Tag Archives: Bible

Jesus Expects Us to Have No Fear about Life

When Jesus said to Jairus, “Do not fear, only believe,” it was said regarding a supernatural miracle of resurrection. The passage says, “While he was still speaking to her, messengers arrived from the home of Jairus, the leader of the synagogue. They told him, “Your daughter is dead. There’s no use troubling the Teacher now.” But Jesus overheard them and said to Jairus, “Don’t be afraid. Just have faith.”” (Mark 5:35-36 NLT).

The man was just told his daughter was dead, and Jesus’ tells him not to be afraid, not even a little bit, but “only,” have faith in God.  If I said this to a parent who just lost their child, they would call me uncaring and a jerk; yet, this is how Jesus expects us to view such a situation. It is this same Jesus who will judge us all one day. This is a good example because this is one of the worst types of life troubles we can face, the death of a child, or a spouse or parent. Since Jesus is applying this teaching to the worst type of life troubles, then we obviously can apply it to lesser troubles.

Let us quickly address the point of “just have faith.” Jesus is not saying have faith in God like a fatalist. He is not saying to just have faith in the broad idea that God is sovereign and just go with the flow like a fatalist. No, Jesus is not telling us to abuse God’s sovereignty like that. Rather, He is telling Jairus, do not fear, because your faith in God will lead to a supernatural resurrection of your daughter. Why be afraid by the death of a child, if they will be resurrected? Obviously there is no fear of a child’s death if the death is overpowered by resurrection. Obviously, there is no fear of cancer if it is healed.  Obviously, there is no fear of Jesus paying the temple tax if he can just get the money from a random mouth of a fish.

Jesus is talking about faith in a supernatural miracle for specific trouble you need help with. Not human help, but God’s miracle help.

Jesus’ reasoning for why we should have no fear and only faith, is because miracles make the troubles of life go away. Jesus expects us to view life in this way. No wonder the religious elites hated Jesus, He was a miracle and faith fanatic.

Jesus’ presupposition is that with faith in God we do not fear life’s troubles, because God will destroy the troubles with supernatural power.

In the finished atonement, Jesus has already forgiven us, has given us His righteousness, already healed us, already exchanged our curses for the blessing of Abraham, and already exchanged our poverty for His riches. This is already about new creation, new reality, and identity. We are this right now.

Thus, what you believe God will do for you, God will do for you. The supply for all these supernatural miracles have already been laid up for you. Jesus said “only believe.” Thus, if Jairus stopped believing and gave into fear over his child’s death, thinking, “there is no more hope, and I will just go with whatever God sovereignly caused,” then that is what God would give him, no hope. But because He believed God could help with miracle power, even in the death of his child, then that is what Jesus gave him.

As Vincent Cheung said in his essay (Faith is The Answer), “God wants us to live life thinking that there is no reason to fear, but that we should have faith only. God wants us to live life thinking that all things are possible to the one who has faith… You are never a victim. You are never limited. You are never doomed. You are never desperate. You are never alone. God will come to you. God will answer you. God will rescue you. God will heal you and prosper you. God will increase your spiritual power and fruit. God is the answer to all your problems. And beyond your problems, God will give you the desires of your heart. How can you know? Faith! The faith in your heart is God’s answer.”

I WAS Healed or I Will be Healed?

Abraham said, “I am the father of many nations,” and not “I will be the father of many nations.” Abraham’s confession was exactly what God promised and it was a contradiction to reality. Faith was stronger. He confessed he was already the father of nations before it was true. This is not a lie, because faith in God’s promise is both truthful and is a stronger power than reality.

Jesus’ exchange with the Sadducees, about the resurrection, showed Jesus pointing out a category fallacy with present tense and past tense. The scripture said God present tense, “I am the God of Abraham and Isaac,” even though they had died many years before. But the Sadducees’ presupposition was the passage was recorded in the different category of past tense, “I was the God of Abraham.” After this Jesus publicly shamed them and shut them up. This passage from Jesus shows us how important logic is; it shows us you cannot violate the laws of Contradiction and Identity and have category fallacies.

The importance of this is significant for faith. Faith is assenting to what God has said. You cannot assent to what God has said, if you change the tense of verbs, because then you change categories and thus change the meaning.

What if Abraham said, “I will be the father of many nations?” If he said it, then it would be a confession of unbelief in God’s promise not a faith confession.  Faith, as shown above, is only faith if it confesses what God said, it is not faith if it changes what God said.  Even such a small change, as a verb tense, Jesus shows that you are greatly mistaken about God’s word and power. One change to a verb tense and you have different doctrines. You cannot confess in faith, while being greatly mistaken about the word you are confessing.

Isaiah 53 says in the past tense that Jesus bore our sin, but also past tense bore our sickness and then present tense by His stripes we are healed.  There is no future tense. Regarding our sickness they have been and are healed.  Thus, Peter in his letter says, 1 Peter 2:24, that we were healed by His stripes.

This is why the faith teachers are correct when they teach you to confess, “By the stripes of Jesus I WAS, or I AM healed,” and not that I will be healed somewhere in the future.

