Tag Archives: Bible

Arthritus is How God Curses a Person

“The Lord Himself will send on you curses, confusion, and frustration in everything you do…. The Lord will strike you with wasting diseases, fever, and inflammation… The Lord will afflict you with the boils of Egypt and with tumors, scurvy, and the itch, from which you cannot be cured… making you miserable and unbearably sick… with madness, blindness, and panic… The Lord will afflict you with every sickness and plague there is.” (Deut. 28 NLT)

The curses of the law come from God, not Satan. They’re God’s curses. Thus, sicknesses are God’s curses. Even if demons and Satan administer sicknesses in their demonic priesthood, they’re ultimately God’s curses. Acts 10:38 tells us most, if not all, the people Jesus healed were afflicted by demons, but the foundation for sickness is God’s curse.

Sicknesses of the body and mind are curses for rejecting God. God doesn’t give boils, tumors (cancer), itch, fever, fear, and inflammation (e.g., arthritis) to help people but to destroy, shame, and damn them. If God is giving you such things, you’re His enemy, not His friend. For those God loves and who please Him, He gives health and strength. Curses like inflammation, or what we call arthritis, are promised to worsen until they destroy the person, causing an elderly person to be so bent over in pain and barely able to move. The curse of arthritis makes a person weak and immobile. Weakness in old age is a curse from God. This is how God curses a person.

The good news is that Jesus became a curse for us in our place and, in exchange, gave us the blessing of Abraham, which includes wealth, fame, and health. Paul also says Abraham’s gospel includes the Spirit, referring to the baptism of the Spirit: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’—in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (Galatians 3:13-14).

Additionally, for the specific issue of healing, in His substitutionary atonement, Jesus took lashes on His back in exchange for our healing. Thus, curses aren’t permitted in your body or mind. They have no legal right to touch you. Jesus was nailed to our curses; they have no claim on us. The curse is gone because of Jesus. You don’t have to tolerate curses in your body. Use the Name of Jesus to tell sicknesses in your body, which are curses, to leave, and command that body part to be healthy.

You’re the one responsible for allowing or preventing curses from festering in your body. If you let a demon convince you arthritis is a natural part of aging, you’ve given that demon permission to steal, kill, and destroy you with God’s curses, which Jesus died to save you from. If you agree with demons and their lies, you give them a foothold to curse you with the sickness Jesus died to redeem you from. You hold the responsibility for this.

This is similar to the command to make the devil flee. God won’t do this for you because He commanded you to do it. You have the power to let the devil keep harassing you or to make him flee. Likewise, you have the power to allow curses into your body by agreeing with men and demons or to confess with faith the finished work of Jesus Christ.

Whatever you choose, don’t blame God for your sickness, because Jesus already became a curse for you. He already took 39 lashes for you to be healed. He already did something. There’s no need to ask. You only need to believe He did it.


Arthritis, boils, cancer? Straight-up God’s curses for His foes, not party favors. Deuteronomy lays it bare: sickness is divine wrath, often demon-delivered but God-ordained. Good news? Jesus took the curse hit, swapping it for Abraham’s VIP blessings—health, wealth, and Spirit power. Stop letting demons gaslight you into keeping arthritis and weakness as an “aging badge.” Speak Jesus’ Name, kick curses out, and own your healing; He’s done the heavy lifting, so stop limping and start winning.

Tell It What You Want

“What I do have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.”
(Acts 3:6)

 “Jesus Christ heals you. Get up and roll up your mat.”
(Acts 9:34)

“Stand up on your feet!”
(Acts 14:10)


Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. 22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.”
(Matt. 21:21)

The fig tree was a real fig tree, and it dried up when Jesus spoke to it. Jesus didn’t ask God; He spoke to the tree, and it died. It wasn’t a spiritual fig tree. Thus, the category is material or physical. When facing mountains in the material world, Jesus didn’t ask God for help but spoke directly to the problem. He then instructs the disciples to do the same: to speak to the mountain or problem and command it in faith, knowing God’s power will back their words. Jesus didn’t tell the disciples to inform God of their problem or mountain or to present a sad sob story about how bad it is. Rather, He said to speak to the problem and tell it what you want it to do.

After the baptism of the Spirit in the opening salvo of the Book of Acts, the disciples did just that. In Acts 3, Peter didn’t tell God how awful it must be for the cripple to suffer so long and beg God to find it in His will to heal the man. No. Peter spoke to the mountain or problem—sickness. He said, “What I have, I give.” It’s not what God has or what God gives. Peter declared the power to heal is what he has and what he gives. He then said, “In Jesus’ Name, walk.” He spoke to the mountain and told it what he wanted: “Walk.” This is exactly what Jesus instructed.

In Acts 9, Peter says, “Jesus heals you, get up.” Peter doesn’t tell God about the mountain of sickness; rather, he tells the sickness what he wants: “Get up.” Peter obeys Jesus’ instructions for interacting with material mountains and problems. In faith, tell them what you want them to do, whether it’s killing a tree, casting it into the sea, healing the sick, or telling a fish to bring you money.

In Acts 14, Paul looks at the mountain of sickness and speaks to it like Peter, saying, “Stand up on your feet!”

These commands are both spoken to the mountain and serve as instructions for the person to act on faith. Because they believe they are healed, then they need  to do something they couldn’t do before. This is integrated into speaking to the mountain of sickness. It’s a powerful way to administer healing.

God gave Moses the Staff of God. When they were backed against the sea, God told Moses to stop monologuing about His help and use the Staff of God to divide the sea. Thus, it was not God who divided the sea in the most direct sense, but Moses divided the sea, using God’s power. However, what we have is greater than the Staff of God. We have the name of Jesus Christ engraved on our tongues. We are part of Jesus and so we use His Name as our own.


Jesus didn’t whine to God about fig trees or mountains—He told them what to do, and they obeyed. In Acts, Peter and Paul channel that vibe, bossing sickness around like pros: “Walk!” “Get up!” “Stand!” No sob stories, just faith-fueled commands backed by Jesus’ name. Speak to your problem, not about it—whether it’s a tree, a mountain, or a coinless fish, tell it who’s boss and watch God’s power roll.

Extra Baskets Left Over #4

*70

I remember a guest minister telling a church I was visiting, “Everybody in here can have an airplane.” He heard the people sigh in unbelief, so he said, “Let me ask you this. Does everybody in here have a car?” Most people nodded.

Then he said, “If you can have a car, why can’t you have an airplane?”

Someone responded, “Because we don’t need an airplane.”

He said, “You don’t need a car. You could get a ride every day or catch public transportation.”

His point was that the enemy takes over people’s minds and causes us to think that some things are too lavish or too expensive for us to have. We get into this mindset that says, “Too much wealth and nice things promote avarice or opulence.” But in God’s way of thinking, it’s not enough! God wants you to live on His level. Some people think that a Rolls-Royce is more valuable than they are, so they never see themselves owning one. The truth is that we are far more valuable than an automobile or an airplane. No amount of money could redeem us from sin and death. God had to give the life of His only begotten Son, Jesus. That is a dramatic statement of how valuable your life is.

God said in Isaiah 55:8, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the lord.” As I’ve mentioned, the Bible promises, “As he [a man] thinketh in his heart, so is he” (Prov. 23:7). We have to allow God to pull up our level of thinking, as He was doing with me and with our congregation in our new location. Even Jesus’ first miracle in the Bible was a miracle of luxury (turning water into fine wine). God has the very best set aside for us. It is time for the church to move from the place of scarcity and “just enough” into our promised land of more than enough.

A Wealthy Church

Again, the church should be the wealthiest institution, and God’s people should be the wealthiest people, on the face of the earth. Our lifestyles should stagger the imagination of the world. Why? Because we have a larger responsibility than any other people to evangelize the world and complete the assignment God gave [us].

Bill Winston.
Revelation of Royalty. 2021. p. 159 160

——–

Vincent Cheung does a great job in exposing the absolute stupidity in the idea of “need” versus a “want” regarding if our prayers qualify for a yes or no. For example, do you need to live through this day? Really? You could just die and go to heaven. Thus, you don’t really need to even breathe, or need food, clothes or a bed. Such a divide would reduce into a logical absurdity. What you need is what you want, and there is no way around this without jumping into insanity.  

*71  Fountain of Salvation.

In the ultimate sense God is the fountain of salvation. Jesus’ finished atonement creates a fountain of benefits for us to drink from. With this being established, we can affirm there is a fountain of salvation within us.

In Isaiah 12 we are told God is the fountain of salvation and we drink from Him. However, Jesus in John 4:14 furthers this teaching. If we drinks the water, that is salvation from Jesus, this water becomes a fountain of eternal life in them. This fountain of life is not just springing out of God, so that I go to God to draw some out, now it is in “me,” and I draw it from me. Jesus adds more to this by saying in John7:38-39, “Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit.” We learn in Acts chapter 1-2 and 19:2-5, that “the Spirit” is not referring to being born-again, but the baptism of Spirit for speaking in tongues, power and miracles. 

By faith we drink God’s fountain of salvation, and then a fountain of eternal life and Spiritual power fountains out of us. We are not a dry place that a demon can inhabit, but a fountain of life and power. We pray in tongues and the Spirit fountains power in our souls, by edifying us and often leading to interpretations and other spiritual powers. When we do this we are drawing from the fountain of salvation from within us. This is the same with forgiveness and being imputed with God’s righteousness. God did not forgive and credit His righteousness to Himself, but us. I am blameless and I am righteous. It is mine. It is my definition and identity. The same for eternal life and spiritual power springing out of myself. It is me. I am this fountain of salvation now. It is my definition and identity.

In that day you will sing:
    “I will praise you, O Lord!
You were angry with me, but not any more.
    Now you comfort me.
2 See, God has come to save me.
    I will trust in him and not be afraid.
The Lord God is my strength and my song;
    he has given me victory.”

3 With joy you will drink deeply
    from the fountain of salvation!
(Isaiah 12:1-3 NLT)

14 but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.”
(John 4:14 NKJV)

*72  I Would Have Given You Even More

“I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.”
2 Samuel 12:8 NIV

Look at how giving God is with material things. It is good to ask for such things and God is glad to give. You cannot ask for too much prosperity and happiness in relationships, if you are a Christian. It is not wrong to even ask for an entire nation. God wants to enrich and those who oppose this are against God, His nature and promises.

God’s goodness leads us to repentance. His love constrains us to forsake evil.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and will keep you on the path of wisdom. However, mature wisdom is receiving the good gifts from God.

.. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more…

What is amazing about this, is the particular focus on sex. David is being confronted for his sin of adultery. God gave him multiple wives for sex, and then God says, if you wanted even more (sex), I would have given it to you. Of course, today we don’t have multiply wives but a request for good and much sex in marriage is something God wants to give.

*73 falsifiable

In the realm of science, a falsifiable claim is one that can be observed, tested and has the potential to be disproven. 

Some fools claim that we ought to use the standard or epistemology of “falsifiable” as a way to discover biblical truth or Christian truth.  However, is this claim itself falsifiable? But I digress, so that I can address some of the main problems of this standard.

First, the bible does not teach the doctrine that we discover biblical truths by observation and testing it with the potential that it can be disproven. Thus, this standard is an anti-biblical standard. If one uses this to discover truth, then this standard is the person’s first principle of knowledge and not the scripture. They are using something more foundational than the bible and are using it to evaluate the scripture. Also, this presupposes empiricism and observation. But these are both logical fallacies.

Second. The law of contradiction is not falsifiable. You cannot observe it and test it with the potential of it being disproven, because you must use it to deny it. It is self-authenticating in this way. Thus, there is at least one thing that is not falsifiable, and so how many other things are not falsifiable? Thus, the standard of falsifiable is not universal to all knowledge, and this would lead to skepticism if used as a starting point for knowledge or a test for knowledge.

Third. The bible is not falsifiable because you must use the bible to deny the bible. There is no potential for it to be is disprove. It is self-authenticating. How can the bible teach the doctrine of falsifiable as a standard for finding truth, when the bible is not falsifiable? 

Thus, those who use this anti-biblical standard to find truth are to be mocked and dismissed. They do not know what the bible teaches and the do not understand what logic is. Do not let such people be your teachers.

*74

You can’t out extreme Jesus with faith. His teaching is too extreme. Nothing you say about faith can overreach Jesus’ extreme faith doctrine. There is no risk in taking it too far.

Faith for anything anytime anywhere

*75

Jesus who asked the Samaritan woman for a some water, because He was tired and thirsty. And yet, Jesus turns around and says “if you know Who I was and the gift I have, you would ask Me and I would give too.” What a lavish giving our God is. His mission was to serve man like a waiter. Even when He was tired and thirsty He still homed-in on His mission to serve man.

