Confessions of a Heretic

It’s true!  I don’t believe they exist.  There is no such thing as someone who doesn’t believe in a sovereign god.  I don’t care how much evidence you want to provide trying to validate their existence - I cannot believe that any person is a true atheist. 

Atheists do not exist.  They’re not real.  If there were ever a true atheist, they would not invest so much energy in trying to convince themselves and others that God does not exist.  The thought of God consumes them. 

If someone claims to be an atheist, I think they’re lying.  What they’re really trying to say is that God let them down, and they can’t reconcile how a good God allow such evil.

I simply cannot in good conscience believe in atheists. 

There seems to be a lot of judgment within the body of Christ between different denominations, churches and even within churches themselves.  The kind of judgment I am referring to here is judgment based upon differences of opinion.  Where someone states that someone cannot be a Christian or follower of Christ for differences of opinion, differing interpretations of scripture, etc.

However, I am reminded of Jesus words to his disciples:

38 Now John answered Him, saying, “Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.” 39 But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. 40 For he who is not against us is on our side. 41 For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.  (Mark 9:38-41)

I think so many times we, as believers, are quick to disassociate with each other or label someone as a heretic or apostate based upon our opinion of them when we don’t have all of the facts. I think of folks who say that well-known personalities are not Christian for any number of reasons.  But in fact their “opinion” comes without due diligence. It is based upon something they have heard from a third party like the media or a friend, but in reality they’ve probably never even  held a conversation with the subject of their criticism.

I can’t judge whether any of you are right or wrong before the Lord, because I am not personally involved in any of your lives. But my hope in being here is that we can deal with issues, and learn from mistakes made. Our own, and each other’s.

I will say that having personally suffered under the heavy hand of someone in leadership, it has made me re-evaluate my own heart. Most times finding that I was just as guilty (on some level) as the one who wronged me toward someone else.

Hopefully, I am a stronger man for my experience. And hopefully I will not make the same mistake when in similar situations, because except for the grace of God there go I.

It saddens me to see the disunity in the body of Christ at large.  We all think that we have the correct way of thinking.  That we alone possess God’s plan for reaching the lost, when in reality we’ve simply placed God in a box.  We’ve tied His hands by stating what He will and will not use and do. 

I wonder how He feels about our haste to forbid those (who call themselves by His name) from accomplishing God’s will simply because they don’t follow us?

After reading a book on church discipline where the author suggested that there were certain sins that were considered insufferable, I began wondering if this was true.  Are there certain sins that if committed can disqualify someone from church leadership or membership indefinitely?  More accurately stated - forever?

I know that there are certain qualifications for those who are to be elders, but once disqualified does that mean forever disqualified?  Aren’t the gifts and callings of God irrevocable?  Didn’t I read that too somewhere?

What is an insufferable sin?  The book defined it as this:

Insufferable sins, “. . . namely: notorious and aggravating licentiousness. . .” such as  “. . .perjury, forgery, grand larceny, absconding in debt, habitual licentiousness, murder, treason, and such like gross violations of moral, civil, and criminal law” merit the “. . .exclusion” of the brother or sister, “without the ceremony of labor, upon the simple and certain ascertainment of the facts.”  (Link)

The book goes onto suggest that men and women who commit such high offenses should be excluded from the church, and never restored back into the body.

“Some may object to this view as being a course too summary, and as savoring of a spirit too uncompromising and too unforgiving, to accord to the genius of the gospel; and especially in case of real penitence. They may think that a transgression, however atrocious, if there be penitence in the case, should be forgiven; and the member retained in the church.”  However, “the position that every offender, in case of real penitence for his sin, should be retained in the Church, as well as forgiven, is as impracticable, in point of fact, as it is inconsistent with the universal sense of right.”  (Link)

This argument is very persuasive and bold.  The rule is hard and fast, and doesn’t leave any room for adifference of opinion.  But is it scriptural?

The book uses the scriptural support of 1 Corinthians 5.

Now the rule given by Paul for one of these cases . . , is found in 1 Cor. 5:13 and is the true rule for all of them.

“Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.”  (Link)

But that’s all the author offers in support of his position on insufferable sins.  Everything else seems to be extra-biblical.  One man’s interpretation of one small passage.

Let’s see if the Bible has anything else to say about sin:

Matthew 12:31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.

