VBF Position Papers

click below...

VBF position on WOMEN IN MINISTRY

VBF position on PROPHECY and PROPHETS

VBF position on the CATHOLIC CHURCH

VBF position on ELECTION and HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY 

VBF Position on DIVORCE

VBF POSITION on TONGUES

VBF END TIMES OVERVIEW

Articles (we would agree with)

A MUST READ...The OLD CROSS and the NEW"-by A.W. Tozer."

Articles about  the "Purpose Driven Life"

Women in Ministry by Greg Lundstedt Rev 2004

Can women teach in the church?

 To begin we must recognize that both men and women receive spiritual gifts.   The scriptures point out that some women received the gift of prophecy (please see our position paper on prophecy) and can prophecy and pray in the congregation if they recognize the headship of their husbands (1 Cor. 11:1-16).  Also, we see Paul instructing older women to teach the younger women in Titus 2:3-5.     There is admittedly few New Testament references to women in ministry, specifically the teaching ministry.  However, it is apparent that Priscilla and her husband Aquila were involved in the teaching ministry.  They were the companions of the Apostle Paul in Ephesus and Corinth.   Also, Priscilla with her husband taught Apollos, who was “mighty in the Scriptures,” with no objection from Paul (Acts 18:24-26).    So what is the problem with women teaching? There would be no problem except for two difficult passages on women teaching:

Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says.  And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.  Corinthians 14:34-35

Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.       1 Timothy 2:11-12

On the surface these two passages prohibit women teaching in church.  Is this what Paul meant?   Two points must be addressed:  First, Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, would never say anything that would contradict his other writings.  Remember, Paul approved of women praying and prophesying (please see our position paper on prophecy) in the church, if they and others recognized the headship and authority of their husbands (1 Cor 11:5).  Secondly, the immediate context of each passage points to a problem that was being addressed. 

These problems were disorder (1 Cor. 14:40) and dissension (1Timothy 2:8) in church meetings.    Most likely women and men were disrupting the services in Corinth with tongues, prophesies, revelations and teachings, which were out of order (1 Cor. 14:26-40).  It is possible that these women defended their disruptions by saying that they needed to act in such a manner so that they could learn.  Paul’s solution for them is to tell them to “be quiet,”  “subject themselves,” and to “learn” from their husbands “at home” (1 Cor. 14:34-35).     

In Paul’s instruction to Timothy concerning conduct in the church (1 Tim 3:15),  he states that “women are to “quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.”  He also does not allow a woman or better said, a wife (gunaiki.) to teach or to exercise authority (or possibly domineer) over a man, but she is to be “quiet” (1 Tim 2:11-15).  Paul’s reasoning for this command is the order of creation and that woman was deceived.   Remember, woman was “quite deceived,”  yet,  man was clearly rebellious. 

What can we get from this passage:  First, women are not to act like the Corinthian woman. They are to be submissive, quiet and orderly in church.  They are not to disrupt the church meetings.  Second and most important, woman are not to “teach or exercise authority over a man.”  The key to interpreting this passage is in verses 14-15.   This is the portion in which Paul justifies his argument with a reference to Adam and Eve.  Since woman was created after Adam and she was “quite deceived” in reference to God’s command (His authoritative Word), she is not to be in ultimate authority concerning the doctrines and teachings of the church or teach men in the church.

In conclusion, can women teach in the church?  Yes, within certain biblical guidelines.  We have seen that Paul allows women to prophecy (please see our position paper on prophecy).  However, this prophesying must be in order and married women must recognize the headship of the husbands.  Also, we have seen that the woman’s teaching must not challenge the authority of the male leaders in the congregation. Women are not to be in or appear to be in a position of leadership that exercises authority over men or be teaching men in church.  This we believe would prohibit women from pulpit ministry or any aspect of teaching where women are instructing men in the church. With this in mind, women and men teachers are responsible to teach in accordance with the doctrine as established by the Word and approved by the elders.  For elders have the authority and calling to oversee, establish and protect the church in sound doctrine (Tit. 1:9).    

Can a woman be an Elder?

This question assumes that the office of elder is biblical.  Note that Paul uses the term elder (presbute,roj) and overseer or bishop (evpi,skopoj) to describe the same office and these terms  are virtually synonymous (Titus 1:5, 7).  Peter also sheds light on the usage of these terms.  He states that “elders” (Presbute,rouj)  are to “exercise oversight”  (evpiskopou/ntej) over the “flock of God” (1 Peter 5:1-2).

