“The design of every false scheme and system of religion is to depict the character of God in such a way that it is agreeable to the tastes of the carnal heart, acceptable to depraved human nature. And that can only be done by a species of misrepresentation: the ignoring of those of His prerogatives and perfections which are objectionable, and the disproportionate emphasizing of those of His attributes which appeal to their selfishness—such as His love, mercy, and long-sufferance. But let the character of God be faithfully presented as it is actually portrayed in the Scriptures—in the Old Testament as well as the New—and nine out of every ten of church-goers will frankly state that they find it impossible to love Him.” The plain fact is, dear reader, that to the present generation the Most High of Holy Writ is “the unknown God.”

—A. W. Pink (1886–1952)

That quote brings Paul’s Areopagus sermon to mind. “What you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.”

“Do you imagine that the Gospel is magnified or God glorified by going to worldlings and telling them that they “may be saved at this moment by simply accepting Christ as their personal Savior” while they are wedded to their idols and their hearts are still in love with sin? If I do so, I tell them a lie, pervert the Gospel, insult Christ, and turn the grace of God into lasciviousness.” —A. W. Pink (1886–1952)

“The carnal mind, when once it has perceived the power of God in the creation, stops there, and, at the farthest, thinks and ponders on nothing else than the wisdom, power, and goodness displayed by the Author of such a work (matters which rise spontaneously, and force themselves on the notice even of the unwilling), or on some general agency on which the power of motion depends, exercised in preserving and governing it. In short, it imagines that all things are sufficiently sustained by the energy divinely infused into them at first. But faith must penetrate deeper. After learning that there is a Creator, it must forthwith infer that he is also a Governor and Preserver, and that, not by producing a kind of general motion in the machine of the globe as well as in each of its parts, but by a special providence sustaining, cherishing, superintending, all the things which he has made, to the very minutest, even to a sparrow.” (Institutes, I,16,1)

I found this very interesting, when I read it last night. I had a suspicion Calvin would have something to say along the lines I’m going. The argument I advanced here hits on something re: The Problem of Evil and similar arguments that have been advanced many times. 1) They don’t address the entirety of who God is. 2) They don’t account for the interrelationship of God’s attributes. 3) They don’t address the interrelated exercise of God’s attributes in His creation.

Just something to think about.

Chap. V. – The Manners of the Christians.
“For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. (Comp. 2Co_10:3) They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. (Comp. Phi_3:20) They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. (Comp. 2Co_6:9) They are poor, yet make many rich; (Comp. 2Co_6:10) they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; (Comp. 2Co_4:12) they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.”

Chap. IX. – Why the Son Was Sent so Late.
“As long then as the former time endured, He permitted us to be borne along by unruly impulses, being drawn away by the desire of pleasure and various lusts. This was not that He at all delighted in our sins, but that He simply endured them; nor that He approved the time of working iniquity which then was, but that He sought to form a mind conscious of righteousness, so that being convinced in that time of our unworthiness of attaining life through our own works, it should now, through the kindness of God, be vouchsafed to us; and having made it manifest that in ourselves we were unable to enter into the kingdom of God, we might through the power of God be made able. But when our wickedness had reached its height, and it had been clearly shown that its reward, punishment and death, was impending over us; and when the time had come which God had before appointed for manifesting His own kindness and power, how the one love of God, through exceeding regard for men, did not regard us with hatred, nor thrust us away, nor remember our iniquity against us, but showed great long-suffering, and bore with us, He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous, the incorruptible One for the corruptible, the immortal One for them that are mortal. For what other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? By what other one was it possible that we, the wicked and ungodly, could be justified, than by the only Son of God? O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! that the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors! Having therefore convinced us in the former time that our nature was unable to attain to life, and having now revealed the Saviour who is able to save even those things which it was [formerly] impossible to save, by both these facts He desired to lead us to trust in His kindness, to esteem Him our Nourisher, Father, Teacher, Counsellor, Healer, our Wisdom, Light, Honour, Glory, Power, and Life, so that we should not be anxious concerning clothing and food.”

