Atheism's Dishonest Redefinition of Faith

Atheist popularizers dishonestly conflated faith with blind faith to support their dishonest argument that materialism has evidence while no religion has evidence.

It's human nature to get frustrated, even angry, when people use dishonest arguments to argue against your position. Atheists always irritate me by using a dishonest definition of faith to score rhetorical, but illogical, points. Most do so in ignorance, so I have to practice some self-control when responding. If I point out the dishonesty of the rhetoric, I have to emphasize that I'm accusing the originators of the trick of dishonesty, not them.

Faith is not necessarily decided in the absence of evidence. That definition was popularized over the couple of decades by promoters of Atheism such as Dawkins and Boghosian. Those pop-science writers equivocated by conflating faith with blind faith. 

Faith, honestly defined, is active trust in the absence of absolute proof. I use the redundancy in “absolute proof” for emphasis. Blind faith is a subset; classifying all faith as meeting the definition of blind faith and then relegating faith to religion, to the exclusion of other matters, especially science, was deceptive rhetoric on the part of the popularizers.

Belief overlaps faith because it is a decision about a claim. The difference is that faith is active. Faith influences decisions, whereas belief can be active or passive. That is, one can accept a claim “in theory” without letting it influence decisions. 

(Grammatically, believe is a transitive verb: one believes a claim. Sometimes, the believed claim is implied. In contrast, faith is a noun that labels an active belief.) 

Can anthropogenic climate change be proven? No. Can the claim be believed? Yes. Can one put faith in it? Yes. Is there sufficient evidence (e.g., long-term history or evidence that politically- or career-motivated managers in the science industry fudge the numbers) to create reasonable doubt? Also yes.

Since issues such as climate change depend on evidence in the absence of proof, believe and faith are perfectly applicable terms in the realm of science. Technically, they lie outside the rules of the process of science, but they certainly apply to scientists, the public, and the policies and cancel culture that rely on scientific issues and evidence. One can honestly conclude, based on observation,  that fearmongering over climate-change crosses into religious (or at least ideological) zeal. 

To say that faith applies to religion and not to science is to mislead — and on the part of Atheists who popularized the bad definition, to use such rhetoric is to deceive. 

Copyright 2021, Richard Wheeler. Permission granted for non-remunerated use.

Repentance, Calvinism and Works

I love Wretched Radio. I never miss an episode. Today, Todd took a stand that requires a response. It is a fundamental issue.

Repentance, Misdefined, Is Works

Todd Friel, Ray Comfort, and John MacArthur conflate repentance and reform. In today's podcast, Todd defended including repentance in the gospel. That is fine until they explain repentance as turning away from or ceasing from sins. Todd's reasoned today that repenting is "not works" because not doing something cannot be works. This is a flawed definition and an illogical excuse.

Before continuing, I want to point out that, in the Witness Wednesday episodes, Todd asserts his definition of repentance only a minority of the time, and when he does, he does not camp on it. 

Repentance versus Reform

John the Baptist clearly distinguished between repentance and the fruits of repentance. He challenged people who claimed to have a change of mind and heart toward sin, yet failed to demonstrate that change in their actions. Our word for fruits of repentance is 'reform'. 

The tight causal relationship between repentance and reform makes it easy to conflate them. However, 'metanoia', the change of mind and heart called repentance, is a cause. Reform is an effect and evidence of repentance's sincerity.

Moreover, the natural man cannot reform without God's enabling work of regeneration. So, while repentance is involved in the process of salvation, and genuine repentance motivates reform, reform cannot be part of that process. 

Restraint, an Element of Works

To justify turning from sin as a requirement of the gospel, Todd quoted Ray's explanation that not doing something cannot be a work. Thus, they admit that they define repentance as including reform.

Just as there are sins of commission and sins of omission, there are works of commission and works of restraint. "Not doing something," therefore, is indeed "works."

Ray and Todd frequently make use of the Ten Commandments. Five, and arguably six, of the ten are Thou-shalt-not's. What is obedience to those commandments if not works of restraint? If obeying the Ten Commandments is "works," then refraining from sins as part of "repentance" is an offering of righteousness to God in exchange for salvation.

Arminians say you must refrain from certain sins to maintain salvation. Calvinists say you must refrain from sins to enter salvation. It's like the extremes of both have wrapped around the back and met each other.

Calvinist Repentance

From a Calvinist's perspective, the natural man's spirit is dead, inanimate, nonfunctional, dead-dead. God must regenerate him, that is, must animate his spirit before he can have faith. Therefore, if God has already saved a man, then all of what God commands of Christians becomes presentable in the gospel. Under Calvinism, faith plus works is a result of salvation, not a cause, so commanding good works or restraint from sin is orthodox... under Calvinism. 

But if commanding works is applicable to the convert, who has already been saved so that he can believe, then why would Todd defend preaching repentance-reform? Why must he deny that his definition of repentance is works? His agreement that it would be heretical to preach works refutes his belief in Calvinism. 

