Q: What is Decisionism? Is it Biblical?

Decisionism is the belief that human beings shape their own destiny ultimately by how they manage the course of their actions / decisions in this life. I emphasize the word "ultimately" to make it clear that you do not become a decisionist simply by believing that humans make decisions. We all believe that humans are capable of making decisions, but we are not all decisionists. Decisionism asserts more than just the fact that we make decisions; it insists that our decisions are inviolable, autonomous, and sovereign.

This philosophy has become very prevalent both in our society and in many "Christian" churches today. How many times have we heard preachers saying: “God has a wonderful plan for your life, but it is up to you to make it happen”? or that “God has done everything He could do to save you; now the rest is up to you to invite Christ in your heart”? The idea is that God has always wanted to break into our lives, but wouldn't do it unless He gets our permission. While “there are many plans in God's mind," yet "it is man's counsel which will stand,”

The Bible, on the contrary, tells us that “there are many plans in a person’s mind, but it is the counsel of the LORD which will stand” (Prov. 19:21). We don't hold our destiny. God does; for “the LORD has made all things for himself: yes, even the wicked for the day of evil” (Prov. 16:4).

Even in the economy of Salvation, the Bible says that “it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy” and that, therefore, “God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden” (Romans 9:16, 18). In fact, our very conversion (faith and repentance)—which, as every one must admit, involves our “willing decision” to follow Christ—is itself a gift from God! (Eze. 36:26-27: cf. Acts 16:14).

Every Christian must understand that God's work of Salvation didn't stop at Christ's death and His invitation for sinners to come to Him. God Himself, by His sovereign Spirit, unfailingly converts the heart of whomever He wills! He demands faith and repentance (Mark 1:15), yet He also produces them in the heart of His elect (Jn. 6:29; Acts 13:48; 2 Tim. 2:25-26).

Don't me wrong though. I'm not suggesting that we never decided to receive Christ (or that it isn't necessary). Of course we did receive Christ, and we did so freely and willingly (John 1:12). To acknowledge this, however, is not necessarily Decision*ism.* It is one thing to grant that Salvation involves our will, and rightly so; but it's a completely different story to insist that our willing decision to receive Christ is a product of our own inherent ability apart from the sovereign operation of God's grace by His Spirit (Decisionism). God converts hearts, and He converts invincibly (see Eze 36:26-27 & Acts 16:14).

Therefore, if we take the Bible for what it says, we must affirm that the final decisive factor of our eternal destiny lies ultimately on God's Sovereign Decree, and that our decision to follow Christ is just a product of the mighty work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. It's not "up to us" in any way. Our decision to receive Christ (whereby we are forgiven) could never have been possible if it weren't for the grace of the Spirit that first quickened our rebellious, sinful, darkened, spiritually dead hearts (see 1 Cor. 2:14; cf. Jn. 6:44, 63-65). It isn't that God chose us because we chose him, but that we choose God because He has first chosen us (Jn. 15:16; Eph. 1:4-5, 11). Or as Christ puts it:

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up in the last day.” (John 6:44)

Salvation is by God's Sovereign Grace alone from first to last. Decisionism, then, is an affront to the Grace of God. Our churches need to be purged from this dangerous philosophy once and for all.

Ang Tula ng Isang Tupa

O Diyos, puso ko noon ay kasing tigas ng bato;

Walang pag-asa at hindi kayang magbago;

Hinding-hindi lalapit sa Panginoong Jesu-Cristo,

Malibang ang pananalig ay ipagkaloob Mo.

Ngunit ang iyong pagibig ay napaka-dakila;

Sapagkat Kaligtasan ko'y iyo nang itinakda,

Noong bago pa man likhain ang langit at lupa,

Para sa kapurihan ng iyong habag at biyaya.

Kay Cristo Jesus nga ako ay iyong ibinigay;

Sa Pastol na para sa katubusan ko'y namatay.

Pagliligtas Niya'y tiyak na magtatagumpay,

At lahat Niyang tupa ay magtatamo ng buhay.

Panginoon, tinawag mo ako at iyong binago,

Sa pamamagitan ng iyong Espiritu Santo.

Ipinaunawa mo sa akin ang iyong Ebanghelyo,

Upang aking makita ang kagandahan ni Cristo.

Mayroon bang bagay na makapaghihiwalay,

Sa mga hinirang at sa kanilang Diyos na buhay?

Ang mga iniligtas ay patuloy Mong iniingatan,

Upang matamo nila ang lubos na kaluwalhatian.

—Jeph

Solus Cristus and the Eternal Destiny of Dying Infants

One of the most difficult and tricky questions one could ask a Calvinist is whether or not babies who die as babies automatically go to heaven. To the non-Calvinist, the question itself seems very trivial. What an insanity it is to insinuate that such cute little "angels" could possibly go to hell! The thought of babies being burned in hell is for some reason intuitively unbearable. And yet, Calvinists for many centuries since the Reformation, have always been divided over this issue.

Before we move along, I must candidly confess that I personally hope that all babies dying in infancy are indeed saved, and I say "hope" because I also acknowledge the fact that the Bible is simply silent on the issue. I am convinced that in any attempt to answer the question, "are all dying babies saved?", one necessarily enters into the realm of speculations. That being said, I would want to make it clear that it is beyond the intention of this blog to offer an answer to that particular question. My concern here deals with something way more important than the dispute over whether or not all dying infants are saved. What I'm concerned about is the preservation of the purity of the Gospel message in all this.

A few days ago, I had a discussion with a certain Calvinist who claimed that all babies dying in infancy are saved. Of course, there's nothing inherently wrong with that assertion (note that I personally have that hope myself!). What made his position wrong, however, is the reason that has been provided to justify it. My Calvinist friend made a bold assertion that it would be unjust for God to send dying infants—who have never committed any personal/actual sins—to hell. To state it positively, what he implies is that God's justice requires the salvation of dying infants by virtue of their innocence from the charge of having committed any actual/personal sins. This is tantamount to saying that some people (i.e. dying infants) are bound to go to heaven by the merit of their own innocence and not by the gracious redemption of Christ! I am convinced this is an implicit affront to the Gospel of Grace that Calvinists are expected to hold dearly.