Chap. X. – The Blessings That Will Flow from Faith.
“If you also desire [to possess] this faith, you likewise shall receive first of all the knowledge of the Father. For God has loved mankind, on whose account He made the world, to whom He rendered subject all the things that are in it, to whom He gave reason and understanding, to whom alone He imparted the privilege of looking upwards to Himself, whom He formed after His own image, to whom He sent His only-begotten Son, to whom He has promised a kingdom in heaven, and will give it to those who have loved Him. And when you have attained this knowledge, with what joy do you think you will be filled? Or, how will you love Him who has first so loved you? And if you love Him, you will be an imitator of His kindness. And do not wonder that a man may become an imitator of God. He can, if he is willing. For it is not by ruling over his neighbours, or by seeking to hold the supremacy over those that are weaker, or by being rich, and showing violence towards those that are inferior, that happiness is found; nor can any one by these things become an imitator of God. But these things do not at all constitute His majesty. On the contrary he who takes upon himself the burden of his neighbour; he who, in whatsoever respect he may be superior, is ready to benefit another who is deficient; he who, whatsoever things he has received from God, by distributing these to the needy, becomes a god to those who receive [his benefits]: he is an imitator of God. Then thou shalt see, while still on earth, that God in the heavens rules over [the universe]; then thou shall begin to speak the mysteries of God; then shalt thou both love and admire those that suffer punishment because they will not deny God; then shall thou condemn the deceit and error of the world when thou shall know what it is to live truly in heaven, when thou shalt despise that which is here esteemed to be death, when thou shalt fear what is truly death, which is reserved for those who shall be condemned to the eternal fire, which shall afflict those even to the end that are committed to it. Then shalt thou admire those who for righteousness’ sake endure the fire that is but for a moment, and shalt count them happy when thou shalt know [the nature of] that fire.”

~The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, circa 130 A.D.

“To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one [of you] from your iniquities.” ~ Acts 3:26

Remember: We give thanks to the One from whom all blessings flow.

“From the God of your father who helps you, And by the Almighty who blesses you {With} blessings of heaven above, Blessings of the deep that lies beneath, Blessings of the breasts and of the womb.” ~ Gen 49:25

If God is morally perfect then He must perform the morally best actions, but creating humans is not the morally best action. If this line of reasoning can be maintained then the mere fact that humans exist contradicts the claim that God exists.

HT: urbanphilosophy.net

Look at the assumption required for the second half of this sentence. “creating humans is not the morally best action”. Says who? By what standard? As usual, I think we can guess what that is.

Walker suggests that God is morally culpable for creating human beings with defective natures (defective in comparison to God’s).

Is He, now? Culpable to who? Oh, wait. That’s the assumption! The same assumption all of these dumb arguments make. God is answerable to man. That’s funny, here I thought Scripture answered that sort of ridiculousness.

What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” So then it {does} not {depend} on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And {He did so} to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, {even} us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. ~Rom 9:14-24

See, man always believes that he can pass judgment on God. That he is morally autonomous. Scripture says differently. This text rightly denies man’s ability to judge God. It then goes into an explanation of God’s intention in the creation of man. God is not unjust. A Holy God can rightly judge the man with a fallen nature – and the fallen man cannot judge the Holy God. This argument fails on point #7, for those interested in the formal argument also included in the post linked to above. I’m not concerned with the rest of the points, although I would likely dispute them if 7 didn’t fail so spectacularly. The reason 7 fails is because it introduces that pesky “should”. Who says He “should”? Man does. Man is not capable of imposing a “should” upon God, as man is not morally autonomous. Scripture relates to us why that “should” is incorrect, and the argument fails to even give any reason whatsoever why the “should” is applicable to God. It is an assumption of human autonomy.

I truly wish atheists who make these sorts of arguments would pay more attention to what they are arguing against. I’m sure this will be touted, with much hoopla, in that community – but it is not anything novel, damaging, or even explanatory. To break it down, a pot says “I don’t like the way you made things. If you didn’t make things the way I wanted, I deny that you exist – because I’ll only believe in a Potter that makes things the way I want them to be.” Not overly satisfying, or convincing. It would also help if they didn’t use an argument directly countered in Scripture. That would, of course, assume that they had read it. It doesn’t look like this atheologian bothered, sadly.

God be praised, we made it, even though it went until 3:15am for me! If I recall, that was 4:15 for poor Mitch.

I’ll likely repost the transcript here tomorrow, with the Q&A, and a few more comments of my own – but I think it went very well.

Here’s the Urban Philosophy debate transcript!

Soli Deo Gloria!

I’m debating Mitch LeBlanc, a philosophy student at the University of Toronto, at 10:30 EDT this evening, July 31st. The debate is in a chat channel maintained by Urban Philosophy, established by the same Mitch LeBlanc! Viewing the debate requires registration at the site, so please stop by early to register!

