COGWA on the Resurrection: That's Nice, Now What?

It's almost Easter, which means it's time for the Churches of God to wax eloquent on the sign of Jonah and chocolate rabbits; while making only passing mention of the greatest miracle in the history of the world.

I'm used to it. I cheered it on for years from the sidelines. Now I cringe, but still, I expect it. It takes a lot to shock me. But something I read in COGWA's latest issue of Discern stopped me dead in my tracks:

“Drive down a church-filled road on Easter Sunday, and you'll encounter the literary equivalent of a broken record: He is risen! He is risen! He is risen! He is risen! He is risen!” COGWA writer Jeremy Lallier laments on page 14 of Discern magazine's March/April edition. 

“It's meant to be encouraging, but seeing sign after sign bearing the same emphatic declaration instead leaves me with a single nagging question: Now what? Yes, He is risen, but now what?”

Lallier continues, in his article titled “He is Risen, NOW WHAT?”: 

“Christ died to pay the penalty for our sins, but now what? Where do we go from here? What do we need to be doing?”

Let me digress from my shock over the seemingly flip words COGWA saw fit for its flagship publication to bring you the following message: Guys, when are you guys going to stop pretending that no one besides you knows that Romans 6 is in the Bible?

I could spend the rest of this post citing the same passages as Mr. Lallier to prove I know they exist, but what would be the point? Either you believe me when I say many churches outside the COGs teach about sin, repentance and obedience; or you don't. Yes, some mainstream Christian churches are soft on sin. There are some where “repentance” is a dirty word. But that isn't all of them, it isn't even most of them, and it isn't mine. The standard COG claim that all “so-called Christian” pastors are spineless about sin is just plain silly.  Even total skeptics must admit that the stereotype of the“hellfire and brimstone preacher” had to come from somewhere.

But really, complaints like “now what?” and “Easter doesn't tell the whole story” are just distractions from the real issue. I could just as easily point to an individual Holy Day in a vacuum and complain that it doesn't give a full picture of salvation. We've dealt with the problematic Easter narrative handed to us by Herbert Armstrong and Alexander Hislop many times. Today, let's set aside the hot-button "E-word" and instead talk about something more relevant, like the resurrection.

The deeper issue is this: discussing Jesus Christ and His resurrection really aren't a high priority for COGWA. Or for the other, competing WCG splinters that share its theology. Anyone who professes faith in Christ; yet can respond to the resurrection with "now what" in any manner other than Acts 2:37 brokenness and humility, fails to fully grasp the significance of Christ's sacrifice and what it accomplished. We're talking about the biggest miracle ever, the proof that Christ WAS the Savior and not a madman, the reason for us to have any hope in this life. It's not exactly an occasion to be snarky.

Sure, COGWA and its sister splinters pay lip service. They say the right words when people like me press them on the issue. But, really, Jesus Christ is a footnote; His resurrection is simply one checkpoint along “God's plan of salvation.” And not a very big one, either. After all, if God had wanted us to celebrate Christ's resurrection, He would have made it happen on a Holy Day! I mean, He even had two feast days to choose from that very week! 

As COGWA states in the very same magazine issue, on page 29, “It's all about the Father.” That's pretty obvious. We've seen COGWA's Encourage, Equip and Inspire parenting manual. Jesus didn't even make the short list of biblical characters whose life lessons are lifted up as examples in its "People of the Bible" section. Christ got an honorable mention in the lesson that discussed Simeon in the temple, but apparently didn't merit His own section when compared to people like Abraham, Abigail and Timothy.

According to the COGs, Jesus Christ was the second being - both in number and importance – in the God family; which will become a divine polytheistic oligarchy at His return.

Furthermore, Jesus had to qualify during his time on earth for reinstatement to this soon-to-be Pantheon. Your own founder, the one who created your theology and shaped your religious environment, stated that church members would essentially become co-Saviors with Christ in the Kingdom. COGWA, you claim that “the entire Bible leads us to the Father.” Is it any wonder that the resurrection is a blip on your radar screen?

Dear reader, the entire Bible doesn't point only to the Father, as the latest issue of Discern states on page 29. Don't swallow this dangerous lie. The Bible primarily points to the Savior and man's need for Him. It is intended to convict you of your sin and point you to the only possible solution. Over and over, we see themes of sin, desperation, sacrifice and deliverance. Noah and the Ark. Abraham and Isaac. The blood of the Passover lamb on the doorposts. The Sabbath. The Holy Days. The Serpent on the post stopping the plague. Blood sacrifices in the temple. The Holy of Holies. Ruth and Boaz. The Suffering Servant of Isaiah. Paul, Stephen, Peter and even Jesus Himself showed how the Old Testament pointed to Him:

(Luke 24:25-27) Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory? And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.”

That's the whole point of the As Bereans Did blog. To help people who have been trapped in Herbert Armstrong's web of false doctrines to untangle the scriptures and learn the truth:

(Acts 17:11) These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.”

So, like the believers at Berea, let's reason from the scriptures to see what they reveal  about the Christ (Acts 17:2-3):

(Genesis 1:1) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

(John 1:1-3) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” The whole world was made through the preincarnate Christ.

(Colossians 1:16) For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.”

(Genesis 3:15) And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” This is considered the first Messianic prophecy in the Bible.

(John 1:45) Philip found Nathaniel and said to him, “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote – Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” The law and prophets pointed to Christ.

(Luke 4:16-21) So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” Then He closed the book and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” Christ explained that these scriptures were fulfilled in Him.

(Luke 24:44) Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning me.” And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. The Law and Prophets pointed to and were fulfilled by the Christ.