During our discussion, my Calvinist friend also insisted that while it is God's justice that requires the salvation of dying infants, such supposedly innocent infants would nonetheless still be saved by grace. But I could only imagine a snake eating its own tail when I read that statement. It is a fatal self-contradiction that ultimately reveals a serious misunderstanding of why is it necessary for us to be saved "by grace" in the first place. 

Saved by Grace Alone

Salvation is by grace simply because we don't deserve it.. God's justice condemns us (Rom. 3:19-23). If we deserved anything, as far as divine justice is concerned, it is only death: "for the wages of sin is death" (v. 6:23). Thus, grace presupposes our unworthiness before God. It presupposes our just condemnation. No sinner who is saved by grace can claim that God saved him because he justly deserves it. It also follows that God is never under any moral obligation to save any sinner. He could have thrown us all to hell in an instant and yet remain perfectly holy and just. If this isn't the case, then our salvation becomes a matter of legal obligation on God's part, and grace would no longer be grace (Rom. 11:6).  The mere mention of grace assumes that the recipient of such a bounty is justly condemned before God. In other words, the person who receives saving grace from God, left in himself, is a guilty sinner, and being guilty he is NOT innocent. So how can it be argued that dying infants are justly saved because they were innocent, and yet their salvation is still by grace? One can already see the absurdity of such a position.

Can a Christian hope that all dying infants will enter the kingdom of God? Sure! But let him confess that such little ones must enter the kingdom of God by grace alone; and if by grace, then it is not by any merit of their own (e.g. merit of innocence). Nobody is innocent before God—even infants (Psa. 51:5). "Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath" (Eph. 2:3, NIV). If dying infants are innocent and must be saved by virtue of their innocence, then they are saved by bare justice, and not by grace.

Saved in Christ Alone

At this point one may ask: If salvation cannot be acquired by anyone on the basis of God's bare justice (which can pronounce nothing but condemnation for our sins), does this mean that "grace" is unjust? No. God's grace has been made available because God's justice has been answered for in and by the Cross. "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor. 5:21). Justice is served by Christ's death on behalf of His people so that salvation may come to them by grace alone (Rom. 3:23-26). No Cross, no grace.

Our need for a Savior presupposes the reality of both our depraved condition and our just condemnation apart from God's mercy. So, do babies need Christ and His grace? If the answer is "Yes," then it follows that they, too, are not innocent and are justly condemned; for "it is not the healthy who need a Physician, but the sick" (Mat. 9:12). But if the answer is "No," then Jesus was lying when he said: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (Jn. 14:6, NIV).

Conclusion

As a closing remark, let me suggest that whatever position we take concerning the eternal destiny of dying infants (i.e. whether or not all of them are saved), we nevertheless ought to uphold the scriptural fact that heaven is a glorious place filled with people who are redeemed and forgiven by the Father through His Son, Jesus Christ. No human being can be found in heaven who is not redeemed by Christ. If this declaration is true, then how can we imagine babies in heaven without also accepting the fact that even those babies were—as far as God's justice is concerned—guilty and condemned, so much so that they were not less in need of Christ's forgiveness as we are? Do you imagine babies in heaven? I do. But I imagine babies in heaven who are saved not because they were innocent, but because of God's grace in Christ.

-Jeph

Law and Gospel

Here's a nice poem about Law and Gospel written by a godly 17th century Puritan named Ralph Erskine (1685-1752) ,

The law supposing I have all,

Does ever for perfection call;

The gospel suits my total want,

And all the law can seek does grant.

The law could promise life to me,

If my obedience perfect be;

But grace does promise life upon

My Lord’s obedience alone.

The law says, Do, and life you’ll win;

But grace says, Live, for all is done;

The former cannot ease my grief,

The latter yields me full relief.

The law will not abate a mite,

The gospel all the sum will quit;

There God in thret’nings is array’d

But here in promises display’d.

The law excludes not boasting vain,

But rather feeds it to my bane;

But gospel grace allows no boasts,

Save in the King, the Lord of Hosts.

The law brings terror to molest,

The gospel gives the weary rest;

The one does flags of death display,

The other shows the living way.

The law’s a house of bondage sore,

The gospel opens prison doors;

The first me hamer’d in its net,

The last at freedom kindly set.

An angry God the law reveal’d

The gospel shows him reconciled;

By that I know he was displeased,

By this I see his wrath appeased.

The law still shows a fiery face,

The gospel shows a throne of grace;

There justice rides alone in state,

But here she takes the mercy-seat.

Lo! in the law Jehovah dwells,

But Jesus is conceal’d;

Whereas the gospel’s nothing else

But Jesus Christ reveal’d.

Paul's Letter to Philemon and the Doctrine of Double-Imputation

St. Onesimus, the Saved Slave

The doctrine of double-imputation states that believing sinners are justified--that is, declared righteous in God's sight--through an exchange of moral accounts between the sinner and Christ. At the moment of faith, all our sins are imputed to Christ and were nailed on the cross (Rom. 3:25; Eph. 1:7), and the same time, His righteousness is imputed to our account in order that the just demands of the law may be fulfilled in us instantly - based solely on what Christ has done (Rom. 4:5-8, 5:19, 10:4; 1 Cor. 1:30; Gal. 4:4-5). This happy exchange is expressed in St. Paul's words, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor. 5:21). This is the reason why evangelicals deny that human works have any role to play in salvation, and this is clearly taught in Romans 3:19-20, 23, 28, Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:5, Galatians 2:21, and many similar passages. Yet, surprisingly, the clearest allusion to the biblical doctrine of double imputation is found in one of the shortest and most ignored books in the Bible; Paul's pastoral epistle to Philemon.

