more and more people talking about being part of the conversation, as if there is a worldwide discussion happening, and they want in on it.  I have heard people say that Christianity is "part of the conversation."  I'm not sure how this sets with me.

     I recently read an article about a "progressive" church in Tennessee that stated that they don't believe the Bible is inspired, or even God's word.  The pastor was quoted as saying the Bible is a "product of community" (whatever that means!), and that when fundamentalists (like myself!) say it is infallible, it is putting pressure on it that it can't live up to.  He accuses fundamentalists of making an idol of the Bible.  Now that is a weird concept!  He said he partly made these bold claims because he wants to "start the conversation." He says that these topics are taboo to fundamentalists because we are afraid of what we'll discover if we really try to talk about it.  

 

     Well...here is my response to that.  Is this man really opening up the floor for people of dissenting views to express their thoughts, or is he just trying to make it clear where he stands?  I believe he has built a strawman--an imagined enemy that he can defeat.  I will expound on this, point by point:

     Point 1: The Bible is a "product of community."  The article didn't expound further on what was meant by this, but the Bible itself tells us what kind of book it is.  Second Peter 1:21 says, For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.  The Bible was written by godly, or "holy" men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.  According to this verse, they didn't impose their own opinions onto it.  They didn't push their own agenda.  They said exactly what the Holy Spirit told them to say.  Second Timothy 3:16 tells us, All scripture is inspired by God... The Bible is a bold book, claiming to be God's word.  Jesus is a bold Savior, claiming to be the Only way to salvation (John 14:6).  The Bible and Jesus go together!  If the Bible were of human origin (as this progressive pastor claims), yet clearly claimed to be God's word (which we have seen it does), it should be thrown out as a total lie.  Some very basic proofs of the Bible being the word of God are archeology (many artifacts support the claims of scripture), fulfilled prophecies, and the words of scripture themselves.  For example, if the Bible was of human origin, it would probably make mankind look a little bit better off than inherently sinful, redeemable through faith in an outside Savior.  Our human pride wouldn't let us come up with that.  No other religion's sacred text has a faith-based salvation, apart from works.  Also, continuing along those lines, the writers of the Bible share their own shortcomings (for just a few examples, Moses describes his own sins in Exodus 4 and Numbers 20, Jonah shares his disobedience and selfishness in the book of Jonah, David relives his sin and need of forgiveness in Psalm 32 and 51, and the Apostle Paul states his own regrets about his life in Philippians 3).  Again, this goes against human tendencies.  God clearly led them to write as they did.  Also, the Bible doesn't contradict itself.  It was written over a period of about 1500 years, and had approximately 40 God-inspired human authors.  Try to get forty people to agree on anything!   Yet God's word never contradicts itself.  There are a few places where the Bible appears to have contradictions.  An example is that, Matthew's and Mark's accounts of the Mount of Transfiguration state the event to have taken six days after Peter confessing Christ, the previous event mentioned, while Luke's gospel says it was eight days after.  This does look like a small error, and there are other small things like this a few places in the Bible, but upon closer study into the original languages, these differences are a result of the English language, not the truth contained therein.  Also, these few seeming discrepancies are technical things, never theological truths.  All this to say, if the Bible were a "product of community" as this progressive pastor says, it would not have come out the way it did.  People would never have agreed enough to make it happen, and their own inclination would have created a very different message.    

    Point 2: The Bible can't live up to expectations of it being infallible.  In saying this, that pastor also said that it can't live up to modern standards, but God has said, For I am the Lord, I change not... (Malachi 3:6).  Hebrews 13:8 says Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.  Sounds to me like God had that covered.  God doesn't have to live up to modern standards...modern standards would do well to align with the Bible.   If you were to say that I'm perfect, I would not be able to live up to that, because I'm not perfect.  Sooner or later, I would sin, or make a mistake of some kind, and everyone watching would know that I'm not perfect after all.  I can't live up to that.  But can the Bible?  Yes!  The Bible contains no mistakes.  It is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and for instruction in righteousness.  (Second Timothy 3:16b).  The Bible itself tells us how to use it.  It also tells us For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.  It is more than infallible (though it is that).  It is powerful!  I have shared in the last point all the things that make the Bible reliable, and are indicative of its infallibility.  