Lastly consider Jesus’ teaching on faith itself.

“And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” So Jesus answered and said to them, “Have faith in God. For assuredly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that those things he says will be done, he will have whatever he says. 

Therefore I say to you, whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.” (Mark 11:21-24 NKJV)

Jesus teaches us that when we pray that we are to believe (past tense) that we have received what we asked for. He says if you believe that you (past tense) have received, then you will (future tense) receive them. As with the fig tree, they found it, the next day dried up from the roots. It took a day for the full 100-fold manifestation to appear. The presupposition for Jesus is that God’s promise to give us anything we ask for is a past or present tense application, and not future. Even if the answer appears to be delayed, the example of Daniel, shows us that it was answered the moment Daniel prayed, but was delayed by demonic attacks. Thus when you pray believe you have received what you ask for.

This does not mean we never say, “this will happen,” for in some context this would be appropriate, or that God never answers a prayer if the verb tense is wrong; however, we should always strive for perfection in our understanding of God’s promise and speaking it in the same. Faith is assenting to what God has promised, not category changes to it.

Think about Abraham and his confession of faith that he “is” the father of many nations before it happened. This is what faith does. The Israelites shouted and praised God for the defeat of Jericho, before the walls fell down. Faith gives a victory shout before it happens, because we know when we prayed it was answered.  Faith is the contradiction to what we see, but because faith gives us direct contact with God and His power, we know faith is stronger than reality. Because God is sovereignly faithful to fulfill His promise, we know when we ask, God has already given it to us.

Resurrection According The Scripture

Paul says in 1 Corinthian 15:4 that we know Jesus was resurrected because the Scripture says it. This is good reasoning. This is the best type of deductive logic. This is adhering to the laws of Contradiction, Identity and Excluded Middle in perfection. This is thinking like the LOGOS.

Anti-Christians often dislike this type of answer and find it unacceptable. They want you to say, “we know the resurrection is true because of some empirical evidence proves it.” This is of course delusional. Empirical evidence cannot prove any statement of reality because empiricism, observation and scientific experimentation make a triple logical fallacy. This foundation of knowledge makes knowledge impossible. It violates the law of contradiction because it makes knowledge skeptical; and it leads to skepticism, because empiricism, observation and experimentation are fallacious.  Any worldview that uses such a foundation for any knowledge is to be mocked and dismissed.

It is a good thing that resurrection is not proved by our sensations, observations or experimentation, because if it was then resurrection could never be proven. Since our sensations and observations cannot prove any statement of reality, such as water, rocks or trees, then it therefore cannot prove resurrection. Just because some fools use delusional means to interact with the world does not mean you are to follow this example, or compromise by making a bible and delusion into a hybrid. No, you expose how dumb their source of knowledge is and destroy it by logic and the scripture.

The only source of knowledge is God’s revelation. God’s word says there is resurrection and that Jesus was the first born from the dead. Just as He experienced physical resurrection, we also will experience a physical resurrection with a new body. What Jesus experienced we experience. This is God’s love and promise to us.

The Scripture and God are interchangeable, and therefore, Paul says Jesus was raised according to Scripture. We ought to have renewed our minds so that no truth statement about reality has any foundation in our senses, observation or experimentation. As Paul says, we live by faith not sight. This is why Paul says, (Acts 26:8) why should you think it incredible that God raised the dead?

The Gospel Is The Baptism Of The Spirit For Miracles

If Jesus sitting on the throne is the foundation eschatology, and His commands for power still stand, then applied eschatology for Christians is baptism in the Spirit, faith and miracles.

“Always remember that Jesus Christ,
a descendant of King David, was raised from the dead.
This is the Good News (GOSPEL) I preach,”
 2 Timothy 2:8 (NLT).

Tradition and men have a tendency to limit God, man and the gospel. In this case they limit Jesus’ nature, His position of authority and glorification of man in the gospel. Imputed righteousness and being declared righteous is an awesome doctrine, but there is more that the bible defines that belongs to “good news,” than a few narrowly selected pet doctrines. Men are habitually and systematically man-centered, and this leads to limiting God, His gospel and the elect. This happens because their worldview, despite having many scriptural terms, starts with themselves. They see the world from their limited human experience and then force God, the gospel and the elect into this limitation. We know who they serve.

Paul teaches in this passage that the gospel includes that Jesus was raised from the dead “as a descendant of King David.” This refers to the promise God made to “King” David about a descendant that will come from him. There are two aspects of this promised person. One, he will be the saving Messiah. The second, is that He will be a “King” on a throne, ruling in power and authority.

This descendant of King David, according to Paul, is connected to the fact that Jesus was raised. When you and I are resurrected, it is not necessarily connected to us sitting at God’s right hand as King and Judge over all things as what is inherit in us; however, this is precisely what it means for Jesus. Because we are connected to Jesus as part of His body, by God’s decision, then we share in His power and authority. Not as the head, but we do indeed share in what Jesus’ experienced. We are not just sub-heirs, but co-heirs. Jesus judges in authority, and likewise we will also one day judge angels, etc. The point is that what happens to Jesus in resurrection, also happens to us. For example, Paul argues in 1 Corinthians 15 because Jesus had bodily resurrection, we to will have a bodily resurrection.