The book of Philemon which contains only twenty-five verses in total was written by Paul probably around 59-61 AD during his Roman imprisonment. The letter is addressed to a certain Christian named Philemon (v. 1), the owner of a slave Onesimus (v. 10-12), and (if tradition serves us right) a member of the church at Colossae. Onesimus apparently ran away from his master (Philemon), a crime punishable by death during those days, and ended up encountering Paul in Rome whereby he was converted to the Christian faith. In Philemon 10 we see how deep Paul has cultivated his personal relationship with the run-away slave, but Paul seems to have considered it unethical to continue making use of Onesimus' services since the slave was still, technically, owned by Philemon. So he eventually decided to send the slave back to his master. In verses 12-14 we read thus:

"I am sending him back to you, sending my very heart. I would have been glad to keep him with me, in order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel, but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord." (Phm. 1:12-14)

Paul knew death was the normal punishment for run-away slaves, so he entreated Philemon to receive Onesimus "no longer as a bondservant but more than a bondservant, as a beloved brother" (v. 16). But, humanly speaking, why would anyone repay a run-away slave with such favorable treatment? On what ground does Onesimus deserve this warm welcome from his master? Observe how Paul elicited Philemon's kindness towards Onesimus:

"So if you consider me your partner, receive him as you would receive me. If he has wronged you at all, or owes you anything, charge that to my account. I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it—to say nothing of your owing me even your own self." (Phm. 1:17-19)

Onesimus has merited death by fleeing from his master Philemon, but Paul stood in the way and asked Philemon to receive the slave as he would receive him, echoing the imputation of Christ's righteousness on our account. The apostle also told Philemon that if ever Onesimus has wronged him or owe him anything, he himself will pay for it, echoing the imputation of our sins on Christ's account. Here we see how central the doctrine of justification was in Paul's life, even in his dealing with social cases like this. 

This clear allusion to the doctrine of double-imputation that we find in the book of Philemon, I believe, is why God providentially included this document in the canon of Scriptures. I don't know of any ancient fathers of the church who saw things the same way, but beyond this perspective it would be hard to look for any good reason why this book should be included in the canon (other than that it was penned by an apostle).

-Jeph

All by Grace

Justification by grace through faith is a doctrine that is most basic among evangelical Christians. It is based on the Bible's teaching that all men are sinners and are under the just condemnation of God (Psa. 130:3, 143:2; Eph. 2:3); that nobody can earn his/her way to heaven by doing good works (Mat. 5:48; Rom. 3:10, 23; Rev. 21:27); and that it is out of God's great love and mercy that anyone is justified "by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith"  (Rom. 3:24-25a; cf. Jn. 3:16-18, 5:24; Rom 4:4-6; Gal. 4:4-5). This fundamental tenet of our Christian faith, according to Martin Luther, is where the Church stands or falls. 

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is
not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works
so that no one may boast." (Eph. 2:8-9) 

Now what do we exactly mean when we say we are saved by grace? We simply mean that we never deserved to be saved (because we are sinners), yet God saved us free of charge (Rom. 4:4-6). We are saved not according to worth. The word "grace" basically means undeserved favor. Hence, it is NOT given because of anything we do or anything in us. And since grace is wholly undeserved, it logically follows that it should be freely given without us needing to fulfill any requirement. For if there's a requirement imposed, the fulfillment of that requirement will be the determining factor of worth. And if something's received according to worth, then obviously it cannot be properly considered grace (Rom. 4:4, 11:6).

However, the Bible is also clear that faith is the proper means (or requirement) through which sinners obtain the grace of justification. (Rom. 5:1-2).  All who receive Christ are given eternal life, and without faith, nobody gets saved (Jn. 3:18; Heb. 11:6). So here's a good question: Why is it that salvation is referred to in the Bible as given according to grace, when in fact no one receives it without performing a certain act, that is, faith? Is salvation really by grace, then?


Who makes thee to differ?

According to popular opinion among the evangelicals, God has sent His Son to die on the cross and offer free salvation to all, but it is up to our own autonomous freewill to receive it or not. In this framework, Salvation is "by grace" only in the sense that it was God who initiated the attempt to save sinners (and graciously did most of the work), but it is our own choice which seals the deal at the end of the day. Thus, Salvation is only "by grace as offered", but not "by grace entirely and ultimately" since there's still something required from us that lies entirely on our own power, namely faith. In the final analysis, the sinner's positive response to the Gospel then turns into some kind of work that made him worthy for Salvation, which in turn creates room for boasting on the part of the redeemed and defeats the very meaning of "salvation by grace."

Let's try to put it this way. If asked, "What makes you to differ from unbelievers?", how would you respond? Perhaps you'd say: "Well, obviously, it is my faith which makes me to differ." Nice answer. But how did you come to finally believe in Christ? You might say: "Because I willed to believe" or "I made a decision." Good for you. But may I ask, what made you willing to believe? Or what caused you to make that decision to trust in Christ? Look around you. Some of your unbelieving friends or relatives may have also heard the Gospel at one point in their lives, but they remain unwilling to embrace Christ as you did. What then is that particular quality that you have, which is lacking in those who do not believe, that caused you to come to Christ? Is it because your intelligence is more superior than theirs? Then salvation would be based on human intelligence, which cannot be (Mat. 11:25; 1 Cor. 1:27). Is it because you're more kind than them? Then salvation would be based on human kindness, which also cannot be (Rom. 4:5; 1 Tim. 1:15-16). Or perhaps it is because you're more receptive than them or that your heart is more sensitive than theirs? Tell me, then, what is it that made your heart more receptive or more sensitive than those who remain unwilling to receive Christ (Eze. 36:26; Ac. 16:14)? Is it because of some innate goodness in your nature? But the Bible says we are all equally by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3; cf. Mat. 12:33; Jer. 13:23), dead in our trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1-2), and have a depraved heart that is desperately wicked and beyond cure (Jer. 17:9). How come, then, that you ended up believing in Christ alone for Salvation? What made you to differ?