A Moderate Calvinist View

A Moderate Calvinist sees problems with the Calvinist definition of spiritual death. How can a dead spirit be accountable for things it was not even conscious of, aware of, and in power over? How can a dead spirit suffer in Hades? How can a dead spirit go to Hades without regeneration that is reserved for Christians? 

A Moderate Calvinist also sees a contradiction between the Calvinist order of salvation processes and the explicit New Testament teaching that God uses faith as the means through which He works the grace of salvation.  

A Moderate Calvinist would define spiritual death as analogous to physical death, which is separation of the spirit from the body. Spiritual death is separation from God with an accompanying cognitive disability with respect to spiritual things, resulting from bondage to sin. The "dead" spirit, then, has awareness and influence over decisions and can be held accountable for sins. The order of salvation would be a bracing or healing of the cognitive disability and a conviction of sin, followed by receiving the gift of faith, followed by salvation by grace through faith. 

In other words, since spiritually dead means separation from God and not dead-dead, God does not need to regenerate the spirit before granting the gift of faith. Commanding the unsaved to perform works, then, mixes grace with wages and faith with works, leaving the "convert" unconverted. 

Copyright 2021, Richard Wheeler. Permission granted for non-remunerated us, provided credit is properly given. 

1 Corinthians 13:13

From a question on Quora:

What does 1 Corinthians 13:13 mean?

Three things abide

[Love] bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things (1 Corinthians 13:7).

Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. (verses 8–10)

But now these three things abide: faith, hope, love; but the greatest of these is love (verse 13).

Chapter 13 compares the fruits of the Spirit such as faith, hope, and love, to verbal, revelatory gifts of the Spirit, prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. From the perspective of the early 50’s AD, when the apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians, spiritual gifts of prophecy and knowledge would be done away with (passive voice), and the spiritual gift of speaking in unlearned foreign languages would do itself away (middle voice).

This, in fact, happened before the end of the first century. The bit-by-bit Word of God revealed through knowledge (of the existing, incomplete scriptures) and prophecy was completed with the apostle John’s writing of Revelation. Chapter 14 explains that tongues was a sign to educated Jews that Jerusalem was about to be destroyed and the Roman diaspora of the Jews was about to happen. (Chapter 14 does this by invoking prophetic Old Testament passages.) The prophecy was fulfilled in 67–70 AD.

So the Spirit stopped endowing people with the spiritual gifts or prophecy, tongues, and knowledge within less than 50 years of when the passage was written. In contrast, the fruits of the Spirit would continue.

The Corinthians had been emphasizing the wrong things. They went for the showy, the novel, the impressive, the ego-boosting gifts of the Spirit and missed the greater things, holiness and the fruits of the Spirit.

If you miss this contrast, you miss why Paul was correcting their priorities.

The greatest of these

Verses 4–6 describe characteristics of love. For example, contrast “Love… does not seek its own” against 14:4, The one who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but the one who prophesies edifies the church. Each phrase in verses 4–6 describes a characteristic of behavior that flows from love.

Specifically, in verse 6, love “believes all things, hopes all things….” The word translated believes is the verb form of the word translated faith in verse 13. So we can see that love not only has many characteristics, but believing/faith and hoping/hope are two of those characteristics. In a hierarchy (an ontology), love is expressed or enacted through faith and hope. Hierarchically, then, love is greater than faith and hope.

Tangent

I’m surprised how some people link passing away (verse 10) to faith and hope (verse 13). Doing so, they break up the sentence that defines passing away’s context:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. (verses 9–10)

The partial is prophesy and knowledge. The partial, prophesy and knowledge, will be done away.

True, when prophesy is fulfilled and knowledge is based on first-hand, entire observation, faith and hope will become moot. But the topic is types of verbal revelation. Don’t miss what was to be done away: prophesy, tongues, and knowledge.

The looking-glass in verse 12 is a mirror (compare the same word in James 1:23, For anyone who hears the word but does not carry it out is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror. The mirror in which they saw themselves dimly was the Old Testament scriptures, discerned through knowledge, plus prophecy. The thing to be completed was the scriptures, at which time the partial, prophesy and knowledge, became superfluous.

The passive verb for prophesy and knowledge is not the same as the middle-voice verb for tongues. The meaning of tongues is explained in chapter 14 and in Old Testament scriptures that chapter 14 refers to: It was a sign to educated Jews of coming judgment, which was fulfilled by the destruction of Jerusalem and the diaspora in the first century.

So within 50 years of Paul writing 1 Corinthians, the Holy Spirit stopped distributing spiritual gifts that revealed new truths. The fruits of the Spirit, however, will continue throughout this age. 

Copyright 2020, Richard Wheeler. Permission granted for non-remunerated use, but please give credit where credit is due.

Did "righteous men" who had concubines sin?

Question on Quora:

In the Bible it was said that some righteous men had concubines. Is it not a sin?

Indeed, some “righteous” men had concubines, multiple wives, and even children by incest. Yes, they committed sin. Multiple spouses and non-spouses deviated from God’s perfect plan (See Matthew 19:4-6), but God tolerated “for the hardness of your hearts” in ancient times; there were more destructive sins. And as the scriptures record, it always came at a cost, causing family divisions, subterfuge, and sometimes violent strife.