Jesus is raised as the promised King, from King David, who sits on a throne of power. That is, Jesus’ resurrection by the Father from the grave, cannot be disconnected from the fact that His rising is a rising to sit on a throne. The doctrine of Jesus rising from the grave is the same thing as His rising to sit at the right hand of the Power, because the two cannot logically be separated. One cannot separate Jesus’ resurrection from His sitting on the throne as a King. Jesus raised from the grave is not to some nebulous place in the clouds. We are told and know where He was raised to. He was raised to the right hand of the Power. This doctrine for Paul, is “the gospel he preached.”

Also note, this is Paul to Timothy. Furthermore, this is the gospel Paul preached to the gentiles; thus, is not a specific doctrine for Jews or something like that.

Peter, in the first recorded apostolic gospel sermon, harps on this aspect of Jesus being King David’s descendant, who was raised to the position of throne power and authority. Peter devoted a good amount of space to make this point about Jesus. 

Peter sums up Jesus’ rising as the seated King from David as,

“both messiah and King.”

Thus, this promised descendant from David, according to Peter includes both the “saving Messiah” and “King” aspect to it. The resurrection is part of the gospel, most would admit, but the resurrection cannot be separated from that fact that it is a resurrection as a King to a throne. This last part of the gospel is the focus of eschatology, as it pertains to this side of eternity and Jesus ruling. This power the Father “worked in Christ, raising him from the dead and seating him at his right hand in the heavenly places,  above all rule and authority and power and lordship and every name named, not only in this age but also in the coming one, and he subjected all things under his feet,” Ephesians 1:20-22. Again, Peter does not separate the saving and Throne aspect of Jesus Christ as the risen descendant of David. It was the gospel Paul preached and it was also the gospel Peter preached. The promise included both, and thus cannot be separated by theologians without blaspheme.

Peter then makes connection to the baptism of the Holy Spirit. His argument is this. Jesus as the descendant from King David, was raised to the right hand of God. What does Jesus do, sitting at the right hand of the Power?  Peter argues that in His position of power, has poured out power on His chosen ones, through the baptism of the Spirit. What does this newly seated King do with His position of Power? Well, He starts to empower His people. What will this seated descendant King of David do with all this authority and power? Peter’s answer is this: He gives us His power and authority so that we can overcome the world and spread His kingdom to every corner. Jesus gives us power to cast out demons, to heal the sick, and make mountains obey us. This is what Jesus does with power.

Thus, to say, “the gospel is the baptism of the Spirit, for speaking in tongues, casting out demons and healing the sick,” is true and should have no resistance. Jesus had to be cut up into a bloody pulp, under the Father’s wrath, and then resurrected to the right hand of Power, in order to have a contractual right to pour out the Spirit for power.  Thus the gospel is the baptism of the Spirit for miracle power; the gospel includes more, but not less than this. It is no less the gospel than the forgiveness of sins, because both are produced by the same thing, which is the blood, death and resurrection of Jesus to the right hand of the Power. To be against the statement, “The gospel is the baptism of Spirit for miracles,” is to trample the blood, death and resurrection of Jesus to God’s right hand.  To be against the baptism of the Spirit for speaking in tongues and power, is to be against the blood, death and resurrection authority of Jesus Christ. To be against the baptism of the Spirit for miracles, is to mock how the reigning Jesus Christ uses His authority from the right hand of the Power.

Paul said if you deny the resurrection then your faith is destroyed, and your hope is vain. However, there are more subtle ways to deny the resurrection rather than doing it directly. In the logic of Modus Ponens it would be resurrection as the antecedent and the manifestation and effects and application of resurrection would be the consequent. But the logic of Modus Tollens is also valid. If you deny the consequent, then you deny the antecedent. If you deny the baptism of the Spirit for miracles and speaking tongues, then you deny the resurrection of Jesus to God’s right hand.

Men and tradition, who use many scriptural terms, mock the gospel continually. You need to remove such a faithless mocker from your life. They spit on the blood of Jesus, trample on His death and make a mockery of His decisions made from His position of authority. Do not even eat or wash your hands with such people. Instead, honor the decisions that Jesus made, as He sits in all authority, at the Father’s right hand. We must seek to be baptized by the Spirit and to be constantly growing in Spiritual power for miracles and spiritual physics. The Spirit will become your personal instructor, as if Jesus Himself were right there with you, giving you instruction. The baseline spiritual power, as recorded in Acts that all get for being baptized, is speaking in tongues for inward edification (1 Corin 14:4,18). If you must start, then start there, and then seek more than more power. I have heard many ministries say they started after they first had a season of increased speaking in tongues. This gift is a spiritual gateway to other spiritual gifts. In my experience this gift is not utilized as it ought, and many have paid harsh price for its neglecting. And if you don’t care about yourself, then have some compassion and care for others and God’s kingdom expanding. Praying in tongues will help you have power to expand God’s kingdom.