(Romans 10:17, ESV) So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. The NKJV renders the last word of this verse God, but in the Greek it is clearly "Christou." Faith - which is what saves us - comes through hearing the words, the teachings, of Jesus. 

(Revelation 17:14) They will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kinds; and those who are with Him are called chosen and faithful. Jesus Christ is King of King and Lord of Lords.

(1 Timothy 6:13-15) I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, which He will display at the proper time - He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords..." This same King of Kings and Lord of Lords is the ONLY SOVEREIGN.

(Revelation 22:12-13) And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the End, the First and the Last. Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end.

This is clearly Jesus speaking in Revelation 22. He is the Alpha and Omega. The same Jesus being worshiped in the center of heaven before His return in the following verse:

(Revelation 5:11-14) Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing!” And every creature which is in heaven and on earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: “Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!” Jesus is the Lamb and He is to be worshiped, praised and glorified. 

I suppose, in a roundabout way, God's plan for salvation is the story. But only because Jesus is – and always was – God's plan for salvation. The risen Christ is not half the story, as COGWA suggests. No, Mr. Lallier, we are not the other half of the story. Not by a longshot. No, returning to Sinai Covenant law is not the other half of the story. Jesus didn't suffer and die to initiate the better New Covenant in His blood so that we could cling to practices from the inferior covenant (and hopefully perform them well enough that God will let us into the Kingdom). We dishonor God and cheapen Christ's sacrifice when we claim that we can use the filthy rags of our deeds to cleanse the sinful stains from our hearts.

The story is all about Him. We are blessed to even be the clay in the potter's hand; to be instruments He can use for His glory. We have been set free from sin, and now live our lives as servants of righteousness (Romans 6:18). We do good works, but only because we are His workmanship, created and equipped by Him to do them (Ephesians 2:8-10).

So, He is risen. Now what?

• Now we can be reconciled to God through Christ rather than our deeds (2 Corinthians 5:18-19).

• Now God can call hard-hearted sinners like us (Romans 5:10) to Himself (John 6:44).

• Now God can grant us salvation when we place our faith in His promise to save us through the sacrifice of His Son (John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10)

• Now God can regenerate our hard, darkened hearts (Colossians 2:13) and give us new life (2 Corinthians 5:17) through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27). 

• Now we can have Christ's righteousness imputed to us, so that we are found blameless in God's sight (Philippians 3:9, Galatians 2:16, Romans 4:5)

• Now God can lead us through the Holy Spirit, so that we can cooperate with Him and become more and more like Christ (Romans 8:29, Ephesians 4:22-24, Romans 12:2).

• Now we need not fear death, since we know that when we leave our earthly body, will will be present with the Lord  (2 Corinthians 5:6-8). 

• Now we can have faith that God will transform our earthly bodies into glorified bodies like the resurrected Christ's at His return, reuniting them with our souls (1 Corinthians 15:35-58). 

Now what? Now we can place our full faith in God for salvation, rather than toiling and worrying whether He will decide we are "good enough". Now we can strive to follow Him, to obey His commands; secure in the understanding that we will not be condemned when we fail; secure in the knowledge that God will finish what He begins in us (Philippians 1:6).

Now we can have hope, because of the resurrection.

Now that's something to celebrate.

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

COGWA, LCG and the Laying On of Hands

Awww, COGWA, you're so thoughtful. Whipping up fresh biblical half-truths every morning and serving them to all of us in your Daily Bible Verse blog. And in a format that makes them so easy to share with others! What will you think of next???

Honestly, COGWA's Daily Bible Verse blog has been bothering me for some time. I've wanted to address several of them, but never quite find the time. Why are they unsettling? Because, like almost everything COGWA disseminates, they are sparse. Now, all well-written social media communications need to be short and sweet. But in COGWA's case, their brevity allows them to disseminate the image of a sunny, happy, grace-filled church without fleshing out the cognitive dissonance between that snapshot and their largely grace-less doctrines.  And to share this staged snapshot with unsuspecting friends at the click of a button.

But anyway, that's not exactly what I'll be discussing today. The COGWA Daily Bible Verse Blog entry I want to look at today was posted March 1 and comes from Acts 8:14-17: 

Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. 

Historically, the COGs have used this passage to explain their teachings on how individuals may become members of the church of God. 

“In Acts 8:14-17, the apostles heard that people had repented and had been baptized, but had not yet received the Holy Spirit. This passage shows the method God used to impart His Holy Spirit, through the laying on of hands,” writes Mike Bennett, COGWA's editorial content manager.

I've always wondered why God chose to impart the Holy Spirit this way in Acts 8:14-17, but without the laying on of hands in Acts 10. Because clearly, what COGWA describes is one method - but not the only method -  that God gives the Holy Spirit:

(Acts 10:44-45) While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.

No laying on of hands here. Instead, they Holy Spirit was given in the same manner as it was on Pentecost. Why the difference?

Take a look at Acts 8:14. Where were these disciples? In Samaria. What's the big deal? Well, who made up the early church, at least at first? Mostly Jews. Did Jews like Samaritans? Nope. They despised them. 

Presumably, the vast majority of those baptized in Acts 2 were ethnically Jewish Christians. Acts chapters 1 through 7 take place in Jerusalem. All but the apostles scattered to Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1) in the wake of Stephen's stoning and Paul's persecution. It was only once Philip started preaching Christ in Samaria (Acts 8:5) that the Samaritans heard the message. 

Now, do you think the ethnically-Jewish Christians, who regarded Samaritans as unclean, would believe Samaritans who claimed that God had given them the Holy Spirit, independent of laying on of hands, like He did with the apostles at Pentecost? Consider the drama about accepting Gentiles into the church in Acts chapters 10 through 15. Consider the astonishment that “those of the circumcision” expressed in Acts 11:18 when they heard Peter's report about what transpired in Acts 10:

When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.”