The confusion comes from misunderstanding what righteous means.

There are two ways to be “righteous.” The way that occurs to us first is to achieve righteousness through human merit. Merit includes three main methods.

1. Heritage. Some think God will count them as righteous because they are descended from Abraham, or maybe grandpa was a preacher.
2. Church. Many think that a church can convey righteousness to them through membership or ceremonies such as confession and baptism. (Have you watched the Godfather movies?)
3. Good works. This includes church activities (#2), refraining from doing evil, and doing loving or charitable acts.

The problem is:

• (1) we will stand alone before God for judgment; deeds cannot be inherited — or as they say, God does not have grandchildren.
• (2 & 3) nobody can be good enough. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23) We all blow it. We all sin. And God cannot simply overlook sin and “forgive” it without becoming unjust.
  
  Many think, “I will do good things that will outweigh the bad.” That does not work because we already owe to our Creator the good things we do to justify ourselves. It’s like falling behind on your rent and trying to pay April’s rent with June’s paycheck. We can never catch up or get ahead.

The result is that God cannot allow us to defile His holy presence, and we could not bear the brightness of His glory. If He did not cast us into outer darkness, we would willingly flee there.

The second way to be “righteous” is through accounting. God knew nobody would become righteous by their own merit, so He provided an alternative. God Himself would become a man called Jesus of Nazareth, live a perfect life, and like a big brother, take the punishment that we all deserve.

God placed all our guilt on Jesus, and, in exchange, credits the righteousness of Jesus to all who will receive it. He (God) made Him (Jesus) to be sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (Jesus). (2 Corinthians 5:21.) God offers this exchange to us as a gift.

Going back to the three methods of human merit: Trying to earn the gift or even partially earn it insults the Giver. You can’t earn God’s favor by insulting Him.

The righteousness of “righteous” men in the Bible came not through their deeds or their restraint from sins such as polygamy. It came through recognizing their guilt, confessing their sinfulness, and trusting God.

In the Old Testament times, the things they trusted God for varied because the object of trust was gradually defined. Since the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, however, the object of trust has been explicitly defined. We call that definition “the gospel.”

For more background, see:

• Polygamy in the Bible - What Does God Say?
• What does the Bible say about polyamory?

The Heresy of Forgiveness

Or more precisely...

The Heresy of Requiring Forgiveness to Get Forgiveness

Many people fail to discern the difference between the preaching of Law that demands repentance and the preaching of Christ that demands trust in Him to redeem us. One heresy is the idea that, if we do not forgive all who sin against us, God will not forgive us. This is based on Jesus's preaching to the self-righteous Jews.

• "For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” Matthew 6:14-15

Jesus used the Law and rules like this to show self-righteous people that they could never achieve the level of righteousness needed to stand justified before God. 

• Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law [Jews], so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

Anything less than lifelong sinless perfection would desecrate God's holy presence. 

The Jews added thousands of commandments to the 600+ in the Old Testament, yet Jesus said...

• unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:20).

This was to drive us to depend on God's grace:

• the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3:24).

So then, we are justified not by do's and don'ts such as forgiving others, but by the grace of God, and if justified by grace, then we are no longer under the law of death that condemns, but under the law of love that liberates and rewards.

• But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster (Galatians 3:24).

This does not mean we can get away with sins such as unforgiveness. God chastises us to form righteousness in us. 

• Listen up, Joel Osteen! Listen up, Prosperity preachers! For the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives (Hebrews 12:6). Christians' lives are actually MORE painful than non-Christians' lives. But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons (verse 7).

But although we are under our loving Father's disciplinary hand, He will never, ever cast us out of His family, reverse our adoption, or un-birth us; and our Big Brother Jesus will never, ever disobey our Father's command to lose none of us. 

Saying that God's grace of forgiveness is contingent on our good work of forgiveness contradicts the gospel. It even contradicts itself: Grace means "gift," so anything earned cannot be grace. The gospel commands us to let go of all forms of self-merit and rely 100% on God's gift. If we do not receive the gift as a gift, we insult the Giver and receive neither the gift nor the Giver.

The unsaved forgive to get forgiveness. Christians forgive because they have been forgiven. To say otherwise may simply reflect confused and incomplete thinking about the gospel. However, adding any condition such as forgiveness to the gospel costs people their salvation. When salvation is jeopardized, heresy is not too strong a word.

If you depend on your ability to forgive others in order to attain to God's forgiveness, repent of this form of self-righteousness and trust Christ alone. Now, before you forget.

Copyright 2020, Richard Wheeler. Edited version of a previous post on Facebook. Permission granted for personal, non-profit use; but please give credit where credit is due.

Messiah's Unfulfilled and Fulfilled Prophecies

Question from Quora:

Since even the Christians agree that Jesus did not fulfill most of the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah, then why should anyone accept Jesus as the Messiah?

A Broken Question

The question is contains two non sequiturs. The correct answer to the question is, “The question is not a valid question.”