His statement had two parts. The first was “who Jesus was,” and the second was about a “gift” that He was willing to give.  Jesus says He has a gift to give, and so He instructs with the obvious conclusion. “Ask and I will give to you.” The scene started with the woman worried about serving Jesus with some water to drink, but Jesus made the point that He was there to serve and give.

This has some similar instruction as Martha and Marry. We learn it is more blessed to receive than to give, with our relationship with God. Jesus says He has a gift. We do not need to worry  about if it is God will to give or not. Jesus say He has a gift, tells us to ask for it and He will give it.  This is the type of God we have. Jesus says if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father. Our prayers are directed to this type of lavish giving God.

*76  God Is Our Provider Again

In the garden, God was Adam’s source for provision. When Adam sinned God’s curse included this: “Adam, I will not provide for you. You will now provide for yourself with toil.”

In Abraham, God’s gospel included providing abundance for man again. God Himself provides wealth. God becomes man’s rich supply. Jesus’ atonement gives us the blessing of Abraham.

God called creation good, and in this context, God was Adam’s provider.  God provided Adam with a rich supply of material food, goods and land.  Adam did not work to provide for himself, God provided for him. God was humanity’s bread winner.

When Adam sinned, this changed. God cursed Adam with death. This curse included God withdrawing from the position of being Adam’s provider. God told Adam that he will work and with hard toil provide his own supply. What God called good, was now cursed.

This idea might seem strange for some but working to provide for yourself was introduced as a curse. We are always to work, because we are created and commanded by God to do so, but the idea to work in order provide for ourselves was not part of creation. Adam worked in the sense of administering the Garden of Eden, but he did not work to earn his provision.

In God’s promise to Abraham, God begins to restore the natural order of things, by promising to give favor, increase and wealth to him. God begins to be the provider for His chosen ones.  For example, Isaac worked by planting in the waste land, but God gave it a supernatural 100-fold increase, despite the lack of water. This increased Isaac’s wealth.  The king gave Abraham a large sum of money for temporally taking Sarah, thinking she was only his sister. God provided wealth to Abraham, without Abraham working for it. God was Abraham’s bread winner. Abraham believed God would do these good things for him and God declared him righteous.

Some make the mistake in only applying one narrow aspect of the gospel to forgiveness of sin. Jesus gave us Abraham’s blessing, through His atonement. The gospel puts God back in the position of being our bread winner. As in all the blessings of the gospel, to fully enjoy them you must have in faith to receive them. Therefore, we are not to look to our employer as the “source” of our supply and ability to get money. Sadly, many do exactly this and are practical atheists this part of their life and mind.  Knowing the gospel of Abraham gives us the power and favor to gain wealth, even wealth transfers and know Jesus bore our poverty and already gave us His wealth, our eyes ought to be focused on God as our source.

Because our employers are limited, if we see them as our source of money, then our lives will be constrained by their limitations.  However, if we turn to God who has unlimited wealth and power, our ability to gain wealth and have doors opened to us will be as measureless as God’s ability.  God has good things to give, and there is much work to be done in expanding the kingdom of God. A human focus for our provision will greatly diminish our ability to fulfill God’s goals for our lives.

God has become our provider again through Jesus Christ. We must take full advantage of this for our own lives, and to expand the kingdom. We ought to focus on God being our rich provider.

*77

How did sickness come into you? How did it come into the world?

Sickness is not a natural consequence of creation. Adam did not believe God, rather, he believed a lie. He operated in unbelief. God did what He said. He cursed Adam and Eve and creation with death.

Here is the main point. Sickness came by words. Sickness came when God spoke a curse against creation. Sickness is destroyed in the same way, by words. If you look to human means to heal, then human means is all you will be rewarded with, however small it is. By Jesus’ stripes we were healed. This is the foundation; however, we are healed by opening our mouths and commanding the sickness to leave. God spoke the curse of sickness into the world, and we speak to make it leave. Jesus said, “You heal the sick.” You do it. This is why Peter, even after being baptized in the Spirit, spoke words to heal the crippled man in Acts 3. “What I have, I give. In the name of Jesus Christ, “walk.””

Healing will not happen by waiting for “God’s Will.” Healing will not happen by waiting for God to open His mouth and tell the sickness to leave. The reason is simple. Jesus commanded us to open our mouths and do it ourselves. God’s not going to do something He commanded you to do and speak. God’s command for us to do it, is God’s will and decree.

*78

When God called Samson, He needed a person with faith to Judge with superman power, not integrity. We are commanded to strive for integrity, and so we are not diminishing this command. Not only is holiness obedience, it has many blessings attached to it. Having practical righteousness and integrity will make the job easier, with less problems and make it more enjoyable. And Yet, when the one thing that is needed is faith for superman power to kill thousands of men, tear down and carry off city gates and push stone pillars like they were a toothpick, integrity will not accomplish it. It is a different category.

The man with the highest integrity but not enough faith to work superman power is a useless man when God needs faith for miracles.

Jesus said to not begin ministry until the church was endowed with supernatural power by the baptism of the Spirit. Jesus commanded us to heal the sick, cast out demons and throw mountains into the sea. When the situation calls for faith and power, there is no substitute.

Some people say Samson is about not letting your sexual passions overtake you. Even if this can be extracted it is only indirectly. It is not what the story of Samson teaches. It teaches that when power is needed, then only faith to work superman power will get the job done. This is why Samson is a hero of faith.

Some say if you lack integrity you are disqualified. This is true as far as it goes, but it is also misleading. Samson and David, with their big sins, were not disqualified from the gifts and callings on their lives. Even Peter, after playing the harlot of a false teacher for a short time, was not disqualified from his gifts and calling.  And yet, consider the opposite. If any of these men never had the faith to do the miracles needed, then they were disqualified from the start. If Ruth did not have the faith to go to the king and rescue her people, then Mordecai said God would disqualify her and her family.

When God needs miracle power, there is no substitute.

*79

“What do you mean, ‘If I can’?” Jesus asked.

“Anything is possible if a person believes.” (Mark 9:23 NLT)

The father responded in the typical way religious elites and tradition does. “If it is Your Will, and if you Can, Oh Jesus please help.” Jesus was not happy with this reply. Think about that. He was not happy when man put the outcome of a healing on Him, or God. He said, “If you are able to believe, then your boy will be healed.”

Elites put the outcome on God’s power and if it is His will, but Jesus teaches the 180 degree contradiction to this. Jesus puts the responsibility and outcome on a person’s faith

*80

Unbelief is the original matrix. Unbelief is the only real matrix.

Johnny, “Jesus heal me please, if it is your will.

Jesus response, “if it is your will and you have faith then you do it; because I won’t do it. Command the sickness to leave.”

Johnny, “No, its up to You to heal me, if it’s your will.”

The matrix has Johnny enslaved to Satan and to man-centeredness. Johnny is not able to obey Jesus. He can’t hear and believe Jesus’ words.

*81 Jesus Was the Real Victim in this Story

 He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?” (Mark 4:40 NIV)

Jesus told him, “Don’t be afraid; just believe.” (Mark 5:36 NIV)

The saying is true, you are either in faith or fear. Jesus puts these as opposites. He says, “only believe,” with no mixture of fear. He says in Mark 4 that the disciples had fear and zero faith. They don’t mix well. If you have fear in your heart about a sickness, then you realize you don’t have faith. This is how it works.

(Momo, I mean) Jesus was the real victim in this story. He was asleep with His head on a cushion and was woken up for something He expected the disciples to deal with, without disturbing Him. I am not trying to be funny here. It is no joke being woken up from a good nap from something so minor as a deadly storm, which only a little faith could destroy and remove.

The prayers of many people are like the disciples in this story. They pray as if Jesus is teaching that He likes it, if we cry out in fear for His help over something like deadly weather or sickness. People repeat the disciples fearful cry as a model for prayer, when Jesus rebukes it as how not to pray. Jesus was upset with their fearful cries for help. Think about that. Because God is merciful He might answer some fearfully cries of unbelief, but don’t expect it.

The point that made it a bad prayer was no faith. It is ok to ask for Jesus help if you have faith, but here is Jesus’ point. If they had faith, then they did not need to ask for Jesus’ help. That’s how you know you have faith.

 We do not have every lesson Jesus told the disciples at this point, but Jesus’ reaction gives us enough details that He expected them to use their faith, and deal with the situation, without waking Him up.

This also brings up the issue of where the storm came from. Of course in the ultimate level God causes all things, but the bible mostly deals with the human level. Peter in Acts 10:38 said it was not God, but Satan who was victimizing all the people in Israel with sickness and diseases. When Jesus was casting out diseases He was fighting demons, not God, because the sicknesses came from demons not God. When you have an insider relationship with God He relates to you in blessings. The contract in Jesus’ blood stipulates that God only relates to us in blessings (it could include discipline, but not curses). Thus, whether it is a sickness, or a deadly storm, in human level, it was not from God. When you rebuke it, you are not rebuking God but demons and the curse. Jesus teaches us to not tell God about our mountains, or sickness or deadly storm, but to use our faith and we command it to move and die. Jesus has given us the power and authority to do it, and expects us to do something. Don’t wake Him up and tell Him about a storm, when you have the Staff of God in your mouth. Open your mouth. You divide it. You heal it. You cast it out. You calm it.

*82  Jesus Did Not Use Jesus Power

Jesus did ministry as a man born under the law. After His temptation He was filled with the Spirit, and then He started His ministry. Thus, did He cast out demons by His Jesus power? No. He cast out demons by the Spirit of God, not the Son of God power. Jesus said, “if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom has come upon you.” Moving past the implications that what brings in God’s kingdom is casting out demons and healing the sick, let us just think about Jesus’ point about the Spirit. He cast out demons by the Spirit.

Another example that this power was the Spirit and not His, is how the lady, with the flow blood, took power away from Jesus, without Jesus knowing who it was. The power of the Spirit upon Jesus, acted like a spiritual law, in that anyone with faith who touched Jesus, had the Spirit’s power automatically flow into them for healing. The law is simple. The Spirit was the electricity, and faith is like flipping on a light switch.

 Referring His miracles, Jesus said the Father does the works. In John 14:10-12 the PTP does a good paraphrase translation saying, “Don’t you believe that the Father is living in me and that I am living in the Father? Even my words are not my own but come from my Father, for he lives in me and performs his miracles of power through me.”

The big idea is simple. When Jesus as casting out demons He did it by power of the Spirit. When He healed, did various miracles, such as commanding the storm to calm, the power that caused this to happened was worked by the Father, and not by the Son. Jesus operated as a man. He was given authority by the Father to heal and calm storms, but the power and authority came by the Spirit and the Father.

We do the same. We have the same authority and command. When Jesus told us to speak to our mountains and command them to move, when Jesus told us to heal the sick and cast out demons, He gave us His authority to do it and put His power in us.  Jesus gave us authority to use He name to ask and command whatever we want. This power is God’s power, but it rests in us. When we command a mountain to move, it obeys us, but the power is God’s. God has up His power in us like a flowing river, and has stamped His authority on our tongues. However, God will not move our jaws for us. We must chose to open our months and use the authority and power He has gifted us.

Jesus is now sitting at the right hand of the Power. He uses His own power now. But on earth He did not use His own power. How successful was Jesus miracle working ministry when the power was not His but the Father’s and the Spirit? It was 100%, with the exception of unbelief, such as in His hometown. Some might say, “well it’s not my power, and so it might not happen.” This is nonsense. Jesus never failed to work a miracle, even though it was not His power. He did not fail, because He trusted God and was given the authority to command and work miracles. We are in the same ministry. We are given the same authority. We are in the same position as Jesus.  The only difference is that Jesus said you will do even greater miracles if you believe in Him.

Rejoice, your success for miracles is guaranteed. Open your mouth and command something.

*83   Eschatology In A Nutshell

If someone sums up eschatology without baptism of the Spirit for power, they have no idea what they are talking about.

Acts 1:6-8 NIV. “ Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses… to the ends of the earth.”

The context is about eschatology. Jesus has sat down on his eternal throne and is ruling. The disciples did what most do, they made eschatology about politics. However, Jesus rebukes them and says eschatology is about being baptized in the Spirit for power and miracles.

The important part to note is that in eschatology the followers made it political and Jesus made it about miracles and the Spirit for power. By making it about politics they made it about man. Religious elites make the baptism of Power belong only to the apostles, and thus they still make it about man. They use religious words, but the result is a man-centred doctrine in what it means to be God-centred. In Peter’s sermon on Pentecost, he made baptism of power about Jesus and His eschatology position, sitting at the right hand of the Power. It had nothing to do with the apostles, thus, the baptism of power still remains, because Jesus still remains at the right hand of the Power. The Power was faithful to His promise to give Jesus the authority to pour out power.