These series of questions could go endlessly, and in responding to these, an average professing Christian—convinced with the humanistic philosophy that asserts that we are the author of our own destinies—will always search for something in and of himself as the distinguishing factor between him and unbelievers. Yet again, it should be kept in mind that if the final arbiter of salvation lies upon anything coming from us, then our salvation would ultimately be based on worth; and therefore, not by grace.

So how do we solve this problem? St. Paul provides the answer:  

"For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?" (1 Cor. 4:7, NIV)  

Paul rebukes the prideful hearts of the Corinthian believers who set divisions among themselves (1 Cor. 1:11-13, 4:6), asking them these questions: "For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive?" Apparently, Paul's main purpose in asking these questions isn't really to solicit answers. He wants to make something obvious. He is implying that whatever good thing it is that we possess which makes us [or makes us think we are] better than those whom we look down, does not really have its origin from ourselves but from God (Jas. 1:17). It is God's grace which makes us to differ, so we've no right to boast! Observe Paul's last question: "And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?" The same principle applies to our coming to Christ for Salvation. Say, "My faith makes me to differ; I had the willingness; I chose Christ; I surrendered my life to Him; I responded to the Gospel; I made a decision." Well that's true, but what do you have that you did not receive? If faith doesn't come from God as a gift, then it isn't God's grace which makes the redeemed to differ from those who perish but the merit of their own faith; and thus, grace is no longer grace (Rom. 11:5). Such cannot be the case.


Faith is God's work

The truth is, left in our own sinful nature, none of us will ever turn to God for salvation because "the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot" (Rom. 8:7); and again, "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14; cf. 2 Cor. 4:4-5). Our rebellion was so deep and so complete that the Bible describes us as having been dead in our Sins and transgressions (Eph. 2:1-3; Col. 2:13), and that we wouldn't have seen the beauty of Christ and finally trusted in Him alone for Salvation had not God spiritually quickened us by His mercy (Eze. 37:14; Jn. 1:13, 3:5-6; Eph. 2:4-5; 1 Pe. 1:3; Jas. 1:18).

Faith is a gift from God. When the Lord confronted the Jews concerning their unbelief, He told them: "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father" (Jn. 6:65). It is the Father who grants conversion or one's coming to (faith in) Christ. When Peter confessed that Jesus is the Son of God, the Lord responded to him saying: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Mat. 16:17). When Jesus Christ was asked by His disciples about His usage of parables (which makes His teachings indiscernible to most of His hearers), He answered them: "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given" (Mat. 13:11). When the apostles Paul and Silas were on an evangelical mission in Philippi, the Bible records the conversion of a certain woman named Lydia, who came to believe the Gospel because "The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul" (Ac. 16:14, cf. Eze. 36:26-27). In Philippians 1:29 St. Paul wrote: "For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake." These and many other passages testify that faith itself must be a gift from God.


Where then is boasting? 

Now we already know the solution to the question why the Bible considers justification as grace, even though it still requires something from sinners (i.e., faith). It is because faith itself is a gift of God's grace! It is not our work. It is God's work! "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (Jn. 6:29). Where then is boasting? It is excluded! For "if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?" (1 Cor. 4:7, NIV; 1 Cor. 15:10). It is by God's power that "[we] are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord'." (1 Cor. 1:26-30).

With these being said, it is NOT, therefore, true that God works everything which pertains to our salvation except our coming to Christ. Listen to Christ's words: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (Jn. 6:44). Therefore we should glory not in ourselves, but in the Lord (1 Cor. 1:30-31), acknowledging every tiny detail of our Salvation, from first to last, including our conversion and perseverance in the faith, as coming from the gracious sovereign hand God, "who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began" (2 Tim. 1:9; cf. Psa. 29:2; Jon. 2:9; Jn. 15:16; Rom. 8:29-9:21; Eph. 1:3-5, 11; Php. 1:6).

Salvation is by grace, and grace alone.

"If any man doth ascribe aught of salvation, even the very 

least, to the free-will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, 
and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright."

~Martin Luther, the Reformer

To God alone be the glory!

- Jeph

Want your life to go well? Stay away from Jesus — John Piper

"For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you 

should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake." 

(Philippians 1:29)

What are good works for?

Dr. Martin Luther, Reformer

Here's a frequently raised objection against the reformed doctrine of Justification by Faith and how Christians should respond to it:

Question:
If Salvation is attained through faith alone, and if works of charity are completely unnecessary and superfluous, why then does the Bible exhort Christians to be holy in all their conduct (1 Peter 1:15-16)? What for if it doesn't have any bearing to one's eternal destiny?

Answer:
First of all, it is not true that doing service to God or performing acts of charity are completely unnecessary and superfluous. According to Jesus Christ, it is through our obedience to God's law that we evince our love for Him (John 14:21, 23). However, these works won't save us because no amount of human works can suffice to reach God's glorious standard of perfection (Matthew 5:48; Romans 3:20, 23; James 2:10; Revelation 21:27). The psalmist writes, "If you, O LORD, should mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand?" (Psalms 130:3); and again, "Enter not into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you" (Psalms 143:2; cf. Romans 3:10).