The New Testament is clear in its teaching on elders.  Luke shares that elders were appointed by Paul and Barnabas in every church (Acts 14:23).  Paul “called to him the elders of the church” at Ephesus for a tearful good by  (Acts 20:17).  He instructed them to “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28; italics mine).  Paul instructed Titus to “appoint elders in every city” (Titus 1:5). 

In 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9, Paul gives the qualifications for elders.  An open and obvious reading of these texts reveal this office is for men not woman.  In the Greek text all the references are masculine in gender.    One who would justify women eldership must ignore the plain teaching of the text.    God has given men and women different roles.   Even in the Trinity there are differing roles and headship (cf. 1 Cor.11:3).  Christ is not demeaned to be under the headship of God is He?   Is man demeaned because he cannot give birth?  So also male eldership does not lesson the immense value of women.  As Peter shares, women are to be honored as fellow heirs “of the grace of life” (1 Peter 3:7).   

 VBF position on Prophecy

We at Vancouver Bible Fellowship agree with the following position on prophecy and prophets from the Valley Bible Church elders.

Prophecy

Prophecy in the Bible was an authoritative communication by God to His people through an individual (cf. Revelation 10:7; 16:15; 22:7). A literal rendering of the Greek word for prophet (prophetes) is "one who speaks before God," that is, someone who speaks in the name of God. The message of a prophet was a direct revelation from God. Old Testament prophecies consisted of two basic elements: fore-telling and forth-telling. That is, they were God's revelation about the future and God's revelation about the present. Both aspects were God's direct revelation to man.

In the New Testament, prophets ranked second in importance only behind the apostles (1 Corinthians 12:28-31; Ephesians 4:11). With the apostles, the New Testament prophets were considered the foundation upon which the church was built (Ephesians 2:20). New Testament prophecies were identical in nature to Old Testament prophecies. Both were God's direct revelation to man and both included new information regarding the present and the future.

New Testament prophecy is not the same as modern preaching or teaching

In order to see a continuing nature to prophecy, some have defined prophecy different in the New Testament. One approach is to teach that the New Testament gift of prophecy is not new revelation from God but simply gathered from the completed revelation of God in the Bible. Prophecy under this definition would be declaring God's Word from the Scripture, such as occurs in a typical worship service. The New Testament prophet would then be understood as proclaiming truth already revealed, not a source of new truth from the mind of God.

There are two fatal problems with this understanding of prophecy in the New Testament:

1. Since there is no question that prophecy in the Old Testament is direct revelation from God, what is the basis for changing the definition when the word is used in the New Testament. There must be a compelling reason to understand prophecy to be fundamentally different and there simply is none.

2. If prophecy is the declaration of God's Word from Scripture, then what is teaching? How are the two distinct? There simply is not a difference.

David Farnell writes, "To equate preaching with the spiritual gift of prophecy is fallacious. Such an equation is also quite artificial. While preaching is essentially a merging of the gifts of teaching and exhortation, prophecy has the primary elements of prediction and revelation. As Friedrich notes, 'All prophecy rests on revelation (1 Corinthians 14:30)'.... Therefore, since the preacher is not in contact with God as was the prophet, the preacher is not the modern equivalent of a prophet."

New Testament prophecy is not in error

Another mistaken attempt to understand prophecy as continuing today is to define the New Testament prophecy as divided between apostolic prophecy, which is from God, infallible and on par with Old Testament prophecy and the gift of prophecy, which is also from God but meant to edify, encourage and console. While this supposed secondary prophecy is also direct revelation from God, it may not be entirely accurate and alleged prophet may then be in error with his prophecy.

This forces the obvious question, "How can any message from God contain error?" If God is perfect and without defect, then all that He produces is perfect and without defect. God can allow error, but he can never speak error. Human prophets no more necessarily corrupt the revelation of God anymore than the human authors of Scripture corrupted the revelation of God. A fallible revelation from God is a contradiction in terms.

In light of this, Deuteronomy 18:21-22 specifically describes the test of a prophet. If the prophet is in error, then the Scripture instructs us to conclude the prophecy is not from God. The penalty for prophesying falsely was death (18:20). The only biblical test for a prophet is truthfulness and the flawed understanding of New Testament prophets being wrong is in stark contrast to Deuteronomy 18.