     Point 3: Fundamental Christians make an idol out of the Bible.  This was a very odd concept for me, but I'll try to go into this.  The Bible is God's true word, how He has chosen to reveal Himself to us.  Once we have embraced the truth it teaches us about ourselves and the salvation offered, we are endwelt by the Holy Spirit, who illuminates the Bible to us, further confirming the truth of God's word. We continue our relationship with the Lord, being led by the Spirit, experiencing Him working in our lives.  The Bible is God's word to us, but it isn't God.  It is how we know the truth of what God has said, so our relationship with God is entirely based on it.  If we remove the Bible from the equation, we remove everything we know about God.  Imagine you have a best friend who lives far away and writes you a letter.  Is that letter your friend?  Of course not!  It is a message from the heart of your friend, but the letter itself isn't your friend.  On the flip side, you can't disregard that letter and say that it isn't really from your friend, or really true.  If you did that, what would be the basis of hearing from your friend?  How do you know this person really is your friend if you no longer value the correspondence they sent?  There is a correct balance in the way we view the Bible.  We view it as God's true word, and the basis for our faith.  We don't worship it, but we worship the God revealed in it.  

     Point 4: Certain subjects are taboo to fundamentalists because they fear the answers.  This is where he builds a major strawman.  I don't know about you, but I am not afraid to search out the truth, even if it means changing my mind at times.  The question is where we go for our source of these answers.  There is no real issue the Bible doesn't address the heart of.  When these progressive types talk about the "tough questions" they are really referring to the biblical answers they dislike, and are looking for a loophole, or another source for answers.  Today more than ever, evangelical churches are addressing the issues being discussed out in the world.  We want to have a biblical response for those who come through our doors.  I don't know of any subject that is "taboo" in my church.  I know that as human beings, we might become uncomfortable with certain topics, but I have not seen that stop Bible-teaching churches from addressing important subjects.  We have studied the Bible on these things and come up with the answers God has given.  These progressives don't like that, so they say we have made these things taboo to discuss, and are afraid.  Logic is on our side, and they can only resort to insults, and rewriting the narrative.  

     I get deeply concerned by progressive Christianity.  The words Progressive Christian are oxymoronic.  If you let go of the absolute truth of the Bible, what do you have left?  Why even be Christian at all if there is no basis for it?  I have a much greater respect for those who follow other beliefs entirely than those who claim to believe some semblance of the truth, but then discard much of it.  It's like trusting someone who lies a lot.  How do you know when they're actually telling the truth?  What if we can't agree about which parts to discard and which parts to keep?  This progressive pastor says that certain things in the Bible can't be God's word because they go against the character of God.  How would he know what the character of God is if he isn't trusting God's revealed word? If the verses in the Bible aren't all God's word, how would he know he's choosing the "right" verses to say what God's character is?  Is his view of God just what he thinks God should be?  Trying to be a progressive Christian is problematic.  Hebrews 6:19 says, We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure.  The truth is meant to be an anchor.  Anchors aren't progressive.  They don't move along with the currents.  They hold fast.  That is how our faith should be.  

     Worth noting about this progressive church that made these claims: they started in 2003 as an evangelical church.  In 2015, they chose to change their theology to progressive Christianity.  They lost half of their congregation, and as a result, were unable to remain in their building.  They are in a smaller building now.  The one issue that made them decide to change their entire belief system, including whether or not the Bible is God's word, was their desire to include the LGBT (etc.) community.  Another strawman they stated was that evangelicals won't allow this group of people into their churches.  I don't know any evangelical churches that would refuse to allow homosexuals or those struggling with their identity to come in and worship with them.  They would be just as welcome as anyone to come in, sit down, and hear the word of God.  This also extends to the person who cheats on his taxes, the heterosexual couple living in sin, the person who struggles with unforgiveness or gossip...or anyone else.  Like all these others, the LGBT person would be faced with the fact that what they are doing is not in accordance with God's plans for them, and be challenged to change, with the Lord's help.  No one gets a free pass.  We are all called to deny ourselves, take up our crosses daily, and follow Jesus.  No one's sin is "okay."  Evangelical churches won't indulge anyone's pet sin.  They are usually loving, simply not affirming, of that lifestyle as being of God.  People indulging any sort of sin--whether it has anything to do with their sexuality or not--should expect to hear the Bible preached, and light shed on what God has said about it.  These people, if unwilling to agree with God, would most likely not be allowed to be an active member of such a church.  In contrast to evangelical protocol, this progressive church doesn't want to challenge people to let the Lord change them, and make them into who He has said they are in Him.  That is very sad.  God could very rightly accuse them of holding back progress!  Also, is it fair for them to preach against things like gossip, complaining, hatred, but affirm the sin of homosexual practice?  How is that fair to the person struggling with hatred?  Their sin is a problem, but the next person's sin is okay?  What did these LGBT folks do to get this free pass on their sin?  How can I get one?  I don't want to hear my sin preached against either!  