The wolf underneath the sheep's clothing

It is still under dispute whether or not Martin Bashir's a "devout Christian", but he sure did an excellent job in this interview with Rob Bell concerning the latter's controversial new book entitled Love Wins. Bashir gets right to the core and heart of the issue in his questions. I love the part when Bashir frankly told Bell that he's amending the Gospel to make it palatable "to contemporary people who find, for example, the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach." Here's the video from youtube:

-Jeph

Jesus In Every Book Of The Bible

Just a while ago, a facebook buddy shared me this video which really had me blown away. It is about our Lord Jesus Christ being present in every book of the Bible from Genesis to Revelations. We all have an idea that Jesus is indeed the prime focus of God's Word, but I haven't came across any presentation of that truth as powerful (yet concise) as this one:

And to someone like me who has a mind like a sieve, the kid sure did a great job memorizing all that. Praise the Lord for that edifying presentation.

-Jeph

Why Should We Hate The 'Prosperity Gospel' - John Piper

This John Piper video goes out to all prosperity preachers today who misrepresent God as something like a Ginnie-in-the-bottle who is bound to make people materially prosperous in exchange of their service. It should serve as an eye opener to all of us that we should be aware of how dangerous this gospel (which is no true gospel at all) is. A must watch indeed.

-Jeph

St. Augustine On How To Eat The Bread Of Life For Salvation

"Don't go after the food that spoils..." (Jn. 6:27)

How do we eat the Bread of Life that came down from heaven so that we shall have eternal life as Jesus Christ promised in John 6:26-33? St. Augustine answers the question:

And, consequently, he that hungers after this bread, hungers after righteousness — that righteousness however which comes down from heaven, the righteousness that God gives, not that which man works for himself. For if man were not making a righteousness for himself, the same apostle would not have said of the Jews: "For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and wishing to establish their own righteousness, they are not subject to the righteousness of God." (Romans 10:3) Of such were these who understood not the bread that comes down from heaven; because being satisfied with their own righteousness, they hungered not after the righteousness of God. What is this, God's righteousness and man's righteousness? God's righteousness here means, not that wherein God is righteous, but that which God bestows on man, that man may be righteous through God. But again, what was the righteousness of those Jews? A righteousness wrought of their own strength on which they presumed, and so declared themselves as if they were fulfillers of the law by their own virtue. But no man fulfills the law but he whom grace assists, that is, whom the bread that comes down from heaven assists. "For the fulfilling of the law," as the apostle says in brief, "is charity." (Romans 13:10) Charity, that is, love, not of money, but of God; love, not of earth nor of heaven, but of Him who made Heaven and earth. Whence can man have that love? Let us hear the same: "The love of God," says he, "is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us." (Romans 5:5) Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food. (Tractates on the Gospel of John, 26:1)

This is hardly an interpretation coming from a Roman Catholic. No Romanist today would offer the same line of understanding John 6 the way St. Augustine did. The blessed Doctor makes it clear that the Bread of Life should be eaten by believing in Christ for Salvation. Thus we do not eat Christ literally as what Rome insists we should; we receive him by faith. St. Augustine elsewhere states in the same compilation of tractates:

"They said therefore unto Him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?" For He had said to them, "Labor not for the meat which perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life." "What shall we do?" they ask; by observing what, shall we be able to fulfill this precept? "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent." This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already. Faith is indeed distinguished from works, even as the apostle says, "that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law:" (Romans 3:28)

This goes out to those who insist on the literal interpretation of the eating of the Bread of Life mentioned in John 6. Well, which else it is but Rome?

-Jeph

Martin Luther's Account Of His Own Conversion

The following selection is taken from the Preface to the Complete Edition of Luther's Latin Writings. It was written by Luther in Wittenberg, 1545. This english edition is availble in Luther's Works Volume 34, Career of the Reformer IV (St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1960), p. 336-337. In the first few lines of this selection, Luther writes, "during that year;" the immediate context indicates he is refering to the year of Tetzel's death (July, 1519). This puts the date for Luther's conversion, in his own view, two years after the posting of the ninety-five theses.

Meanwhile, I had already during that year returned to interpret the Psalter anew. I had confidence in the fact that I was more skilful, after I had lectured in the university on St. Paul's epistles to the Romans, to the Galatias, and the one to the Hebrews. I had indeed been captivated with an extraordinary ardor for understanding Paul in the Epistle to the Romans. But up till then it was not the cold blood ab out the heart, but a single word in Chapter 1, "In it the righteousness of God is revealed," that had stood in my way. For I hated that word "righteousness of God," which, according to the use and custom of all the teachers, I had been taught to understand philosophically regarding the formal or active righteousness, as they call it, with which God is righteous and punishes the unrighteous sinner.

Though I lived as a monk without reproach, I felt that I was a sinner before God with an extremely disturbed conscience. I could not believe that he was placated by my satisfaction. I did not love, yes, I hated the righteous God who punishes sinners, and secretly, if not blasphemously, certainly murmuring greatly, I was angry with God, and said, "As if, indeed, it is not enough, that miserable sinners, eternally lost through original sin, are crushed by every kind of calamity by the law of the decalogue, without having God add pain to pain by the gospel and also by the gospel threatening us with his righteousness and wrath!" Thus I raged with a fierce and troubled conscience. Nevertheless, I beat importunately upon Paul at that place, most ardently desiring to know what St. Paul wanted.

At last, by the mercy of God, meditating day and night, I gave heed to the context of the words, namely, "In it the righteousness of God is revealed, as it is written, 'He who through faith is righteous shall live.'" There I began to understand that the righteousness of God is that by which the righteous lives by a gift of God, namely by faith. And this is the meaning: the righteousness of God is revealed by the gospel, namely, the passive righteousness with which merciful God justifies us by faith, as it is written, "He who through faith is righteous shall live." Here I felt that I was altogether born again and had entered paradise itself through open gates. There a totally other face of the entire Scripture showed itself to me. Thereupon I ran through the Scripture from memory. I also fount in other terms an analogy, as, the work of God, that is what God does in us, the power of God, with which he makes us wise, the strenght of God, the salvation of God, the glory of God.