Mark 3:28 “Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter;

Luke 7:47 Therefore I say to you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little.”

Luke 7:48 Then He said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”

Romans 4:7  “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,And whose sins are covered;

Ephesians 1:7  In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace

Colossians 1:14  in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.

James 5:15  And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.

1 John 1:9  If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 2:12  I write to you, little children, Because your sins are forgiven you for His name’s sake.

Ok, I’m going to have to do some more digging.  I don’t see but only one insufferable sin?  And that sin is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.  Most scholars are not even in agreement as to what this actually means, so I’m not going to try to define it here.

But the rest of the references seem to imply that everything else is fair game for being washed and covered by the blood?  In fact, I think it said that the more grievous the sins we’ve been forgiven of, the greater our love for the Father will be?

So for all those out there who feel that they are beyond redemption or have been told you are beyond redemption let me share with you the good news - “Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men!”  And those aren’t my words, they’re the words of the savior!

Blessings!

In a conversation with someone regarding their Appeasement Theology, they made a comment about how Jesus was god to the Christian, just as Vishnu was god to the Hindu, just as Allah was god to the Muslim.  The man claimed that we were all worshipping the same thing - god.  

It was interesting to me his choice of Vishnu in comparison to Jesus.  I spent over 6 months living in India, interacting with Hindus, and studying their religion and culture.  Vishnu is not Jesus, nor do they reference the same object.  Hindus might claim that Vishnu is a god, but they cannot claim that he is Jesus.

Appeasement Theology is nothing more than Hinduism.  In the Hindu religion, there is not one way to god or eternal life.  There are many.  That is the lie of Hinduism.  The lie told to the people living in India was that they were all Hindu.  There were so many different forms of worship in India, but each were told they were Hindu in an attempt to unite the people.  It didn’t matter the name of the god by which salvation was found, it was Hinduism.  A great big free-for-all.    

Vishnu, is not God. He is a false god, just as Baal was in the Old Testament. God makes it perfectly clear that we are to have no other gods before Him. He will not share His glory with another.

Having been to India, and talking with many Hindus, the hardest thing for a Hindu to do is to forsake their numerous gods. They have no trouble accepting Jesus Christ as another god. They put their crucifix on the wall with the rest of their idols.

I remember sharing with one friend about Jesus Christ. I had invited this man to a Bible study we were having. He said he would gladly come. In the course of the conversation he asked me what set Christianity apart from other religions. I said, well Jesus claimed that he was the only way, the only truth and the only life, and that no one comes to the Father (goes to heaven) except through Him.

It was as if I dropped a bomb inside his soul. His temper quickly turned to anger as he cried, “I DON’T BELIEVE THIS! JESUS WAS NOT THE ONLY WAY.” I stood firm in my position that He was, even-though I felt as if he could hit me at any moment. He said through clenched teeth and fists that he would not be attending my Bible study. I advised that was fine, but wanted him to know that he was still invited. He left in a rage, stating that he was not coming over and over again, while I reaffirmed my invitation.

He called me the next day, and asked if he was still invited, which I implied that he was. My friend was the first one there, and was so disruptive that I asked him to step outside. He asked many questions, still vehemently opposed to Jesus’ exclusive claim of being the only way.

Ironically, at the end of my 6 months in India, this man was the only real fruit that I remember seeing. Why?  Because he was honestly seeking truth.

He came to me one day, and said “I think God spoke to me last night.” I said, “what did he say?” He said, “that he wants me to believe in Jesus.” I said, “what do you think?” He said, “I think that God brought you all the way from the United States so that I might know Him. I think Jesus led me to you, because He wants me to know Him.”

He came to know the Truth.  I never tried to convert him, I simply shared with him the Truth.  It was the Holy Spirit of God that opened his eyes so that he might see the lie that he had embraced.  That lie was Hinduism.  That there were many ways to eternal life.  My friend had so embraced the lie and made it such a part of his thinking that he appeared willing to go to blows over it. 

But when he seriously evaluated the question and the claims, in the end he consented.  Why?  Because he had seen and heard the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE for himself.  He had tasted and had seen that the Lord was good!

Appeasement theology is not heresy, but rather apostate.  It denies the deity of Christ.