First, I’d like to know the count of fulfilled and unfulfilled prophecies and how it was arrived at. Bear in mind that many prophecies were in the form of typology.

For example, Moses prophesied that the Messiah would be like him. Both Jesus and Moses were rejected by their people. Both, after presenting themselves to their people, when away for a very long time before a second appearance. Both delivered Law: the first, a Law that condemns, and the second, a Law that liberates. Both presented sacrifices: the first, covering sacrifices, and the second, a redeeming sacrifice. I haven’t even scratched the surface here; Moses’ life was rich with prophetic symbolism. And that’s just one of many prophets.

Second, saying the prophecies concerning Messiah were not fulfilled is like writing a review for a play before the second act has even started or calling a baseball game after only the second inning. During Messiah Jesus’s first appearing, He accomplished a redemptive sacrifice that is there, plain as day, throughout the Old Testament, yet none of the Old Testament Jews anticipated. They focused entirely on nationalistic, political events yet to unfold, to the exclusion of predecessor, spiritual events. As Jesus said to Peter, “you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.” (Matthew 16:23, NKJV).

Why Believe?

Why anyone should accept Jesus as the Messiah remains a valid question, even if a gross misunderstanding of the prophecies motivates it. There are other answers, perhaps better answers, but this answer fits the context of the question. To understand it, some context is needed.

In the Bible, redemption, adoption, and sanctification all have two phases. These differences are gleaned from how the words are used in their contexts and from customs of ancient Jewish, Hellenist (Greek culture), and Roman societies.

• Redemption first involves the payment that transfers ownership and then involves taking delivery of the thing purchased.
• Adoption involves a legal declaration that makes someone a legal heir and then involves the execution of the will; which means for Christians the resurrection or transformation of the body leading into Judgment Day.
• Sanctification involves a legal declaration that makes someone holy and righteous, based on Messiah’s already having paid sin’s debt, followed by a gradual process of transforming that person’s behaviors into righteousness.
• Redemption, adoption, and sanctification converge when Messiah returns, wherein Messiah takes to Himself the believers remaining on earth, and transforming them into holy perfection, no longer in a form that is subject to temptation, and worthy to enter God’s presence.

As you can see, the phased processes (along with too many other processes and goals to mention here) dovetail with the concept of two appearance. That brings us to the answer to the question. First, one should believe because Jesus did fulfill so many prophecies. Second, one should believe, and believe now, because the delay in fulfillment of the remaining prophecies means there’s still time to find redemption. When Messiah fulfills the rest of the prophecies, it will be too late.

Tank

I remember a troubled young man Tank. After believing, he thought about questions he’d never considered before. One question above all bothered him: Why hasn’t God stopped sin and punished the wicked? How can God allow it to go on?

I asked when he had become a believer. Tank answered, two weeks ago.

Then I asked him, “Two weeks. Suppose Jesus had come three weeks weeks ago, stopped sin, and judged all the wicked for their sins. Where would Tank be now?”

Tank thought about it. “I guess, instead of asking why God allows sin to go on, I should thank Him for giving me more time, shouldn’t I?”

The delay between the first and second appearances of Messiah Jesus allows time for more people to repent and their place faith in Messiah. It allows them time to grow in holiness, worship God, and demonstrate His power. It also allows others to add to the accountability that will enable God to demonstrate His justice and holiness. You don’t want to be in the group that thinks the yet-to-be-fulfilled prophecies comprise a valid rationalization for rejecting the redemption the Messiah offers.

Copyright 2020, Richard Wheeler. Most of this question was originally posted on Quora. Permission granted for personal and non-profit use, and please give credit where credit is due.

Sacraments, Ordinances, and Channels of Grace

Sacraments Are Catholic. Ordinances Are Biblical.

A sacrament is a ceremony that both symbolizes something and serves as a conduit for grace. Sacraments are "Christianized" substitutes for the Jewish religious practices that the Catholic hierarchy restored after God had fulfilled and abolished them. So sacraments are "good works" by which Catholics think they earn grace.

Earn grace is an oxymoron, of course, because grace means unmerited favor, and you cannot earn something that you cannot merit. In Romans and other epistles, Paul goes to great lengths to explain that faith and works, and grace and wages, are mutually exclusive pairs. By trying to mix the unmiscible, Catholicism

The only conduits of grace in the New Testament are faith (Ephesians 2:8), prayer (Jude 20), and hearing the Word (Romans 10:17). (Calvinist/Reformed may add the new birth, which they believe has to precede faith because they take "dead in trespasses" to be literal, not metaphorical.) These are neither symbols nor conduits. A purely symbolic ceremony such as baptism is called an ordinance, or sometimes, a tradition.

Many churches that descend from Rome retain Romish baggage such as infant baptism and words like "sacrament." If you carefully distinguish between sacraments and ordinances, it will be easier to discount Rome's works-based gospel.


Copyright 2020, Richard Wheeler (Permission granted for non-profit purposes; just give credit where credit is due.)

How to Get Spotless Garments

From a question on Quora

What did the Bible mean when it said "Only those that their garment was without impurity will see Jesus"?