The Resolution is: “The Triune God of Scripture is the proper grounds for all knowledge.” I am taking the affirmative.

The format is as follows: Opening Statements (2500 words), Rebuttals (1500 words), Cross-Examinations (15 questions apiece), Closing Statements (1500 words), Question and Answer (Until we drop!). I’d like to invite you to stop by and view the debate – and hang around to ask us some questions!

I returned to speak to the Jehovah’s Witness elder, as I mentioned in a previous post. It did not go as expected, for either of us – but God was, I think, glorified.

I believe that I was not, perhaps, honestly represented to this man by the people I talked to previously – so he got something unexpected, as well. He seemed to be under the impression that I was there to confront him about my children being part of his religion. There is an element of that, to be sure – but my primary goal was to take advantage of the opportunity to speak to their teacher. I was asked to speak to the young man previously – as I was asked to speak to this elder. My goal was, first and foremost, to faithfully present the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hopefully, I was able to impress that point upon him during our conversation, which only lasted about 45 minutes. I hope and pray that God was glorified through it.

I started out with a summary of JW doctrines I requested from Dr. White some time back, which reads as follows:

There is one true God, Jehovah; He is eternal and unchanging. His name is very important to know, and to use. He has revealed Himself in Scripture as Jehovah. His first and greatest created thing is Michael the Archangel – in fact, Michael is the one through whom all other things are made. He is the master worker. He is the only direct creation of Jehovah God. It is only through Michael that all other things have been created. Michael then becomes the man Jesus Christ.

The man Jesus Christ does not have a spirit, in the sense of some other spiritual component. We possess a soul, that is the life force within us. It does not survive death as a disembodied spiritual essence. This one, Michael, becomes Jesus of Nazareth, who gave his life on a torture stake as a corresponding ransom for the sins of Adam, and he is one of the 144,000. The 144,000 are those who will be with Jehovah in heaven, and Jesus is one of that anointed class. The rest of God’s faithful servants are known as “the great crowd” – they have not what is called a “heavenly hope”, as the 144,000 have, but what is known as a “earthly hope” – they hope to live on a paradise earth. The Bible teaches that God created the earth to be inhabited, and after it is cleansed, this will be the place where the great crowd will live.

Those who are in heaven, are in the new covenant, and those who live on earth receive the benefits of the new covenant only in and through their obedience to and fellowship with the anointed class. Once a year, the witnesses gather together for the memorial supper, and during that memorial supper, the elements are passed throughout the room in remembrance of Jesus – yet in the vast majority of congregations, no one will partake. Only those who partake are those who claim to be of the heavenly, or anointed class, and those who partake are demonstrating that they are part of the new covenant. All others in the great crowd let it pass by, because they are not a part of the new covenant.

A day is coming when Armageddon will take place, the faithful will be removed from the earth, God’s wrath will fall upon the earth, and those who have not followed Jehovah’s ways will be destroyed. Then a millennium is ushered in where those who have died before this time period will be resurrected, and they are taught the ways of God. This is not a sudden resurrection, but a resurrection over time. The servants of God will teach them the ways of Jehovah, and at the end of that time, there is a test. Even the faithful Jehovah’s Witnesses who are on earth at that time will be tested. Those who do not pass the test of faithfulness will be destroyed.

There is no conscious punishment for sin, there is simply destruction, or annihilation. Those who pass the test will live forever in paradise on earth – even though, the option is held open that if ever evil is found among those on earth, they will be very quickly destroyed, that this evil does not spread. Jehovah’s witnesses are very focused upon evangelism, very focused on going door to door, in obedience to the commands of Scripture. There is one organization that speaks for Jehovah today. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, centered in Brooklyn, New York, directed by the governing body of the Jehovah’s Witnesses – the “faithful and discreet slave”, that gives meat in due season to the members of the household, and one only finds true spiritual nourishment by listening to what is given them by the governing body of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

There were 6 things objected to in that summary, which I hope to rectify soon. Those were:
1) “The man Jesus Christ does not have a spirit, in the sense of some other spiritual component. We possess a soul, that is the life force within us.”
2) “and he is one of the 144,000…and Jesus is one of that anointed class.”
3) “The rest of God’s faithful servants are known as ‘the great crowd'”
4) “the faithful will be removed from the earth”
5) “even though, the option is held open that if ever evil is found among those on earth, they will be very quickly destroyed, that this evil does not spread.”
6) “There is one organization that speaks for Jehovah today. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, centered in Brooklyn, New York”

I’ll address what I’ve discovered as to the possible inaccuracies in that statement, perhaps in a following post, but I wanted to share the fruit of that discussion.