Jesus is still faithful in pouring out power on “all whom the Power calls to Himself,” (Acts 2:39).  The Baptism of power is connected to God predestination of the elect. Peter’s point is not directly about repentance, but baptism of the Spirit and to this Peter directly connects, as many as God calls to Himself. This is why Peter says the gentiles were granted salvation and eternal life when He witnessed them speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44-47). In His Pentecost sermon Peter already said that being baptised in the Spirit is about God calling His predestined ones to Himself. Thus, when Peter saw the gentiles speaking in tongues, and then he told the other disciples, they concluded God elected them to eternal life (11:15-18).  In fact, Peter said because the Spirit was given to them, it was proof they should be baptised in water. And let us not forget that water baptism is a sign that they have died and were raised in new life with Jesus. Speaking tongues was proof they were elected to eternal life.

Peter’s argument for the baptism of power is based on two points. One is the Father being faithful to His promise (2:33) to Jesus, so that Jesus has the authority to pour out power. The second part of the argument is that Jesus is sitting on His throne, at the right hand of the Power (2:31-36). These are the 2 relevant factors, in Peter’s argument, for the conditions in pouring out the baptism of power.  Peter, who is an Apostle, gives no scriptural quotes or logical connections, that the baptism of the Spirit is connected to the apostles. Zero.  What do the religious elites know that Peter did not?

In addition to the Spirit baptism of power, there is the issue of authority. Jesus gave the disciples the authority to heal the sick. In fact, it was a command, because He said, you “heal the sick,” and “cast out demons,” and “preach the gospel.” Then Jesus did the same with 72 others, and so no one can logically say it was only for the apostles. To further insure this, Peter in Acts 3, after commanding a healing, says it was by “faith in Jesus,” and not by the authority of an apostle.  Faith in Jesus is what causes a person to receive salvation, and it is the same faith that commands sickness to leave. It is heavily God-centred. It is not man-centred on the apostles. It is centred on Jesus and His position of authority, while He is sitting at the Father’s right hand.

The next major event after the baptism of the Spirit Acts 3-4, shows how Jesus’ plan for power is how to apply His eschatology.

After being released from prison the Christians got together and prayed. They quoted Psalms 2, a militaristic Psalm, and asked that God would apply this to their situation of government opposition, by healing the sick, miracles and boldness to preach the gospel. God responded back with a resounding Yes.

This is how they applied eschatology. This is how they applied the doctrine that Jesus is on His eternal Throne and rules forever. This is how they applied the doctrine that King Jesus gave them power to advance His Kingdom when they face opposition, even when their enemies use the government to persecute them.

They mentioned 3 things, healing, miracles and bold preaching, in context of eschatology advancement under King Jesus. Many only preach (and they are not even good at that), which is only 1/3rd of the disciples applied eschatology. It is no surprise they fail at kingdom advancement.

*84 Under the Boots of Observation and Emotions

Yank the Redwood of observation out of your own eye before you try to remove the splinter of observation from the eyes of the Word of Faith teachers.

I heard Mark Driscol start a series of sermons about faith and the Spirit. There is an occasional quotable statement, when he slams cessationism, but he is not in a position to criticize them, because Mark rejects the bible with empiricism, observation and emotions just as much as the cessationist do.  The only positive aspect of Mark’s dual epistemology is that he tells you up front he is using observation or emotions as a higher authority over scripture. The cessationists, even if their attempts are bad, try to hide dual epistemologies. They will use the idea of God’s sovereign providence and history, but in reality they are using the logic of induction and relying on the epistemology of empiricism and observation. They use God’s sovereignty, as odd as it sounds, to hide their adultery with human starting points.

In attacking the Word of Faith, Mark says they are wrong because Jesus taught x, y and z from the bible. This is what we would expect if the bible is one’s only starting point for knowledge.  No, what Mark said, was that they are wrong because to tell someone they did not get healed, because they lacked faith, is cruel and hurts people’s emotions. When did emotions become an authority over scripture?  Because you observe x, therefore the bible is wrong. When did this become a standard way to understand the bible? The scripture tells us public knowledge only comes to us by the Scripture, however, our observations can be mistaken, such as in the case with Moab and the blood water. Thus using observation to gain knowledge leads to skepticism, but this leads to denying the law of contradiction, which is self-refuting nonsense. It means observation is a false starting point of knowledge that does not exist.

The other thing Mark said was that Acts was over several years, and so all the miracles you see, really isn’t that many miracles, and so we should not except to see constant miracles. This is a very careless reading of scripture. It is said many miracles were done by the apostles and followers, so that entire crowds were healed, things like napkins were used to healed and they even tried to get healed off Peter’s shadow. Acts was a drive by summary of the miracles, because there was too much to record. Acts starts off with Jesus commanding everyone to get endowed with power to perform miracles, it is connected to Joel’s prophecy that says everyone will be doing miracles.   

Again, what is oddly missing is the Word of Faith’s main passages of Jesus’ extreme faith doctrine. For more see, Vincent Cheung, The Extreme Faith Teacher. These are the main basis for their doctrine of faith. Unless you can bring up those passages and say Jesus was wrong, then the faith teachers are correct for their faith doctrines.

It is wall punching hilarious to see so-called Christians champion themselves as “the bible is my final authority,” and “I am a bible believer,” but every time they find a doctrine they don’t like, they shove the bible under the boots of their human observation and emotions.

*85

No longer have consciousness of sins.” Heb 10:2

 “Go boldly to the throne of grace, that you may obtain mercy and find grace to help you.” Heb. 4:16

Show me a person who is not conscious of their sin, and I will show you a person who “boldly goes to the throne of grace, that they may obtain mercy and find grace to be helped.”

To “boldly” enter God’s throne room, means you are walking with your head held high. Without knocking, you put your hands on the royal doors to God’s throne room, you push them open and march in like you belong there. With other heavenly host, standing to the side, who don’t have the same access that you do, watching you. Then you say, “I need this help,” or “want this thing.” And God says, “You got it. Your faith has helped you.”

There is no way you can do this if you are “conscious” or mindful of your sins. It will not happen. There is no way a sinner can demand help from a holy and righteous God, who demands perfection.  But a righteous person, and person who has a blood contract with God that allows them to ask and receive, is able to demand help and grace.  A person who is mindful of their sins, is a person who does not boldly go to the throne of grace. And if they do ask, they end up not asking, but begging like an outsider, because they are mindful they are indeed a sinful outsider.

What is on repeat in your mind? When you are afraid? When you hurt? When you go to sleep. Are you mindful how righteous you are? Are you mindful you have a contract with God to make demands on Him? Or are you mindful how sinful and pathetic you are?

*86 Two Contracts (Grace and Works)

There are two types of covenants. or contracts God made. One is a contract of blessings based on the law, and but the first contract is based on a one sided promise of God to freely bless.

As Paul says in Galatians, the blessings God gave to Abraham was a one-sided “promise” (Abraham was a sleep) to bless. The law was a contract based on performance. Paul again makes the distinction in Romans 4 that the “promise” was based upon grace, so that it is secured by his chosen ones by faith. In this sense, the law is not based on faith, in and of itself. Because Abraham was first, it cannot be replaced by the works for blessings. Thus, the law (before Jesus) could only be lived by faith, in light of doing it in the hope of the blessings promised to Abraham.

As Vincent pointed out in “The Edge of Glory,” because Abraham was sleeping and it was a one-sided promise of God to do good things, can we still call it a contract? We can call it a covenant, but only in a very lose way. In fact, Paul in Galatians calls it a covenant, chapter 4 when making a contrast to works, but on the other hand, Paul almost exclusively calls what was given to Abraham a promise and grace, rather than a covenant. Even the writer of Hebrews does the same thing in chapter 5.

The law in Jesus was fulfilled and as Paul says it, nailed to the cross, or in modern terms, it was stamped “fulfilled,” filed away in the archive section of God’s documents. Abraham’s promise was not “built” upon through Jesus’ atonement or by His new contract; rather, His atonement, “He became a curse for us so that we have the blessing of Abraham,” ensures we get the promised blessing of Abraham. This is like the bible saying “Jacob shall possess their possessions.” Jesus’ atonement ensures that we possess our Abrahamic processions.

Now in addition the all the goodies promised to Abraham, the very first one-sided promise was to Adam. It was a promise of deliverance. We learn more about what that means, but it centered on forgiveness and righteousness. The atonement of Jesus accomplished both of these promises. It accomplished the promised deliverance and salvation through the gift of righteousness, and it ensures we inherit Abraham’s blessing.

Thus, these two promises are accomplished in Jesus or guaranteed as an ever present action to us. But the covenant of the law and works is not included in this. Only what can be received freely by grace is combined in Jesus’ finished atonement as a contract. It is a contract of grace, not our performance. Because Jesus was our cruse and fulfilled the law, God promises, or makes a contract with us that He will never remember our sins. We receive this promise as grace in faith. The law as a performance, was performed by Jesus for us in our place, and so it was totally finished. It demanded and it was satisfied. In the most loses sense, Jesus performs the work of not remembering our sins, but that is a negative or indirect sense, because the work itself is done. However, the blessing of Abraham is not finished and nailed to the cross or filed away in a drawer. The gift of righteousness and Abraham’s promise, is an everlasting and ever present thought and action of God upon His children. God is directly and always performing this promised love and goodness on us.

*87 Is This the Year of My Blessings?

Is this the year of triple blessing?

Is this the year of rest and acceleration?

Is this the year of restoration?

Is this the year of 7 healings?

Is this the year of double prosperity?

The answer to this is, yes; however, it is only in the sense that every year these already apply, and they already belong to the Christian.

The Christian has inherited the blessing of Abraham, every single year, every day, every minute. They are under the blessing of Abraham by the finished atonement of Jesus Christ. With faith in this truth, any Christian can make it a 100x blessing year, for even that is not enough to describe how much God blessed Abraham in prosperity, fame, military victory, health and favor. Paul argues the blessings (or as Paul calls it the “gospel”) of Abraham means the Spirit and miracles. We get more than 3 miracles. The only limit is your needs, wants and faith to receive them.

Some ministries are looking for hype and extra offerings, but there is nothing wrong for a pastor asking God and looking for a “theme of the year.” If it is a pastor, and God did answer their prayer, then such a theme is for the “members” of their local church and not for everyone else. The question now is this, is it wrong for someone to claim this for themselves if they are not part of this local church? No.

But remember, although, because of our weak faith, having a theme and focus might be helpful to a certain extent, we must strive for maturity. By faith in God’s promises all these declarations and themes are yours by right, through Jesus Christ. They are yours through Jesus’ finished work for you. They already belong to you. They are already your identity and definition. You do not need another mediator, or pastor, or ministry to make your definition in Jesus more real. You do not need a mediator to bring you directly to God. You do not need a pastor to bring you to your blessings given to you by Jesus. You already have direct and immediate access to God in Jesus. The blessing of Abraham is already yours. God gave it to you in Jesus and no man can mediate this blessing from God to you. You already own it, and you have access to it by faith. Let no one replace, the direct access you have with God and with your blessing of Abraham, with any man or thing.

Rejoice. Hold your head up high. With faith, all these good things are yours for the taking. With faith, every year is the blessing of Abraham that causes you to reap 100-fold.

*88 He Gives New Strength

He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak
.”
 Isaiah 40:29 (NIV)


Even after being born from above, we can still get weary and weak. This isn’t because God withholds these things from us, leading us to beg for strength that isn’t part of our DNA or inheritance. Through Jesus’ finished atonement, we already have power and strength.

Because of our imperfections and immaturity, we can become weary, making it right to ask for new strength. God wants to supply our needs. It is His delight to hear our cries for help. God loves us and has promised to help, but we ask from a position of victory. Strength is ours through Jesus’ atonement; it’s our definition. Paul doesn’t say to ask for God’s armour or ask to walk in His power; he says to put on the armour because you already have access to it, and to walk in the power because you already possess it. You already have God’s old strength, but you must take responsibility to put it on and use it. Ask for God’s help, but also use the power God has already given you.

Satan wants you to fight for new strength on the wrong hill, making it seem like you must ask and beg for it. He wants to put new strength behind a paywall of, striving, doing and begging. He wants you to view your identity as lacking this strength, pushing you to strive from a position of not having. This is the wrong hill to fight on. This is a lie from the pits of hell.

God’s shield of protection and favor is already surrounding you; the mighty sword of the Spirit (praying in tongues) is already in your hand. You have power; release it. The authority to use Jesus’ name for anything is already branded on your tongue. Open your mouth and use that authority.

*89 Jesus’ New Deal

In the story of Job, Satan brought all the sickness, destruction, and troubles. Jesus says the devil comes to steal, kill, and destroy. Peter in Acts 10:38 states that all the people Jesus healed (thousands) were victimized by Satan. Consider how Peter assumes these sicknesses were caused by Satan, not just from Adam’s fall. Jesus also said Satan bound a “daughter of Abraham” for 18 years—Satan, not God, bound one of God’s daughters.