Our first challenge is to determine what passage in the Bible the question refers to. It has me stumped. It sounds like a paraphrase from memory of a sermon. The closest Bible wording would come from Hebrews 12:14, Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

However, the quote states biblical principles using the Bible's symbolic language.

Clothes, in this sense, symbolize your history of thoughts and actions. Impurity symbolizes sin. For example, save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh (Jude 1:23). The garment polluted by the flesh represents the lifestyle and trappings of a worldly, carnal lifestyle. For example, the “party animal” may seem “cool,” but charisma, popularity, and pleasure can be deadly moral traps.

Another form of polluted garment is the life of self-righteous hypocrites. "But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments (Matthew 23:5). Phylacteries are small leather boxes containing Hebrew texts, worn by Jewish men. The tassels were white to symbolize purity, with a blue thread symbolizing heaven. Some wore over-sized tassels to draw attention, as though it made them holier than thou, like the priests who wear elegant robes or backwards collars. The point is that they dressed to impress other people when they went to synagogue rather than presenting themselves humbly before God.

Many miss the warning that God is so holy that nobody can defile His presence without being cleansed of their guilt. We think of the Beatitudes as rules for peace and beauty, but the passage includes this razor-edged gem: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God (Matthew 5:8)

People think the Ten Commandments were given so we could make ourselves holy. However, they are just the summary of 613 commandments in the Old Testament. Their most important purpose is to show us that none of us are pure in heart because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).

Obeying the Ten Commandments is profitable, but it cannot make us righteous. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). For all of us have become like one who is unclean [ceremonially defiled or diseased], And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away (Isaiah 64:6). If we understand that, then we can understand that the Law has become our tutor unto Christ, so that we may be justified by faith (Galatians 3:24) instead of trying to be justified by deeds or heritage.

The Bible uses two metaphors for how we can have clean clothes, that is, be freed from our guilt.

The first metaphor is being washed in the blood of the Lamb. In Old Testament Israel, animals were sacrificed to temporarily cover sin. The sacrifice of an animal was a substitute for punishment of the sinner. The animals symbolized Messiah Jesus whose sacrifice would permanently remove guilt. He [God the Father] made Him [God the Son] who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him [Christ] (2 Corinthians 5:21). When we place our faith in Christ, God credits our punishment to Jesus’s death on the cross and credits Jesus’s righteousness to us.

You can find this language in the first epistle (letter) of the apostle John: if we walk in the Light as He Himself [Christ] is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7). Another place is in Revelation: These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7:14).

Whereas the first metaphor focuses on sins being washed away, the second metaphor emphasizes the substitution. I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed… (Revelation 3:18).

The command to “buy” in a spiritual sense confuses many. They think the “price” is sacraments and good deeds, but the price of God’s grace is the opposite. It is free. Ho! Every one who thirsts, come to the waters; And you who have no money come, buy and eat. Come, buy wine and milk Without money and without cost (Isaiah 55:1). The price is our pride.

We must come to God in utter, desperate humility. Grace means “gift,” and a gift cannot be earned. To offer God our efforts, the efforts of others, or our heritage as a price of grace is to insult the Giver. Note that the symbolic purchase of gold makes you rich; but if you had something to buy it with, you would already have been rich. Pride is the reason it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man — or a religious man — to enter the kingdom of God (Luke 18:25). When you let go of pride and exchange your need for God’s grace, He makes you spiritually rich.

Also note that the transaction has to actually take place. We cannot simply agree with the exchange intellectually or desire it without understanding. The mind, heart, and soul must motivate an act of the will.

Summary

The quote is not from the Bible. It does summarize biblical principles using biblical symbolism. Clean garments represent the righteousness of God the Son. God credits this righteousness to those who let go of any merit of their own and trust in, and only in, Christ and the price He paid for our sins on the cross.



Since I already posted the bulk of this on Quora, I can't copyright it. But I trust that if you use it, you will give credit where Credit is due.

Psalm 23:2 -- Translating "Green Pastures"

In Psalm 23:2, why is "pastures of grass" translated to "green pastures" (or similar)? (Question on Quora)

As you know, a word can have multiple definitions ("denotations"), but it can also imply multiple meanings, including emotive and figurative meanings ("connotations"), depending on how it is used in its context.

The Hebrew noun deshe, translated grass, comes from the verb dasha, to sprout, shoot, grow green. Thus, deshe implies grass or vegetation that is in its growing phase, and the word is sometimes translated more generically as herbs, vegetation, or as my doctor called it, greens.

Deshe contrasts with a different word for mature grass, châtsı̂yr. Châtsı̂yr implies grass that has turned brown and is ripe for the harvesting of its seed. Where I live, the seeds of brown natural grasses have husks called foxtails that embed into a sheep’s fur (and human’s clothes) and cause irritation. (Shall we add that that this evokes tick season and the hottest time of the year?)

In this case, the noun is used as an adjective that modifies the noun pasture. Grassy pasture wouldn’t quite draw out the meaning. Tender/young/green grass-pasture comes closer but is awkward in English. Grass and pasture are also slightly redundant. Since what matters is not the composition of the vegetation, but the fact that it is nourishing and comfortable, we can simplify the wording to green pastures.