As we continued to speak, I asked him to tell me what the Gospel is. I was given the predictable response “repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” – which, while true, is not the entirety of the Gospel. I then responded by asking if I could give him what I had just taught the children in my 1-6th grade class concerning the Gospel.

A) Man is sinful, God is Holy! (Lev 11:44-45; Gal 3:11)
B) Man is cursed with sin, due to the Fall of Man in Eden. (Gen 2:16-17) Man’s nature is such that he cannot do good.(Eph 2:3)
C) God, however, has a Perfect Way to satisfy His wrath (Rom 1:18) toward sin, and to proclaim His glory (rom 5:2, Rom 15:7).
D) God promised a Redeemer, from the very beginning. (Gen 3:15) The law, and the prophets all point to Him (Rom 3:21)
E) That Redeemer was born to a virgin (isa 7:14), and lived a perfect life in obedience to the law(Heb 7;28)
F) That Redeemer was crucified by the Jews on a Roman cross,(Acts 2:36) in propitiation for – in substitution for (2 Co 5:21)- our sins (1Jo 4:10)
G) That death was the satisfaction – the payment for – the wrath of God. (Rom 3:25) All who believe on Christ will be saved from the Judgement to come. (Rom 5-9)
H) That Redeemer defeated sin, overcame death (Rom 8:3) and proved the reality of His sacrifice’s power by raising Himself from the dead (Acts 17:31; John 2:19)- and now lives always to be the intercessor for His sheep (Heb 7:25)
I) Men come to Christ by the power of God (John 6:44) – by being born again of the power of the Holy Spirit (1 Pe 1:3), by the Repentance (Acts 5:31) and Faith (Rom 12:3, Phil 1:29)that both come as gifts from God – and are foreknown, predestined, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified by the power and for the glory of God. (Rom 8:28-37)

I think I was able to present most of it – and as we talked, he tended to try to direct the conversation to the Trinity argument – which I answered, and then returned to my presentation.

When we got to propitiation, we had a discussion of the atonement, justification, and the nature of man’s sinful state before God that I truly hope was extremely valuable to him. We discussed why the sacrifice had to be God, that there were two essential doctrines that the JWs truly do not properly recognize – sin, and the need for atonement from it. Personal atonement, for personal sin. He brought up the Trinity once, in relation to the early church’s witness – and I shared with him a bit of background concerning their supposed citation of Tertullian, in their book “Should you believe the Trinity?”. I’ve been working on a selection of quotations from those various Fathers, demonstrating that Trinitarian belief was something every major writer affirmed – albeit with lesser or greater degrees of accuracy. I’m also going to send him a rewritten summary, to see if he would consider that unobjectionable.

Hopefully, we can stay in contact – and he looked to be very interested in doing so. May God bless these opportunities in the future 😉

I’m participating in a debate with the “proprietor” of Urban Philosophy, a website devoted to discussion of Philosophy, and the return of Philosophy to the forefront of people’s lives. Mitch LeBlanc is an undergraduate student in Philosophy and an atheist.

The thesis of the debate is:

“Is the Triune God of Scripture the proper grounds for all knowledge?”

I am taking the affirmative position, Mitch the negative.

The debate is on July 31st, and begins at 8:30pm. Anyone wishing to attend can register at the Urban Philosophy site, and join “Chat”.

The format is still TBD, but will likely include an opening statement from both parties, multiple cross-examination periods, as well as rebuttals. Other details still forthcoming.

I was afforded an opportunity that most Christians are not, last Saturday. The opportunity to discuss the scriptures in the house of a Jehovah’s Witness. The reasons for this are rather lengthy, but I can summarize it briefly. Two of my children, and their mother, (hereafter referred to as S.) now attend a local Kingdom Hall – I was informed of this the day before I was scheduled to pick them up. I was curious as to what brought their mother to this decision, as she comes from a (nominal) Roman Catholic background. A phone discussion ensued, in which she admitted that she didn’t have answers to many of my questions. Therefore, I was told that they would invite their Elder to answer any questions that I might have. you HAD to confess the Father as GodFurther, I could not have the kids unless I had this discussion. As it turns out, he didn’t show up – I was rather skeptical that he would, as JWs are told not to invite “apostates” (non-JWs) into their houses. However, I did talk to a younger man living there, hereafter referred to as J. – (I’m not sure what the relationship there is, and I didn’t ask) whose sister, and her two small children also live in the house (and who listened to the entire conversation).