     One more thing I will add about churches affirming LGBT folks, but not other sinners.  Our society has convinced everyone that you ARE your sexual orientation.  You aren't a real person besides that, so if you reject someone's sexual behavior, the world is programmed to think you are rejecting that person.  In reality, you are NOT your sex life.  You are NOT your habits.  You are a human being, created by God, sinful, but redeemable through faith in Jesus.  With His help, and by His grace, you can live a victorious Christian life.  He can give you greater joy than your current lifestyle gives you.  This truth isn't being proclaimed.  These progressive churches are leaving people enslaved, withholding the victory Christ promises.  

     Some people accuse Christians of thinking all other people are wrong while we are right.  They say this as if it is only Christians who have firm beliefs.  The truth is, every belief is held at the expense of opposing beliefs.  Belief that George Washington was the first President of the United States precludes the belief that John Adams was the first President (he was actually the second!).  You can't believe both.  It might sound kind and inclusive to vaguely say that all faiths are really right in some way, but that is logically fallacious.  My friend Garry told me that, as a Christian, he was accused of being brainwashed.  At first that hurt his feelings, but after he thought about it, he realized it was true.  His brain (as well as the rest of him) was washed in the Blood of the Lamb!  

     So, is the world having some big conversation that Christianity is one small part of?  I don't really know what the world is doing, but I do know that Christians are to be ready always to give an answer to every man who asketh you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear. (First Peter 3:15).  We are to be ready to share the gospel at a moment's notice, and not worry about what to say, because the Holy Spirit will give us the right words when the time comes (Matthew 10:19).  The only conversations I want to have are those that honor the Lord, not that affirm other beliefs as being equal to the Truth!  

Smokescreens

     Issues in life are bound to come up, and Christian ministry is no exception.  How we deal with these issues is often more important than avoiding the issues.  It is through resolving problems that we grow and mature.  Of course, there are some people who don't want problems to be solved or dealt with.  Sometimes, their motive is laziness.  Other times, it is feelings of insecurity in one's ability to solve it.  Still other times, sadly, it is about power.  When you are working toward resolution by addressing a legitimate issue and you get one of the following responses, you are getting a smokescreen.  What is a smokescreen?  There are two definitions.  The first is a literal definition:  A cloud of smoke created to conceal military operations.  Very telling, isn't it?  The second definition (the one you will run into) is more of an idiom: a ruse designed to disguise someone's real intentions or activities.  The following are a list of smokescreens people in leadership (particularly in ministry) sometimes give when faced with concerns.  

     Before I move on, I want to make one point.  Not every complaint leaders get is legitimate.  There are people who find problems where none exist.  Sometimes, people are being critical and trying to make trouble.  For this post, I am assuming that you are a faithful worker in the situation, going to your authority with honest, heart-felt concerns.  Your leader may or may not agree with your concern or point of view, but a good leader should still consider genuine concerns their subordinates bring up, not just try to shut them up.  Even if a leader doesn't agree with the concern, he shouldn't be dismissive.  He should prayerfully consider it.  If you get any of these responses from anyone--boss, pastor, congressman, whatever, you are receiving a smokescreen and should find more help for the situation.  

"You're the only one who feels this way."

     That is a trick to try to invalidate you and make you feel like you're not with the program.  Are you really the only one who feels that way?  Probably not.  Often, leaders will follow this up by admonishing you not to gossip about your concern.  While I would never condone actual gossip, I would encourage you to find someone you trust who agrees with you and then go back to the authority figure.  This isn't gossip.  This is biblical.  In Matthew 18:15-16, Jesus tells us, Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother, But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed.  This passage tells us a few things.  You first go to the person in private, and if they won't hear you, you involve a few others.  Something else worth pointing out is the first part.  It says that if a brother sins, you are to then go through this process.  Before you address something, consider this: is this person my brother or sister in Christ?  You might be in a secular situation, and that makes it no less important to be respectful and follow proper protocol, but particularly if this person is a Christian, this is vital.  The next point is that the person has sinned.  Sin has happened.  You're not just making idle complaints.  Not everything is clear-cut.  Maybe the concern you have is that something sinful could result from the situation, but isn't happening yet.  If it is serious, go ahead and share your concern, and follow the biblical procession given in this passage.   Some believers truly do have the gift of discernment (First Corinthians 12:10), and can sense that something isn't right, even when it isn't apparent to others (these people usually aren't very popular, speaking from experience).  Maybe God has given you insight into the situation before any sin becomes obvious.  Commit it to prayer, and then, if you still believe the Lord wants you to address it, follow the biblical pattern. 

     I will say this.  If something is just a preference or something you feel uncomfortable with for yourself (such as the type of music they're playing or something along those lines), you could still informally talk to your authority figure about your thoughts on it, and if he doesn't take it seriously, you can conclude that either God wants to stretch you out of your comfort zone, or that it's time for you to move on from this particular ministry.  You know what you can and can't live with, and you also know when the Lord is working in your life.  You have to make that choice. 