If the ethnic Jewish believers in Jerusalem still got their feathers ruffled in the early verses of Acts 11, chances are good that they would not have believed the Samaritans. This, most likely, is the reason the apostles sent such reliable sources as Peter and John down to Samaria. And why God chose to impart the Holy Spirit this time through the laying on of hands. 

“The Jerusalem Jews considered the Samaritans to be second-class residents of Palestine and kept them at arm's length religiously. And on their part, the Samaritans returned the compliment. It is not too difficult to imagine what would have happened had the apostles at Jerusalem first been the missioners to Samaria. Probably they would have been rebuffed, just as they were rebuffed earlier in their travels with Jesus when the Samaritans associated them with the city of Jerusalem,” according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary.

“But what if the Spirit had come upon them at their baptism when administrated by Philip? Undoubtedly what feelings there were against Philip and the Hellenists would have carried over to them, and they would have been doubly under suspicion. But God in his providence withheld the gift of the Holy Spirit till Peter and John laid their hands on the Samaritans—Peter and John, two leading apostles who were highly thought of in the mother church at Jerusalem and who would have been accepted at that time as brothers in Christ by the new converts in Samaria. In effect, therefore, in this first advance of the gospel outside the confines of Jerusalem, God worked in ways that were conducive not only to the reception of the Good News in Samaria but also to the acceptance of these new converts by believers at Jerusalem,” according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary.

But God did not “withhold the gift of the Holy Spirit”  from those in Cornelius' house until Peter laid hands on them. Peter didn't even get a chance to finish preaching. 

(Acts 10:44-45) While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.

Why would God deliver the Holy Spirit in such a dramatic way? In a way that did not include the laying on of hands?

“The six Jewish believers who were there with Peter were astonished at what they saw and heard. For in accepting these Gentiles and bestowing his Holy Spirit on them, God had providentially attested his action by the same sign of tongues as at Pentecost,” according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary.

“Undoubtedly the sign of tongues was given primarily for the sake of the Jewish believers right there in Cornelius's house. But it was also given for Jerusalem believers, who would later hear of what happened, so that all would see the conversion of these Gentiles as being entirely of God and none would revert to their old prejudices and relegate these new converts to the role of second-class Christians.” 

Messianic Jewish scholar David H. Stern concurs:

“As with Kefa (Jewish name for Peter), it took a supernatural act of God to dislodge their resistance to bringing Gentiles into the Body of the Messiah, accomplished and symbolized by immersion.” (Jewish New Testament Commentary, p. 260).

But wait. Isn't the laying on of hands one of the foundational Church doctrines listed in the book of Hebrews 6? This is what COGWA states in its web entry, “Laying On of Hands.”

(Hebrews 6:1-2) Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 

“Once these stepping-stones of understanding are laid, we are expected to grow toward “perfection” (which can mean completeness or maturity). God wants us to maintain that foundation and then build on it in our converted lives,” according to COGWA's entry.

But most Bible students understand that the doctrines listed here are not necessarily "stepping stones" of the Christian walk, but most likely Jewish practices which the persecuted Hebrew recipients of the letter to the Hebrews should have settled by now. The word “baptisms” in verse 2 does not refer to the Christian practice of baptism, but Jewish ritual washings. The plural use of the word adds to the insight that we are not talking about Christian baptism.

“There were such purification ceremonies, or lustrations, in the Jewish religion as in most other religions of the day. Sometimes there was confusion over ritual washings. It would thus be one of the elementary items of instruction that converts be taught the right approach to the various "baptisms" they would encounter,” according to The Expositor's Bible Commentary.

In a similar vein, the “laying on of hands” listed in Hebrews 6:2 likely does not mean exactly what COGWA asserts that it does. Laying on of hands was a common practice in antiquity, was sometimes associated with the giving of the Holy Spirit, but at other times linked with commissioning into Christian service or ministry. We see examples of this in the commissioning of Stephen (Acts 6:6), Saul and Barnabas (Acts 10:3) and Timothy (1 Timothy 4:14). 

This is in keeping with the conclusions of both Theologian John MacArthur and Messianic Jewish scholar Stern, whom I quoted earlier.

“S'mikhah, the laying on of hands, refers here to the ordination of an individual for a particular task of ministry by the elders of the congregation, as with Sha'ul (Saul) and Timothy at 1 Timothy 4:14; also see Matthew21:31N.” (Jewish New Testament Commentary, p. 677)

Obviously a proper perspective on Jewish ritual washings versus baptism, on ordinations, on faith and works, on repentance, on resurrection and on judgment would be critical for these Hebrew believers to have, especially given Jewish tradition on each of these topics. But the mere fact that these terms are discussed doesn't mean they indicated the same thing to Hebrew believers as they do in Western society in 2016. And the proximity of “baptisms” and “laying on of hands” in Hebrews 6:2 certainly does not link the two as the first "stepping stones" along the walk of the Church of God lifestyle. 

Further, we see mentions of people in the New Testament who were baptized but never had hands laid upon them. In the case of the Ethiopian eunuch, Philip was whisked away as soon as they came out of the water (Acts 8:39). Lydia and her household were baptized in Acts 16:14-15, but there is no mention of hands being laid upon her. Later in the chapter, the jailer and his household were baptized and rejoiced (Acts 16:34-35) without any direct discussion of laying on of hands. 

In all of these cases, which are we to believe? 

a) None of these people received the Holy Spirit.

b) That hands were laid upon them, the Bible just doesn't record it.

c) God sometimes imparts the Holy Spirit to a believer without a minister laying hands upon him.

