Christian Heresy - Arminianism

Happy Valentine Day's Eve to everyone. I am blessed to have a wonderful woman as my wife, that is also my best friend, and who I continue to be attracted to, even after 18 years of marriage. I sometimes see at my work the pain of failed marriages, and the permanent scars that this causes in a person's life. So I count as one of my life's most important blessings the blessing of a happy marriage. Ok, so I have to share a quick story from this past week. This past week, my wife and I had a fight. It was so bad, that she told me to sleep on the couch, and when I did not, she slept on the couch herself. When I came home the next day, I tried to make amends by buying her chocolate, and making dinner for the family. But when I went upstairs to our bedroom, I was caught by a BIG surprise. Peggy was not home. But she pulled back the corner of the comforter on our bed, and there laying on the mattress was her wedding ring. I thought the message was clear, she had left me.

My initial reaction was one of anger – she would leave me over a simple fight? I was going to read her the riot act when she got home. How dare she! But as I thought about the pain of thinking she had left me, I thought that because I wanted her to forgive me for the previous night's fight, that I needed to unconditionally forgive her for removing her wedding ring. So when she finally came home I greeted her with a heart-felt hug and a kiss, and told her how glad I was to see her.

Now here's the kicker of the story – after the family ate dinner together, I sat down with her and I asked to see her hand. And the wedding ring was back where it belonged. When I asked her about why she removed her ring, she simply told me that she was retaining water, and removed it when she was sleeping. No message was intended, and she was not threatening to end our marriage. We laughed together when I explained what I thought when I saw the ring lying on our mattress. Anyway, just remember to not read too much into things, especially when it involves your spouse.

My topic today is to discuss a major Christian heresy – Arminianism. John MacArthur, perhaps the leading Protestant voice in America himself has ranked Arminianism as the third most important theological crisis that the North American Church is facing today. Article is here. So allow me to speak generally about this heresy, and perhaps we can learn together why it is so dangerous to today's Church.

Arminianism is a response to the hard to swallow John Calvin doctrine of pre-destination. Theopedia describes it as follows: Arminianism is a school of theology based on the teachings of Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), for whom it is named. It is perhaps most prominent in the Methodist movement and found in various other evangelical circles today. It stands in contrast to Calvinism, with which it has a long history of debate…

The Arminian followers published something called a 'Remonstrance' which outlined these 5 Arminian beliefs of salvation:

1. On their own, humans can do nothing good;
   
2. Before the foundation of the world, God chose to save everyone who would freely choose to put their trust in Jesus;
   
3. Jesus died for everyone, but His death only redeems believers;
   
4. People can choose to reject God's attempts to save them;
   
5. Scripture does not clearly state whether believers can lose their salvation. (this summary is from 'Christian History Made Easy', Jones, p. 123.
   

The Calvinist response was to hold the Synod of Dort in 1618, which is where the Calvinist's articulated their 5 TULIP points of Calvinism. Arminianism was also condemned by the Synod.

I have previously been accused of being an Arminian, and so it is a topic I would like to spend more time learning about and discussing. So if anyone has any comments or explanations of Arminianism, I hope you will feel free to share them Thanks, and may God bless you abundantly this week. /s/Tom

Does God Punish People or Nations Today?

Happy Super Bowl Sunday to everyone. This is a day I have feared for a month now. The Packers are in the Super Bowl, and are actually favored to win. Nooooo! Besides the dread I am experiencing because of the Super Bowl, I am also recovering from a bout of strep throat, as is Elijah. Olivia is at a Holy Spirit retreat this weekend, and I cannot wait to see what she takes away from this experience.

For today's topic, I thought I would write about the topic of whether God punishes people or nations in today's world. Clearly in the Old Testament, we see that God is described as being 'Sovereign', meaning He is the responsible agent for all blessings and all adversity as well. As one example among many we have Ecclesiastes 7:14 which says: "In the day of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity consider: God has made the one as well as the other." In dealing with Israel, God's chosen people we also see in the Old Testament that God is the author of blessings upon both Israel and Individuals when they are faithful, while also punishing wickedness for their lack of faith. Again there are many examples, but I will provide two: first, as an example in the Old Testament of God punishing an individual, we have the example of King Saul, the King of Israel before the famous King David. In 1 Chronicles 10:13-14, we see that Saul "died because he was unfaithful to the Lord" (NLT). So God was the agent of Saul's death because of his unfaithfulness to the Lord.