Back to Job: Job’s understanding of God improved not because of his suffering, but because God revealed truth to him. God had to step in and drop some knowledge bombs. Satan’s torture? Yeah, it didn’t teach Job jack; it just made him listen up when God finally spoke. Experience is the worst teacher, and God’s word is only teacher.

In the new deal with Jesus, we’re supposed to get the good stuff, healing, and blessings, not Satan’s new green deal. We’re God’s kids now, not his punching bags. In our Contract with Jesus, God promises only good. We’re promised insider status as children. God might give you a slap on the wrist, but he’s not out here causing your misery. He teaches by writing His laws on our hearts and the Spirit opening our minds to His truth. Even when Paul throws some dude to Satan, it’s Satan doing the dirty work, not God. God promises “only good” in the Contract. If Jesus administers suffering, He would be a minister of death, diseases and pain. That’s Satan’s priesthood, not Jesus’.

This is the problem with those who focus on suffering and sickness. You’re saying Satan’s your professor in the school of hard knocks. Your knowledge? It’s just from getting your butt kicked, not from the holy book. And you’re giving Jesus Satan’s job title.

*90 The Land of the Word


Canaan is the land of the Word and promise.
The sands of Paran are the land of observations and experts.


If you want the milk and honey, you must believe the Words and Promises of God. Unbelief will disqualify you from entering. If you decide what is reality for you—in categories like health, wealth, family, and various miracles—based on what you see, hear, experiment, observe, or on the words of other men, such as doctors, then you become an abomination to God.

The Israelites did not lie when they said they saw giants and felt small compared to them. But God cursed and rejected them for truthfully reporting what they saw. Their expert trackers and scouts did not lie when they delivered their findings, but God hated them for their truthful report based on their senses, observations, experts, and experiments. And God will reject you if you do the same. The Promised Land can only be entered by those who reject their observations and experts and affirm that God’s Word is truthful, despite what they see. The only way to honor and glorify God as the true God is to confess and believe what He says over what you see and what the experts say.

It is the same today. When Jesus came down from the mountain after His meeting with God (like Moses), He rebuked the disciples as spiritual perverts for not having enough faith to cast out a demon. The demon was causing the boy to scream and twist on the ground. These loud sensations caused the disciples to doubt, and Jesus was not happy. He expects us to believe, even when there is much carnal stimulation and even when many voices—like doctors or experts—say there is no way out.

*91 Thorn In My Mind

All humans have sinned.
I am a human.
Thus, I have sinned.

This is a correct way to apply knowledge from the bible to yourself. To say monkeys have sinned is a false way to apply this knowledge. Monkeys are not humans. It is a category error. However, imagine me forwarding such a dumb argument? I would be mocked, and for good reason.

[However to say I have sinned is faith. It is an deductive syllogistic application of the truth to me. This is why the word for ‘faith’ interchangeable with the words for syllogism or deductive logic or rational, or logic.]

And yet Christians do the same with Paul’s throne in the flesh. It was only given to him because of the abundance of supernatural revelations, visions and trances. The messenger of Satan was given to Paul to keep him humble. And yet, a Christian will say, “I’m like Paul, with this thorn of cancer in my flesh.” However, they haven’t had one vision or revelation, let alone a super abundance of them. Their category lunacy is not less than saying “chickens have sinned, because all humans have sinned.” People who forward such silly arguments have put thrones into their own minds.

This is beside the point, the thorn in his side are false super apostles attacking his children with false doctrine.

*92  I Give What I have

“What “I” do have “I” give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.” Acts 3:7

Although God, out of compassion and sovereign bulldozing, will still heal; yet, in the larger picture, God is not healing, because He has commanded us to heal the sick. Peter shows what this means. He said something that would get him called a heretic by most churches. He said what “he” has “he” gives, which is the name of Jesus to heal. Peter has the name of Jesus to heal.

Thus, God did not heal the man, but Peter using God’s power (and the man’s faith) that healed the man. Acts 9 shows something similar. We have been commanded to be baptized in the Spirit for power (Acts 1-2), and given Jesus’ name to ask for anything we want -John 14-16).

Thus, just as God told Moses to use the Staff to divide the sea, we have also been given the Staff of God and commanded to heal the sick. If people are not being healed it is not God who is holding it back, but people not obeying and not believing. You cannot blame God for something that He has already given to you and commanded you to do.

*93

Job didn’t have a contract with God as we do. However, in this story Satan gives Job sickness and poverty and God gives him double wealth and health (James calls this God’s mercy) and yet the conclusion is that Satan gives us wealth and health, and God gives us sickness and poverty?

I have never understood the use of this story to teach the opposite. So, I guess the story of God creating the earth means God did not create the earth?

*94 Sad Sob Story.

When the gentile woman told Jesus about the sad sob story of her demon possessed daughter, it did not move Jesus Christ to heal her daughter. The woman begged, “please help me.” And yet this did not move Jesus Christ to heal her daughter.

What did move Jesus to heal? It was the greatest and rarest thing found on earth. A person who has faith in God. Faith is what finally moved Jesus to heal her daughter.

It’s not a sad story or begging that will move God. It is faith that God will be faithful to His promises to give you what you ask. You can do the same.

“Who Touched Me?”

Faith will cause God to focus on you when there are millions trying to get His attention. They might be pressed up against Jesus, but He will bypass them all and focus on you if you have faith.

It was not compassion; it was not a sad sob story or begging that got Jesus’ full attention. It was faith that God will help and give a miracle of healing. He will do the same if you have faith for a miracle. He will give you His undivided attention and power.

Upgrade!

When the Roman centurion received an upgraded miracle to the one Jesus was already was giving him, it was not a sad sob story or begging that produced the upgrade. It was faith. It was absolute confidence that Jesus ordered reality like a general ordering men below him. And because he was asking with such confidence, he presupposed Jesus was willing.

This was the type of faith that caused miracles to be upgraded to a bigger miracle. It is not begging or trying to impress on Jesus how awful your circumstance is. It is faith.

*95 Slapping Falsification on it

Science commits a triple logical fallacy with empiricism, observation and scientific experimentation (affirming the consequent). Slapping an unsound use of falsification at the end does not make it rational. Science violates the law of contradiction (because it leads to skepticism) and identity (this happens multiple times). The epistemology of science is empiricism, but this foundation is a systematic denial of the laws of contradiction and identity. Induction and observation violate the laws of contradiction and identity. The very conception of induction is a violation of the law of identity. It is anti-logic

However, Jesus is the logic and appeals to the law of contradiction in Mark 12:35-37. Jesus is the law of contradiction. To say science gives any premise about anything is to violate Jesus who is the Logos. You must pick to either murder science or logic, or that you must either murder science or Jesus. Science has no justification for any statement about reality. Science is not knowledge. When used to produce a premise about reality, it is to be mocked and dismissed. Science is a group of people and nothing more.

I Apologize for the Diversion

[This section was part of my Systematic Theology, but I decided it was to much of a rabbit trail to leave in the book; and so, I published it here as extra reading material]

I am not alone in saying this. The famous John Calvin says in his institutes, as I paraphrase, “that God with His infinite power, could have created Adam to resist the temptation in the garden, but willfully chose to create Adam in such a way, that Adam did not have the power to resist the temptation. And it is wicked to question or look for a further reason why Adam sinned.” Martin Luther, not directly dealing with Adam’s sin speaks of Satan. Satan’s sin is relevant, because as Adam is the original sinner for mankind, Satan is for angels. “So that which we call the remnant of nature in the ungodly and in Satan, as being a creature and a work of God, is no less subject to Divine omnipotence and action than all the rest of God’s creatures and works. Since God moves and works all in all, He moves and works of necessity even in Satan and the ungodly.[1] Martin is saying, regarding the only real level causality, God directly works evil, in evil creatures, just as directly as He works good, in good creatures. As direct as God is, as He works faith in an elect, it is the same as He works unbelief in the reprobate.

Some modern Reformed people, such as R.C. Sproul, call this hyper-Calvinism[2]. This is self-damming because the Bible teaches this, and so it is an attack on God. It is also stupid because Calvin teaches this, and so now we have a history manmade mess, where we need to keep talking about what man said what. God and the bible become secondary at best. Calvin says there is NO such thing as “permission will” with God about anything in reality, thus, God is not permissive with the reprobate. Calvin clearly taught that God is as directly involved in reprobation as He is in the elect. God does not, merely leave the reprobate, yet actively works in the elect. Calvin says,  

Finally, he adds the conclusion that “God has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills” [Rom. 9:18]. Do you see how Paul attributes both to God’s decision alone? If, then, we cannot determine a reason why he vouchsafes mercy to his own, except it so pleases him, neither shall we have any reason for rejecting others, other than his will. For when it is said that God hardens or shows mercy to whom he wills, men are warned by this to seek no cause outside his will.[3]

So, whether it is the elect or reprobate, Calvin says you cannot go beyond, “God Willed it.” God willed it, and not that man willed; God will, and not that God left it, and a nebulous neutral power, outside of God, willed it. God did it directly, by His will and power. Calvin applies God’s will and direct working power, as equally to the elect as reprobate. Thus, if Martin Luther and Calvin are correct, then the WCF teaches a false doctrine, when it talks about secondary causes. I do not want to linger long on history and people, because Christians, like the Jews in Jesus’ day, use traditions to negate the Scripture. However, it might be worth saying that Martin Luther thanked Erasmus for attacking his teaching on God’s direct sovereign power in man, and with the gospel, and not attacking non-relevant issues. That is, Luther saw this teaching about God’s absolute sovereign power that directly works in the saint as it works in the sinner and Satan, as the central argument. Calvin, it seems, saw the importance as well. The WCF, which came later, contradicted what they taught.

Calvin actually gives a summary of this doctrine saying,

The sum of the whole is this,—since the will of God is said to be the cause of all things, all the counsels and actions of men must be held to be governed by his providence. Therefore, as God exerts his power in the elect, who are guided by the Holy Spirit, He also exerts force in the reprobate to do him service.[4]

…When [Augustine] uses the term permission [He means] that the will of God is the supreme and primary cause of all things, because nothing happens without his order or permission. He certainly does not figure God sitting idly in a watch-tower, when he chooses to permit anything. The will which he represents—if I may so express it—is an active will; for if God’s will is not active, then God’s will could not be regarded as a cause.[5]

…When I say that God bends all the reprobate, and even Satan himself, at his will, some object that only happens by the permission, not by the will of God…

[Those who are against the will of God that causes all things, counter this by saying] this is done only by the permission of God, and not by the will of God. However, God himself, openly declares that he does this, and thus, rebukes their evasion of this doctrine.

I admit, indeed, that God often acts in the reprobate by interposing the agency of Satan; but in such a manner, that Satan himself performs his part, just as he is impelled.

Some say, if God causes the counsels and affections of the reprobate, he is the author of all their sins; and, therefore, men, in doing what God has decreed, are unjustly condemned, because they are obeying his will. Such an objection makes a category mistake made between God’s will (decree) and his command, though it is obvious, from innumerable examples, that there is the greatest difference between them.

What we formerly quoted from the Psalms, to the effect that he does whatever pleases him, certainly extends to all the actions of men.[6]

Calvin is defining “providence” as this category proposition, “All things that are caused are things caused by the will of God.” This is not how I hear some Reformed people say it; they use it in a softer, vaguer, and more fatalistic way. I do not know if Calvin is truly representing Augustine about his use of “permission,” however it is not relevant, for the only point I wish to make is that Calvin is saying this because he agrees with the doctrine. Calvin is defining “God’s Will,” as only meaning a “active willing.” This of course lines up with Calvin saying that God does nothing by permitting it. This is important for there are people who use the word for “active” predestination for the elect and “passive” for the reprobate, such as R.C Sproul.  Calving contradicts this in both his negative and positive definition in what “God’s will” means. (1) It never means permission, and it always means active. In addition to this Calvin defends God’s active will, by saying if God’s will is not active, then it cannot logically be defined as a real “cause” of something. That is, if God only permits Pharaoh’s heart to be hard, and Pharaoh only permits, his heart to be hard, then there is no cause for it, which is nonsense. Calvin, like Luther, says that as God uses His power and force to make the saints believe and do, God uses the same power and force to make the reprobates and Satan to not believe and do.  Thus, when Calvin says God willed something he means God causes it, and not something or someone. When Calvin says that God will is the cause of all things, he means that it is the real, primary and active cause of it.

Even if you disagree with my points and copyediting, Calvin says God’s will does not mean permission, and that God’s will always means the same thing applied to all reality. This means you cannot say Calvin taught predestination one way for the Christian and then something less for the reprobate.

Martin Luther says that God is the one who put the evil in man originally. Additionally, as active as God is in causing “faith” in the Christian he is as active in causing “unbelief” in the reprobate. The way Luther talks about God’s causality with faith and unbelief, being the same, we conclude there is no room to say active will this and permissive will that. God makes the reprobate as a defective hammer from scratch, and not that the hammer made itself. God then picks up this defective hammer and uses it (causes them to will and do in life). The hammer makes defective hits, and God judges them for it.