"You're trying to cause disunity!"  

     This is a blatant smokescreen.  If you were trying to cause disunity, you would be out talking to everyone about it and stirring up trouble, not respectfully broaching the subject to the authority figure.  The authority figure should be grateful you are being so conscientious and humble in how you are handling it.   Also, unity is important, but not at the expense of truth.  Jesus said that the truth, not unity, would set us free (John 8:32).  Recognizing the fact that some people would follow Him and others would not, He warned in Matthew 10:34 that He didn't come to bring peace, but a sword.  He would rather have us follow Him than have "unity" with those who don't.  Unity is only as good as what we are unified under.  Leaders who call for unity at all cost should be very carefully scrutinized.  Ephesians 2:14 tells us that our salvation breaks down the "wall of hostility" between different people, making us one in Christ.  Our unity is in our common faith in Jesus, not about agreeing with a human leader's decisions.  Nowhere are we commanded to agree about everything.  Disunity can even serve God's purpose, such as in Acts 15:36-41, where the Apostle Paul and Barnabas had a "sharp disagreement" and went separate ways, thus expanding the ministry and those who were being saved.  If you are accused of causing disunity by simply expressing a concern, I would politely assure this authority figure that you are not, and that you care deeply about the ministry/business/whatever, and that you have prayed a lot before coming to him.  Explain why you are concerned, and what you foresee if things continue.  Ask him if he can offer a solution for your concern.  Be very polite in all you say, showing utmost respect.  However, do not let him make you feel bad, or question yourself.  If he truly won't hear you, I'd follow the steps in the previous section, and bring someone else along.  

"You need to examine your own life before you criticize." or  "Take the plank out of your own eye!"

     Is there a place for self-examination?  Yes!  But this is not the time for that.  In this context, it is a smokescreen.  The implication is that, if you have faults, you have no right to complain--ever--about anything.  This is not true.  If this logic were applied on a wide-scale, that would mean police officers couldn't arrest dangerous criminals, because they aren't perfect either.  This would keep the police--sworn protectors--from being able to protect people, and would give the dangerous criminals the green light to harm us all.  That is sadly what happens sometimes in ministry or other settings in these situations.  The idea that no one can bring concerns to the authority figure's attention unless they are perfect is downright ridiculous.  We all have faults, and we are still called to speak out when things are wrong.  Ephesians 4:15 says to speak the truth in love, and I would assume you are doing that in respectfully bringing up your concern.  We all need to examine our lives before the Lord (First Corinthians 10:12), but that isn't the point here.  I once had a concern in ministry.  I shared it with my superior, and was completely shut down.  I was told I was prideful and that I needed to love my neighbor more.  My character was attacked.  Was this leader correct?  Am I prideful?  Do I need to love my neighbor more?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  But that had nothing to do with the issue at hand.  A leader making it all about the person raising the concern instead of the actual issue is someone creating a smokescreen to avoid dealing with the real problem.  There is no excuse to attack someone.  They may try to make you feel as if you're attacking others with your concern, but you aren't.  Don't let yourself be manipulated.  You are not attacking.  The leader is attacking you.  If a leader tries to bring up your sins (or supposed sins), politely say, "You  may be right.  I'll talk to the Lord about that.  But as for my concern, what are we going to do about it?"  Keep asking until they give you an answer.  They might not, and if it isn't going anywhere at all, you might excuse yourself and ask for another meeting, possibly bringing another person who shares the concern.  

"You're passing judgment"

     This is the biggest trick of this century.  I confess that at times, I have wished Jesus hadn't stated His words in Matthew 7:1, Judge not, lest you be judged.  But He did, even knowing how people would abuse and misuse it, so it was obviously important.  I would never remove God's word, but I have had a hard time with the way people who give no regard to anything else Jesus said seem to quote this one.  It is used to mean, "Don't you dare disagree with me or call me to any sort of account," when that was never the intent.  This verse means not to draw conclusions without having all the facts, and not to have a critical spirit.  However, He was not saying we're not allowed to disagree.  In fact, if something isn't biblical, we are supposed to judge, but to judge rightly.  John 7:24 says to judge with righteous judgment.  I like the way the New Living Translation puts it: Look beneath the surface so you can judge correctly.  Second Timothy 2:15 says, Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.  Dividing the word of truth means to know God's word, and call out false teachings that go against the Bible.  Again, like the last smokescreen we looked at, this is the leader drawing attention away from the real concern and placing it on the person mentioning it by accusing him of being judgmental.  I have allowed leaders to do this to me in the past, and I felt ashamed.  God doesn't want His children to be ashamed, especially when we're trying to do right.  Romans 10:11 says, Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.  We could possibly be mistaken, but a good leader will take what we say into consideration, rather than turn the tables on us.  If this happens, you guessed it, persist in your concern, possibly calling for another meeting with this leader, brining another person with you.