S. and I had discussed several passages previously – especially John 1 and Hebrews 1. However, when we began our discussion, I began by asking him to define what it was he believed, in his own words. After he did that, I would take a bit to explain what I believe, in as succinct a manner as possible. He did so, and took about 2-3 minutes to do so. I took notes as he did, so that I would be sure not to become confused thereafter. Here is what he told me:

1. Jehovah is God’s name.
2. His son is Jesus.
3. After the resurrection, Jesus will be the head of the government, along with the 144,000.
4. There is a trial period after sleep.
5. Satan deceived Eve, and tested God.
6. Therefore, God gave Satan a chance – to exercise a certain amount of rule.
7. Satan is the government over the world, and the world has seen how Satan’s rule is.
8. How we choose is how we will be judged.

I believe I asked one question, at this point, in order to confirm what it was he had said. I think it was about point 6, and the story of Job was discussed, but very very briefly.

I then began to present what I believed. I was only able to get a very short way into point 3, due to the myriad objections that came my way at that point. This is the outline I use when giving a short explanation of what Christians believe. It can be expanded, compressed, or given a detailed look, depending on the subject.

1) Scripture:
i) Scripture is the God-breathed (inspired) self-revelation of God to, and for His people.
ii) It is comprised of 66 books – the OT originally written in Hebrew, with the NT written in Greek.
iii) No word of the Scripture can be broken, as Christ said – therefore, it is the only arbiter, source, or definition for what must be believed.

2) Trinity Defined
i) Within the one Being that is God, there exist eternally three coequal and coeternal Persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
ii) Each word of this definition is important. Each term has a certain, definite meaning. Please don’t ignore any of them. These few words present the foundation of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity: monotheism, the existence of three divine Persons, and the equality of those Persons.
iii) The phrase “one Being” communicates the truth that there is only one true God, the Creator of all things. The Trinity is monotheistic. It is not, however, Unitarian. Monotheism says that there is only one Being of God, while Unitarianism asserts that there is only one person of God. The Being of God is what makes God, God. It is the substance of God. In the Christian definition I just gave you – recognize the difference between the words Being and Person. The failure to recognize that the definition given above is using these two terms in different ways is one of the prime reasons for confusion in regard to the Trinity. Being is what makes something what it is. Person is what makes someone who he or she is. As Hank Hanegraaff puts it, when speaking of the Trinity, we speak of one what (the Being of God) and three whos (the three divine Persons).
iv) We speak of these three divine Persons as coequal and coeternal. The Father has eternally been the Father, and the Son has eternally been the Son. The terms Father and Son refer to an eternal relationship that they have with each other. It is vitally important to understand that this relationship has always been. If we neglect to recognize this fact, we run the danger of thinking that the Father precedes or creates the Son, when this is not the case. While theologians speak of the Father begetting the Son, they do so in such a way that completely denies that the Son is a creation of, or ontologically inferior to, the Father. Each of the divine Persons shares fully and completely in the divine Being, but they likewise bear a relationship to one another within the Godhead itself. Many arguments raised against the Trinity actually focus on the relationship between the Persons, as if these automatically indicate an inferiority of nature. We do well to recognize this kind of error in the arguments of those who oppose the Christian faith.
v) The final assertion of our definition comprises the deity of Christ and the deity and personality of the Holy Spirit. Many of our conversations of the Trinity focus on this particular area. The key element in successfully explaining and defending the Trinity is to recognize that the doctrine is based on the plain teaching of Scripture. We can never afford to abandon the only ground upon which the Christian can stand — the teaching of God’s Word. Each of the three foundations of the doctrine are clear teachings of the Bible, and we must focus our defense there, if we wish to honor God and give a God-glorifying answer to those who ask.
(Taken and compressed from a section of The Forgotten Trinity, James R. White)