Seriously, if all you do is a word search for “permission” in Calvin’s institutes, you will see Calvin over and over, in many different ways and with many passages say, God’ will does not involve permission for anything, relative to Him. Then modern Reformed people, like Sproul come around and say, God actively wills election, but only is passive or permits the reprobates. To deny passive or permissive will of God for the Reprobate, is for them is hyper-Calvinism. If you read Calvin and Luther a few times, and then read modern reformed fanboys, then you will become as appalled as I have in how much they speak in a continual and habitual slander and false witness against them. Why don’t they just say Calvin and Luther are heretics and just own up to it?

Calvin gives a category proposition for Christian metaphysics. He defines what it means and what it does not mean. All things are things caused by God’s active will. How simple and to the point that is. Modern reformed guys trying to complete this by coming up with phrases like, “active and passive,” “double predestination,” “soft this hard that,” “equal ultimacy” (etc.). They do this to make themselves look smart and academic, and to hide their unbelief under long, complicated loaded phrases.

Here is a pro-tip. If you truly want to communicate clearly, just use basic category statements. All, Some or None. The Scripture, along with Calvin and Luther, define Christian metaphysics as “All things are things directly caused by God.” The only two options for disagreement are “Some things are things directly cause by God, and some are not,” or “No things, are things directly cause by God.” Rather than saying “soft this and hard that,” just say “God determines all things by His will,” or “He does not,” or “He sometime does, and sometimes does not.” See, how simple and clear that is?

Calvin says, “the will of God is the cause of all things.” This will is defined as active by “God’s” “force” and “power,” and “never by permission.” Therefore, Calvin denies “secondary causes.” He does affirmed “secondary objects,” like Satan, that are themselves moved by God’s active force and power, but denies secondary cause as it is relative to God. Calvin also says, along with Luther, that the category of God’s decree and command, removes any human complaining about injustice done to them, when God punishes them for things that He causes them to do. Thus, both Calvin and Luther are in direct contradiction to the WCF, when it affirms secondary causes.

The WCF says,

“God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.”

This is outright blasphemy. It denies the absolute and direct sovereignty of God over all things. They are trying to avoid calling God the author of sin, but since God directly controls all things, then He is precisely the metaphysical author of sin and evil. There is no logical maneuver to avoid this. If they affirm God decreed and caused all things directly by his sovereignty, then of course God is the author of sin. One fool tried to tell me that the WCF, in this place, is affirming God and sin are not categorically plausible, the way Gordon Clark would teach on this topic.[7] Yet, this is not the context. The “context” is about metaphysics or ultimate causality, “God ordaining all things by His choice.”

If the WCF by saying “ordaining,” does not mean that God is the only absolute direct cause for all things, then it up-fronts admits that it is affirming Arminianism, and that there is dualism in Christian ontology. I will be kind here, and assume it is affirming God’s absolute and direct sovereignty over all things.

They try to affirm God’s decree and control over all things, but then say God is not the controller of sin—this is said in CONTEXT to God decreeing and controlling all things. They contradict themselves, to affirm a human superstition, which says God cannot be the author of sin and unbelief in the same direct causality, since He is the author of faith and holiness. Some who see the insanity of this try to affirm a mystery or paradox. LOL! You cannot say God ordains or causes “all things,” and then say, God does not ordain or control sin. You cannot say, “All things are things directly controlled by God,” and “This thing is a thing God does not directly control.” Or, “God does control all things, but at the same time God does not control some things.”  Let us try this with something else. “All persons who are saved are saved by Jesus. This saved person is a person not saved by Jesus. This statement is not contradictive or blaspheme, it is a “mystery and a paradox.”” Wow, I am on my way to be a great theologian!

Again, in CONTEXT to the category of God directly causing all things, it is said, “the freedom and possibility of secondary causes are not taken away.” Therefore, we will stay in this same category, so as not to commit a category fallacy.

If God is the direct causality of all things, then all secondary causes do not exist, and there is no freedom or possibility of any created object to do or cause anything; God takes away all secondary causes, because He along directly causes all things.

Some have mentioned to me that the phrase “secondary causes” was used in two different ways a few hundred years ago. One means what the noun phrase naturally says (relative to God there are secondary ontologies), the other meaning is similar to pointing out the category fallacy issue that Gordon Clark often points out. There is no historical evidence this second meaning was widely used and popular, other than a few insistences (as far as I have been able to research it, and even then, I am not totally convinced it wasn’t just a typo or accidently used that way). This is an interesting point, but ultimately a non-relative point for interpretating the WCF’s statement, because the authors all knew how Calvin in his Institutes answered it, and his answer did not use this phrase, or the category of ontology.

John Calvin later in his life wrote a book about predestination, and he does seem to distance God as the author of sin from His predestination, or at least, making contradictive statements about it. It was less popular and less read as compared to his Institutes. However, because it was Calvin’s Institutes that all pastors and theologians were required to read, and that greatly influenced Europe, we will refer to his teaching in this book, as “Calvinism.” History shows the Institutes as hugely popular and influential.  As pointed out in the quote above, Calvin, when addressing the question of author of sin, does not use “secondary causes” (ontology) language, but said, “Such an objection makes a category mistake made between God’s will (decree) and his command, though it is obvious, from innumerable examples, that there is the greatest difference between them.” Calvin does not refer to causes to refute the accusation of God being the author of sin, but merely says it is a category fallacy to combine these. The WCF, was written by pastors who had to read Calvin’s Institutes in school. Yet, they chose to use “secondary causes” (ontology) rather than the concise and easy explanation from Calvin’s Institutes, which they all read and studied.

Seeing these pastors and theologians all studied logic and philosophy, the phrase “secondary causes” would still have ontology as its most direct meaning, even if some used is differently. The WCF chose to use a noun phrase, when its main meaning is about ontology, (and phrase naturally means ontology), in context about ontology. When the Institute’s dealt with ontology and the author of sin, Calvin answered with a category fallacy; yet, when the WCF answered this, it did so with another point about secondary ontology. These are two very different ways to answer the question. The conclusion is that even as early as the WCF the doctrine of God’s sovereignty was already defective and compromised.

It seems beyond reasonable to me that highly schooled pastors, who read the Institutes, Logic and Philosophy, when writing about ontology, would immediately answer with a phrase “secondary causality” or “secondary ontology” and not mean the category of ontology. Maybe an amateur, who is not good at communicating, but a room full of very educated pastors, I do not see that mistake happening.

To avoid this biblical outcome of the author of sin, the WCF commits the blasphemy of affirming secondary causes, at the ultimate level with God. They are pagans who affirm metaphysical dualism with God. Martin Luther is famous for pointing out the category fallacy that Erasmus made with ontology and ethics. It seems the WCF, with their category fallacies and paradoxes (and how modern Reformed people try to excuse this section) has more in common with the Catholic, than Martin Luther.

Again, think about a chess game.

This WCF passage is talking about the real level causality, which would be “Johnny moves white bishop to b4.” This passage is not talking about the relative level, which would be, “white bishop moves to b4.” In order to save the WCF many do the same category error that Arminians do to many passages of Scripture, by changing real level causality to relative level. The Armenians are morons for doing this, and so are the Reformed teachers who try to salvage this WCF passage, when it cannot be saved.

Vincent on this WCF passage says,

…I believe that if a person is a Christian and somewhat intelligent, then if we were to repeat, “If God is not the direct metaphysical cause of something, then something else is,” to his face over and over again, eventually he would realize what this really means and would become just as alarmed and repulsed at the notion as we are. But perhaps both faith and intelligence are rare, and the combination even less likely.

As for secondary causation, I have addressed this a number of times. If all else fails, I can say that I did not write the books, but my computer did. The fact that I was typing on it when the books appeared does not nullify the authorship of the computer or its moral responsibility, but only establishes it. If the reply is that the computer is not an intelligent mind but a dead object, I would insist that Dual Core is superior to a lump of clay (Romans 9). In any case, if God’s authorship is only so distant (I did not make the computer, the software, nor did I make or control the electricity), he might not be so clearly the author of sin….

If I am right, then they must be wrong. The question is, how can they be right without self-contradiction — that God controls all things, but he really doesn’t, that God causes all things, but he really doesn’t? The Reformed is fond of appealing to “mystery,” “paradox,” and “antinomy,” which are nothing but more dignified and deceptive terms for saying, “Clearly, I contradict myself, but I don’t care.” Instead, it seems to me that divine sovereignty is an altogether clear and coherent doctrine. It is so easy to understand. I have also answered the almost universal abuse of James 1:13. Temptation and causation are two different things, and the topic is causation, not temptation.

We must submit to the direct teachings of Scripture and its necessary implications, and not the traditions and good intentions of men.[8]

I apologize for the diversion. Although I do not call myself a Calvinist, I do not like false witnesses and un-needed complexities and un-needed phrases. We can see from this the importance to leave history and fanboys with their slanders, loaded phrases and complexities to themselves. We will focus on making doctrinal statements (all, some or none) and making easy deductive application for ourselves, so that we can walk by the commands of God in joy.


[1] Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will; translated by J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston; Fleming H. Revell ,1957. 204

Also see my website for an article called, “Martin Luther- The Bondage of the Will – Commentary,” for more about the Bondage of the Will.

[2] R. C. Sproul, Chosen by God; Tyndale House Publishers, 1986; p. 142.
 “The Reformed view teaches that God positively or actively intervenes in the lives of the elect to insure their salvation. The rest of mankind God leaves to themselves. He does not create unbelief in their hearts…”  
Sproul also in page 142 says active reprobation is “hyper” and “sub” Calvinism.

[3] Calvin, Institutes. p. 947.

[4] Calvin’s Institutes. CCEL ebook edition. publish domain. (www.ccel.org). Book 1, Chapter 18.
I have done a medium copyedit on the English (to modernize it), on this material. See original for comparison.

[5] Ibid. Book ,1 Chapter 16.

[6] Ibid. Book 1, Chapter 18

[7] Gordon Clark, in order to make the WCF affirm the correct level of sovereignty he taught, had to bear false witness against the WCF to make it say what it does not. His slander is the opposite of most Reformed teachers, who slander Calvin and Luther, by falsely saying they teach the same thing as the WCF. The WCF is their creed; it is their gate keeper, but Calvin and Luther are also their divine fathers. Yet, they contradict one another. And so, this back-and-forth slander is how it ends up being for fan boys, and traditionist.

Leave them and their tradition, they have their reward.

[8] Vincent Cheung. “WCF, secondary causes, etc.”

From the ebook, Sermonettes, Vol. 1. 2010. Page. 82-83.

Jesus Living In Our Hearts

“To be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith” (Eph. 3:16-17 LSB).

Paul prays in Ephesians 3:16-17 that our inner man will become strong, and this stronger inner man would lead to Jesus Christ living in our hearts by faith. This doesn’t mean that without a strong inner man and mature faith, Jesus doesn’t live in a Christian’s heart in any way, but that they’ll experience Jesus’ love in a small and limited way.

Is Jesus living in our hearts important? How does this important thing happen? By faith. Faith in our hearts will cause us to experience Jesus living in us. It’s good to define what Paul isn’t saying. He’s not saying Jesus will live in our hearts when we work harder or do good things to earn God wanting to live in us more. Paul’s prayer continues by focusing on us receiving, knowing, and experiencing God’s great love for us. Thus, when Paul mentions faith in verse 17, it’s a faith focused on God’s love for us, both in knowing it and experiencing this great love. The focus of faith isn’t our love for God but His love for us.

In verse 18, Paul prays that we know and understand how much God loves us, and in verse 19, he prays that we experience His great love. This is the context for Paul saying that Christ would live in your hearts by faith. Want Jesus crashing in your heart? Crank up the faith in His love-fest for you, not your imperfect obedience.

What, then, are ways to experience God’s love? The answer is to partake of His good promises, such as the gospel of Abraham (Galatians 3:5-14). The gospel of Abraham means baptism of the Spirit, miracles, increase, fame, wealth, and health. It means we ask and get the things we ask for. In fact, Paul continues in verse 20, saying God answers our prayers exceedingly, abundantly, beyond all that we can think or ask. This doesn’t mean God gives us something categorically different from what we ask, because by Jesus’ own teaching, that would be an evil father. Jesus says our God is a good Father, not an evil one. What Paul is saying here is like Jesus feeding the 4,000 and 5,000—there were so many extra baskets left over. This is what Paul refers to here. God will give you what you ask, but it’ll be excessively more of that good thing you asked for.

If you want Christ to live in your heart by faith, then live with your mind focused on His love toward you—not your love toward Him, but His love toward you. There is no risk of excess here. There’s never a point where you can go too far with this, because Paul says the true extent of God’s love is beyond our ability to fully experience. Finally, the result of knowing and experiencing the love of God is to have your prayers answered in an excessively great way.