And as an example in the Old Testament of God punishing a nation, we again see many examples of God's sovereign punishment. The example I have chosen is God's punishment of Israel in 2 Kings 17, where God "removed Israel from His sight" (v. 18). They feared other gods (v. 7), they served idols (v. 12). They did secretly what was not right (v. 9). They did wicked things (v. 10-11). But here is the real clincher of the reason for God punishing Israel: they did not believe in the Lord their God (v. 13-14). This was shown by their ignoring the prophets sent by God. They despised His statutes and His covenant (v. 15). And they abandoned all of the 10 Commandments (v. 15). But the key for God's punishment is found in verses 13-14, where Israel did not believe anymore in their God.

Thus, in the Old Testament God was responsible for punishing both individuals and nations for their lack of faith. But can we draw the conclusion that God still does this in the age after Jesus Christ's death and resurrection, in the age of the New Testament? Let me give a quick reason why this is not necessarily so. First, the Old Testament has the focus of God's relationship with Israel. God made a Covenant with Moses and Israel and this is found in Exodus 19:5 - Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be ^wmy treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine". As you can see from the wording this is a conditional agreement. If Israel obeys and keeps the Commandments, then it will be God's treasured possession. But if it was not faithful…

But today, we do not have this sort of Covenant with God. And so, God's reason for punishing his people or nations is not the same as it is in the Old Testament.

The example of an event that some preachers have attributed as an action of God is the recent Haiti earthquake. But does this make sense to say God punished Haiti, and not other nations of the world? For example, the claim is that Haiti made some sort of pact with the devil, involving voodoo practices. Why are we so quick to judge others as being worthy of judgment? I know little about this, or even the claim, but don't you think that if there is another nation that unjustifiably slaughtered millions of unborn, innocent children, that this might be a better reason for God's punishment? I'm just saying that America likewise deserves God's punishment. As does Russia. And China. And England, and every other nation on the planet. And so, should we really say the Haitian earthquake is from God, when there was no direct fingerprints of God having acted. It looks like a "natural" tragedy, right? This lack of clarity is a good reason for believing that this was not God using His Sovereign judgment. If we cannot see that God judged Haiti, than this earthquake judgment does not glorify God. We all deserve punishment from God, and we should not so quickly attribute an isolated tragedy as being God's wrath or judgment.

The New Testament story that helps me to draw this conclusion is found in Luke 13. In this chapter, there is a recent tragedy of a tower falling resulting in 18 deaths which was discussed by people asking Jesus the simple question – did they deserve this tragedy because they were terrible sinners? Here is Jesus' response:

"Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? ³ No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. ⁴ Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? ⁵ No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." (Luke 13:2-5)

 

So Jesus reminds us that we are all miserable sinners in God's eyes, deserving punishment. And when we see tragedies likes earthquakes or tidal waves, etc. we should not be so quick to judge these people as making a "pact with the devil". Or judging them for not being the right religion. Instead, we need to see our own need for a Savior, and repent. Isn't it that a simple application for today? May God bless you this week.

Greatest Quarterbacks of All-Time

On the Access Viking website this morning, Mark Craig of the Strib looks at the top 10 Quarterbacks of All-Time. The link is here. A Daily News reporter's list of the top NFL QB's is as follows:

1. Joe Montana (4 Super Bowl wins – San Francisco, played with Jerry Rice and a young Terrell Owens as his receivers, and a great back in Roger Craig);
   
2. Tom Brady (3 Super Bowl wins – going for his 4^th SB victory this year);
   
3. Johnny Unitas (1 Super Bowl win);
   
4. Dan Marino (1 Super Bowl win with some great receivers in the Mark's Brothers - Mark Duper and Mark Clayton);
   
5. John Elway (2 Super Bowl wins);
   
6. Peyton Manning (1 Super Bowl win);
   
7. Troy Aikman (3 Super Bowl wins with Michael Irvin as his main receiver and a great running back in Emmitt Smith);
   
8. Brett Favre (1 Super Bowl win);
   
9. Terry Bradshaw (4 Super Bowl wins, Lynn Swan and John Stallworth as his main receivers, and an offence including Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier);
   
10. Otto Graham – (token old-timer?)
    

First, let me comment about 2 graet quarterbacks left off the list: where is Bart Starr? He won 2 Super Bowls (the first 2), as well as three league championships before they had Super Bowls. He has to be on the top 10 list. I also think Steve Young (1 Super Bowl win as a starter), should be on the list. He changed the quarterback position in the NFL, by having a great arm as well as the ability to effectively run the ball as a big part of the offense (all due respect to the Viking's Fran Tarkenton, but his scrambling wasn't a big part of the offense).