3) Sin defined
i) Sin is any failure to conform to the moral law of God in act, attitude, or nature. (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, pg 490)
ii) Exo 20, Matt 5:22,28, Gal 5:20, Eph 2:3
iii) A failure to glorify God in all things and to thus love him perfectly – Mark 12:30, Isa 42:8, 43:7,21, Eph 1:12
iv) Sin is lawlessness – 1jo 3:4, Rom 2:15, Rom 2:17-29,
v) Right in their own eyes – Deu 12:8, Judg 17:6, 2Ki 10:30, Pro 21:2

4) Punishment defined
i) Death – Eze 18:4
ii) Everlasting – matt 25:46
iii) Demanded by God’s Holiness – Rom 7:12, Rev 4:8, 6:10, 15:4
5) Biblical requirements for salvation
i) Belongs to God alone – Gen 49:18, Psa 3:8, Isa 12:2, Isa 45:8, 45:17
ii) Everlasting – Isa 45:17, 51:6,8, Mar 16:20, 2th 2:13, Heb 5:9
iii) Substitutionary – Rom 4:24-25, 5 (all)
iv) Justifies – Rom 5 ( all of 5) Rom 8:33 (and all of 8 )
v) Atones (propitiates) – Rom 3;25, heb 2:17, 1jo 2:2, 4:10

6) Depiction of the Savior and Redeemer
i) Isa 53, Mic 7:16

7) His salvific work – atonement and redemption
i) By that atoning work, He satisfies the wrath of God against the sin of man – past, present of future. Fulfills the covenant of the law, begins the covenant of grace, and satisfies every requirement God had decreed. By this mighty work, He has secured us as His elect people, as chosen from before the foundation of the world (eph 1), as newly reborn creatures, being sanctified in his love and grace.

8 ) Perfection of that work, due to the perfect fulfillment of it
i) His work is not, and cannot be, a failure. Christ died for His peculiar people, throughout history, and throught the future, securing their pardon, once and for all. His perfect sacrifice, as the spotless lamb, purchased us as His people for all eternity.
ii) Our rebirth is His gift (Eze 37-38, eph 2:5) Our faith in Him is His gracious gift (heb 12:2), as is the repentance (acts 5:31, 2ti 2:25) we must show. His salvation is a perfect gift, as is His sanctifying grace (eph 2:8-9, 5:26, 1th 5:23).
iii) Therefore, man may never take one iota of God’s glory in salvation for Himself.

9) Perfection of His people through Him
i) Those who are in Christ are branches of the one true vine. There are those who falsely claim to be part of the vine – but will be pruned, and cast into the fire.
ii) False professors – apostates – are those who knwo the truth, yet reject it in favor of a lie.
iii) True believers endure to the end. That is the hallmark of a true, enduring faith – for all true faith is a gift of God, and therefore cannot fail.
iv) At the resurrection, we will be made like Christ, and live forever in the presence of the Triune God, praising and glorifying Him forever. Heaven and earth will be remade, and a number beyond counting will be present. We will no longer sin, and sin will be cast into hell along with the demons, the unsaved, sinful humans, and every hint of depravity and corruption.

10) To put the Gospel succinctly: God is Holy – man is sinful. Man must repent of his sin, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, for who he claims to be – Lord over all of creation, and the only savior for mankind. To reject the identity, the lordship, or the salvation of Christ is to reject the only way to be saved from an eternal hell, and to fulfill the condemnation of God which He has already determined for all sinful creatures. To believe truly is to spend eternity in the presence of God, glorifying Him.

So, this was my planned outline. As I said, I didn’t get far into it. J. said he had a question – if I recall, the immediate question was – how can two persons be the same person. if you will recall, the above specifically states that it is important to make the distinction there. When i expanded upon what the various terms meant, and signified – I was given more objections, and more, and more. When I asked if I could finish the presentation of what I believed, I think the answer I received was “but you haven’t answered what I said about (x) yet.” Answering the objections, it seemed, was now the point of the discussion! This is a very, very common gambit in debate. I have a name for that – shotgun apologetics. Fire a full spread, see what hits – then chamber the next round of shot. Eventually, your opponent is either out of time, or out of answers – and either one works. So, I switched tacks a bit. I began answering objections with Scriptures that would counter his objection. I did get to exegete a bit of John 1 – unfortunately, the greek text I had pulled up on my browser (transliterated, original, english) was lost as I plugged my laptop in. The screen wouldn’t reactivate, and I lost my browser windows that i had kept up the entire trip, for this very purpose, as I knew that text (along with several others) would be a sticking point. So, I had to “reconstruct” the word order of the Greek text from what I could show him from Strong’s inline references in my KJV E-sword. Very frustrating.