It is important to note that false prophets sometimes prophesied accurately (Deuteronomy 13:2). Even if what a "prophet" says comes true, the prophet is not necessarily genuine. Jeremiah 5:30-31 provides an accurate commentary on the charismatic movement's prophetic practices, "An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land: the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priest rule on their own authority; and my people love it so!" We must likewise describe the embracing of prophets who even themselves admit to being in error as "an appalling and horrible thing."

Prophecy does not occur today

Before we explain why prophecy does not occur presently a couple of clarifications are in order. First, we are not teaching that God cannot reveal Himself through prophets if He chooses to. Second, we are not teaching that God will not reveal Himself through prophets ever again.

We certainly acknowledge God's ability, yet we also observe that He has chosen to complete His revelation to the church. One day the age of the church will end when Jesus Christ returns at the rapture of the church (1 Thessalonians 4:15-18). After the church age and during the period of the seven year tribulation, we see prophets once again functioning (Revelation 11).

There are a number of good reasons why we believe that the only prophecy that God is currently to reveal Himself is found in the pages of the Bible. The reasons why we believe that prophets are no longer functioning to provide us with new revelation from God are detailed below:

1. The current practice of "prophecy" is not revelation from God

Both the propensity for falsehood in prophecy among charismatics and the common practice of simply regurgitating existing revelation under the auspices of "prophecy" provides convincing evidence that the gift of prophecy as described in the New Testament has ceased.

Norman Geisler writes an excellent summary, "Either those who claim the gift of prophecy are uttering infallible truths on par with those in the Bible or else the New Testament gift of prophecy does not exist today. For the 'prophecies' given today are not infallible, but are often false. Thus, we must conclude that the New Testament gift of prophecy does not exist today."

What is being practiced in charismatic circles today is clearly not direct revelation from God and to claim it to be only cheapens the genuine gift of prophecy.

2. The testimony of church history shows that prophecy has ceased

Church history is a serious problem for charismatics who attempt to defend their practices since its silence of church history regarding prophecy is deafening. The church throughout the centuries has been noticeable absent of charismatics and prophecy. On the occasions when certain mystics claimed special revelation, the church responded with strong opposition. Three examples below testify to the early church's resolve concerning the cessation of prophecy.

a. Montanism

Montanism was a movement that claimed to practice tongues speaking and claimed new revelation from God in the second century. Montanus fell into a trance in a village in Phrygia in 156 and reportedly began to "prophesy under the influence of the Spirit." Two young women also allegedly prophesied (Priscilla and Maximilla), and with their help the movement quickly spread through Asia Minor. Montanus claimed to have a new and final revelation, foretold the return of Christ and the establishment of the New Jerusalem in Phrygia, encouraged fasting and welcomed persecution.

Bishops in Asia Minor excommunicated the Montanists about 177. The Second Ecumenical Council, the Council of Constantinople in 381, which met with 150 church fathers to settle the Arian controversy and approved the Nicene Creed, decreed that Montanism was tantamount to paganism. Augustine also opposed this movement. The sect of Montanism survived until the 6th century. The failure of the Montanists and the early church's resolve against them caused those advocating special revelation from God to be viewed with great disdain until the twentieth century charismatic movement.

b. The Muratorian Fragment

One of the first references to the early church's view on the cessation of prophecy is from the Muratorian Fragment, which dates from around 170 A.D. This document contains the oldest existing list of recognized books of the New Testament canon. It explicitly states that the number of both apostles and prophets "is complete" and thereby indicates an end to prophecy.

c. John Chrysostom

John Chrysostom (c. 350 - 407 A.D.) was a leading figure in the fourth century. He was appointed the bishop at Constantinople and was widely traveled and aware of the state of the early church. The Protestant reformers would later regard Chrysostom as a church father second only to Augustine, because he opposed allegorical interpretation and sought the exact, literal meaning of the text.

In Homilies in First Corinthians, Chrysostom writes the following regarding the miraculous spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12-14,

"This whole place is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity has produced us again another question, namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more?"

Thomas Edgar comments on the reason why Chrysostom stated that the passage is "very obscure":

"They [miraculous gifts] no longer occurred in the Church and they had not occurred for a sufficient length of time that the facts regarding them had dropped from available knowledge, so that the passage is considered obscure by the time of this homily."