Take Your Choke Points Off

“But Moses responded to the Lord, “There are 600,000 foot soldiers here with me, and yet you say, ‘I will give them meat for a whole month!’ Even if we butchered all our flocks and herds, would that satisfy them? Even if we caught all the fish in the sea, would that be enough?”

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Has my arm lost its power?””
 (Numbers 11:21-23 NLT)

God told Moses that He would feed the Israelites with meat (Quail) for a whole month. Oddly, Moses’ response was that such a thing was impossible even for God. This is the same Moses who performed miracle after miracle and divided the sea with the Staff of God. This is Moses who, as God said it, was a God to Pharaoh. And yet, Moses could not believe God for this miracle food.

I remember Bill Winston in a sermon saying, (as I paraphrase from memory), “God had reached, Moses’ choke point. Moses could believe God for some things, but He could not believe God for this. Take your choke points, off.”

He is correct. Even the heroes of faith still have some choke points where they limit the Holy One of Israel.  No one has perfect faith in this life, but it is our command from God to always live by faith and mature our faith to its greatest heights.  Miracle food in large proportions, for some reason, was a choke point for Moses. It seemed impossible even for God. God rebuked Moses and said, is My arm to short that I cannot do this, or in modern terms, is My power so pathetic to you that I can’t do this miracle? Moses did not doubt God’s willingness to help but His power, and God rebuked Moses for this.

We often combat this abusive doctrine called, “if it is God’s will,” and so we say “God is always willing to help because of His love and because He promise to always provide if we have faith.” However, we can have choke points of doubt regarding God’s power. We might wrongly assume it is about the topic of God’s willingness, when it is really about doubting His power. We all have our own dispositions and weaknesses and strengths. And so it will vary from person to person what might be a choke point of faith. And I will try to use and example that might be more common to all. All Christians have faced those sins that more easily trip them up (Hebrews 12).  What can happen in a besetting sin, is that the experience can distort the mind to doubt God’s “power” to sanctify us.

If a person is blessed to have been ministered healing at their conversion, then asking God for healing would naturally be less of a choke point for them. However, they might find asking God for miracle money, or transmuting material substance to be a choke point of doubt.  Thus, we must find where we choke up with doubt and attack as if it was a cancer on our heart.

I remember Billy in response to Jesus’ statement that “anything is possible for the person who believes,” saying, “James and John asked for seats next to Jesus, but were told those were already reserved by the Father. Therefore, we don’t know if our prayers will be answered because God answers them on the dictates of His own whims.”

We know that apart from extreme examples that are categorically impossible, or violate a command that there are no limits to what we can ask for. Even a fool knows not to ask, “God, I want you to make me immutable and infinite like you, or help me murder my neighbor.” The prayers we see answered in scripture include resurrection from the dead, the multiplication and transmutation of material substance, healing, prosperity, military victory, relationship help, and the list goes on and on. Also, because we understand the blessing of Abraham (which we have in Jesus), which includes prosperity, supernatural health and healing, military victories, fame, glory and excessive fruitfulness in all parts of life, we know that Jesus command to ask for anything and get anything, means what it means.

Billy’s response to prayer, is an example of a person who doesn’t merely have a choke point or two, but who chokes at the entire idea of God helping and blessing them. This is a reprobate mindset. Such a person views God as if God is an outsider. They view God as if they have no Covenant with Him. The idea of Jesus’ Contract in blood, is to remove any “case by case” situation. For more on this see Vincent Cheung, Our Contract, who helped me understand this better. An insider status with God means that we always know how God will relate to us. An outsider status means we do not know how God will relate to us, because it is decided on the whim of God’s choice on a case by case. For example a husband does not decide to love his wife on a day by day decision; no, the contract of marriage means you have made a promise, to remove the case by case, and will always love them. God as removed the case by case, and has promised that if we have faith we will receive what we ask for. This love is only promised to those who God is contracted with. Outsiders of this contract do not have this privilege.

This contract therefore is able to remove all choke points for those with insiders status with God. We already know from the example of the gentile woman, that even without a contract status, faith gives you access to what you ask for. God has a standing contract with faith. However, in our Contract with Jesus, God cuts up His only Son in a bloody mess, and says “I will do what I promise.” There is no room for doubting.  

Removing our choke points is essential if we want to fully obey biblical expansionism in our lives. If we want maturity in expanding our own lives in righteousness and power and visions and expanding the Kingdom of God, we must remove any points of doubts. And doubt here is the key word. Jesus said if you have faith as small as a mustered seed you will command a mountain to move and it will obey you. Any Christian who has lived a few years and has been working on renewing their minds has more than a mustered seed size faith. The reason they do not see answers is because of doubts that gets mixed in with their faith. It is not that they have no faith, but the doubts mixed in is stopping the manifestation. The ins and outs for that, is for another essay; however, remember as you are attacking and removing doubts do not forget that the main focus is always Jesus and His promises, not constant inward self-evaluation.  