SOME HELPFUL PHRASES FOR YOU:

I and me statements, not you or we.  Talking in the first person will make your leader feel less attacked or accused.  Saying, "I am seeing some problems with_________" rather than "You didn't do anything about_______________" will go a long way in retaining your leader's respect.  

Help me understand________.  If your concern is minimized, or the leader uses some of these smokescreens, ask him to help you understand his thoughts and concerns in this.  This will make him feel respected and validated, and possibly get the conversation on a more valid footing.  It might force him to think through his own reasoning.  If he is throwing out smokescreens, he probably isn't thinking that deeply about it.  This might help with that.  And who knows, maybe he will be able to help you see his perspective and change your own.  

Nevertheless.  A wise pastor I worked with for several years taught me this one.  It is a tool used to get the conversation back on the real issue.  You first acknowledge what the person has said, then tell them, "nevertheless..." and bring it back to the real concern.  You might say, "You're right, I can be prideful sometimes.  Nevertheless, there is a concern here."  Every time they try to switch it back to a smokescreen, acknowledge truth in their statement, but then say, "nevertheless..."

Your feelings matter, my feelings matter.  If things become heated, assure the leader that their feelings matter, but so do yours, and that you should be able to examine both of your concerns.  This is a wake-up call to them that they are attacking a human being with legitimate feelings.  It lets them know you care about them, but that you matter too.  

In Conclusion

     There are some leaders who will never hear their people out, no matter how respectfully they are approached.  There are a lot of reasons for this.  It says everything about them and nothing about you or your concern.  Before the Lord, you may need to draw some conclusions about what you should do from there.  Perhaps it's time to leave.  Or maybe there is someone else you can share your concern with.  My goal in this post was to help you realistically detect smokescreens leaders (or other people) might throw at you, and give some biblical perspective.  Don't let anyone tear you down.  You were worth the life of Jesus!  

The Finished Work of Christ

     The longer I live and talk with people, the more I see how incorrectly we view God's grace.  Yesterday, I read an article on GodVine.  The "grabber" for this article was a post that broached the question of eternal security.  I am set in my beliefs about this, but was curious as to what the article would say, so I took the bait and started reading.  

     I didn't even get to the part about eternal security before I read some false teaching.  The article started by saying that we receive salvation when we are baptized.  Whoa!  They took this as a given, and didn't use any sort of scripture to back up their position that being physically dunked in water saves a person.  Baptism is important, as an act of obedience after we are saved.  If it were part of salvation, though, Paul would have said so in Romans, where he goes to great lengths to build the case for our sin, God's solution, and how we receive this salvation He offers.  All through the epistles, we are told that salvation is by grace through faith.  Baptism isn't even part of the discussion.  There is evidence of people's salvation in the book of Acts prior to their Baptism.  For example, in Acts 9, Ananias refers to Saul as "brother Saul" prior to his baptism, indicating he is already saved.  When Peter shares the gospel with Cornelius in Acts 10, Cornelius' family believed and had evidence of the Holy Spirit prior to baptism.  And in First Corinthians 1:17, Paul actually says, For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel... thus indicating that baptism is separate from salvation.  The thief on the cross was never baptized, but he was saved by believing Jesus was who He claimed to be (Luke 23:39-43).  That is all that is required for salvation.  

     Anyway, I commented at the errors I found in the article, and also read other people's comments.  Not only did I get a few people reacting with misapplied scriptures against my statement that baptism is obedience, yet not salvation, but I also read people responding to the eternal security aspect, saying things like, "Yes, you can lose your salvation if you do something really bad, like beat your wife."  Or "Someone who does (insert sin) would surely lose their salvation."  This reveals that they are trusting in their works--the fact that they haven't beaten their wife or done whatever sin they mentioned.  They are scared of the idea of grace being used as license to sin, so they add legalism to the gospel.  They have to get their works-based licks in.  I truly believe we are unable to truly grasp how amazing God's grace is.  In our finite, human minds, we attach so many things to it, when God offers it to us freely.  