Clearly, in some instances, God imparted the Holy Spirit to Gentile believers through the laying on of hands following baptism. And clearly, in other instances, He did not. So why would the COGs choose to adopt and highlight only method highlighted in Acts 8? 

To be fair, COGWA is not the only COG that teaches this. The Living Church of God takes this view in its Fundamental Beliefs. The United Church of God puts it forth in its article, "Water Baptism and Laying on of Hands." Really, most of the Worldwide Church of God splinters hold over this false teaching established by WCG founder Herbert W Armstrong. Who, ironically, was baptized by a Baptist preacher and has no record of having hands laid upon him to impart the Holy Spirit. So much for a Sabbatarian strand with authority stretching backwards across time to the apostles.  

But anyway, this teaching could result from an honest desire to create a standard practice for baptism in the COGs. Or it could be COGWA's best explanation as to how they think God usually works. Perhaps it's a simple oversight of Acts 10. But, conveniently, it also gives them an element of control over their membership. 

How so? Let's return to COGWA's writings on “Laying on of Hands.”

"The laying on of hands does not of itself provide the Holy Spirit. Much like baptism, the laying on of hands is a physical action with a spiritual component. When a minister lays hands on a person after baptism, it is God (not the minister) who gives the Holy Spirit.”

COGWA rightly admits that the minister does not physically transmit the Holy Spirit to the person on whom his hands are laid. It is God who administers the Holy Spirit. However...

“Only authorized representatives of God—most scriptural examples are of ordained ministers—should lay hands on the newly baptized person.” 

So, if I understand the logical implications of COGWA's statement correctly, God chooses to bestow the Holy Spirit upon individuals whom a COGWA minister has baptized and upon whom a COGWA minister lays his hands. The minister's hands are not magical; this is just how God works. Still, only ministers authorized by God - presumably through COGWA - should lay hands upon a newly baptized person.

Furthermore... 

“Once a person repents, believes and is baptized, it is through the laying on of hands that he or she receives God’s Spirit. The Spirit of God would then be in that person as the promised “Helper” (John 14:16), which is necessary for a person to be a follower of Jesus Christ and for our ultimate salvation."

Let me get this straight.  I will not receive the Holy Spirit unless a COGWA minister baptizes me and lays hands upon me. And I cannot inherit salvation without the Holy Spirit. Wow! Sounds like COGWA has a corner on the salvation market. I should have gotten in on the ground floor when I had the chance! 

COGWA's misguided teaching on this topic is dangerous because they allows men to come between you and God. It allows ministers to essentially act as the gatekeepers of salvation. And I'm not picking on COGWA alone - the same is true of LCG, UCG, COG-AIC, PCG and all who adopt this teaching. We've all heard the stories of WCG ministers forcing individuals to leave a second marriage or abandon a “questionable” job (questionable to the minister, anyway) before they agreed to baptize the individual. 

But that's all in the past, Martha! No one in today's COGs abuses their power to the detriment of the membership.

Sure. Tell that to the woman whose PCG parents abandoned her as a teen when she told them she no longer wished to attend the PCG. Tell it to the family of Janet (Gennaro) Privratsky, a young PCG member who committed suicide in response to PCG's no-contact policy. 

Tell it to the man from the Living Church of God who was forced to leave his nursing home job, then disfellowshipped when he gave two weeks notice rather than quitting on the spot at the advice of his minister. 

Tell it to Patrick and Elizabeth Scarborough, who are suing the Living Church of God, Rod Meredith and Rod McNair for the “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” and “Defamation of Character” after being disfellowshipped and marked for no given reason, despite months of pleading phone calls, letters and apologies. 

But hey, that's PCG and LCG, not COGWA. No worries here, Martha!  

Wait, this isn't the same COGWA that just met with LCG officials in January 2016? That agreed with LCG to work together, treat one another as brothers and build trust between the organizations going forward? The same COGWA that agreed to these in the midst of the Scarborough lawsuit? 

It can't be the same COGWA whose officials, while still under the UCG banner, leaked confidential personnel documents over the Internet to foment a church split!

It's certainly not the same COGWA that employs a long-time COG minister alleged to have agitated for the church split on a popular social media outlet using a fake profile! And used said outlet and fake profile to calculate when his group of dissenting ministers had a large enough tithe base to support themselves! 

Right, I see your point. I was totally wrong. There's nothing concerning at all about these guys basically claiming to be the gatekeepers through whom God chooses to bestow the Holy Spirit.

It's certainly biblical to be under the authority of a pastor. The Bible makes it clear that we should assemble regularly with other believers, and that we should submit to the leaders of that assembly. But the Bible also reminds us time and time again to watch the example our leaders set, to consider the outcomes of their behavior and their lives, and to judge them by their fruit.

It's also biblical to be baptized (although it's not required for salvation), and baptism is traditionally performed by a pastor. I was baptized by my pastor. But baptism is an outward symbol of the change that has already happened in a person's life - repentance, death to sin, and new life in Christ by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. It is not what causes the change. As with Lydia in Acts 16:14, God opens our heart, He imparts the Holy Spirit as Jesus explained in John 3:8, and, as a result, we see the fruit of the Spirit in our lives. No minister is the gatekeeper of that process, neither in the beginning, nor in the middle, nor the end.

(John 6:37, NIV) "All those the Father gives Me will come to Me, and whoever comes to Me I will never drive away."

No man can come between you and God. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Especially not these guys.

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

On a Personal Note - Why We Do What We Do

We've noticed that a number of people have been checking out the “About ABD” section lately. It seems a few of you out there wondering who we are, what we're doing and why we're doing it. Fair questions.