We must not put any limits on who we are in Christ and what we can accomplish by faith. Choke points can happen in places such as our vision for our lives. A Christian by faith might finally be out of debt and able to afford a nice home for his family. They even saw some miracles in finances where God helped. They are coasting, and life is good. However, when they were 17 God gave them a dream for ministry and a business that reaches millions of people, and this is still a choke point for them. Some might be enjoying a big house and a family that loves God. But God’s word reminds them if they had enough money to buy 10 big houses, they could give that to godly ministries to help fund the gospel, and for them this financial amount could be a choke point. If we take our eyes off ourselves and think what we could do for the advancement of God’s kingdom, there is always more power, finances and miracles than what we are currently able to do. But God is full of grace. If you seek to believe with no fear, you will find it.

Lastly, if you want to take off the limits and choke points, then you will need to say something with your mouth. Jesus said you will “say,” to this mountain.  Look at the heroes of faith, like Abraham and David. They spoke a confession of confidence in the promise of God. We believe and so we speak. Do not just look at a choke point, speak to it. Say something. Speak the promises of God. Your faith confession is like Moses with the Staff of God. Your staff is your confession in God’s word. Say it. Tell it to get out of your way. Tell the sickness to leave.  

I will let Paul end this with his own exhortation: God answers our prayers exceedingly, abundantly and beyond all that we ask or think. This is how an insider to God thinks about the world and what is available to them in Christ.

Use the Bible to Prove Atheism?

I saw an atheist respond on a post on social media saying,
“How can we know there is a God? Prove it. Not just using the Bible.”

I am not entirely sure if he means, “do not use the bible at all, or use the bible with other non-bible proofs.”

If taken the first way, then the equivalent for me to say the same thing back to him would be like this, “prove to me that evolution is true, but do not use your sensations (empiricism).” An atheist or evolutionist would not accept this because the knowledge of their worldview comes from empiricism.  Without using empiricism, then they have no knowledge about anything. Without their epistemology their worldview is without knowledge. Yet, they demand that we prove our Christian worldview without using the bible, which is the only source of our knowledge. Without the bible there is no knowledge for our worldview about any topic. The bible says that it alone is the source of knowledge (the bible even denies empiricism), and so if we use the bible we can only use the bible for knowledge. There is no dual epistemology in Christianity.

Thus, if meant the second way, then the bible would not allow us to use any other epistemology. Any other source of knowledge would be an anti-Christian source of knowledge. When the opponent is asking us to use other proofs for knowledge other than the Scripture, they are asking to deny the bible at the same time. If we do this, then we have already lost the debate because we have already denied our God and our worldview’s source of knowledge.

 Since the opponent is using empiricism as their source of knowledge, then what they likely mean by “proving Christian with non-biblical knowledge,” means they want us to use so-called empirical proofs for Christianity.  As just said, to do this, since the bible denies empiricism, means we deny Christianity if we use empiricism. Also, empiricism is logically irrational. To infer knowledge from sensation is a never-ending category fallacy. Observation is logically irrational. All conclusions from empiricism and observations are a non-sequitur fallacy. Thus, no matter how good you think your empirical proofs are, they can never logically prove God. Every conclusion from empiricism to God would be a non-sequitur fallacy. For example, the type of existence we sense and observe is not immutable and eternal. Thus, to conclude God’s type of existence from sensation is like saying “All cats are animals, therefore, rocks are yellow.”  The demand to use empirical proofs, is a demand to use a standard of knowledge, that cannot prove any statement about reality. Not only can empiricism not give proof for Christianity, but it also cannot give proof for what is the color red, what is a cloud or what is a rock. Also since Empiricism is irrational, then to hybrid it with the Scripture would be to hybrid the irrational with rational. It would discredit the bible as if the bible is ok with being irrational and stupid. Also what one senses and observes contradicts the bible, and so you have a dual epistemology that contradicts one another. This would make knowledge impossible.

To turn the tables, what if I made a similar demand on the atheist or agnostic by saying, “don’t only use empiricism to prove evolution, but use the bible to give proofs.” The bible obviously contradicts evolution, and many things about their worldview based on their sensations. They would not accept such a demand from me, because they do not accept the bible as a source of knowledge and they know it also contradicts their own worldview.  Likewise, we do not accept empiricism as a source of knowledge. If they want to demand we use their empiricism they need to prove that their epistemology makes knowledge possible. Do not let them bully you with their irrational demands. Rather attack their demands. Attack their standard of empiricism.

I Couldn’t Care Less

To hear one reformed or evangelical guy talk about how involved in politics we should get, I couldn’t care less.  They are discussing a false reality. If they are not presupposing biblical expansionism, then they are talking about what options are left over after there is no God.  If there is no God, then all is lost for me and I don’t care about any of it.

When you have no power, no ability to cast out demons, no supernatural healings, no miracles and no faith to move mountains, then you have about 3 political options, and none of them are good. The Jews in Jesus’ time had no power either. The religious elites were jealous of Jesus, among other reasons, because unlike them, He had real power. If Jesus’ power caused a political shift to happen, even when He was exclusively focus on ministry to people. Imagine if He turned that faith and mountain moving power directly to politics? The Jewish leaders had no faith or power. Thus, even when they directly attacked Jesus, they did not pray to God for help, (obviously God would not answer their prayer, but if they were truly spiritual people, then they would pray and God would help), but turned to the political power to help them attack Jesus. They got political power to help, because they had no faith and power from God. This is what people do when they do not have God’s power and approval. They turn to human power.