If you see a person who is having their prayers answered with so many extra baskets of leftovers, they’re someone who knows and is experiencing God’s love; they’re experiencing Jesus Christ living in their heart in a powerful way, and by this, we know they have a strong inner man.

Paul’s praying for a beefed-up inner man to soak in God’s epic love, with prayers answered so big you’ll need extra baskets. Ditch the doubters, grab Abraham’s gospel goodies, and let Christ’s love throw a party in your soul.

If this isn’t you, correct yourself and become this person. Why not? Why not travel this road of strength when it’s focused on Jesus living in you, experiencing His love, and having your prayers answered in a super-abundant way? The only thing stopping this is your faith in His love for you. If that sounds awesome to you, then fully embrace it. It is yours for the taking. Let nothing stop you. And cast aside those who would hinder you in this grand adventure.

Tongues: The Ultimate Life Hack

I have a few essays on the power of speaking in tongues. The reason for this is simple. It’s a command from Scripture to be baptized in the Spirit; we’re commended to have the corporate gifts that edify the body. But to speak in tongues is to edify yourself; it’s a personal gift, and as a personal gift, it’s for anyone who asks for it. It’s so common that Paul assumes it for believers: “Have you received the Spirit?” And the outcome was, again, speaking in tongues as proof.

Speaking in tongues edifies and builds up the inner man. It keeps you from being depressed and empowers you to be filled with peace and joy. Furthermore, praying in tongues is how you put on and keep on the helmet of salvation and wield the Sword of the Spirit. Praying in tongues is also how you keep yourself in the love of God. Lastly, praying in tongues can easily lead to interpretation. This is the category of prophecy, divine knowledge, and insight. It allows Jesus to sit at the right hand of the Power and be a personal counselor to all His children across the world. Interpretation of tongues is, therefore, a gateway into all the powers of the Spirit. It’s a foothold into more and more power.

However, over the past week or two, I needed a new computer because the old one was breaking down. I decided to build my first PC rather than buy one, because I noticed I could build it for a cheaper price with the same parts and get more performance out of it. I built it and enjoyed doing something new for the first time. Praise God, it went well, but with one minor issue. I won’t bore you with the details. But for over a week, I toiled over this issue to fix it. I spent day after day, with long, exhausting hours, with no success. I was on forums asking and getting all sorts of replies, but none helped.

I did my devotions during this time, but they were rushed, including not praying in tongues as much as I usually do. Because of my internal frustrations and my devotions suffering, I remember asking God for help; however, if I’m honest with myself, I felt my request lacked faith or had doubt mixed in. I should’ve done a full stop there and worked on my inner man, but the temptation of a new thing momentarily distracted my discipline.

Then, a few days ago, while I was at work, I listened to a new essay by Vincent Cheung called “The Benefits of Praying in Tongues.” I like this topic, so I engrossed my attention in fully listening and meditating on the essay. It was mostly a review of my own thoughts and teaching on the subject, with a few new insights. I was encouraged to do the very thing I often do and encourage others to do: praying in tongues.

So, while I was still at work, I began to pray in tongues and confess God’s good promises over my life. Soon, I felt my inner man flood with peace, and my mind became sharper and more focused. When this happens, I know from experience that prayer is so much easier and the results better. I asked God to help with the computer issue that was vexing me. Unlike previous times, I felt faith in my heart as I prayed. The next moment, I received an interpretation, and the Spirit spoke to me, saying, “I will help you with this small issue, and I will also help you with big issues.” I barely had enough time to process and enjoy the Spirit’s word when I got a notification from a forum post. A person responded with a possible answer, and upon reading it, I knew immediately it was the solution. And it was.

A few takeaways: Praying in tongues is a cheat code for life. It’s the ultimate life hack that penetrates all aspects of life. If unbelievers knew the power and extreme advantages that praying in tongues gives believers, they’d scream we’re cheaters and demand we don’t use it. It’s a game-changer. It’s having admin rights when others don’t. It’s the NES Nintendo Game Genie. If Christians utilized praying in tongues, unbelievers couldn’t compete with them in life; depression would run away with its tail tucked between its legs, and demons would tremble in fear. If Christians prayed in tongues, they would both experience the love of God in their hearts and see more of God’s love affecting all parts of their health, wealth, work, family, and on and on. To not pray in tongues is to hate yourself.

It’s the ultimate cheat hack. You can be experiencing a slow mind and disturbed heart due to your own lack of discipline, but then bypass the consequences of this by praying in tongues. It’ll sharpen your mind and bring peace to your heart. It’ll supernaturally allow you to bypass everything going on around you and help you boldly walk into God’s throne of grace to ask and receive. Because praying in tongues strengthens your inner man with peace, joy, and mental sharpness, it helps you have faith without doubts. This is what a stronger inner man has: a more continuous joy and peace of God, with fewer doubts intruding. Praying in tongues is particularly good at strengthening your inner man. This stronger inner man means a more confident faith, which results in more answered prayers.

Tongues are the ultimate cheat code—God’s Game Genie for life! Skip the toil, dodge depression, and crank up peace and power with a Spirit-fueled prayer hack. My PC woes? Toast, thanks to tongues and a divine forum nudge. Refuse to pray in tongues and you are benching the Spirit and begging for a cursed slog!

Lastly, to toil is a curse. We’re commanded to work and not be lazy; however, overworking and toiling with little fruit to show for it is the curse of God for Adam’s sin. But Jesus became a curse for us, in our place as a substitute. In exchange, Jesus gave us the gospel of Abraham, which is abundant increase, health, wealth, and fame. We don’t bear the curse of toil but the blessing of Abraham’s abundant increase. Isaac did sow in the drought. He did work. But God gave a hundredfold increase when there was no water. We’re not under the curse but the gospel of increase.

I should’ve realized this when I was troubleshooting the computer issue. I was toiling as if I was still under the curse. This is wrong. Thankfully, the gospel of Abraham also means being given the Spirit, which means the baptism of the Spirit for power. Thus, when I was praying in tongues, I stopped operating under the curse and began to operate under the gospel of Abraham.

I immediately received fruitfulness and increase.

What Does It Say?

For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of law: “The man who does these things shall live by them.” 
But the righteousness of faith SPEAKS in this way:
Do NOT SAY in your heart, ‘Who will go up into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), or ‘Who will go down into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).” 
But what does it SAY?
The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart
—that is, the WORD OF FAITH which we are preaching, that if you CONFESS with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;  for with the heart a person believes, leading to righteousness, and with the mouth he CONFESSES, leading to salvation. 
For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes upon Him will not be put to shame.”
Romans 10:5-11

The WORD OF FAITH does something. What does it do? It CONFESSES or declares something. It’s not called the “thought of faith,” but the “word of faith,” because the point is about saying and speaking it, not merely thinking it.

The immediate context of the passage is righteousness and salvation. Paul says the Jews didn’t have the knowledge of God’s righteousness. It’s true the Old Testament spoke of faith, but the Jews disregarded this and attempted to acquire righteousness by their effort, not by faith.

Faith, in the purest sense, is just a mental assent to God’s word and promise. That is, in the context of the Bible—for example, Abraham’s use of faith—it was a faith that was spoken. It was spoken with confidence as true before it happened. Abram said he was the father of many nations before he had the son of promise.
Another important systematic theology context is that God created us with a body. We have a mouth. Thus, God didn’t only intend for us to agree with the truth mentally but to speak it, sing it, and declare it. This is what James says: faith without works is dead. Speaking faith is the smallest work you need to do; otherwise, faith is dead. It’s like Jesus’ parable about the money bags. The Master said to the last person who hid the money, “At the very least, you could have put my money in a bank and gotten interest.” This is what words are to faith. It’s the bare-bones minimum you should do with it. The least you should do is to open your month and let faith speak.

Faith is a mental agreement with everything God has commanded and spoken, whether it’s about a historical statement or a good promise of healing. Faith is agreeing with God about all of it. However, in the context of a promise, you’re agreeing about something God has already promised, and in the context of the gospel, you’re agreeing it has already happened and been given to you. Thus, in the context of the gospel, you can speak of faith in a shorthand way by focusing on the end results. You can say: Faith isn’t my love for God—it’s God’s love for me; Faith is confidence in God’s promise, not our ability; Faith is receiving God’s free supply by grace, not our performance; and Faith is God giving to us, not us giving to God.

Paul now expands on what faith means concerning righteousness. The first thing that Faith Speaks is to avoid saying the wrong thing. Paul then gives a specific example: Do not say, “I will bring Jesus Christ down,” or “I will bring Him up.” The point is simple. Considering righteousness being freely given in the gospel, you don’t do anything. Jesus, as our Savior, was the Father’s plan, and by His choice, Jesus went down, did all the hard work, and by the power of God, He went up back to heaven. Thus, in the context of righteousness being accomplished by Jesus, the first thing for Faith to Speak is to not say the wrong thing by claiming you did something to make yourself righteous.

Next, Paul explains that Faith does have something positive to say. In the context of the gospel being finished, faith isn’t just a mental assent anymore; it’s a “Word of Faith” that’s to be “confessed.” Why is faith now more than just an agreement in our mind? Because God did something for you, and you’re to receive it; the bare-bones smallest work to authenticate your faith in God’s finished work is to open your mouth and declare it. This is why Paul says you believe in your heart, but you also declare with your mouth, and this combination is what saves you.

This is why the Jews didn’t have a knowledge of righteousness: because they didn’t believe it was freely given and didn’t declare it was freely given. Paul first mentions that faith doesn’t say something, referring to the Jews trying to do something to accomplish it. If it was given by unmerited favor, you can only receive it by unmerited favor.

The biblical principle of first mentions is with Abraham. He believed and confessed he was the father of many nations before it happened, and by this, God freely credited righteousness to his record. Abraham didn’t work or earn this; it was given by unmerited favor. Abraham had to introduce his name (father of many nations) to his neighbors before he saw the promise fulfilled. Abraham was praised for his faith. Abraham is important because he believed and also spoke the Word of Faith, and on this, God declared him righteous. His name was literally a Word of Faith declaration. Abraham is the father of faith, and his name is a Word of Faith. This means, as true children of Abraham who claim to have faith, we also must live a Word of Faith declaration.

The Bible shows the children of faith who followed Abraham also lived a “Word of Faith” that confessed and declared confidence in all the good things God promised. David’s Faith Spoke in front of the giant and crowds: “This day the LORD will deliver you into my hands, and I’ll strike you down and cut off your head. This very day I will give the carcasses of the Philistine army to the birds and the wild animals, and the whole world will know that there is a God in Israel” (1 Samuel 17:46 NIV). The Hebrews had a Word of Faith to the King of Babylon: “Our God will deliver us.” Joshua’s Faith Spoke: “Sun, be still.” Peter’s Faith Spoke this way: “What I do have I give to you: Walk, in the Name of Jesus.” There are many ways to say a Word of Faith. Like a child, a simple “thank you” or praise is all that’s needed for Faith to speak.

Abraham’s Word of Faith was confidence in God to perform all the good things, such as healing, various miracles, fame, riches, and blessings. Galatians says the gospel was preached to Abraham. What was this gospel? It was to make him famous, rich, overly healthy, and powerful. God didn’t promise these things for Himself but to do them for Abraham. Abraham believed God would make him famous and give him health and wealth. God declared him righteous for believing all the health and wealth He promised him. According to Paul, Scripture terms this health, wealth, and fame as the “gospel.” And according to Paul, this same gospel is given to us through Jesus Christ.

Abraham’s Word of Faith in God to give him health and wealth is what caused God to declare him righteous. Through Abraham, God displayed Himself as the Savior of the whole man, materially and spiritually. God is pleased when we look to Him to be this total Savior to us. This is why you see God granting the requests of those who asked for the same type of blessings and favor; they’re commended by God and praised by Jesus Christ. More is better. More health, wealth, and fame asked for, and then God supplying it, glorifies Him and His gospel. Less means less glory for God and Jesus Christ.

The Word of Faith is a rock-solid confidence in God’s word and promise. Faith sees what God promised as already given and deposited into our accounts, so it Speaks, knowing the reality has already been set in stone. It’s like a parent buying a gift for their child (a gift they know the child has been wanting) and placing it on their bed. The child comes home from school, and the parent says, “I got you something special; it’s on your bed.” The child’s face lights up, and they scream “thank you” because, even though they haven’t seen it, they know it’s already reality. The child screaming “thank you” and hugging their parent is similar to what Paul is saying about faith “Speaking.”

However, some will doubt that Jesus will forgive or heal them. This is like a child saying, “I don’t believe you put a gift on my bed,” even though you did. It’s particularly insulting because you already put the gift on the bed. It’s not like you’re going to do it; you already did it, and they’re calling you a liar. This is how most relate to God. God has already given them health, fame, wealth, forgiveness, and favor in the gospel, and they call Him a liar.