     Let me make myself clear.  Wife-beating is not acceptable to God.  No sin is acceptable.  Sin is the cause of all the world's ills.  It separates humans from a righteous God (prior to salvation).  All sin cost Jesus His life.  It must be dealt with.  But Jesus defeated sin, and those who embrace this by faith receive forgiveness and salvation.  There isn't a certain sin listed in scripture that makes someone lose their salvation.  We aren't saved by good works, or by avoiding certain sins; therefore it stands to reason we don't lose that salvation when we fail.  If someone is actively living a sinful life, I would wonder if they were truly saved to begin with, but I can't know that.  A godly lifestyle should be the result of our salvation, but sometimes it isn't.  Ephesians 2:9 says our salvation is not a result of works so that no one may boast.  In the past, I falsely assumed certain people weren't saved, because of certain sins they committed, but later, I saw that they were saved, and that God was working in their hearts in ways I couldn't see.  I have resolved not to doubt someone's salvation based on outward behavior.  We can judge the works, but not their salvation. 

     As humans, we tend to categorize sins into misdemeanor and felony sins.  A little white lie is a misdemeanor, whereas being a drug-dealer or a wife-beater is a felony.  But God doesn't see it that way.  Sin is sin.  Some sins have a greater impact than others, but in terms of sin itself, it is equally wrong, and equally forgivable.  I believe that once-for-all-time forgiveness happens at salvation.  Once we are saved, there is no barrier between us and God.  When Jesus died, Matthew 27:51 tells us that the veil of the temple (which separated sinful men from the Holy of Holies--God's presence) was torn in half.  There is no more barrier.  I believe that even means sin in the believer's life no longer creates a barrier between us and God.  I know that sounds as if I'm saying grace is a free pass to sin, but I am not.  The Bible doesn't stand behind that idea.  Romans 6:1 begs the question, What shall we say?  Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? The Apostle Paul wanted to make it very clear that grace isn't license to do wrong.  He understands that the logic of grace might lead some to think sin is "okay" now, so he poses this question that some might have been thinking.  He answers the question in verse two, including giving the reason.  God forbid!  How shall we that are dead unto sin live any longer therein?  He was not defending sin.  He had simply built a case for God's grace.  He was now saying that grace doesn't entitle the recipients to do as they pleased.  They have a new nature.  Sin no longer has power over us.  In a sense, believers are "dead to sin."  Believers no longer get the pleasure out of sin that an unbeliever gets.  This verse seems to indicate that there should be changes in a believer's life after salvation, but they're not by our own self-effort.  Just like our salvation, it's God.  Philippians 2:13 says, For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases Him.

     Why do so many believers think that they have to add to the finished work of Christ?  When Jesus hung on that cross and cried It is finished, He meant it.  He is the one who calls you, and will keep you.  Philippians 1:6 says, He which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Christ Jesus.  Second Timothy 2:13 says, if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot disown himself.  We are still going to struggle with sin until we are in Heaven.  But that doesn't mean our salvation is in jeopardy.  First John 2:1 is such a wonderful reminder, But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father--Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.  Likewise, Romans 8:1 says that there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.  If you have been saved, that's talking about you!  Later on in the chapter, verses 38-39 tell us that nothing can separate us from the love of God.  With all of these passages that pin our salvation on the Lord, why are we still trying to put works into it?  Why do we think certain sins can take away what Jesus won for us?  I know people who aren't as severe as the comments I read, but they still say things like, "You'd have to go pretty far before you'd lose your salvation," as if to say it's unlikely but possible.  They are still putting it onto us, instead of on God, who is faithful when we are not.  

     Trust Jesus' words.  When He said It was finished, He meant it.  You are saved and forgiven...for all time!  What you do with your Christian life is up to you.  You can lose rewards ,but you can never lose your salvation!  It is finished.  

Double Decker?

     "Salvation," the camp preacher explained, "is like touching first base.  But God doesn't want you to just stand on first base the rest of your life.  He wants you to make it to second base--that is dedicating your life to the Lord's service--and third base--where you actually step out and serve the Lord.  When you get back to home plate, that's like God calling you home to Heaven one day.  You don't want to just spend your whole life in first base do you?"

    Did I?  No!  Of course not!  I was a serious-minded eleven-year-old, attending Bible camp.  I was very committed to my relationship with the Lord, and was starting to think more like a Christian young adult than a child.  When the altar call was given and the piano started playing, I went forward...to touch second base.

     For the rest of the week at camp, there were three kinds of people.  These were non-Christians (who had not yet made a decision for Christ), Christians (who had made a decision for Christ), and "second-base-Christians" (who were not only saved, but had decided to dedicate themselves to something further and greater).  Within Christianity at that camp, it was a double-decker situation.  I wanted to be top-tier.

     Oddly, in every other area of my life, I was just told that there were believers in Jesus, and those who didn't know Him.  I'd never before heard about this "second base" step.  Not at home, not at church, not in any of the Christian settings I was in.  Why had no one else ever told me about touching second base?  