When you do not have God’s power, but only human power, you have a few options. Like the Jews during Jesus’ time, you can give up a certain portion of your worldview and adopt (at least partially) some of the worldview of the current culture and governmental ethics. This is the coward’s way, and you make it obvious you have changed Gods. Another option is to remove yourself from the country, so much so, that you form little bubbles, so that you act as if you do not really live where you live. You know you hate the country you live in, and everyone else knows it to. It’s hard to minister to people who know you hate them. The last option is to get super politically involved. This can take all sorts of forms. The Jews during Jesus’ time, took the form of revolting with force. However, in America, it looks a little different. To sum it up quickly, it means you know, speak and do politics as if it is your God, this usually involves spamming politics on social media and protests and endless talks and debates. You look for governmental power to help, because you have no faith or power to move mountains, transmute material substance, cast out demons and heal the sick.   

All three options assume God does not exist, or they act like He doesn’t. Thus, I could care less. Without Jesus who loves me, it all means nothing to me; no matter the options. Unless you want to start with the options we have in the context of biblical expansionism, then I do not care.

Different Worldviews

“The Catholic Church is the norm of faith. The Catholic Church is the teacher of truth. The Catholic Church is the security of salvation. The Catholic Church is the judge and interpreter of Scripture — which is neither defined nor interpreted. It is not necessary to read the Bible. It is necessary to listen to the Church.” (Some Catholic guy)

I saw this quote from a Catholic yesterday. The point to take away from this is basic. This is an entirely different worldview. It is not a matter of wrong interpretation of a few verses, the above is as distinct from Christianity as any other worldview or religion. When engaging them, you must engage them as you would a reprobate liberal atheist.

I will not go into all the wrong things, nor all the reasons why it is a different worldview, except this one comment.  Your starting-point for knowledge (i.e. epistemology) determines all the knowledge about your worldview. For this reason a worldview can simply be referred to its epistemology, because it is the source for the worldview’s knowledge. The above shows the Catholic’s epistemology in a dualism of the bible and men (Catholic church leaders). At this point I am not even saying if this is bad or good, but only stating what it is. Also because of St. Thomas, most Catholics have a third epistemology of empiricism. However, when there is a contradiction in this triple epistemology, the Catholic’s use Catholic leadership to make a final decision, and so, their true first-principle of knowledge is a human starting point. This is no different than atheism, with their human starting point for knowledge with empiricism. From a human point of power and money, it is clear why men want to be the final gate keepers, but this is irrelevant. The issue is that any deviation with starting points means you have completely different worldviews.  A worldview can be the same view of the world, if the starting point for knowledge is 100% the same. Even with a small 1% difference, because a worldview gives substantial knowledge about reality, the end result will be significant, and thus, different views about reality.

Also, I noticed something with Catholics that I also noticed with Reformed traditions, and that is, the arguments are mostly centered on men. My experience with Catholics and Reformed traditions is like Vincent Cheung’s essay, “Blinded by Atheism.” After their arguments, I am left saying to myself, “Where did God go? God is my defining foundation for reality, epistemology, salvation, praises and ethics, but in all your arguments, God isn’t there.”

 It is all about men. The Catholics and Reformed share this in common, they are a religion of men, focused on men.

God Is Sovereign OR only Sometimes Sovereign?

If God causes all things,
then God caused x to happen.

Some things are so simple that a child can grasp them and apply them in constant success. Many things in the Scripture are this way. Peter did say some things from Paul (Scripture) are hard to understand, but the presupposition behind such a statement would be that most of the Scripture is not so hard to understand.

The reason simple things become difficult, tedious, and annoying is due to man’s unbelief in God to begin with.  The problem is not due to God’s perfect ability to communicate, produced by God’s infinite mastery of His own mind and understanding of man’s mind (which He created); rather, the problem resides in man’s refusal to believe what God has said. Men truly detest and hate God, even many so-called Christians.

I heard one Andrew Wommack try to boil the entire issue of the doctrine of God’s sovereignty to one quick dictionary lookup, regarding the word for “sovereign.” The dictionary, according to him said it has to do with a king or government ruling a nation. His argument is that because an earthly king does not control all the thoughts and actions of his people God does not. This is a very stupid mistake. When was it a good idea to define things by a mere dictionary lookup? Wommack in other doctrines such as, “You already got it,” (which I find edifying) will define the doctrine how the text and passage does it. Why not do it for God’s sovereignty? Why not define God’s sovereign control how Romans 9 defines it? Before the twins made choices of good or bad God already decided to love and hate one of them. Why not define God’s sovereignty how the bible tells us God uses His power and control? The lesson here is that when you see a pastor boil down an entire doctrine to one dictionary lookup and then apply it to God, then you need to mock it and disregard it as trash. If they call themselves pastors, then they need to define terms how the bible and the relevant passages do.