Some try to be humbler. Imagine the child saying, “Okay, I believe when you’re dead, it’ll be in your will, so I’ll have it in the FUTURE.” Or, “I believe you, but I’m not worthy to accept it.” It doesn’t matter the excuse; none are acceptable. All excuses expose the child for not believing their parents and implying their parents are liars.

When we’re saved, we’re declaring God’s love for us because the gospel has already been accomplished and given to His chosen ones.

Faith in your heart is how you know it was for you. Faith is God’s gift that makes you aware that the gospel was for you and already belongs to you. This is why faith is also a “word of faith.” Because the gospel was for you and given to you by the decision of God, you’re not saved by asking to be saved; you’re saved by confessing and declaring with thanksgiving that Jesus has already forgiven, healed, and prospered you. Peter told the crowd at Pentecost to “repent” and be saved; he didn’t tell them to ask to be saved. Because forgiveness and righteousness have already happened, you repent, knowing it’s been accomplished.

To ask God to forgive you and credit Jesus’ righteousness to you is to ask God to re-crucify His Son, because that’s how you’re forgiven and made righteous. Thus, faith is receiving something God has already given, not asking Him to do something, because He already did something. Thus, in the context of a finished gospel, faith is a “word of faith” that confesses Jesus already went down and up, and by this, He has already saved, forgiven, and made righteous. When Peter simply told them to “repent” to be saved, this presupposes the gospel is already finished, so you only need to repent to receive—not ask, beg, work for it, or ask God to do something. In this sense, Faith Speaks of God’s love for you and of Him serving you like a waiter. Faith Speaks and declares how God has already forgiven you and made you righteous in His Son.

Therefore, you do not say that you worked or earned a righteous record, because Jesus went down and up without your involvement. He saved you.

This is important because it also applies to all other things Jesus accomplished when He went down and then went back up. This applies to healing and various miracles.

Isaiah 53 tells us that Jesus was a substitutionary atonement for our healing. The verse uses the Levitical word for substitution, as used on the Day of Atonement for the scapegoat. The verse, therefore, means Jesus carried away our sicknesses and diseases like the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement. We don’t bear sickness because, in the Father’s mind, He considered them taken off us and placed on His Son. The next verse explains healing also in the language of substitution: “By His stripes, we are healed.” In the Father’s mind, He decided the stripes on Jesus were an exchange for our healing. Since healing can only be given in this age and not the next, it means our healing for this age is 100% certain on the demand of faith, just as forgiveness of sins is 100% certain on the demand of faith.

Jesus went down from heaven. You didn’t bring Him down. He went down on His own. He then took stripe after stripe upon Himself in a substitutionary exchange for our healing. After this, He went to heaven by the power of the Father. You didn’t bring Him back up; He did that without you.

Therefore, do NOT SAY that you earn healing by working a job and paying a doctor for it. You don’t work for healing or pay for healing. Rather, believe that Jesus’ finished atonement gave you healing, and CONFESS with your mouth, “Jesus has healed me.” This is how forgiveness and healing are received in this age, and they can only be received in this age.

Without suggesting a type of superstition that some take with speaking unbelief, there’s an important overall principle to be learned. Peter denied Jesus three times, and at the end of John, Jesus asked Peter three times, “Do you love Me?” This gave Peter three chances to confess a word of faith, or to allow faith to “speak”: “Yes, Lord, You know that I love You.” In the Psalms, David admitted that he said a word of unbelief: “I am cut off.” These, and the like, are what Paul was referring to in the first part of defining what a word of faith is. The first part is to not say the incorrect thing. We’re not to be superstitious, as if we need to counter every bad word with a word of faith. However, the basic teaching is obvious. If you’re speaking words of unbelief about how sinful, unhealthy, poor, or pathetic you are, rebuke yourself by not saying those words. Instead, let faith speak. Say how righteous you are, confess how Jesus already carried away all your sicknesses, and declare how Jesus already exchanged your poverty for His riches.

Let faith speak!

There’s a reason the New Testament gives commands to always give thanks to God and always be singing songs and Psalms to God. Thanksgivings, songs, and Psalms are a constant VOICE to faith. They allow faith to speak. They’re a continual Word of Faith confession in God’s salvation, forgiveness, healing, prosperity, peace, and power at work in our lives. Like the example of the little child, thanksgivings are a strong declaration of your faith that God has already given you healing and provision without you working for it.

Thanksgivings, songs, and Psalms, being a Word of Faith, are the life and devotion that make the inner man strong. They’re the living activity of a Christian. Especially when your eyes, feelings, and circumstances contradict the promises of God, you ought to double down on the Word of Faith. As Paul says, “What does it say?” What does faith say, when you are 99 and your wife is past child bearing? Faith says, God will do what He said, we will have a son.” What does faith say, when circumstance seem impossible? Faith says triumph is my definition, and my dreams are a reality. Let faith speak. And if you do, Scripture promises you will have what you say.

What does faith not say? Faith does not say “they are giants, and we are grasshoppers.” Faith does not say, “healing is uncertain.” We know them by their work. If a person keeps saying what faith does not say, it means they do not have faith. This is painfully obvious. They are the faithless. They are servants of the Faithless one. But I believe better things for you.

Faith has a megaphone—it’s the Word of Faith, shouting God’s done-deal promises. Abraham named himself “Big Daddy” before the kid showed up, and God gave him a righteousness high-five. Don’t mumble doubts or grovel for what’s already yours—confess Jesus’ finished work, from healing to riches, and watch faith’s mic drop dominate.

Preaching is Casting Out Demons and Healing the Sick


15 “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!” … 23 Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an impure spirit…
32 That evening after sunset the people brought to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed…
38 But Jesus replied, “We must go on to other towns as well, and I will preach to them, too. That is why I came.” 39 So he traveled throughout the region of Galilee, preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons. 40 A man with leprosy came and knelt in front of Jesus. (Mark 1:15, 23, 32, 38-40 NLT)

A few quick observations:

After Jesus was anointed as a man by the Spirit for ministry, Mark shows His first church service and ministry involved casting out a demon. Scripture reminds us that judgment begins in the house of God. We are also reminded that churches can become safe houses for demons and prisons for the suffering when the faithless and powerless are in charge. Mark presents a sequence: Jesus declares the Kingdom has come, and His first church ministry is casting out the kingdom of demons, thereby ushering in God’s kingdom. If a space is filled with demons, it is occupied by the kingdom of darkness. The first step, then, is to remove them so the kingdom of God can replace it and take residence. That same evening, Mark shows Jesus continuing to cast out demons and heal the sick; this demonstrates how the kingdom of God comes “near us.”

The next observation comes from verses 38-40. Jesus declares He came to preach the gospel. What’s striking is how Mark defines “preaching” in the following verse. It begins with “therefore” or “so,” implying a necessary consequence of the previous statement. Because Jesus was sent to preach, He went to the next town to “preach and cast out demons.” Mark equates preaching with casting out demons, as if they are inseparable. We’re not saying preaching and casting out demons have identical definitions—nor is Mark. However, Mark is defining the ministry of preaching, which is tied to bringing the Kingdom of God near, as preaching with miracles. Preaching the gospel that brings the Kingdom near, cannot be separated from casting out demons and healing the sick. The next verse reinforces this with a leper being healed. As Paul says, “For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.” Preaching proclaims the power of God unto salvation, which requires the very power it proclaims. To Mark and Jesus, preaching that the Kingdom of God has come near isn’t preaching unless demons are cast out and the sick are healed.

Churches with benches full of depressed and demonized people, or sick members who return week after week unchanged, are churches where the kingdom of God has not come near.

“Mark’s Jesus doesn’t just preach with a mic—he kick drops demons and heals the hurting like it’s all part of the sermon. If your church is a demon daycare and the sick leave sicker, maybe the kingdom’s still social-distancing,” (Grok xAi 2025 summary).

Force it Down My Throat

When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden, He told them they could enjoy all the good things there. Imagine this: Adam, surrounded by pear and plum trees, crying out to God, “I’m so hungry! Please have mercy on me and provide some food!” If such a thing happened, we’d think Adam was insane and delusional. The pear tree is staring him in the face, and yet he’s begging God for a pear. If I saw someone acting like this, I’d think they had a few screws loose in their head.

Begging God for what’s slapping you in the face—be it pears, forgiveness, or healing—is the textbook definition of spiritual screw-loose syndrome

Picture Adam whining for a pear while a tree bonks him on the head with one—sounds nuts, right? Yet that’s how some Christians beg God for what’s already theirs. Some folks pray like God’s a short-order cook who forgot their fries, when the gospel buffet’s been served and paid for—grab a plate already!

However, we know from the story that Adam and Eve didn’t beg God for food because the food was already provided and given to them. They could beg all they wanted, but God wasn’t going to grab a pear and shove it down their throats. They had to take the food provided and eat it themselves.

This is the reality of the finished atonement and the gospel of Jesus Christ. It’s a historical event accomplished for our good and given to us by unmerited favor. Forgiveness was secured once, for all time, for all our sins. Even our future sins were atoned for by Jesus Christ once and for all. It was a substitutionary act: the Father considered our sinful list as belonging to Jesus, punished Him for it, and in exchange, we are given forgiveness and righteousness.

Thus, when we ask for forgiveness, we aren’t begging God to forgive us as if He needs to do something new. If you’re asking God to “do something” to forgive you, you’re essentially asking the Father to re-crucify His Son, because that’s the way God would “do something” to forgive you. Asking God to forgive you again is like asking Him to re-run the Crucifixion—newsflash: Jesus already punched that ticket. Now, because our speak is not always perfect, there is nothing wrong in saying, “God, forgive me,” when you have sinned as a Christian,” as long as you understand the forgiveness has already happened. There is nothing more for God to do to forgive you.

Romans 10:9 says “if you CONFESS with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (NKJV).”

The substitutionary atonement has already happened and is already accomplished. Thus, when we ask God to forgive us, we’re confessing confidence in the truth that Jesus has already saved us. We confess that Jesus died for our sins, and through this, we are forgiven. Repentance isn’t begging God to do something to forgive us—it’s agreeing that Jesus has already forgiven us by His sacrifice. We agree with God that we have sinned, and we also agree with Him that Jesus’ finished atonement has removed all our sins, cleansed us, and made us whole. Then we thank Him for this.

In the Pentecost sermon Peter told the audience to “repent” to be saved, and not “ask” God to save them. This is because in the most technical sense we are not asking, but confessing our agreement with God.  Repentance is not asking, but confessing. This is how you receive salvation.

Repentance is like a pear tree in the Garden. God has already provided it, but you must reach out, grab it, and partake of it to benefit from it. God won’t zap you with a divine beam, force your mouth open, and float a pear into it, moving your jaw for you. The gospel has already happened and been provided. But you won’t enjoy the benefit of forgiveness if you sit there waiting for some so-called “will of God” to force you to eat it. God has commanded you to believe in Jesus. He isn’t withholding your forgiveness—you are, by your lack of faith. You can’t have pear trees surrounding you, smacking you in the face, and then beg God to forgive you as if it hasn’t already happened and been provided for you, and expect God to treat you as anything but delusional.

The same applies to all the benefits provided by Jesus’ finished atonement.  God provided the Garden, and now He has provided the gospel. He won’t fly a pear into your mouth and force you to eat it. You must grab it by faith and receive it.

The same is true for healing. By the stripes of Jesus, we are—and were—healed. Healing, therefore, is part of the substitutionary atonement of Jesus. Healing is like fig trees provided in Eden. Jesus accomplished our healing and provided it to us by unmerited favor. When we ask for healing, we don’t beg God to heal us as if He needs to do something. If you’re asking God to “do something” to heal you, you’re asking the Father to re-crucify His Son and give Him 39 times all over again, because that’s how God has chosen to “do something” to heal you.

The substitutionary atonement has already happened and is already accomplished. Thus, Peter says in Acts 3, “What I have, I give you. In the name of Jesus, walk.” Peter didn’t beg God for a miracle in Acts 3—he cashed in the healing coupon Jesus already signed with His stripes. Thus, he didn’t ask God to heal because healing had already been provided. He didn’t need to ask God to re-crucify Jesus. God had already provided the fig trees. So Peter grabbed a fig and commanded the sickness to leave. Jesus didn’t command us to ask God to move our mountains but to tell them to move ourselves. Jesus said, tell the mountain to move, not ask God to nudge it—same goes for sickness. Command it, don’t grovel.

 Thus, when we command sickness to leave, we confess confidence in the truth that Jesus has already healed us through His substitutionary atonement. Commanding healing isn’t begging God to do something to heal us—since He already did something—but agreeing with God that Jesus has already healed us by His sacrifice. We agree with God that we can get sick, and we also agree with Him that by Jesus’ stripes we are healed. Then we thank Him for this. We are not asking, but confessing.