Remember: The Psalms, as poetry, are saturated with metaphor. Barnes' Notes on the Bible points out that the verse describes a place where one’s hunger is satisfied by a bounty of food and where one is made to comfortably rest from one’s journey. I would add that it also signifies springtime, a season of renewal.

The word picture evokes New Testament themes. For example, Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and ‘you will find rest for your souls’ (Matthew 11:28–29).

Most churches and sects keep their flocks in a state of insecurity and perpetual work to achieve redemption. Work — ceremonies and do’s and don’ts — is good when done out of love and gratitude, and it is needed as evidence that we have become God’s sheep. 

However, work is an unending, impossible mission when done to establish or cling to justification. The gospel teaches us to renounce striving for self-righteousness and enter into the rest that God offers. When pride and fear cease, then love and gratitude transform former work into pleasure.

Why is the Catholic faith so strict?

Why is the Catholic faith so strict?

The gentleman who asks the question clarifies that the strictness that concerns him regards types of sins. I will answer from a biblical perspective, which agrees with Catholicism about most points of morality. Where the biblical perspective differs is in the motive behind that strictness.

As a courtesy, I will quote from the Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims translation; and where needed, I will include explanatory words or words from current translations in parentheses.

Defining Morality

God’s primary attribute is holiness. Because He is holy, He must be just and loving.

• God could be loving without being just or holy.
• God could be just without being loving or holy.
• If God were not just and loving, He could not be holy.

You can tell a lot about how biblical a church is by how well it balances holiness, justice, and love.

Holiness takes two forms. First, it means that all of God’s attributes and actions are right. This may sound circular because God’s holiness is the standard against which we judge “right.” However, we can refine that. God’s perfection before He created the universe is the standard, and he has neither changed away from that standard nor violated it.

Second, God’s holiness involves the concept of sacredness. To illustrate, the leftover Jesus-flesh and Jesus-blood is not to be used for ordinary purposes or disposed of like trash. The priests must protect the leftovers, but God’s holiness is self-protecting. God alone hath immortality, and inhabiteth (dwells in) light inaccessible (unapproachable), whom no man hath seen, nor can see… (1 Timothy 6:16). One day, in the resurrection, the unjustified will see Him. According to Revelation (“Apocalypse”) 20:11, I saw a great white throne, and one sitting upon it (God), from whose face the earth and heaven fled away, and there was no place found for them.

The commandments, or morality in general, is a standard applicable to life on Earth, that reflects God’s character. God revealed the standard gradually. First, there were a few simple commands in the Garden of Eden. Our ancestors disobeyed. Then there were the Ten Commandments. The Ten were summarized in two: Love God first, and love your neighbor. That was in about 1250 BC. Over 600 more commands followed in the Old Testament to help apply the Two and the Ten in daily and religious life.

But it doesn’t end there. You can probably finish this: “Man looks at the outward appearance but God….” It’s in 1 Samuel 16:7.

God judges motives, intents, and emotions, not just actions. For example, Jesus said, whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:28), and whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment…. And whosoever shall say, Thou Fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:22).

We can state the prohibitions against sins positively.

• Sins insult God and hurt others, so abstaining from sins can be a way to love God and others.

If a church is strict in warning against the many sins that we can commit, then it is consistent with God’s own revelation of Himself. The “blame” if there be any, falls upon us for the many ways that we insult God and hurt others.

This can be a loving act on the part of the church. Warning: This is not a loving act when a church crosses into being “strict,” as in being judgmental, intolerant, or impatient. The approach must be balanced because the goal is to help people grow; it is not to turn them into slaves.

Motives for Morality

Because God is holy, souls bearing guilt cannot enter God’s presence. Even if God or the angels did not bar the way, guilty souls would flee — some in regret and fear, others in hatred. God presents two solutions so souls can live in His presence:

• Live so that no guilt ever accumulates
• Find forgiveness of guilt

World religions add:

• Earn your way out of guilt-debt

Catholicism adopts a hybrid:

• God lets us earn forgiveness from some guilt and enables us to work our way out of the remaining guilt

Going back to the Ten Commandments and the other 600+ commands: This is called The Law. Since God gave the Ten and the bulk of the 600 through Moses, it is also called the Mosaic Law. It is one united Law with many points. Break one point, and you’ve broken the whole.

Israel failed to keep the Mosaic Law. Their relationship with God was a roller-coaster ride. Eventually, God split Israel into two kingdoms. They continued their ups and downs — mostly downs — until God allowed other nations to destroyed one kingdom and then the other. After a time, God restored one of the two kingdoms, Judea, keeping it under the rule of other nations. The priests learned their lesson too well.

By the time of Jesus, Judaism had added thousands more commands, called “traditions,” to ensure that they kept the first 600+. Sadly, their efforts to earn righteousness led them, as Jesus said, to make void the word of God by your own tradition (Mark 7:13). They focused on microscopic details and left the weightier things of the law; judgment, and mercy, and faith not done (Matthew 23:23).