His response was to offer more objections. Unfortunately, if someone isn’t listening to your presentations, but waiting for you to finish, so that they can present the next objection, the conversation is effectively over. This wasn’t any different.

So, to make the best of things, so that i could at least present the gospel, I went to Philippians 2, in response to an objection that centered around the humanity of Christ. (One of several) I found something very interesting – every time they’d read Phil 2, they’d just “skip over” the portion that speaks of Christ as “being in the form of God”. Every time. Like it wasn’t even there. After the 4th time I went back to that section, he finally gave me a throwaway answer – “that just means that Jesus was like God” – he became agitated, so I moved on.

So, I proceeded to Isaiah 6. If you remember, this is the chapter where Isaiah sees the Lord – in majesty, train of his robe fills the temple, etc. I showed him the “YHWH” Strong’s reference in my bible – and he agreed, this must be Jehovah God. Then, I took him to John 12. He was visibly annoyed at this point, and muttering to himself – but he turned. We read from verse 30 to verse 41. I asked him: “Who did Isaiah see?” His answer – “God”

I said, “exactly”. Who is John saying that Isaiah saw? “God.” “So,” I said, “who is John saying that Jesus is?” He became extremely agitated at this point, and said “Jesus is a created being – he cannot be God!” “Yet”, I pressed, “Jesus is said, right here, to be the one that Isaiah saw.” “Where does it say that?” He replied. I went through all the times just prior, and just after, that John points out, over and over, that Jesus is the one that is referred to throughout, as “Him”. At 5 times within the previous 5 verses, “Him” is Jesus. There is no context change between the verse prior, and this one – all the same discussion. The next verse says that “even some of the rulers believed in Him” – I asked J. – in who? “God”, was his answer. “The rulers already believed in God the Father – and to be a Jew, you HAD to confess the Father as God – so who is John saying they are afraid of confessing, for fear of being put out of the synagogue? “God!” (Very, very agitated, now)

“Read on a little further, then. ‘He who believes in Me does not believe in Me, but in the One who sent Me. He who sees me, sees the One who sent Me.’ See that? Christ is answering your question for you. Isaiah saw the glory of the preincarnate Christ, seated on a throne, with the train of His robe, fillign the temple.”

I was then informed that the conversation was over, he didn’t want to talk about it, that I could feel free to talk about things related to the children, but that we were done. I asked him – “are you sure you wouldn’t like to look at Psalm 102, first?” The last response I got was “What part of the conversation is over did you not understand?” I spoke to S. for a just a moment longer, and added only that she should recall what Christ said – “Unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins. That’s the reason I wanted to talk to you all today. Not to win a debate, not to score points, or make myself look smart. I have to be a faithful proclaimer of the Gospel.” The discussion ended, I collected the kids, and their things, and we were on their way.

It may not look like a lot – but remember – I was told that I wouldn’t get my kids otherwise. It would have been very easy to have a “can’t we all get along” discussion. Just ask questions. Instead, I challenged the heart of their doctrine, with the full understanding that I might not get my kids as a result. I didn’t expect to get them at all, to be very frank with you, but I knew that God would be honored by a faithful defense of His gospel, and I couldn’t do otherwise. I trusted that God would be faithful to me, whatever the outcome, but that i had an opportunity that doesn’t come along often – to witness to a jehovah’s Witness where they live, with them knowing that it was with the understanding that they were answering my questions.

Despite that fact – they threw the objections at me – I counted at least 30 separate objections, and many of the same type, but in different forms, using verses, in addition. In a discussion that was meant to answer my questions. No, it wasn’t fair. I didn’t expect it to be. I was interrupted, treated rudely on several occasions – and, to be honest, I may have interrupted someone myself. When two different people are both giving you objections simultaneously, it’s hard not to interrupt someone! But, this isn’t to toot my own horn – it’s to illustrate that God is faithful to those who witness faithfully – especially when they are given every opportunity to “opt out” of a defense of the Christian faith. I never got to ask any of the questions I brought with me. I’m saving them for the meeting with the Elder that they said they would set up on my return. I’m just thankful to God for His faithfulness to me in a situation that could have been devastating.

I have also been invited back to talk to their elder – once again in their home – on July 25th. Please pray for me, that I might be a faithful witness!