The testimony concerning the cessation of revelation that comes from church history is certainly strong evidence for the fact that there are no continuing revelations from God being given to man.

3. 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 teaches that prophecy will cease to exist

1 Corinthians 13:8-13 specifically teaches that prophecy will cease to exist. However, the passage does not clearly specify when this will occur. There are two basic views as to the timing of the end of prophecy, either prophecy will be done away at the second coming of Christ or prophecy will be done away when the canon of Scripture is completed.

Both interpretations rest on a particular definition of the word "perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13:10. At issue is whether "perfect" is quantitative or qualitative. That is, whether "perfect" means a completing of what was incomplete, or whether "perfect" means a perfecting of what was imperfect.

Below is an evaluation of why the view that prophecy is done away at the close of the New Testament is best:

The Old Testament depicts periods of special revelation which cease with the passing of prophets. The Book of Acts describes miracles, signs and wonder at a decreasing rate in the history of the early church. Church history validates the ceasing of prophetic revelation and the gifts that confirmed this revelation.

Why does 1 Corinthians 13:8 only include gifts associated with God's revelation? All gifts will end with the return of Christ, so what would be the point of noting that these gifts in particular end with Christ? It is much better to describe them as ending with the close of the New Testament which sets them apart from non-revelatory gifts.

The word for perfect (TELEIOS) in 1 Corinthians 13:10 has a well established meaning of "complete." Also, Paul never uses TELEIOS to mean absolute perfection, which occurs at the return of Christ. The completion of the New Testament fits Paul's usage of TELEIOS much better (cf. Romans 12:2; 1 Corinthians 2:6; 2 Corinthians 12:9; Ephesians 4:13; Philippians 3:12, 15; Colossians 1:28; 4:12).

Understanding TELEIOS in 1 Corinthians 13:10 as "complete" makes more sense than "perfect" because of the contrast with "partial." The completed Scripture is the reason why the partial, or incomplete, prophecy and knowledge are done away, for they are no longer necessary. This is better than trying to contrast the perfection of Christ's return with the imperfection of prophecy and knowledge. Prophecy is not imperfect, it is rather incomplete. This then views both "in part" and "perfect" as quantitative, rather than "in part" as quantitative and "perfect" as qualitative.

1 Corinthians 13:11 describes a development from childhood to maturity, which is not instantaneous but gradual. This illustration does not fit the return of Christ nearly as well as it fits the gradual reduction of prophecy as the New Testament is being written.

We know in part before the completion of the New Testament (1 Corinthians 13:9) and with the completion of the canon the partial revelation of prophecy will be done away (1 Corinthians 13:10). The partial being done away does not need to mean that we then know fully (1 Corinthians 13:12). This final knowledge can be understood to be a separate occasion at the coming of Christ.

1 Corinthians 13:11 describes the increasing completeness of God's revelation while 13:12 describes the absolute completeness at the return of Christ. Thus, these two verses complement each other.

The reason why the completeness of God's revelation in the Scripture is in the context of the return of Christ (1 Corinthians 13:12) is because Paul entertained the definite possibility that Jesus would return soon (cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17). He was aware that if the Lord returned soon the fullness of knowledge would also render the gifts unnecessary.

This view best allows for the contrast of 1 Corinthians 13:13. In contrast to the three gifts which will not endure throughout the church age (prophecy, tongues and knowledge) are the three virtues which will endure throughout the age (faith, hope and love). This temporal understanding of the virtues is further affirmed when we learn that love is the greatest, in that it alone is permanent while faith and hope will be fulfilled when we see Christ face to face (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:6-8; Romans 8:24-25). Love is the greatest in the sense that love abides forever, it never fails (1 Corinthians 13:8).

While this is a difficult passage to understand, the least weight of objection is with the view that prophecy, knowledge and tongues ceased with the closed of the New Testament. For the reasons listed above, it is best to conclude that 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 teaches that the gift of prophecy, along with tongues and knowledge, was a temporary gift that is no longer operative today. This interpretation is confirmed by other New Testament passages and by the testimony of church history.

4. The foundation of the church ended the need for apostles and prophets

Ephesians 2:20 teaches that the church is founded on the apostles and prophets. Ephesians 3:5 makes it clear that apostles and New Testament prophets were of primary importance as vehicles of revelation, thereby providing the foundation for the church. The apostles and prophets passed on as the church is established and God's revelation is completed in the church age. This role of founding the church was completed in the first century and there is never again a need for apostles and prophets to repeat the establishment of the church.