In a conversation with someone recently regarding their apostate views that I’ve deemed Appeasement Theology, they made the following comment:

“. . .I believe no one religion has a monopoly on truth. In the final analysis, we are all blind men trying to explain an elephant. We can only use metaphors, and metaphors are culture-specific symbols.”  (Link)

The comment is partially correct in that no one religion has a monopoly on the truth, because truth was and is Jesus Christ. Jesus wasn’t about establishing a religion, He was about establishing a Kingdom. He was not a mere metaphor or symbol. He was God incarnate.

Sadly this kind of thinking has crept even into the church, but it is not Biblically founded. If it is then Jesus was a liar, and not to be trusted. “Never trust a dishonest person to be honest.” I believe that this statement is an attempt to pacify men, but castrates the power of the true Gospel.

5 Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?”
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.  (John 14:5-6)

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.  (John 10:1)

7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.  (John 10:7-11)

There is only one way into eternal life, and that is through the door. The door is Jesus Christ. If you try to get in any other way, except through Him, will find death. Because the door is the WAY. The door is the TRUTH. The door is the LIFE. The door is JESUS the CHRIST! He is the only way.

Jesus was not a cultural metaphor. He came to earth, and walked through history as flesh and blood. He came so that all men everywhere might be saved.

Appeasement Theology sounds good.  It’s popping up everywhere.  It appeals to the masses.  It says, “hey you’re not wrong.  We’re all right.”  It says that any thinking that excludes another way of thinking is bad.  If someone claims to present the “truth” then they are evil, because they have claimed a monopoly on “truth.”  While they claim to know the truth, they claim that everything else is a lie.

It’s funny to me, how exclusive this inclusive thinking is.  The new tolerance is defined as: “tolerate everything except intolerance.”  But isn’t the except part intolerant?

Appeasement Theology castrates the power of the gospel.  Because while Jesus makes an exclusive claim of being the only way, the only truth and the only life, his call to repentance is supposed to go out to all - inclusively.  The message itself is not exclusive.  The apprehending of eternal life is exclusive to those who will accept His great call.  However, the offer is not exclusive.

The power of the Gospel is that it is unique to the one true God.  Jesus claims that He alone is the way, the truth, and the life.  That no one comes to the Father, except through Him. 

Call that exclusive if you want, but I’ll call it specific.  God is a God of love.  His desire is that none should perish, but that all would come to repentance.  He’s provided a way for all to have life, but it is through His Son. 

13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.  (John 7:13-14)

My mom and I have this ongoing debate about my responsibility to provide for my family.

She says: “the Bible says that if you don’t have a job you don’t eat!”

But I respond:  “I thought it says if you don’t work you don’t eat?”

In America we think of work as getting a job. 

But God’s command is to seek first His Kingdom and His righteousness, AND ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE ADDED UNTO YOU!

That sounds like good work to me!

In CT there is an article entitled “Jesus and the Sinner’s Prayer,” questioning the current popular view of how to obtain salvation.  The sinner’s prayer.  The article notes that Jesus never invites or instructs someone to pray a “sinner’s prayer” or “invite Him into their hearts.”  In fact in 2 different instances Jesus says to obey the law and you will inherit eternal life?

This answer would be considered heretical in today’s modern churches.  But yet, it was the very words of Jesus Christ Himself?  It seems that faith and works go hand in hand.  My question is how can so many Americans claim that they believe in Christ, but yet don’t produce any fruit?  Maybe we don’t really believe?

I’ve addressed this easy believism in another post entitled:  “Saved By Faith? Or Works?,” but wanted to reference this article to show that I’m not the only heretic!

I have come across a book on the web entitled “Manual of Church Discipline” by a Reverend Eleazer Savage.  I’m not sure how the book will turn out, but I found some interesting observations just in the first chapter.  (If you would like to read the book it can be found here.)

Corrective Church Discipline is “the right treatment of offending members.” That is, the application of right principles, in a right spirit, to their wrong conduct. An offending member is one, who has transgressed some law of Christ’s kingdom; for, “where there is no law, there is no transgression” no “offence.” Offences, as to their magnitude, are to be estimated by the importance of the law violated. Hence, as there are different laws of Christ’s kingdom; laws having different degrees of value and importance, just as there are different laws in a State; so there are different kinds of offences; offences of various magnitude; and, of course, requiring different treatment.

Wow!  I think that was the same conclusion that I came to in my own independent study of the scriptures.  Discipline should only be conducted where there is clear transgression of the law.  Without the law there cannot be transgression. 