Having watched all of these guys play (except Otto Graham), here's my take on the list. Troy Aikman and Terry Bradshaw don't belong on the list. Yes, they won Super Bowls but they weren't great quarterbacks. They didn't have great percentages of completions, and the running backs they had were the larger part of why they won. So they'd be out of my list.

Tom Brady is better than Joe Montana. Period. No doubt. Look at what he's done this year, with back up wide receivers like Deion Branch, he led his team to the best record in the NFL this year. And he had no good running backs. And a defense without many big names. This was Tom Brady's show this year. It was all him. Yes, Montana had some great teams in San Francisco. But do you remember his two years in Kansas City? While Joe Montana played for Kansas City with a normal offense, he was mediocre. What did Montana do when the offense was focused on him? Not much, and his quarterback rating during those 2 years was 87 or less. Nope, Brady has done more with less talent around him than Montana did.

And although he's a Packer, Brett Favre belongs ahead of Peyton Manning, John Elway, Johnny Unitas, and certainly Troy Aikman. I put him at number 3 all-time. All of the QB records he has have to mean something.

That's my take. Feel free to share your thoughts about this list or my comments. Have a happy Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend. /s/Tom Wolff

Something weird's going on here. Check out these stories:

 

1. Apocalfish? 2 million dead fish wash on shore in Maryland. (Link here.) Also, reports in Arkansas of thousands of fish deaths in the Arkansas River.
   

   
    

2. "Aflockalypse?" Mass bird deaths rare, not apocalyptic. (Link here.) Mass deaths in Oslo, Louisiana, and the Arkansas River,
   

   
    

3. 39% of NYC Pregnancies Result in Abortion. (Story here.) In 2009, there were 225,667 pregnancies in the City with 126,774 resulting in live births and 87,273 resulting in abortions. In addition to those abortion numbers, there were 11,620 spontaneous terminations. Forty-six (46%) percent of all births in the Bronx result in abortions—the highest among the five boroughs, according to the report.
   

   
    

4. End of Days Coming May 21^st – (Story here.) Harold Camping has a radio program in California, which is where I believe the report is coming from. It sure is getting a lot of press. Here is a part of the story:
   

   Camping, 89, believes the Bible essentially functions as a cosmic calendar explaining exactly when various prophecies will be fulfilled. The retired civil engineer said all his calculations come from close readings of the Bible, but that external events like the foundation of the state of Israel in 1948 are signs confirming the date. "Beyond the shadow of a doubt, May 21 will be the date of the Rapture and the day of judgment," he said…
   

 

 

Christian Heresy – the Donatists

Happy New Year to everyone. Recently, I am enjoying a good book by Rose Publishing called 'Christian History Made Easy'. And one of the topics it deals with is how the early Church has dealt with controversies and even (gasp) heresies. And so, today's post is on one of the major early heresies dealing with the Donatists (DAW-na-tists).

First, let me explain the importance of this issue through a real-life example – FACT EXAMPLE 1 – Suppose there was a strong believer, a natural leader, who makes a real, heartfelt commitment to the Lord. No one doubts his commitment to Jesus and his fellow believers. But he slips. When the going gets tough, he denies Jesus several times to others. The question raised by his denial is this – should this person be allowed back into Christian leadership?

Now back to the heresy of the Donatists. Imagine, if you will, the party that took place in the Rome as it celebrated its thousandth year birthday. This is what took place in AD 247. Roman orgies are still famous to this day, and so I know that I do not want to go into the details of what took place at Rome's 1,000 year birthday. But because the Roman pagan gods were part of the celebration, the early Christians did not take part in the Roman celebration. No problem, right? Yes, until a major plague broke out in Rome right after the 1,000 year celebration. And guess who got blamed? You got it – the Christians were blamed by the Romans for not taking part in the celebration. The plague was punishment of the gods. Emperor Decius (DEE-see-us) launched an empire wide persecution against the Christians. The Emperor required people to sacrifice to the Roman gods. If people were willing to sacrifice to the Roman gods, they received Sacrifice Certificates. Without the Certificates, people were imprisoned and tortured.