In his commentary on Ephesians 2:20, John Stott notes,

"Just as the foundation cannot be tampered with once it has been laid and the superstructure is being built upon it, so the New Testament foundation of the church is inviolable and cannot be changed by any additions, subtractions, or modifications offered by teachers who claim to be apostles or prophets today. The church stands or falls by its loyal dependence on the foundation truths which God revealed to his apostles and prophets, and which are now preserved in the New Testament Scriptures."

5. Prophecy has been replaced by teaching (2 Peter 2:1)

The implication of the comparison in 2 Peter 2:1 between false prophets in the past and false teachers in the future is that teaching from the completed revelation of God will replace prophetic messages of new revelation from God. Just as prophecy was counterfeited by Satan in Israel during the days of the prophets and in the church during the first century, destructive heresy also will come in the form of those posing as teachers of God's existing revelation.

6. The Scripture is final and complete (Jude 3)

Jude 3 teaches us to contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. The faith, according to Greek scholar Henry Alford, is "objective here: the sum of that which Christians believe." What we believe was delivered to us once for all. We did not discover it but it was delivered to us, in the Bible. The faith is not continuing to be delivered but already has been delivered. It does not need to be added to for its results are lasting and complete. This verse deems continued revelation from God in the church age to have ceased.

7. Prophecy after the close of the New Testament is condemned (Rev. 22:18)

Revelation 22:18-19 is an unusual warning, unique to the New Testament, regarding the addition or subtraction of prophecy. While certainly the purpose of Revelation 22:19 is to guard against tampering and to preserve the text, it also warns against adding to it. This may be understood as prohibiting additional prophecy. This corresponds to the diminished prophecy at the end of the New Testament.

Also, these words may have been more necessary in light of the problem of false teachers claiming that their teaching was authoritative revelation from God. 1 John 4:1 gives evidence that the apostle John was concerned about fraudulent claims to prophecy. Since Revelation is the climax of biblical prophecy and the culmination of New Testament revelation, Revelation 22:18-19 seems to prohibit both later revelations alleged to be from God and later changes in the Scripture.

Conclusion

There are many people claiming to receive words from God. If God is speaking to any of these people His words would be authoritative, infallible and without error. The Bible makes it clear that falsely claiming a word from God is a very serious matter (Deuteronomy 18:20-22). Receiving such presumption leads to harm and we are called to protect ourselves from false prophecy (1 John 4:1). It is to the discredit of the church that so many allow prophecy to pass without examination. We must hold what God really says much more highly and not be deluded by claims of prophecy.

Completed: July 2001

A BRIEF STATEMENT ON ELECTION AND HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY

by Greg Lundstedt 

The following statement is a brief response concerning VBF's position on Election and Human Responsibility.  Although I feel it does cover our position adequately, It is not meant to be a complete response on the subject.  For more info concerning Hebrews 3-4, & 10  feel free to listen to the following sermons: Hebrews 3:7-19 RA   Hebrews 4:1-13 RA   Hebrews 10:26-39 RA

Concerning election and Human Responsibility, we believe the Bible teaches both, yet on this side of eternity we cannot understand how both can be true at the same time. Therefore we must take what has been revealed in the Scriptures alone and not try to dogmatically resolve the issues by attempting to raise one position over the other by means of human reason or emotion. Those who see election alone (i.e the hyperCalvinist) have to ignore or reinterpret certain Scriptures to make their case and those who would see free will alone (Arminian's) try to redefine election by ignoring or reinterpreting certain Scriptures,   We believe that God certainly elects those who will be saved (For the sake of time I will not list the Scriptures, but would love to show you another time) Also, we believe that one needs to exercise their will to believe the Gospel. Hence, here lies the problem. How can someone dead in sin (spiritually dead) exercise his or her will in believing the Gospel?

The Reformed view and solution would be that one needed to be regenerated (i.e. born again) before they are able to repent and believe. However, we do not see that in Scripture. Nowhere do we see that one is saved, i.e. born again and then repents and believes. Now we believe the Arminian is quite wrong also. Spiritually dead men cannot choose to believe. “as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;  THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; (Romans 3:10-11).