As Bereans Did is a collaborative blog that examines the teachings of the Church of God movement, often called “Armstrongism” after its founder, Herbert W Armstrong. God called the writers out of the Churches of God and, as folks who have been on both sides of the fence, we feel uniquely qualified to address many doctrinal issues from a standpoint that many who've spent their entire lives in mainstream Christianity cannot. We try to offer a respectful, Christian perspective, in contrast with many other ex-COG blogs. Although we do enjoy us some sarcasm.

The following are NOT some of the reasons we run this blog:

We like to make fun of the COGs and its members. While some of the COGs doctrinal wranglings are amusing, for the most part, we try to attack ideas, not people. Sometimes it's hard to separate the two, and there are some people who, well, you know... many of them are probably the reason you found us in the first place. But we believe that all of us – you, me, Rod Meredith, Jim Franks, Victor Kubik and, yes, even Dave Pack – were made in God's image; that Jesus died for all of us, and that all are worthy of respect.

We think you believe you are earning your salvation. We know that most of you absolutely do NOT believe this. We know most of you feel  that your behavior absolutely does not merit you salvation. A carrot-and-stick salvation is the logical conclusion of the belief system you've been handed, but over the years, cognitive dissonance on these teachings have made things very, very muddy. We'd be lying if we said we weren't concerned about your eternal destiny. The Bible has strong words for those who add to the gospel. Is the responsibility with the teacher? Does God honor the faith of the listener? These are questions we are glad are above our pay grade.

We think you intentionally are following a man. We focus so much on Herbert Armstrong precisely because many of you believe you do not follow him. At this point in the COG movement, you're so far removed from HWA that you're learning from men who were taught by men who followed a man. You can't understand where you've arrived are unless you understand where you were, or more accurately, where past generations came from.

We are bitter people who hate HWA. Actually, some of us are young enough that we barely remember Herbert Armstrong. We're not thrilled what what his false teachings have wrought in our families, and we fear for his soul, but there's no deep-seated loathing on my part.

We think everyone in the COGs are dumb and/or bad people. Don't forget, we were with you. We WERE you. We have come to understand the New Covenant only by the calling and grace of God. We know you are genuine, sincere, thinking people who are trying your best to live in a way that pleases your Creator.

So then, why do we run this blog? In short, because of you.

We care about you. There's no doubt that relations are frequently strained between those who leave the COGs and those who remain. Many of us left without saying good-bye, because we wanted to avoid the inevitable arguments. We know what's said about us, to our faces or behind our backs - because we said those things about others. We know we are judged harshly for some of our choices - because we judged others harshly. We often keep our distance, and that's easy to do since we no longer share Sabbath or festival fellowship time. But you are our friends and family, and we care about you.

We want to “pay it forward.” Those who went before us – sometimes those whom we talked about and judged harshly – helped us negotiate our questions and confusion. We know you think we “took the easy way out,” but in reality, there's nothing easy about this road. Coming out of a controlling, restricted religious environment is difficult, and asking questions in such a place is often an invitation for abuse and harassment. It can feel like there's no one to talk to, nowhere to turn. Without these people, we would have felt stranded and alone. But someone was there for us, and we want to do the same for those who will come after us.

We know how it feels. This is a frustrating time to be a COG member. Splits and financial crises are coming more and more frequently. Almost as frequently as open letters from young COG members  pleading for unity among the divided groups. It's maddening to have your support system, your friends and your family torn apart each time the ministry decides they are no longer “pleased to dwell” and must separate for the sake of all that is Holy. If you're reading this blog, then either you or someone you know is discouraged with the state of the COGs. We are thankful that the drama no longer affects us, but we are still grieved to see it happen to you. True, Jesus did come to turn father against son, daughter against mother. We must “hate” our own family and our own lives by comparison to our dedication to God. But is what we see today really what Jesus meant?

We want you to have the joy, peace and rest of the New Covenant. Even at the height of the Worldwide Church of God's success, it was not a happy place. Feelings of impending doom as the end approaches. Strife that naturally accompanies legalism. Worry that you won't be good enough to “make it.” These are discouraging, demoralizing feelings that can paralyze you, rather than live the abundant life Jesus came and died for you to have.

Life as a Christian, mainstream or otherwise, is not all sunshine and lollipops. In fact, much of the New Testament is devoted to teaching Christians how to conduct themselves when life is less than ideal. But there is joy in knowing that my salvation and my righteousness are found in Him. This security does not give license to sin, but rather affords peace and rest in Christ rather than a lifetime of worry and doubt. His yoke is easy, and His burden is light.

Here's the bottom line: we don't care if you never, ever eat a bite of pork. It seems to have worked out OK for Peter. We don't care if you prefer to worship on Saturday, although we wish you understood how the Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ. Many churches – even mainstream Christian ones – offer Saturday options. We find the Holy Days distasteful and wish you'd embrace the reality of their fulfillment in Christ rather than their shadows. But we know you find some of our practices distasteful, too, like Christmas and Easter. On that note, we wish you'd see their significance and examine their real, historical roots rather than the fabricated ones Herbert Armstrong and Alexander Hislop handed you. But in the end, that's not what we really want for you.

What we want for you is to quit living in fear and despair. Despair about your future – and your children's future - in this dying religious community. Fear that leaving will land you in the Lake of Fire. Fear that, even if you stick with it, you won't be good enough to “make it.” Spoiler alert: you won't.  That's kind of the whole point of salvation by faith through grace.

Bottom line, if the COGs are right about your eternal destiny and how to achieve it, then it's all worth it. But what if they're not? Would that change your answer?

We don't believe it has to be this way. We believe God wants more for you. Hear us out. That's all we ask.

That's why we do what we do.

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

Pinky Promises - or Faith and Parachutes, Part 4

Have you ever made a pinky promise?