An actual Sacrifice Certificate, AD 251: "To: the Sacrifice Commission

From Diogenes, aged 72 years, with a scar over my right eyebrow.

I've always sacrificed to the gods. Now, in obedience to the emperor, I've sacrificed again, poured out a drink offering, and eaten meat offered to the gods. Please certify this below.

I, Syrus, saw Diogenes and his son sacrificing." (paraphrased from Harvard Theological Review 16 (1923), as quoted from 'Christian History Made Easy', 35).

Many prominent bishops of the Church, including Origen, were imprisoned and died during these persecutions, for failing to sacrifice to the pagan gods, or for not having the required Certificates. The persecutions continued until Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, AD, 313. But here is what caused a schism in the early Church – what should the Church do with the priests, bishops and elders who forged false Certificates? Or what should be done with those like Bishop Felix who turned over copies of the Scriptures to Roman authorities? A Bishop named Cyprian of Carthage ruled that those Christians who obtained forged Certificates could be re-admitted if these people showed outward signs of repentance, through prayer and fasting. But this caused the schism with the Donatists who believed that those who complied with the Romans were 'false converts', and should not be re-admitted to the Church. The issue came to a head in AD, 311 when Felix (who turned over the Scriptures to the Romans) with two other Bishops consecrated a successor Bishop in Carthage – Caecilian. And the Donatists refused to recognize Caecilian's ordination to Bishop because of Felix's previous failings. The Donatists, being more strict believers, considered martyrdom rather than cooperation as the only proper response for a true Christian leader. So what should be done with sacraments performed by "lapsed" priests or Bishops (like Felix's consecration of a successor Bishop)?

Through this, the Church developed the sacrament of the sacraments of confession and penance, enabling those who had committed serious sins after baptism to receive absolution and enter into full communion. At the same time, it established the principle that even sinful priests could dispense valid sacraments. The Donatists eventually died out. But was the right decision made? Several places in the New Testament describe the qualities a Christian leader (or elder) should have. If you want to see an example of what traits are needed when selecting an elder/Pastor, see Titus 1:5-9. And it is safe to say that lacking faith in persecution is not what we want in our leaders. But should repentant leaders who made a serious mistake be allowed back as leaders? This leads me back to how I started this Post, with FACT EXAMPLE 1 (above). Of course, this describes the Apostle Peter, the first leader of the early Church. To me, a strong understanding of the importance of God's Grace in a Church leader, is the most important trait to have. If we expect perfection in our leaders to be perfect, we will be disappointed. But as long as the leaders are wrestling with sin, not wanting it in their lives, then their mistakes should be expected and their heart-felt repentance accepted. So I say, yes the right decision was made in accepting back the repentant "lapsed" priests and Bishops.

I think Luther hits a homerun with his description of the Christian life as "simultaneously saint and sinner". I believe there is a greater danger of the leader who leans toward self-righteousness and pride, more so than a leader who has humility with a teachable heart, who understands their daily need of a Savior. But yes, the Church scandals of failed leaders gives all in the Church a black-eye,. My hope is that we be more accepting of imperfections in our Church leaders, and pray for their (and our) continued growth in the faith and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. If you have any thoughts on this, please share them. Have a great New Year! /s/Tom Wolff

Merry Christmas, 2010

Merry Christmas to you. We saw lots of animals at Hosanna's Christmas Eve service. We had a nice evening seeing my family last night. We ate oyster stew and lots of Christmas cookies. We watched 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail' after we opened presents. And my son was as excited as I've ever seen him, from his grandparent's gift of a Nintendo DSI. It has a camera, voice recorder, and of course, the games. Right before bed, he explained that Santa might bring him some more DSI games. I asked him how could Santa know that Elijah was going to receive a DSI from his Nana and Papa? He said, simple dad, he sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when your awake. He just knows these things.

Have you thought about the phrase "have a Merry Christmas"? This thought is all over the place during Christmas-time. Here's a few examples off of the top of my head – have a holly, jolly Christmas. Joyful, joyful we adore you. It's the most wonderful time of the year. Joy to the World, etc… So why is having a "Merry Christmas" such a big theme at this time of year?

Yes, I know this time of year is hard for a number of people, especially for those who have lost loved ones during the preceding year. And the pressure of wrapping up work year-end reports and projects, and the culture driven drive to find the "perfect" gift for those close to us, is upon us all. So with all these things working against us, why should Christmas time be a time of joy and merriment?