We will get more into logic in the next section, but we will go over some there, since many pastors and theologians seem to think the Laws of Logic (contradiction, identity and excluded middle) somehow do not apply to the doctrine of God’s sovereignty.

“ FIRST. After going over the attributes of God, in both spiritual and metaphysical aspects, it leads to a clear doctrine about God’s sovereignty or control over all things.

At this point, I could say-

“(1) All dogs are warm-blooded.
(2) This bulldog is a dog.
(3) Therefore, it is warm-blooded,”

-and this entire section on God’s sovereignty could be finished in one short paragraph. However due to the vehement resistance to God by bullying the mind with stupidity, this section must deal with stating, the most painfully obvious things. For those who already have a willing mind to believe what God says, I apologize for this. However, this will be a good practice in critical thinking skills and a refresher for what you do know.  

The Bible teaches that God is absolutely and directly sovereign over all things. Or stated as a modus ponens.


M.1. (p) If God causes all things directly and absolutely, (q) then God caused x, h or w to happen, directly and absolutely.
M.2. (p) God does cause all things.
M.3. (q) God caused x, h and w.

In logic, if the “all” or “some” is not stated (directly or indirectly), then the rule is that your category statement assumes an “all” universally-distributed proposition.

I recently heard some moron say something like, “God sovereignly moves things at the universal level, but allows man to move things at the particular level.”

If I were to say this nicely, the person probably does not know what the terms, “universal” and “particular,” means; they are just talking about things as if they know about them, when they do not have a clue, and are just making things up. However, words have meaning, as the Bible says so. Thus, if we are to take what this person is saying, then it is bottom of the barrel stupid.

Logical inference works because particulars are necessary applications of universals. For example. When the Bible says, “all have sinned,” this is only “universally true” if every “particular” instance is also true. If it is not sometimes true in particulars, then it is not universally distributed to all things in a said category. Logic or deductive inference is an application of the universally distributed premise applied in particulars. Thus, if all men have sinned, then if I refer to any human, I am able to affirm that this human as sinned. Therefore, a correctly done deduction from Scripture is what the scripture asserts, because it is only applying the universal(distributed) premise of scripture to the particulars. It is only pointing out information that is already there.

For example. If I were to say,

“it is universally true that all dogs are mammals.
This bulldog is a dog.
Thus, this bulldog is a fish.”

This syllogism is invalid; however, if the concluding premise is indeed true about reality, then it is not universally true, that all dogs are mammals, for in some “particular” instances dogs are fish, and not mammals. Rather than just a contrariety, this is what a true contradiction is when applied on the same premises. A ‘some are not’ premise is a contradiction to an ‘all’ premise.

Thus, if you say “it is universally true that God is sovereign, but then in some particular cases in man, man is sovereign, then you just denied the universal.” You could say God is mostly sovereign, and mostly moves things; but you cannot say God is sovereign as a universal statement without violating the law of contradiction. Or you could say, although it would be odd—it is universally true that God is sometimes sovereign. It would be odd, because an “all” distribution of category in a predicate is presupposed as a “all” if left unsaid. In mathematics this category distribution of all, is in fact called a “universal statement.”

Subjects in universal propositions refer to all in that category (All men have a worldview), while those in particular propositions refer to some (Some men are theists). But what about the predicates? This is where distribution comes in.

Distribution is to terms what quantity is to propositions. A term is said to be distributed when it refers to all the members of its class. Distribution can be designated by a stated or implied all.[1]

For example, if I said, “ravens are birds,” then it is assumed to be that “all” ravens are contained in the predicate of “birds.”

If a particular denies your universal category statement, then the universal is not a “all” category statement but a “some” category statement. That is, if I said, “this particular raven is not a bird,” then it is not a true statement that “ravens are birds.”  Likewise, if it is true that some particular humans are not sinful, then the Bible’s universal statement that “all” have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory is a false statement of reality. It is not a universal “all” statement.

Some at this point, who have never studied logic might say, “I sort-of already know this, and after thinking about it now, it is what the Bible teaches.”  If you understand this then, you are already leagues above the intelligence and faith of many pastors and theologians.  

Some might also say, “well, maybe the people above, meant universal, how a human authority might issue a policy at the top level, but a lower person directly applies it.” First, if so, then so what? How does “horse crap” have any logical necessity to proving if 2+2=4? To confess the above is to confess you deny God is not sovereign over everything, and that there are other causalities that moves things around, separate from God doing it.

Such an admission, does a slight-of-hand fallacy to make it sound like God is sovereign over reality, when they freely admit God is not. Many seem to gloss over this; God is not man. Let us say that again. God is not man. God’s authority is not like human authority. God’s control is not like human control. What moron would even compare the two? God’s metaphysical transcendence is not compatible to man. You cannot relate the two in an intelligent way. Color has nothing to do with the concept of numbers. Why do I need to say this to adults?