And I extolled my sweetest word with a love as great as the hatred with which I had before hated the word "righteousness of God." Thus that place in Paul was for me truly the gate to paradise. Later I read Augustine's The Spirit and the Letter, where contrary to hope I found that he, too, interpreted God's righteousness in a similar way, as the righteousness with which God clothes us when he justifies us. Although this was heretofore said imperfectly and he did not explain all things concerning imputation clearly, it nevertheless was pleasing that God's righteousness with which we are justified was taught.

(Source)

A Brief Response To Those Who Say Christmas Is Pagan

"he was laid in a manger" (Lk. 2:7)

CHRISTMAS is a joyful season when families gather together to commemorate the incarnation of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. It is a celebration of God's love in giving us (sending) His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh so that sinners might be saved through Him (Jn. 3:16; Rom. 8:3). It is the Gospel which is (or which should be) the essence of Christmas.

Sadly, however, most people today who celebrate  the season don't really take what it means by heart. Worse, there are people out there who repudiate the celebration altogether, saying it is an evil tradition which is of pagan origin meant to worship Satan. These people I call the "anti-Christmas Gang." The gang offers three basic arguments against the tradition:

1. We are told nowhere in the Bible to celebrate Christ's birth.
2. The belief that Christ was born on December 25 is a myth. There is not a single concrete evidence that can prove Christ was born exactly on December 25. In fact, bible references points us to a different date which is most probably in the month of March.
3. The feast of Nativity was placed by the early Christians in ancient Rome on December 25 to correspond with the official feast day of a prominent pagan god in Rome named Sol Invictus. Thus when you celebrate Christmas, you are actually worshiping Satan.

Based on these assertions, they conclude that those who celebrate Christmas are not really honoring Christ but the Devil. But is that true? Can they prove that objectively? We shall see.

First, they argue that the Bible never commands us to celebrate Christmas. But I ask, is there any prohibition in the Bible against it? or perhaps indications in Scripture that it is sin to do so? How many times have we seen Paul commemorating the birth of Christ in his letters (cf. Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4-5; Php. 2:5-8)? Sure, Paul doesn't prescribe a specific date on which to commemorate Christ's nativity, but nobody's saying that celebrating Christ's nativity every December 25th is an absolute moral obligation either. The funny thing is that most (if not all) who demonize Christmas would still celebrate their own birthdays and wedding anniversaries without even asking themselves if they were ever told by the Bible to do so! 

Second, they say that December 25 is not really Christ's exact birth-date. But who cares? How is it a big deal? They could quote hundreds of references all day to prove that, but they would just end up taking down strawmen. I myself am convinced that nobody knows the exact date of Christ's birth, but this doesn't automatically mean it is ungodly to celebrate His birth on any chosen date. After all, we must commemorate Christ's birth everyday, aren't we? 

Lastly, the gang have this old chestnut that the choice of Dec. 25 as the official birthday of Jesus Christ was influenced by the pagan celebration of the feast of 'sun god' named Sol Invictus. Now in fairness to these anti-Christmas folks, it is somehow true that the feast of Sol Invictus had something to do with the choice of December 25; yet again, it cannot be proven that the early Christians had chosen the date to purposely identify Christ with the pagan god. Their intent was most probably to divert attention away from idolatry to the worshiping of the True God (which is indeed an admirable tactic to propagate the Gospel), not to paganize Christianity. But whichever the case, it is still an invalid reason to insist it is sinful to celebrate Christmas just because it corresponds to a pagan feast. Otherwise, those who were born on December 25 are also sinning if they celebrate their birthdays on that cursed date!

In conclusion:

Romans 14:4-6 (NIV): "Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand. One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers very day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God."

Peace out and Merry Christmas!

- Jeph

 

Did James Teach Salvation By Works? (Part II)

 (Read the first part here)

Sinners are justified (or counted as righteous) before God the moment they begin to trust in the promises of the Gospel with all their heart. Paul used Abraham as an example:

"What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.'" (Rom. 4:1-3, ESV)

According to Paul, Abraham wasn't made right with God by his works but by faith. However, James seems to contradict this idea when he said that Abraham was justified by his works. In James 2:21 to 24 we read:

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness'—and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." (ESV)

Here we are confronted with an apparent contradiction of statements between two divinely inspired New Testament writers. Was Abraham justified by works or by faith? How do we reconcile the seeming contradiction? Again, the key is in the respective context of the verses in question.

While both Paul and James use the same Greek word dikaioō (G1344) for "justified," they don't however make the same application of the word because they don't address the same subject matter (see the illustration below). Paul is discussing how a sinner is declared righteous before God through faith alone (Rom. 3:20). James, on the other hand, talks about how believers are shown to be righteous in the sight of other people by what they do. This is very evident in verse 18:

"But someone will say, 'You have faith; I have deeds.' Show me your faith without deeds, and I WILL SHOW YOU my faith by my deeds." (Jm. 2:18, 24, NIV)

Notice the "your" and "you" in the verse. James is not saying he will show God his faith by his deeds. Rather, James will show his faith to other people who cannot see through the heart of another (see also Mat. 5:16). There is no need for God to look over our deeds for Him to determine whether we have faith or not. He looks directly at the heart (1 Sam. 16:7, cf. 2 Chr. 6:30). This is why Paul says in Rom. 4:1-3 that if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but NOT BEFORE GOD.

When God saw Abraham's wholehearted trust in Him, He considered him as righteous in His sight right then and there (Rom. 4:1-3). Then prompted by his faith, Abraham obeyed the Lord as an outward confirmation that he was really made right with God through faith (Jm. 2:21-24). Here we see the teachings of Paul and James perfectly in harmony with each other. Paul is looking at the root of our salvation, while James is looking at the fruit of our salvation.

Conclusion:

James 2:14-24 is just one of the many passages in the Word of God detractors of the Evangelical faith are quick to take out of context in their desire to disprove the God-glorifying, biblical doctrine of Sola Fide. James is not saying here that we can earn our way to heaven by our works. No. Salvation is by grace alone, that is: "it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace" (Rom. 11:6, ESV).