God won’t force a fig down your throat when you’re surrounded by fig trees slapping you in the face. You must obey God, believe in Jesus Christ, and receive the gospel—which includes the healing provided. These are already accomplished and provided. Begging God is delusional and insane when they are already provided. God already did something. Now you must do something. Waiting on some “will of God” to heal you, is no less insane than Adam begging God for food in the Garden.

Begging for healing when Jesus took 39 stripes for it? That’s like Adam asking for takeout in Eden—check the fig tree, pal! Waiting on God’s ‘will’ to zap you with forgiveness or healing is as bonkers as Adam starving in an orchard—open your eyes, you already have it.

[Grok, xAI, 2025, witty summary contributions]

The Scientific Process

After my own studies and discussions with Grok xAI, I’ll outline a step-by-step breakdown of modern science. Some still believe science is rational, deductive, and logical. We’ll dissect the process and reveal it’s anti-logical from start to finish, despite using modus tollens.

Karl Popper exposed the anti-logical nature of scientific experimentation, particularly the nonsense of affirming the consequent. To counter induction’s irrationality and this fallacy, Popper proposed scientists use modus tollens to invalidate hypotheses. Modus tollens is a valid deductive form. Yet, if you lack upfront truth, affirming the consequent is the only way to positively affirm a claim, if the logic is to correctly correspond to your actions. Popper aimed to minimize this by favoring deduction. The catch? At best, modus tollens can say something is wrong—it can’t confirm truth. Today, top scientists recognize induction and science’s irrationality, leaning into falsification for better experiments.

If we admit science offers no truth, only pragmatic usefulness, then adding modus tollens at the end enhances practical outcomes. We support this. As noted, science fulfils God’s command to dominate the world for practical benefits—a blessing He ordained. But that’s all science is. Even when its utility seems impressive, its statements about reality are false.

Since the scientific process is rooted in inductive and observational fallacies, it’s irrational and anti-logic. Slapping modus tollens on the end doesn’t erase this irrationality; it just improves pragmatic results. It’s right to acknowledge science’s baked-in anti-logic and compensate with deduction—if we clarify this is for usefulness, not knowledge.

Before detailing the process, let’s define falsification. Grok xAI (2024) put it this way:
“The origin of falsification, per Popper, is rooted in the idea that a hypothesis must be scientific if an experiment or observation could prove it false. This was a direct jab at the inductivists and verificationists of his time. Popper’s philosophy was like saying, ‘Science isn’t about piling up evidence for your theory; it’s about daring it to fail.’”
This is accurate but needs unpacking to avoid confusion. Popper critiqued scientific experimentation (i.e., “verification”) that relied wholly on affirming the consequent to link hypotheses to reality.”

Grok calls it a “jab at inductivists,” which can mislead. Even with modus tollens, science remains overwhelmingly inductive. Though Popper shifted “verification” to the “pre-hypothesis” stage rather than the endpoint, falsification swims in a sea of inductive reasoning and observation. Grok was correct that “Popper would have it… it must be possible to conceive of an experiment or observation that could prove it false.” Popper’s falsification operates within “inductive observation” and “inductive experiment.”

Thus, despite jabbing inductivists, Popper’s method still employs induction. Science isn’t one thing—it’s a process. I once heard a scientist claim, “Science is only deductive because it’s only about falsification, specifically modus tollens.” This misrepresents Popper’s approach, which integrates induction and observation. When I asked Grok (2024), it responded, “Absolutely not! Popper argued a theory must be falsifiable, aligning with modus tollens’ deductive logic to disprove it. But induction isn’t sidelined:

  • Initial Phase: Science starts with observation and inductive reasoning to form hypotheses.
  • Ongoing Nature: As hypotheses are tested, scientists refine them with new observations and inductive leaps, keeping induction central.”
    Since falsification uses induction, it’s inherently irrational, violating the laws of identity and contradiction. It’s a systematic affirmation of false premises in unsound arguments, pretending to deny something.

Calling “science deductive” is false. I wouldn’t even say it’s inductive and deductive—its “deduction” is unsound. I wouldn’t label an unsound argument deductive unless we’re pretending in a fantasy world. Generously, we could call science heavily inductive with some deduction tacked on.

This matters for Christians. The Bible uses only sound arguments, rejects induction’s anti-logic, and shows our observations can be wrong. It dismisses empirical observation and induction for knowledge. Thus, falsification isn’t a biblical standard and can’t yield knowledge. Some fools hybridize this irrational human method with the Bible’s rational approach, claiming falsification aids understanding Scripture and truth. This is blasphemy—melding the irrational with God’s rational system defames His mind as irrational or endorsing irrationality. Similarly, fake presuppositionalists claim the Bible ratifies observation and empiricism for knowledge—nonsense.

Another reason to reject falsification: its maxim—“something must be provably wrong to have credibility”—is false. The law of contradiction (LoC) isn’t falsifiable; denying it requires using it. Self-authenticating truths, like the LoC, render falsification inapplicable. At best, falsification fits inductive observations. The Bible, as shown in epistemology, is self-authenticating—unfalsifiable. It can’t be proven wrong because any attempt presupposes it; Scripture declares itself true and all else false. We don’t use falsification to read the Bible or find truth. If it’s such a great rule for Christians, why doesn’t its maxim apply to Scripture?

Note the maxim says “for credibility,” not “to prove true.” Falsification is negative—it can’t produce positive claims without violating logic. Since the Bible rejects observation, empiricism, and induction for knowledge, and falsification uses them, Christians don’t employ it for knowledge. Even using modus tollens—directly, in reductio ad absurdum, or falsification—is only negative, offering no positive truth. When someone says, “I don’t see God healing today,” it’s wrong not because of falsification but because Scripture rejects inductive observation outright.

There’s nothing wrong with modus tollens to show something is false—Scripture uses this deduction. St. Augustine and Paul (1 Corinthians 15) did too, free of empiricism or observation assumptions. But if someone uses empiricism as a standard, showing documented healings should convince them if they’re consistent. We can use modus tollens to refute them with their own flawed epistemology. The catch? Induction’s conclusions don’t logically follow premises, so they can reject evidence due to its inherent uncertainty. Even a deductive argument using observation—ours or theirs—becomes unsound, leaving conclusions skeptical. Induction offers no logical binding to accept any conclusion—you can dismiss or embrace as you please.

As a Christian, the Bible says God heals, and on faith’s demand, He will (John 15: Jesus predestined us to ask and receive). I expect healings. My observations are private knowledge—and if I applied these with deductions from Scripture “for myself,” then my self-knowledge is what the bible asserts. But shifting private to public knowledge violates logic’s laws. Scripture alone is our starting point for knowledge about healing. Anyone using inductive observations to argue miracle healing is a fool, rejecting the Bible as the sole epistemic foundation.[1] Such debates aren’t about healing but epistemology—Scripture’s deductive logic versus induction’s fallacy. Tell them they’ve abandoned Christian doctrine on knowledge and logic; if they don’t repent, boycott and excommunicate them.


The Scientific Process

Observation and Hypothesis Formation (Inductive Step)

Note: “Scientific experimentation (affirming the consequent)” has been pushed back to “hypothesis formation.”
Scientists observe phenomena in nature or data, noticing that when event A occurs, phenomenon B follows. This resembles affirming the consequent: “If A, then B; B happens, so A caused it.”

  • Example 1: (A) Rain occurs, (B) my yard gets wet. (B) I see my yard wet, so I hypothesize (A) it rained.
  • Example 2: (A) Bacteria add chemical X to solution H, (B) it turns red. (B) I see it red, so I hypothesize (A) bacteria added X.

Formulating the Hypothesis (Setting Up for Modus Ponens)

Initially, scientists observe B (a fallacy) to check their idea. If testing’s possible, they run preliminary affirming-the-consequent experiments for merit. Then, they frame hypotheses as modus ponens: “If A, then B; A, thus B.” They pretend a necessary connection exists to apply modus tollens later—not to affirm the consequent but to predict outcomes. They say, “If hypothesis (A) is true, under these conditions, we’ll see (B).”
In layman’s terms, this is logical voodoo, a void, or superstition.
Two ways this bait-and-switch happens:

  1. Vincent Cheung’s Example (A Gang of Pandas):
    1. “If (A) is a cause, then (B) is a result. B happens, thus A caused it.”
    1. Restated as modus ponens with B and A flipped, using a false conclusion to build an argument.
  2. Direct Pretence: Pretending inductive “If A, then B” is real or pretend it’s a necessary connection. This is like misstating a math problem to reflect reality. If I buy 4 apples at $1 each, calling it calculus is delusional if it doesn’t match reality. Scientists engage reality via affirming the consequent due to observation—they can’t avoid it. Restating it as modus ponens is delusional because it doesn’t mirror their actual interaction with phenomena.

Experimental Design (Testing via Modus Ponens)

Scientists design experiments controlling A to see if B follows, mimicking modus ponens:

  • If hypothesis A is true, under specific conditions, B occurs (If A, then B).
  • They ensure A is present.
  • They check if B happens (A leads to B).
    This isn’t just to affirm the hypothesis (a fallacy) but to test predictions under control. Yet, problems still abound:
  • The setup stems from a fallacy—using a false conclusion from observation and affirming the consequent to fake a connection. This restated logic doesn’t reflect their real-world engagement; it’s fabricated.
  • They only pretend it’s modus ponens—in name only. Some admit the connection is merely sufficient, making falsification tentative, not necessary, contradicting the very definition of logical inference.
  • Controlled tests can’t rule out infinite unknowns (e.g., heat affecting results unbeknownst to a scientist ignorant of it).
    Vincent Cheung notes, “The idea is simple. To know that any experiment is “constructed properly” the scientist’s knowledge must be “bigger” than the experiment. But if his knowledge is already “bigger” than the experiment, then he hardly needs to perform the experiment to gain knowledge that is limited by the experiment. The only way to be sure that one has identified and controlled all variables that may affect the experiment is to possess omniscience. The conclusion is that only God can tell us about the universe.”[2]

Falsification Attempts (Modus Tollens)

Here’s the shift:

  • If B doesn’t occur when A is present: “If A, then B; not B, therefore not A” (hypothesis falsified).
    Scientists aim to confirm hypotheses (affirming the consequent), but better ones seek disproof. Misaligned results falsify, and this leads to rethinking and refinement.
    Yet observation and affirming-the-consequent thinking build the argument for falsification. Induction underpins science’s foundation and definition. The “deductive” arguments are unsound—born from false conclusions, misrepresenting reality. It’s deduction by pretence. Before falsification, the hypothesis’s necessary connection is unknown. Falsification deems it wrong, which says little.
    The experimental connection has two interpretations:
  • If honest (connection is sufficient or a guess), falsification is uncertain, not necessary—violating deduction’s essence.
  • If claiming necessity, it’s pretence, falsifying only a pretend reality, breaching contradiction and identity laws.
  • Finally, saying “laws are formulated by falsification” is a non-sequitur. Negative propositions can’t yield positives without adding information—violating logic. Laws from falsification can only say “this isn’t that.” Positive laws from falsification defy logic; negative isn’t positive.

The point is that observation and affirming the consequent thinking and testing is involved in formulating the argument that will be tested by falsification. Thus, induction is both the foundation of science and therefore involved in the definition of science. The so-called deductive arguments are unsound, because they are created by false conclusions and the logic does not reflect their interaction with reality. It is deduction only by pretending. Before falsification is used, it is not known if the major premise of the syllogism (hypothesis) has a necessary connection. Falsification says this unsound argument is wrong. which is not really saying that much.

The connection in their experiment can be taken in two ways. If they are honest and admit the connection, at the very best is sufficient or a guess, then if falsification is used, the falsification is only a guess, but not a necessary falsification. This violates the very definition of deduction, which is necessary. If they insist the falsification is necessary, then they violate the laws of contradiction and identity. If they want to insist their connection in their experiment is necessary, then it is only by pretending. Thus, if they use falsification, it is only falsifying a pretend reality.

Lastly, there is the part where scientists say, “laws… are formulated by falsification.” This is false. It is a non-sequitur fallacy. Remember our rules for category syllogisms? We talked about distribution of terms but also the quality and quantity of a syllogism. If the propositions of an argument are negative, you cannot get a positive out of it. The same here.  Falsification can only say, this is wrong, but to then turn around and say we have a law that says, “this is this,” is to add more information than what the argument says. Laws, formulated by falsification can only say at best, “this is not that.” Every positive law stated by scientists using falsification is a violation of the laws of logic. To say negative is a positive is anti-logic.  


[1] This is different from starting with the truth given by scripture, and then present your healing as “testimony” that agrees with the truth. You are saying the bible is the proof, and my testimony agrees with the truth, not the other way around.

[2] Vincent Cheung. A Gang of Pandas. Sermonettes Vol.1.