Let me fill in the details for those readers who have neither been nor raised an elementary-school aged girl. In this solemn ceremony, two parties mutually signify that a promise has been made by intertwining their two pinkies. A pinky promise may seal a pledge to be BFFs (best friends forever), may signify one party's intention to return a cherished bracelet to the other party, or to cement an offer to procure an ice cream cone later in the day, among other things

While the extent to which a pinky promise can be enforced as binding is uncertain, one thing is clear – a pledge with only one pinky is no pledge at all.

Pinky promises may be a recent, silly phenomenon, but man has used ceremonies to indicate his commitments for millenia. Peace pipes. Blood oaths. Legal contracts. Dissecting animals.

No, really. Do you remember reading something about that in Genesis 15? It's one of those weird parts of the Bible that we tend to gloss over because we don't understand it and, frankly, it's a tad bit creepy. Let's take a look.

(Also, for the record, I realize that Abraham's name was still Abram before Genesis 17. I am not going to vascilate between the two names depending on which scripture I'm referencing. Unless it's a direct quote naming him as Abram, I'm going with Abraham.)

(Genesis 15:9-10) So He (God) said to him (Abram), “Bring Me a three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old ram, a turtledove, and a young pigeon.” Then he brought all these to Him and cut them in two, down the middle, and placed each piece opposite the other; but he did not cut the birds in two.

Now, I'm not going to get into the parts about the vultures and stuff. That is about the Israelites in Egypt, and this is a discussion about Abraham. So what on earth was going on here?

Abraham wasn't just cutting animals apart for the fun of it. He was setting up a traditional covenant ceremony. The Believer's Bible Commentary sheds more light on this practice:

“According to the ancient Eastern manner of making a covenant, both the contracting parties passed through the divided pieces of the slain animals, thus symbolically attesting that they pledged their very lives to the fulfillment of the engagement they made.” (p. 53).

We see biblical support for this explanation in Jeremiah 34:18-20:

And I will give the men who have transgressed my covenant, who have not performed the words of the covenant which they made before me, when they cut the calf in two and passed between the parts of it – the princes of Judah, the eunuchs, the priests, and all the people of the land who passed between the parts of the calf – I will give them into the hand of their enemies and into the hand of those who seek their life. Their dead bodies shall be for meat for the birds of the haven and the beasts of the earth.

So to put it bluntly, the two parties making the agreement passed between the pieces of the animals together as a way of stating that they should face the same fate as the animals if they broke their agreement. Yikes. Pinky promises are starting to sound better and better.

But here's the thing. Abram never had the chance to walk between the animals.

(Genesis 15:12) Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, horror and great darkness fell upon him.

Again, I'm not going to discuss the “horror and darkness.” The verses that follow indicate that had to do with a prophecy about Israel's slavery in Egypt. I want to focus on the part about the deep sleep falling upon Abram. Was Abraham just really, really tired from stargazing with God the night before? Maybe cutting the animals in two took a lot out of him.

No. The biblical language indicates something external that descended, or came down upon Abram. God incapacitated Abram. Theologian John MacArthur expounds further in The MacArthur Bible Commentary:

“The sign of ancient covenants often involved the cutting in half of animals, so that the pledging parties could walk between them, affirming that the same should happen to them if they broke the covenant. God put him (Abraham) to sleep, because the covenant did not involve any promise on Abraham’s part; therefore, he would not walk through the pieces as a pledge.” (p. 35).

Abraham was “simply a spectator” of this exhibition, according to the Believer's Bible Commentary (p. 53). MacArthur explains it this way:

“These items (the smoking oven and burning torch in Genesis 15:17) symbolized the presence of God, who solemnly promised by divine oath to fulfill His promises to Abraham by alone passing through the animal pieces.” (p. 36).

What does this mean? It means that this covenant was unilateral, and that God swore by Himself to fulfill His promises to Abraham. More simply, He made a pinky promise to Abraham but intertwined His own two pinkies, figuratively speaking.

I never understood this section of scripture when I was in the COGs. I'm not sure I ever even read it. After looking back, I was surprised to find that the Churches of God virtually ignore this passage. I found no mention on the web sites of the Living Church of God or the Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA). The United Church of God touched on it in a single article, simply outlining the ceremony and stating that “the covenant ultimately includes a promise of the land of Canaan.” (Gary Petty, How Should Christians Celebrate the Passover, Feb. 1, 2003)

So why would the bulwarks of true Christianity; the only ones who truly understand the Bible; the ones who are constantly discussing Abraham (for purposes of British Israelism or salvation) – totally ignore this passage? My guess is because it threatens their teachings on salvation – you know – the ones that keep you in their churches.

God swore by himself that He would make these promises come true – the promises for the descendants and for the land. Abraham absolutely played a part in the ceremony, as demonstrated in his preparation for the ceremony. He obeyed the command to procure the animals. He split them. He obeyed God's command to circumcise himself and his household. And he clearly participated in Isaac's, um, conception, since Isaac was an heir who came from his “own body.”

About that circumcision... why all the covenant talk in Genesis 17 if this covenant was a done deal in Genesis 15? Well, some theologians posit that Genesis 17 is talking about different aspect of the covenant with Abram – they parse the promise into descendants and land as two separate promises. I disagree with this explanation. It seems like a chicken-or-egg proposition – without descendants, there would be no one to possess the land, without land, there would be nowhere for descendants to live. And anyway, both are mentioned in Genesis 15. Interestingly, the Expositor's Bible Commentary renders Genesis 17:2 as “I will confirm my covenant between you and me” rather than “make.” In other words, God is saying that He will bring these things to bear; make them certain or effectual. Theologian John MacArthur seems to agree with this interpretation:

“This is another reaffirmation of God's unilateral covenant with Abram, which did not mean that there would be no responsibilities falling upon its recipients.” (The MacArthur Bible Commentary, p. 37.)