If there is any chance for joy during this time of the year, it is only in Christ Jesus. This message of joy to the world was clearly provided by angels to the shepherds at the first Christmas:

And the angel said to them, "Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. ¹¹ For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. ¹² And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger." (Luke 2:10-12).

 

So the baby Jesus, the Lord come to Earth, the Savior, is the "good news of great joy" for us. And don't miss the point made by the angels at the end of verse 10 – this joy is for all people, not just Christians. So my hope for you this Christmas is that we be given more light, more smiles, more laughter, more joy for us, through the remembering of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ's birth. So go out there and have a Merry Christmas!

Displeasing the Lord

We are coming to the last week before Christmas here at the Wolff homestead. All of Peggy and the children's shopping is completed. And what about me? I haven't even started yet. So it looks like a busy week ahead for me.

My wife's the best. My wife received recognition this past week on a local radio station (KTIS, which is a Christian Contemporary music station). Here is what she did: she saw that a neighborhood teenage boy was wearing clothes totally inappropriate for this Minnesota winter. He was always wearing shorts, and his tennis shoes were torn along its sides. The boy's mother is a single working mom, and she was stressed out because she didn't have the time or money to help her son out. Peggy learned that the boy didn't have any winter clothes. So Peggy took the kid out to a store that has nice clothes for dirt cheap prices, and was able to get him new winter clothes, a new pair of shoes, without breaking the bank. The boy was happy and grateful. But the mom was so relieved and thankful, that she had to let others know what Peggy had done. So she called the radio station and let them know what a wonderful act of love that Peggy had shown. Peggy has the best heart around, and it is so cool that she received this 'shout-out' from someone she helped.

For today's topic, I wanted to bring up a story from 2nd Samuel which caught my attention. 2nd Samuel deals with King David, after he rises to become King of Israel. David is expanding Israel's borders by defeating the pagan city-states neighboring Israel. And God's hand is with him – he achieves victory after victory. God's relationship with David was special – God's Word describes him as a "man after God's own heart". God loves David. But we see from the story of David and Bathsheba, how God's relationship works even with those whom He loves. During this particular spring described in chapter 11, David decides to stay home instead of going out to lead his armies. He's lounging on a couch, and decides to take a stroll on the King's roof. While out on this stroll, he sees a young lady taking a bath. And even though David has lots of wives and concubines, he asks after this beautiful woman. David learns that she is married to one of his soldiers, Uriah the Hittite (what's a Hittite?) And he still takes her, and has sexual relations with her. You know the story from here – Bathsheba becomes pregnant, and David ends up ordering the death of his faithful and honorable soldier Uriah. One sin leading to many other sins. It's a tragic story.

But the verse that caught my attention is 2 Samuel 11:27, which says: "the thing that David had done displeased the Lord." David displeased the Lord? I think I am like most Christians in thinking that my sins are always covered by God's Grace. My sins are placed on the Cross, and covered by the Blood of Jesus. Grace is a wonderful doctrine that is so freeing, my actions don't make God love me any greater or less in providing me with my salvation. But then I see someone like David who is a Bible hero, and greatly loved by God, but David still "displeased" the Lord. I'm not sure that this verse truly brings out the emotion of God from what David had done. You know, David committed a sexual sin, lied, and eventually caused the death of an honorable man. "Displeased" just doesn't seem to accurately describe what God is feeling here. A couple of other Bible translations describe it as "David had done was evil in the sight of the Lord" (NASB), or even "the Lord was angry at what David had done" (CEV), I think this brings out God's feeling a bit more clearly. God was angry and though He loved David, God was going to do something about it.

So for today's believers, can we make God angry like King David did, even though we are covered by the Blood of Jesus? Well, of course! If you need a New Testament verse, let's go to Revelation 3:19, which says:

"I correct and discipline everyone I love. So be diligent and turn from your indifference." (NLT)

These verses show that being in a relationship is difficult. Our actions hurt and even make others angry. And being in a relationship with God is no different. God wants the best for us, and He acts to help grow us into the righteous people that He wants us to be. So my take away application is this – are you willing to ask God if there is anything in your life that is making Him angry? Let us appreciate God's Grace enough to not view sin with "indifference". Have a peace-filled and thankful ending week of Christ's advent. /s/Tom