True, James is concerned with the importance of good works, NOT as means to attain Salvation, but as necessary evidence of our saving faith in Christ to the glory of God who saved us gratuitously (cf. Mat. 5:14-16; Eph. 2:10).

Saving faith (Eph 1:11-14), the kind that results in following Christ’s example, comes from God (Phil 1:29; 2 Pet 1:1; John 6:44). If we have true, saving faith then we are heaven-bound (Heb 10:19-22; John 5:24; John 6:37; John 10:27-28; Rom 8:38-39). Whatever works come after that, whatever commands are followed, are because of a transformed heart (Deut. 30:6; Eze. 36:26-27; Eph 3:17), a new creation (2 Cor 5:17), and a spirit-filled life (Romans 8:9) all of which are indicative of the saving faith, not a contribution towards it (Eph 2:10; Phil 1:6; Phil 2:13).

To God be the Glory!

-Jeph

Did James Teach Salvation By Works? (Part I)

As an Evangelical Christian, I firmly believe that sinners are saved (justified or made right with God) as a free gift through faith alone in Jesus Christ. The Bible is crystal clear in affirming this doctrine:

"However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:..." (Rom. 4:5-6, NIV-UK)

"...he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,.." (Tit. 3:5, NIV-UK)

(See also: Jn. 1:12, 3:15-18, 36, 5:24, 6:27-29, 40, 47, 11:25-26, 40, 20:31; Acts 10:43, 13:39, 15:9-11, 16:30-31, 26:18; Rom. 1:16-17, 3:22-28; 4:1-4, 16, 24, 5:1, 9:30-33, 10:4, 9-11, 11:5; 1 Cor. 1:21; Gal. 2:16, 3:6, 8-11, 22, 24-26, 5:6;  Eph. 2:8-10, 3:12, 17; Php. 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:10; Heb. 4:3, 11:6; Jm. 2:23; 1 Jn. 5:1, 12-13; 1 Pet. 1:9)

If we are to pursue working our way to heaven, we need to be completely sinless in God's sight for us to be saved. The Bible explicitly tells us that "nothing impure will ever enter" God's kingdom (Rev. 21:27, NIV; cf. Rom. 2:7; Mat. 5:48). Why? Because God is a just and holy God. His eyes "are too pure to look on evil" (Hab. 1:13). Being just and holy, He will not let any sin go unpunished (Rom. 6:23). 

The question now is whether our works (good deeds) would be enough for us to attain the perfection that God requires. The answer, obviously, is NO because: "Everyone has sinned and fallen short of God's glorious standard" (Rom. 3:23, NCV; cf. Ec. 7:20). King David realized this and wrote in his psalm: "If you, LORD, kept a record of sins, Lord, who could stand?" (Psa. 130:3, NIV; cf. 143:2). In other words, no one can be saved by doing good or by obeying God's precepts (Rom. 3:20). It is through faith in Christ that sinners are made right with God on the sole basis of Christ's atoning death and perfect obedience to God's law (Mat. 5:17; Rom. 3:24-25, 5:19, 10:4; Gal. 4:4-5; 2 Cor. 5:21). This doctrine is widely known as Sola Fide (Latin meaning "faith only").

However, opponents of the Evangelical faith (who believe we can be saved by our own efforts) will quote James 2:14-24 to try and refute this doctrine. From this passage they conclude that faith is not sufficient to save sinners unless coupled with works. They put emphasis on verse 24 which says:

"You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." (NIV)

As Christians we are bound to believe that the Bible, in so far as it is divinely inspired (2 Tim. 3:15-16), never contradicts itself. That being said, the idea that James 2:14-24 teaches salvation by works must be immediately repudiated as we have already shown above how the Bible affirms overwhelmingly that we are saved through faith alone in Christ. The key to a correct understanding and sound interpretation of this passage in James must be sought from an honest exegetical examination of the passages in question.


What James is really up to

The apostle is not discussing how to attain salvation, but he is addressing the problem of people who falsely profess to have faith (and thereby claims they are saved). In verse 14 we read:

"What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?" (NIV)

These people (who are most likely Jewish converts to Christianity) profess to have faith but their claim is not supported by concrete evidence in their works. The apostle asked them a very important question, "Can such faith save him?" The answer is obviously negative: such faith won't save anybody. Why not? Because such faith is nothing more than a mere confession of faith or "mental assent" over theological facts as we can see in verse 19:

"You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder." (NIV)

Can you imagine how the Jewish Christians reacted when they read these words? When they saw the words, "You believe that there is one God," they might have immediately recalled Moses' proclamation in Deut. 6, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!" That was foundational! James says, however, that having a good theology is in itself unprofitable because even the demons believe, and shudder. The demons know the truth, and perhaps have a far better theology than all of us combined. But are they saved? No.

Paul wrote: "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” (Rom. 10:10-11). Saving faith is not merely assenting to the truths of God, but it primarily involves a wholehearted trust in Jesus Christ alone for Salvation (Psa. 37:5-6). Unlike the kind of faith which James criticizes in his letter, saving faith is living and active; it produces good works! (Eph. 2:10;1 Thes. 1:3). Thus, a true believer of the Gospel, being a new creation in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17), is expected to exhibit outward manifestations of his saving faith through his works (Gal. 5:6).

Some have argued that James taught that faith dies (or ceases to be genuine) with the absence of works, or that we should work in order for us to have a living (saving) faith when he said: "faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead" (Jm. 2:17, NKJV). But this is not what he was trying to say! The Greek word used for "dead" is nekros, which always denotes uselessness, insensitivity, and inability like that of a rotten corpse. It is the same word used in Rom. 4:19 to describe Abraham and Sarah's inability to bear a child. Now it would sound completely absurd to say that the couple became barren because they don't bear children when it is the other way around. Correspondingly, you don't tell dead people in the cemetery to get up on their knees and work their fingers to the bone so that they could once again live! That's absurd.