     While I think that works well for an analogy, it breaks down.  I'm all for challenging Christians to be more serious about their faith.  We should be doing that.  But the way it was presented, it categorizes Christians into two levels, when God never does that in the Bible.  The Bible never talks about making this other decision that sets you apart from other believers.  It does talk about making daily choices in our lives, and about our commitment.  In Luke 9:23, Jesus tells us to take up our cross daily.  Not as some big experience at camp.  But as a daily choice, sometimes just in the quiet of our hearts.  First Corinthians 3:10-15 reminds us that there are Christian people who make the most of what God has given them, and spend more time earning treasures in Heaven, and others who will have nothing to show for their lives for the Lord.  But they are Christians nonetheless.  

     As a young woman, I got to know some friends outside of my denominational background.  Some of these friends believed that all Christians were supposed to have this "second work of grace" experience where they were "baptized in the Holy Spirit."  The evidence for having had this experience was that the person spoke in tongues.  To this day, I have never had such an experience myself.  I don't deny its reality in some people's lives, but it isn't something God has chosen for me in my relationship with Him.  My denominational background puts very little emphasis on it (people outside claim that we vehemently teach that it is no longer around for today, but that isn't true.  We just don't talk about it...and maybe we should).  I was completely affronted by this implication that I was on the lower tier of Christianity in their mind, simply because I hadn't had this second experience.  I studied my Bible extensively, and concluded that the Bible only talks about one experience of grace--salvation.  All other good things in life are also by God's grace, but they're not some new experience you're "supposed" to have sometime after salvation.  Maybe some people do have unique experiences like that, but there is nowhere in the Bible that says everyone is supposed to experience it, nor does it imply that those who have such experiences are at a higher level spiritually.  I was so ready to tell these friends how wrong they were...but then I realized my own version of this same problem.  Touching second base at camp was the non-Pentecostal version of the exact same thing.  This other decision to "dedicate" my life to the Lord.  Should Christians be dedicated?  Should Christians be open to the working of the Holy Spirit in their lives?  Yes and Yes!  But what matters is that we are saved, first of all, and then, that we are daily making those choices that honor Christ.  

     I believe every brand and shade of Christianity has it's own sense of what we should do, experience or witness after we are saved.  The problem is, that often puts the emphasis on what we do, what we experience, what we witness.  That can even make it about the flesh.  Galatians 3:3 asks the question, Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?  It might be easy to think, "I've really got it together.  I'm not only a Christian, but I've dedicated my life to the Lord, and I've had this second work of grace.  I'm so far ahead of so-and-so, who is just a measly Christian.  All he's done is put his faith in Christ.  I've gotten so far beyond just that."  Do you see how arrogant we can get?  And God never wants us to get over our wonder and glory of the cross!  Our very salvation is a miracle.  It is important to go back to the Bible.  What does God say?  We have a God who loves each of us, and has an individual relationship with every one of us.  What He does in your life may not happen in mine.  Maybe you never went to camp and touched second base!  Maybe I never had some of your meaningful experiences.  That's okay!  With the Bible and the Holy Spirit, we have everything we need!  Second Peter 1:3 tells us or His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness.  May we never get over the miracle of His grace in saving us in the first place!  And may we continue to make godly choices daily.  

White Lies?

      "I just can't bring myself to tell my congregation that they're eternally secure," the pastor told me.  "If I do that, they'll think it's okay to sin, and I just can't let them go through life thinking that.  It's better to scare them a little." 

     I was involved in a ministry with this particular church, and was very disappointed in his comment, but possibly not for the basic reason it might be suspected.  There are believers who believe scripture teaches that a Christian can fall from grace, as well as those (like myself) who believe that we are eternally secure in our salvation.  I have good friends who believe differently than I do on this, and we are able to have peaceful conversations, and maintain respect for each other.  

     The reason I believe in eternal security, or the "once saved, always saved" position, is because I believe scripture teaches it--not just as a doctrine (though certainly as that), but also as a pattern of how God has worked with His people throughout the Bible.  God is the author of our salvation.  He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4).  He started the work and will continue it (Philippians 1:6).  He loved us before we ever chose to love Him (First John 4:19).  He chose us--not the other way around (John 15:16).   Many verses tell us that we have everlasting life, or eternal life. If it's eternal, you can't lose it, or it wasn't eternal to begin with.  There are many other elements to my belief in this doctrine, but that isn't the focal point of this post.  If you want to chat more about this, let me know, and I'll write more about it.  You can check out some of my other posts on the subject as well.