The spiritual, ethical and emotional connection behind all this stupidity is a desire for the praise of men. Rather than just saying, “God is not sovereign over all things,” they perform slight-of-hand fallacies by still affirming the opposite of what they believe, but then deny their doctrinal statement in application. If these people truly believed they honored God with right theology, then they need to say, “God is only sometimes sovereign,” as their doctrine and defend it. Yet, they affirm a contradictory doctrine despite saying they love God. Therefore, we conclude, their love and loyalty to God, cannot be as great as they say. Instead of standing their ground on what they believe, they please men by affirming a doctrine they disagree with. Then in order to affirm their own doctrine, they do a 180 and deny God is sovereign over all things in applications/particulars of life. Their true goal then is to be men pleasures. Their doctrine is a doctrine of men, by men, for the pleasure of men. They live in a kingdom of self. They are thoroughly man centered.  Their condemnation is deserved.

Another fool once said to me, “God IS absolutely sovereign over all things, but in order to let man have free-choice, gave up some of His sovereignty.” Again, this is a self-righteous, man-pleasure. It is a slight of hand, to hide what they are affirming. God IS not absolutely sovereign anymore, because by their own words, God gave up some of His sovereignty over all things. Thus, God WAS sovereign, but IS NOT absolutely sovereign over all things anymore.  Since we are dealing with present reality in most applications, their doctrine is, “God is sometimes sovereign, and sometimes not.” Any affirmation other than this, would be a lie for them.

[1] Geisler, N. L., & Brooks, R. M. (1990). Come, let us reason: an introduction to logical thinking (p. 30). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Ultimate Stupid Cessationist Arguments #1

Argument: “Miracles are to confirm messages from God. Jesus is the final message. Signs already confirmed Him. No more messages are being revealed. Thus, there are no more miracles.”

This is like saying since the last episode of your favorite show aired, TV doesn’t exist anymore.[1] Because typewriters are obsolete, writing is dead. If I was to forward such an argument in any other field, except Christian theology, I would have been mocked and sent home. But theologians get away with it.

From childhood to non-Christians, workplace and church, this has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.

For sake of argument, let us say sign gifts have ceased. So what? What logical relevance does that have to do with healing and miracles on demand of faith. It has no connection whatsoever. Just because a pizza does not have olives, does not mean it stops being a pizza.

This is part of the informal fallacies relating to division and composition. Just because something is true of a part, does not mean it is true of the whole.

Jesus healed the lady bent over for 18 years saying it was “necessary” because “she was a daughter of Abraham.” Jesus’ statement means healing miracles are part of Abrahams’ blessing guaranteed to His descendants of faith. Jesus says this healing is not about confirming a message but about being faithful to an old promise of favor and blessings. Two different categories. Jesus’ word to the gentile woman, “to take the children’s bread,” shows Jesus saw healing as part of Abraham’s blessing to be freely given away, and not to confirm a message. Paul argues something similar in Galatians 3 saying this blessing includes miracles and the Spirit. Thus, even after the advent of Jesus’ atonement, Paul says the blessing of Abraham is still in full force, which includes the Spirit (Baptism of the Spirit) and miracles. Even the cross of Jesus did not replace this promise but only made it available to gentiles.

Paul speaks of miracles in Galatians 3 as if they are a common thing. Thus, common miracles are based on Abraham’s blessing secured by Jesus’ atonement. This means even if sign gifts have stopped, and even if the gifts mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12-14 have stopped, the point is logically non-relevant against saying miracles are a common experience, because God being faithful to His promise to Abraham still stands. God has not ceased in fulfilling His promise to Abraham.

Jesus healed folks not just to prove a point but because they had a VIP pass from Abraham. Healing is like a spiritual inheritance, not just a divine marketing strategy. Think of miracles like family heirlooms, not limited-edition soda drinks. Miracles are part of the package deal with Abraham’s blessing, and they are still part of the children’s DNA post-Jesus. It’s like saying the warranty on your car is still good even if the company launched a new model this year. Just because I got Spotify to stream Elvis, doesn’t mean when I tune my FM radio, there’s nothing but static.

The only way for miracles to stop being a common experience to Christians is if God ceases His promise to Abraham. God would have to rip out Abraham’s blessing from the DNA of Abraham’s children, for miracles on the demand of faith to stop. Jesus also says in John 14 that whosoever believes in Him will do His miracles by faith, and even greater. Jesus makes such miracles in this passage about common discipleship faith, not gifts and not signs. In this passage Jesus says, “by asking anything and getting it,” gives us joy and greatly glorifies the Father. Jesus also mirrors the same extreme faith teaching in places like Matthew 21:21. The signs gifts have no logical relevance to this. None.

And so, anyone who believes will do miracles, even bigger ones. No special gift required, just faith.

Dinosaurs were animals.
Dinosaurs have ceased,
therefore, animals have ceased.

People would never be so shameful or careless in normal speech to say something so irrational; and yet, they will dare to play such games with God’s word. When a person handles God’s word so demonically, it becomes an autobiographic mirror of their hearts.

[1] Some witty remarks in this essay I got from Grok AI 2024, fun mode, as a summary of this essay.