James, therefore, is simply telling us that dead faith is recognized by its lack of works for "a tree is known by its fruits" (Mat. 12:33). It is not the vitality or existence of saving faith which depends upon good works; it is the converse. True believers do good works because they have a genuine, living faith in Christ.

(End of part I. Click here to read the second part)

-Jeph

The Spiritual Condition Of A Spiritually Dead Sinner

Most Christians think the main reason why people don't respond positively when we share to them the good news of Salvation is either we present the gospel poorly, or the prospect was just an idiot. The truth is: it is not the evangelist's job to convert sinners, nor is it on the sinner's power to convert himself, and here's the reason why:

1. Sinners are dead (spiritually) in trespasses and sin / incapable of doing any spiritual good (Eph. 2:1; Rom. 3:9-12):
2. Sinners are slaves under the power of Sin (Jn. 8:34; Ac. 26:17-18; Rom. 3:9, 6:20)
3. Sinners were taken captive by Satan to do his will (Jn. 8:44; 2 Tim. 2:25-26)
4. Sinners cannot/does not come to God (Jn. 6:44, 65; Rom. 3:11)
5. Sinners cannot obey God's law (Rom. 3:9-12, 8:7-8)
6. Sinners cannot understand spiritual things (Mat. 13:14; Rom. 3:11; Eph. 4:18; 1 Cor. 2:14; 2 Cor. 4:4)
7. Sinners cannot savingly believe the Gospel (1 Cor. 2:14, cf. Job. 14:4)
8. Sinners cannot change/convert on their own (Jer. 13:23)
9. Sinners do not seek after God (Rom. 3:11, 10:20)
10. The sinner's heart is hardened and unreceptive (Ezek. 36:26-27; Eph. 4:18)
11. The sinner's heart is desperately wicked and beyond cure (Gen. 6:5; Ec. 9:3; Jer. 17:9; Mr. 7:21-23)

We, Christians, were once dead in our trespasses and sins and are by nature children of wrath like the rest of mankind (Eph. 2:1-3). But by God's own will and mercy he quickened us by His Spirit through the word of truth so that we may choose Him and be saved (Jam. 1:18, cf. Eze. 36:26-27, 37:2-6). So it is not our own doing that we are saved. Salvation is of the Lord alone. Even faith through which we are saved is God's gift!

"He went on to say, 'This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him.'" (Jn. 6:65, NIV)

Soli Deo Gloria!

-Jeph

Why Modern "Evangelism" Is Not Evangelism At All

"The nature of Christ’s salvation is woefully misrepresented by the present-day “evangelist.” He announces a Savior from hell rather than a Savior from sin. And that is why so many are fatally deceived, for there are multitudes who wish to escape the Lake of fire who have no desire to be delivered from their carnality and worldliness." ~ Arthur W. Pink

* * * * * *

St. Clement Of Rome On Justification By Grace

In his first epistle to the Corinthians (which was written towards the end of the 1st century AD), St. Clement of Rome wrote:

...All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (cf. Rom. 4:1-6; Eph. 2:8-9; Tit. 3:5; Heb. 11:11-33)

What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! (cf. Rom. 6:1-2). But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work (cf. Eph. 2:10; Tit. 3:7-8)....

Exactly the evangelical position on Justification. While we are not saved by our works but by faith in Christ, we do not neglect the importance of good works as the necessary outward evidence of our saving faith. So after all it wasn't really Luther who invented the doctrine of Sola Gratia and Sola Fide. I believe it's not Clement either, nor Paul, nor any of the apostles, but Jesus Christ himself:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (Jn. 3:16-18, KJV)

-Jeph

Thank You For Loving Me

Hindi talaga ako nagsasawang pakinggan ang kantang "Thank You For Loving Me" ni Tommy Walker mula noong una ko itong marining hanggang sa kasalukuyan. Una ko itong napakinggan sa isang JIL church sa Calamba (noong bagong mananampalataya pa lang ako), at talaga namang tumagos sa puso ko ang bawat letra ng awiting ito.

Sino at ano lang ba ako sa paningin ng Diyos? Kung ibulid man ako ng Panginoon sa impyerno, makatarungan siyang gawin iyon sapagkat ako'y isang makasalanan. Wala naman siyang obligasyong iligtas ako eh. Gayunpaman, pinili niya ako't tinawag upang maging kanyang sariling anak, hindi dahil sa kung sino ako o anong magagawa ko, kundi ayon lamang sa kanyang habag at biyaya (Efeso 1:4-5, 10-11).

Ang galing diba? Yan ang pinaka nagbibigay sa akin ng dahilan upang patuloy na magpuri at maglingkod sa kanya. At sa tuwing naririnig ko ang awiting "Thank You For Loving Me", hindi ko mapigilang magpasalamat sa kanya nang taos puso. Maraming salamat sa Diyos sa napakagandang awiting ito.

Thank You For Loving Me
by: Tommy Walker

What love the Father has lavished on us
That we should be called His sons and daughters
Precious in His sight
Greater love this world had never seen
When He hung on that tree
O why would He do such a thing
For dirty sinners like you and me?

Chorus:
O God thank You for loving me
When on the cross You made history
Lord You died for me
Forever my praise will go to Thee
O God thank You for choosing me
To be Your child and bear Your name
O Jesus I will never cease to sing Your praise

Verse 2:
Your love is patient and humble and kind
It's greater than all my sin
It always protects and trusts and hopes
And will have no end
It's Your love that lifted me up from the depths
Set my feet on a solid rock
With a firm place to stand
Lord I always will trust in Your loving hand

Bridge:
How wide how long
How high how deep
How endless is Your love for me
How wide how long
How high how deep
How endless is Your love for me