I believe that, in Genesis 17, God is calling Abraham to turn back to Him after trying to work things out for himself. Consider that Abraham's blunder with Hagar occurred in Chapter 16 – after the covenant ceremony but before the circumcision command. Perhaps God commanded Abraham to circumcise himself as a tangible, costly act that was the first step in his turn back to God.

The wording in Genesis 17:1 does not indicate God is commanding Abraham to be blameless, according to the Expositor's Bible Commentary. Rather, the language indicates that being blameless is a consequence of walking with God faithfully. Abraham clearly has not faithfully walked the path God intended for him in Genesis 16.

Really, are things any different for us? Romans 4 gives Abraham as the example for salvation by faith – the template for Christian salvation – for good reason.

We are justified by grace through faith in the shed blood of Jesus, our sin is imputed to Jesus and His righteousness is imputed to us:

(Romans 4:20-25) He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was able to perform. And therefore “it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him, but also for us. It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification.”

Our work is to place our faith and trust in the shed blood of Jesus and not in our own actions, as Abraham trusted God:

(John 6:28-29) Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said unto them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”

Since we have been bought with a price and our lives are not our own, we are responsible to obey the commands of Jesus and His apostles: love God with all your heart, your soul and your strength. Love your neighbor as yourself. Do not worry. Turn the other cheek. Do not get drunk. Do not commit sexual immorality. Carry one another's burdens. Do not show favoritism. Just to name a few.

(Romans 6:1-2) What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?

The indwelling Holy Spirit regenerates our hearts, guides us into truth (John 16:13), sanctifies us to become like Jesus (2 Thessalonians 2:13) and enables us to obey (Romans 8:12-13). We are responsible for obeying and cooperating with the Holy Spirit. Like Abraham, we have responsibilities along the path of sanctification. Abraham set up the covenant ceremony. Abraham circumcised himself. Abraham attempted to sacrifice Isaac. But God directed Him to do each of these things; and He similarly leads the process of our sanctification.

However, we will not always run with endurance. Because we are human, we will still screw up and deviate from God's path, as Abraham did when he took matters into his own hands and fathered Ishmael. But our sin does not void the covenant we have entered:

(Romans 7:24-8:1) O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God – through Christ Jesus our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

We repent and re-dedicate ourselves to walking the path God has chosen for us:

(Ephesians 2:10) For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Yes. We do have work to do. Scripture tells us that faith without works is dead. We do have work to do. But God prepared them for us, and us for them. He knows what He's doing.

(Hebrews 12:1-2a) Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith... 

God initiates salvation. God leads the process of sanctification. And God will finish it. He pinky promises.

(Philippians 1:4-6) In all my prayers for all of you, I always pray with joy because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now, being confident of this, that He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." 

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

Abraham's Faith and Works - or Faith and Parachutes, Part 3

Abraham. Just reading the name to myself, I hear it being spoken by someone like James Earl Jones. Imagine trying to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with him in God’s Kingdom. You’d feel about two inches tall by comparison. I know I would.

Abraham is mentioned prominently in the “faith chapter” – Hebrews 11 – and for good reason. There he is lauded for leaving his home for an unknown land and for offering up his son, Isaac.

Wait a minute. Why would Abraham’s works be mentioned in the “faith” chapter? I must be thinking of Romans.

(Romans 4:2-5) For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work, but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.

Ok, that makes more sense. But wait, isn't there another scripture, one that marries the two concepts?

(James 2:21-24) Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

Hmmm. Now what?

The Churches of God love to exploit the seeming contradictions found within these passages to ridicule “so-called” Christianity’s teaching that salvation is by faith alone. Works are a requirement for those who wish to inherit eternal life, they object. Most of  today’s COGs are softer on the “or else” side of the works equation, but their founder, Herbert Armstrong, was known for teaching that believers were comparable to spiritual fetuses, and God would abort believers who did not grow enough or overcome enough sin.

As a result, today’s COGs are populated by a generation of people who know they can’t earn their salvation, but hope they don’t screw up badly enough to lose it. After years of well-meaning, uneducated, and dogmatic messages from a shrinking pool of speakers, they see nothing wrong with the mutually exclusive beliefs that you can’t earn right standing with God, but you must work for the rest of your life to keep your right standing with God. I know. I was one of them. For decades.

So who got it right when it comes to Abraham? James or Paul? Or, since both were inspired by God, is there another explanation? Today and in the coming weeks, as I continue delayed “Faith and Parachutes” posts (see part 1 and part 2), I’d like to look at some key events in the life of Abraham to get a better understanding of the correlation between faith and works, resolving the tension between Paul and James.


ACCOUNTED FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS

The story begins in Genesis 12:1-3, which lists the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant. God tells Abram to leave Haran; promises to make a great nation of him and that he would bless all the families of the earth through him. Abram obeys, then famine and Lot’s captivity temporarily derail the story line.

In chapter 15, we see Abram lamenting that he has no heir. God responds by promising descendants as numerous as the stars in the heavens. In Genesis 15:6, Abram decided to trust God regarding his descendants, and God accounted his faith for righteousness. Simply put, this means that because of Abraham's faith, he found favor with God. God credited Christ's righteousness to Abraham's "sin account" and credited Abraham's sin to Jesus.