The Jews had missed an important lesson of the Law. We are all become as one unclean, and all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman: and we have all fallen as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away (Isaiah 64:6)

The main purpose of the law was to show us our inability to justify ourselves by showing us an impossible standard, God’s perfection. Because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified before him. For by the law is the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).

Jesus stressed the lesson through irony. The religious leaders had their thousands of commands, yet Jesus said, unless your justice (righteousness) abound more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:20).

So the lesson was not to rely on self-righteousness. Rather, as Paul wrote, the law was our pedagogue (teacher) in Christ, that we might be justified by faith (Galatians 3:24).

The Jews of Jesus’s day tried to earn their way to heaven. Abstaining from sins and doing good deeds are good, but not as a way to heaven. The Apostles explicitly taught that works and faith, and wages and grace, were mutually exclusive pairs. For example:

• Knowing that man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ; we also believe in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified (Galatians 2:16).
• If by grace, it is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace (Romans 11:6).

Just as Judaism went off track with teaching self justification, the Church gradually went off track, mixing grace and self justification. Grace means “gift,” but the church redefined it as being like money, to be earned through ceremonies and deeds, here a little, there a little. And if you collected enough of this substance, you could buy your way out of Purgatory or Limbo sooner. This is a blasphemous insult to the Giver of grace.

The Church also came to teach that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was not enough. When He cried Tetelestai on the cross, it was a victory cry, “It is finished!” But the Church claims to continue that sacrifice in thousands of locations every day.

• We are sanctified by the oblation (offering) of the body of Jesus Christ once. And every (Jewish) priest indeed standeth daily ministering and often offering the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, From henceforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool. (Hebrews 10:10–13)

Notice the contrasts. The Jewish sacrifice was continuous. Christ sacrificed Himself once. It had a definite ending. He does not now rise up and descend to Earth to continue His suffering thousands of times each day, but rather, sits, resting, waiting with the Father on God’s throne, making intercession for His followers. To teach that the one-time sacrifice of infinite God the Son was inadequate is blasphemous.

• For by one oblation (offering) he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified (believers) (Hebrews 10:14).

Not only was the sacrifice a complete act, but the redemption of those who place their faith in it is perfect (complete). Redemption is not bit by bit, but perfect. Implying that a complete redemption cannot be claimed blasphemously insults the Giver’s resources and generosity.

Now we can apply this to the original question. The biblical Christian has many reasons to recognize strict rules of morality.

• The rules are ways to love God.
• The rules are ways to love others.
• Love seeks the benefit of others
• In the eyes of others, our holiness qualifies us convey the gospel
• By obeying the rules, we love ourselves
• We emulate our Father
• We live at peace with God
• We enjoy peace with others
• We avoid our Father’s loving chastisement
• We earn rewards in heaven

The Roman Catholic recognizes some or many of the above benefits, but the primary reason to obey strict rules of morality is to earn “grace” and redeem oneself. Reliance on morality for justification before God has a name: self righteousness.

As Hebrews 6:1 says,

• Wherefore, leaving (moving on from) the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect: not laying again the foundation of penance (repentance) from dead works and of faith towards God….

The writer framed the gospel for Jewish converts (and all of us) this way:

• Repent from the dead works of attempting to achieve self righteousness through ceremonies and deeds.
• Simply consent to the Giver who bestows the gift upon you.
• Trust the Giver to keep His promise.

Rightly Interpreting James 2:24

Someone invoked James 2:24 to rationalize that Catholicism is strict because good deeds are necessary for salvation. Here it is, out of context:

• Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only?

Now, here’s the context. There are three types of justification.

• Justification by God who paid for and forgave your sins — assuming you have received the gift as a gift, without insulting the Giver
• Justification before others
• Justification before yourself (1 John has a lot to say about self examination in order to gain assurance of the sincerity of your faith).

James chapter 2 is about justification before others. Look at how the passage begins in verse 18:

• But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works. Shew me (a man) thy faith without works; and I (a man) will shew thee, by works, my faith. (Emphasis added.)

James refers to Abraham’s offering of Isaac as an argument, but acknowledges, by citing Genesis 15:6, that God had already justified Abraham roughly 25 years before, on the basis of faith alone. Abraham believed God, and it was reputed (accounted) to him to justice (righteousness).

Offering Isaac justified Abraham before men. And he was called (by men) the friend of God. Being justified before men is not salvation.

We agree, good deeds are necessary. You’re useless to anybody if you don’t do good. Jesus said,

• Jesus said, So let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven (Matthew 5:16).
• John the Baptist said, Bring forth therefore fruit (deeds) worthy of penance (repentance at the time of conversion) (Matthew 3:8).

Genuine faith produces good works.

• For it is God who worketh in you, both to will (desire) and to accomplish (act), according to his good will (Philippians 2:13).

But good deeds are worthless for redeeming yourself before God. This was addressed above but bears repeating.