     Is there biblical support for the idea of losing one's salvation?  I don't believe there is, and what little appears to be there doesn't fit with all the other scriptures that teach to the contrary.  However, to be fair, the scripture that appears to teach that a person can lose their salvation is Hebrews 6:4-6.  This passage talks about how it is impossible to restore someone who has fallen away after having "tasted of the heavenly gift, been partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted of the good word of God and the powers of the age to come."  That sounds like it's saying this type of person has lost their salvation.  I think this verse it talking about someone who was never saved, but was close to God's power at work.  Maybe they came close to a decision, but didn't make it, or maybe they hardened their heart against God.  Pharaoh in the book of Exodus might fit this.  He witnessed God's power, but hardened his heart, and there eventually came a point when God hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 9:12).  There is no evidence anyone in the Bible who had genuine salvation ever lost it.  In fact, we are told instead in Second Timothy 2:13, If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot disown Himself.  

     If someone tells me they believe we can lose our salvation based on those verses in Hebrews, I would disagree with their interpretation of those verses, but I would respect the integrity of how they arrived at that.  However, this pastor I mentioned at the beginning wasn't using any scriptures at all to support his teaching.  He was saying that he teaches against eternal security because his people might think sin is okay.  That would put it in the category of a white lie.  Denying true doctrine to protect another teaching.  It is never right to withhold correct doctrine from people.  Worrying they might misuse it is no excuse.  The truth is the truth.  And if they think they remain saved because they're avoiding sin in their lives, then it's a works-based salvation anyway.  We are saved by His grace, and we are kept by His grace.  No one who has the Holy Spirit in them gets pleasure out of sin the way an unbeliever does.  Romans 6:1 says, What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?  God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?  As believers, we have a new nature, new desires.  We are dead to sin.  God is at work in us to make us more like Jesus.  Believing that God keeps us should motivate us toward wanting to please Him.  If someone has the attitude of, "I can do whatever I want, because I'm saved and God can't send me to hell now," I would question their heart.  The truth is, I have never met anyone who said this.  In my entire life, I have always attended churches that believed we are eternally secure, and I have never been taught or led to think that sin is okay.  I think this pastor's fear is unfounded. 

     On the other hand, I have known those who believe we are secure use more of a "front door" approach to cause doubt.  If someone isn't living a good Christian testimony, they might raise the question, "Is this person really saved?  He probably didn't really understand or mean it."  They might say it is impossible to lose their salvation, but they almost make it almost impossible to get that salvation in the first place!  Why?  They don't want people to take sin lightly or think it is "okay."  The motive is the exact same as the person who thinks someone lost it.  

     As we can see, believers from all theological positions have a fear of letting people think they have license to sin.  In reality, how we act has nothing to do with our salvation.  It's not what we do.  It's not what we don't do.  It's what's already been done by Jesus.  When He said "It is finished," He meant it.  Salvation is available for all who believe (Romans 1:16).  We are saved because of what we believe, not what we do.  It is the gift of God!  Not a result of works so that no one may boast.  (Ephesians 2:9).  Making it about works or behavior (whether we doubt they were ever saved, or whether we think they lost it), reveals that we are operating under a works-based mentality, instead of the free grace God offers us!  We carry a burden God never intended.  Jesus' burden is easy and light (Matthew 11:30).  The prodigal son (Luke 15) and the woman at the well (John 4) were both examples of people who received forgiveness by faith, not actions.  Neither of these people said, "Here's all the good stuff I intend to do," or "Here's a list of all the things I'm going to change."  They were forgiven because they received it by faith.  We are not told of their works after they received it.  

     In all of this, is sin acceptable?  Does grace mean we let sin go?  No.  Picture this scenario.  A man keeps breaking into people's homes every night and stealing from them.  Is it showing grace to just let him keep doing this?  Not at all!  It's allowing him to harm other people, as well as himself.  We all need to be held accountable.  It isn't grace to just ignore sin.  It just means that sin isn't related to our salvation.  I have felt very unsafe at times when people wanted to extend "grace" to the person who was harming me by ignoring it and allowing their sin to continue.  This was a misuse of grace.  Grace doesn't say sin is okay.  Grace says sin is forgiven, and then enables the sinner to have victory over it.  Grace doesn't free us to sin.  It frees us from the power of sin!  You technically never have to sin again once you are saved (but we do, because we have a sin nature).  

    The pastor I mentioned at the beginning had good intentions to worry his congregation would indulge sin.  As someone who wanted to see them growing in holiness, he had a genuine concern.  However, unless he believed scripture teaches that we are not eternally secure, he was telling his people little white lies.  Avoiding certain truths because of how they might be used or misused isn't a reason to avoid teaching them.  Remember what Jesus said, the truth will set you free.