The statement made in Genesis 15:6 is so simple, yet so significant. But rather than considering the logical implications of this statement, groups like the Living Church of God try to immediately divert our attention:

“Taking this scripture alone seems to indicate that belief in the Lord is all that is necessary to be considered righteous. But James, the brother of Jesus, forcefully argues that without backing it up with action, belief is simply not enough.” ("Phil Sena, From Belief to Faith, Tomorrow's World , November-December 2015).

I'd like to offer my own follow-up scripture. We already read this passage, but it deserves a second look. Let's allow Paul to start unpacking the implications of this scripture.

(Romans 4:2-5) For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace, but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.

This means that God considered Abraham legally righteous before Him. Abram was now entitled to eternal life (because of God's grace). Let that sink in for a minute. God did not account Christ’s righteousness to Abraham when he left Haran, when Isaac was conceived, or even when he attempted to sacrifice Isaac. He imputed Christ's righteousness to Abraham when the man decided to trust God and was simply staring up at the night sky.

No, God didn’t reward Abraham with salvation because he backed up the claim with action, despite what LCG's Phil Sena claims:

“Abraham believed that God could even resurrect Isaac back to physical life if He so willed.   This faith in God's power and goodness gave him the strength to obey God's command to sacrifice his son. "By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, 'In Isaac your seed shall be called,' concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense" (Hebrews 11:17–19) Anyone can claim to 'believe God' —but backing up the claim with action is why God accounted Abraham's belief as righteousness."

How can I say that Christ's righteousness wasn't the payoff for obedience? Because that's what Romans 4:10-11 tells us:

How then was it (righteousness) accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also.

Abraham was circumcised in Genesis 17.  Simple math tells us that at least 14 years must have passed between Genesis 15:6 and the time God commanded Abraham to circumcise himself and his household (which included 13-year-old Ishmael, who was not yet conceived in Genesis 15:6).

Christ's righteousness was imputed to him before he was circumcised, and was not dependent upon his actions. Thankfully. Since the little bit we know of Abraham's track record during that intermittent period was not amazing. In the intervening verses, Abraham fathered a child with Sarah's maid and laughed in God's face.  Yet folks like LCG's Sena would have us believe that God credited Abraham with righteousness because of his actions.

“Anyone can claim to "believe God"—but backing up the claim with action is why God accounted Abraham's belief as righteousness,” Sena wrote.

If you tried to back Sena or other LCG comrades into a corner, I suppose they could argue that, back in Genesis 15, the omniscient God knew that Abraham would obey Him in Genesis 22 and therefore credited him with righteousness based on that knowledge. But that line of reasoning pushes LCG dangerously close accepting predestination – a doctrine they reject. If predestination were true, then God would know who would remain obedient from the beginning, your salvation would be sealed, and LCG and other COGs couldn't hold your eternal destiny over your head as blackmail for tithes and organizational loyalty. But if you feel your salvation is precarious, your fear makes you more likely to resign yourself to accepting their shenanigans and ultimatums.

This hypothetical desperate rebuttal becomes even more threatening to LCG when you consider how it refutes the false Armstrongist teaching that Jesus had to qualify to replace Satan as the ruler of the world. This false doctrine – which, in short, claims Jesus' victory was uncertain – is not consistent with several scriptures:

(Isaiah 53:4-5) Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. This “suffering servant” passage is prophetic, not speculative. It does not say "by His stripes we might be healed, depending on whether He is successful."

(John 3:14-15) 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. If this account from the book of Numbers depicted Christ, then surely His victory was assured at that time. Jesus wouldn't use it as an inspired example, then fail to follow through at the actual time this word picture symbolized.

(Revelation 13:8) All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Jesus was as good as slain from the foundation of the world, and his victory was assured. His sacrifice was not a hastily drawn-up plan B when Israel failed to keep its covenant with God.

Further, if our condition to “qualify” for salvation is based on Jesus' requirement to qualify, then  how solid is the case for either? God's decision to impute Christ's righteousness to Abraham clearly predated the crucifixion. He couldn't have done so if Christ's victory wasn't already certain.

But back to the main topic. Some would argue that Abraham's regeneration  and justification was what enabled his legendary works of obedience in the first place. This would makes sense. If we are to believe that heroes of faith like Abraham, Noah and Rahab were able to overcome their emnity with God on the strength of their own human efforts, then there is no need for Jesus’ death on the cross or the gift of the Holy Spirit. And isn't that really the point of Romans 4?

(Romans 4:2-4) For if Abraham was justified by works, be has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

Abraham had faith, and the evidence of that faith manifest itself in his actions, as explained in James 2:22.

Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 

Like Abraham, God regenerates our hearts and counts us righteous because of our faith, not because of our works. Like Abraham, works of obedience should follow that give evidence of this invisible change. (if they don't, we need to examine where we really have faith, not just dig in and work harder). And like Abraham, we will still make mistakes.

Rather than scoff at the idea of salvation by faith, we should be grateful that we don't need to worry that every misstep will land us in the Lake of Fire. We should be thankful that the blood of Jesus covers our sins; be mindful that our sin is costly; be quick to repent, then go and strive to sin no more. We can rejoice in the knowledge that our works don't maintain our salvation; but instead, they give us the daily opportunity to serve our Father and bring honor and glory to His name.  

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

Ron Dart Passes Away

Ron Dart, liberal Armstrongist Minister and founder of Christian Educational Ministries, has passed away. From his Facebook page:

Ronald L. Dart died peacefully in his sleep early this Sabbath morning, January 23rd, from a prolonged battle with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.

After the WCG exploded in 1995, I remember sitting with my family and listening to Ron Dart's messages (during his CGI days). He tended to be a lot easier to listen to, and softer in his approach. I visited one of his Feast of Tabernacles meetings in Tennessee once. It was actually a lot better than I thought it would be. The music was great.

Our sympathies to his family and friends.