• Knowing that man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ; we also believe in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified (Galatians 2:16).
• We are all become as one unclean, and all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman: and we have all fallen as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away (Isaiah 64:6)

People who cite James 2 to rationalize a requirement works for salvation violate an important rule for interpreting the Bible:

• Never use a vague, tangential, or ambiguous passage to contradict a clear, explicit, relevant passage.

Read Romans chapters 3–6. Chapter 4, in particular, puts James’s argument into context.

Regeneration or Faith First?

Addressing one aspect of God's sovereignty, Hyper Calvinists claim that God regenerates a person's spirit. As an extreme application, you don't have to repent from dead works and put faith in Christ's gift of redemption to be saved; if you believe, it's because you've already been saved.

The reasoning goes that a man does not give birth to himself (John 3:3-8) and that people dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1) cannot choose to believe the gospel (1 Corinthians 2:14).

God's act of regenerating is part of the process of salvation. God must regenerate

1. before faith OR
2. simultaneously with faith OR
3. subsequent to faith

If either (1) or (2) is true, then God cannot save through faith. This contradicts Ephesians 2:8.

For by grace you have been saved through faith....

Therefore, (3) must be true. Regeneration must follow faith.

The argument that dead men cannot have faith depends on "dead" meaning "devoid of animation." If that definition were true, then the "dead" in hell could not perceive torment. "Dead" must have a different meaning.

Namely, as physical death is separation from the body, spiritual death is a separation from God that includes disability with respect to righteousness. This definition of "death" allows that God can partially heal spiritual disability and give faith to the "dead" before regeneration.

Thus, God can give faith, then save (regenerate) through faith; and Ephesians 2:8-9 is not violated. 

Silence In the Search

Atheist: I want to believe so hard. I've prayed to God to help me find faith, to guide me, just even a tiny shred of light in a dark world. So far, even trying to be open as possible, it's been resounding, deafening silence.

I have the same struggle, though I'm a believer. I want that "shred of light in a dark world," too. Here are some differences in our thinking.

The light does not come through the world. The world is corrupt. Whether you attribute that to the Second Law of Thermodynamics or to the consequences of sin, everything tends toward decay and evil. Although there are philosophical arguments that make God highly probable, the world is the wrong place to look for light.

God is not an impersonal force that we can test in a laboratory. He is personal. Like us, He generally does not hang with those those who are hostile or untrusting. When we trust our senses, we trust ourselves (which are part of the world) and the world itself -- which, apart from God's interference, has no light.

We not only look in the wrong place, but we look for the wrong reasons. Look at the counterfeits, the televangelists obsessed with self-esteem, worldly prosperity, vulgar displays of "power," and worked-up emotional experiences. They all look to worldly experience, too. But that's not where God reveals Himself.

The hindrance to faith is usually love of something that offends God. For many, that offense is a practice that they know they'd have to give up. Some rationalize that the practice is not sinful, but the really arrogant ones admit they don't care whether it's sinful. Others stumble over their pride. Some refuse to replace their idols with the biblical concept of God, while others justify themselves. Self-justification takes the form of believing one is righteous enough to stand in God's presence or that one can earn such righteousness.

Faith in God requires a context of need. We cannot realize that need until we face the ways we offend God, ways that render us unworthy to stand in the unbearable light of His holy presence. The prophet Isaiah wrote, "the LORD’S hand is not so short that it cannot save; nor is His ear so dull that it cannot hear. But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you so that He does not hear."

Humbly facing that diagnosis sets the context for the cure. The cure is a gift. Like a big brother taking his younger sibling's punishment, God, as Christ, suffered our sentence for us. He offers that as a gift, to be received as a gift. That entails two conditions.

First, remember that part about humility? We can do nothing to earn the gift. We cannot do ceremonies or good deeds to compensate for the bad we've done. We already owe it to God to do good, and we cannot pay with what we already owe. Neither can we earn the gift without insulting the Giver's capacity, resources, and generosity. (Most "Christian" churches violate this!)

Second, since there's nothing we can contribute to earn the gift, all we can do is quiet our minds and trust. To trust ourselves, our experiences, or our feelings is to distrust the Giver. God rewards trust. Sometimes He exercises our trust with trials or silence; sometimes, He shows people supernatural evidence (that cannot be repeated or shared with others). But it starts with enduring trust.

I used to wish I were a Pentecostal. (That has a strong parallel with what the seeking atheist describes.) It would be so much easer being able to walk by sight rather than by faith. However, according to the Bible, if my faith endures, my reward will be greater than that received by those who believe because they experienced (or thought they experienced) something miraculous.

This is not blind faith that believes despite the evidence. This is informed faith that puts the evidences together and then acts on the probability.  We all have some light. We do not all receive it. Some, like the person who asked the question, are too busy collecting arguments against it to learn why those arguments are flawed. (You'd have to read the whole of his conversation to know that he falls in that category.)

Your challenge, then, is not to convince God to prove Himself to you, but to decide whether you are going to admit your need and then trust the cure for everlasting benefits, no matter what it costs you in this world.

- - - -

Since I originally posted this on Reddit, I can't copyright it; and I'd welcome anyone to use it for personal or non-profit used, anyway; but I hope that if you use it, you will give credit where credit is due.