It is at this point we see that both unbiblical extremes miss the main point due to rationalistic deduction beyond the text or by an emotional appeal to resolve the unresolvable. It is not “either or”, but “both and” strictly in the context of God’s powerful Gospel and convicting Spirit. Thus the resolution to the problem is found in the Gospel. Paul makes it clear that “it (the Gospel) is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek (Romans 1:16). God’s Word penetrates the dead heart calling for a response of faith.  Thus faith then cannot be exercised without the Spirit convicting with the alive, powerful, saving Gospel. Therefore, saving faith would be a gift from God (Eph 2:8-9) and not a work of man.   

Hebrews 3-4 illustrates this perfectly. As the writer of Hebrews is making the case for Jesus being superior to Moses, he introduces the illustration of Israel and their hard hearts. This serves as a warning to those who are tempted to leave their confession of faith and revert to Judaism (3:6b, 3:12-14), ultimately because they were not saved in the first place.  Therefore if they hear His voice, they are not to harden their hearts. For just as the Israelites saw God’s mighty works and ultimately didn’t believe in Him (cf. Numbers 14:11 and Numbers 14), they too would fall because of unbelief in the good news (Heb 4:1-11). So then they are not to harden their hearts, “For (because) the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do (Heb 4:12-13).

Here lies the point. When the alive, piercing, Spirit empowered, Word of God is heard by a non believer, it is able to pierce through the deadness of the heart, and then the person can believe or harden his own heart to the message. So then, one is responsible for the choice they make when their heart is confronted by the living, active, piercing, judging Word.  

This principle is illustrated throughout the warnings of Hebrews:  "For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame." (Hebrews 6:4-6)   Notice how the apostate, one dead in sin, has "once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come."  It is clear that even though one is dead in sin, that because of the power of the Spirit and the Word , he is able to taste and thus is fully culpable for the hardening his own heart.

 Indeed in Hebrews Chapter 10:26-31, the apostate who is facing eternal judgment is said to have had received "the knowledge of the truth." The word translated "knowledge" is epiknosis. It speaks of a full knowledge. These apostates have received full knowledge of the truth and are thus rightfully condemned for rejecting the Person of Christ, His Work, having "insulted the Spirit of grace" (Hebrews 10:26-29). They are rightfully deserving of eternal hell because they have insulted the very means in which God reveals His grace.   

 Now we know God uses His Spirit to convict the world of sin (John 16:8) and illumine the gospel of God’s grace in Christ as revealed in the Word. When the Spirit of God convicts a man that is dead in sin, by means of God's all powerful Word, he can either respond in repentance and faith or harden his heart. When a heart is hardened to the Spirit's work in revealing their sin and the Savior Jesus Christ, this is unforgivable. This is the only unforgivable sin, deserving of eternal judgment (see Luke 12:10).

Now we know that God elects and that whom He elects He saves -- Yet for some reason we do not understand, He reaches compassionately to those who will be eternally damned, by convicting them of their sin, and revealing the Only Savior Jesus Christ by His Spirit through the Gospel. And thus man who is dead in sin, is convicted and fully understands, and because the alive Gospel has pierced their dead hearts he is thus fully able to respond in repentance and faith and is fully culpable.  This helps us understand how God could command one who is dead in sin after being pierced with the alive Word to "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME." Hebrews 3:15.    

Thus God's means of quickening, opening or drawing  the heart of the unregenerate, those dead in sin is by means of  His Spirit and the Word,  not by independently regenerating a person before he exercises faith  (i.e. making one born again, giving a new life, so that he can believe).    

Now comes the part we cannot resolve on earth without fallaciously appealing to prideful human reason or emotionally influenced exegesis. God does elect and those whom He elects will believe. Also, those whom He doesn’t elect will not believe, yet they will be eternally responsible because they themselves have hardened their own hearts to the alive Gospel message, which is the power of God unto salvation.  

Therefore our position is that we cannot resolve this issue on earth with what has been revealed in Scripture.  To do so would take us past what Scripture has revealed into the realm of human reason or emotional reaction which both ultimately result in unbiblical exegesis that spawns the spiritual pride as we see in Hyper Calvinistic Reformed theology or unbiblical emotional reinterpretation of the gospel as we see in Arminian theology with it's devastating results.  All this said, we believe that the Scriptures affirm both  Election and Human responsibility. .

 Greg Lundstedt  copyright rev 7/6/2006

Click below to download Free Acrobat reader