He goes on to discuss 5 varying degrees of transgression.  They are as follows:

1. Minor - namely small offences
2. Private - offences that cannot be proven
3. Personal - when one brother injures another brother and there is proof of the injury
4. Public - an offence that injures the entire community equally
5. Insufferable - an offence of such enormity that it requires the immediate removal of the member from the body in order to maintain the honor of the Kingdom

My initial thoughts are that his classification is just and trustworthy.  However, as I jumped ahead to Chapter 6, where he deals with insufferable offenses, I had to pause and reflect. 

He gives examples of insufferable offenses ranging from civil to criminal offenses.  He explains that there is no room for not removing the transgressor from the local body, as the very act they have committed is insufferable.  He says that it is for the sake of God’s good name. 

He cites 1 Corinthians 5:13:

“Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.”

and claims that Paul’s 

“rule for such high offences, is, exclude, without the ceremony of labor, upon the simple and certain ascertainment of the facts.”

The offender is not to be tolerated for even an hour.

Even strong manifestations of remorse or sorrow for the crime, must not shield from the stroke of separation.

He goes onto state that although this act seems uncompromising and unforgiving, it follows the ”genius of the gospel.”  He argues that the most atrocious of transgressions should not be excluded from the body even in the event of genuine repentance.

Huh?  Am I reading this right?  That there are certain sins that are simply insufferable?  That there are certain sins to which the directives in Matthew 18 do not even apply?

In the case of 1 Corinthians 5, Paul’s directive comes as a result of the fact that the brother is unrepentant.  It seems as though the transgressor’s sin is common knowledge among the church, even Paul has heard of it!  His sin was not insufferable?  He was living in sin, and unwilling to repent.

The chapter concludes with the following statement:

And, hence, the position that every offender, in case of real penitence for his sin, should be retained in the Church, as well as forgiven, is as impracticable, in point of fact, as it is inconsistent with the universal sense of right.

What?  Am I reading this correctly?  I guess he never read Jesus’ words about forgiveness?  Apparently, God is not as full of grace and mercy as His word proclaims Him to be?  Apparently hell will have varying degrees of torture for those who have committed atrocious transgressions!

There is a new form of theology that has been infiltrating even the most conservative of churches, that I believe is not theology at all, but rather apostate.  This way of thinking is something I’ve chosen to deem “Appeasement Theology.”

I’m sure that this post will offend a lot of folks who subscribe to this way of thinking, and I’ll be accused of all sorts of vileness.  Some will say that I am a fundamentalist.  Others will claim that what I am about to lay out here is too narrow.  Yet others will say that I am egotistical to think that I can claim a monopoly on the truth. 

But, truth is not relative.  It is what it is.  In fact, it is more than that.  Truth is the person of Jesus Christ our Lord.  He was absolute.

So what is Appeasement Theology? 

Appeasement Theology is the idea that Christ is not the only way to enter into everlasting life.  That there are in fact many ways to get to heaven.  That Jesus was a mere symbol and model for the Jewish culture, just as Vishnu is the same symbol for Hindu culture, as Allah is the same symbol for Islamic culture.  That there is not one way to get to heaven.  That there are indeed many roads and many ways.  That God is infinite, and cannot be limited to one form of expression.

Many people who preach this apostasy actually refer to themselves Christians.  And while they hold to their faith in Christ to redeem their souls, they also believe that others who do not profess Christ will also be redeemed.

I can see the logical reasoning behind this point of view.  It is to appease the masses, so as not to offend those who have put their hope in a lie.  It sounds good.  It surely won’t offend anyone - except the offensive fundamentalists who claim that Jesus is the only way.  But is it true?

Let’s look at some of the exclusive claims of Christianity and Jesus Christ:

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.  (John 14:6)

1 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.  (John 10:1)

7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.  (John 10:7-11)

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.  (John 3:16)

“He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.  (John 3:18)

In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.  (1 John 4:9)

10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”  (Acts 4:10-12)

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.  (Romans 1:16)

For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,  (1 Thessalonians 5:9)

Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.  (2 Timothy 2:10)

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.  (Romans 5:12-19)

Whew!  That is a lot of pretty exclusive claims stating that Jesus Christ is the only hope of attaining salvation!  Now either Jesus was lying when He said those things?  Or someone was lying saying that He said those things?  Or He was telling the truth, and meant exactly what He said?