How to read the Bible and remain Catholic

The Bible, God's written Word, teaches many many things that don't agree with the official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. For example, Rome teaches that Mary is mediatrix of all grace from God, yet the Bible says, "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time" (1 Tim. 2:5-6; cf. Jn. 14:6). Rome teaches Catholics to venerate carved images, yet the Bible says "You are not to make worthless idols, images, or pillars for yourselves, nor set up for yourselves carved images to bow down to them in the land, because I am the LORD your God" ( Lev. 26:1; cf. Exo 20:4-5; Isa. 42:8; Ac. 17:29). Rome teaches that one merits eternal life through faith and works, yet the Bible is clear that it is "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; cf. Jn. 3:16-18, 5:24, 6:47; Rom. 3:23-25). These are just few of the countless theological clashes between the Bible and Rome's teachings.

 So, how can a Catholic read the Bible and remain Catholic? Here's a simple advice from a Catholic blogger:

IF YOU WANT TO STUDY THE BIBLE AND STILL REMAIN CATHOLIC, TAKE IT FROM A CATHOLIC PRIEST, OK? (source)

Or better off, don't even dare open your Bible, else you'd lose your mind (according to an old pinoy superstition). Either way, I think this Catholic blogger knows what he's saying, and I'm glad he's aware of the fact that Catholics may take risk of losing their faith to Rome's teachings by simply reading the Bible. So instead of examining the Scriptures daily to see if Rome's teachings were true (as was the practice of the Bereans in Ac. 17:11), you must completely and blindly submit to everything the priest is saying.

"And he said to them, 'Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.' And he said to them, 'You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!'" (Mat. 7:6-9)

-Jeph

My Take on the Eternal Destiny of the Unborn & Babies who Die in Infancy (A Response to Ptr. Steve Griffin)

"Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have
prepared praise." (Matthew 21:16, ESV)

Ptr. Steve Griffin, a reformed baptist pastor who runs the blog Just Thinking (and writing), recently wrote an article concerning the question whether hell is the eternal destination of the unborn and born babies dying in infancy. Though I agree with his answer, namely, that all such are going to heaven instead of hell, there are points in his treatment which I didn't find agreeable and biblically sound.

To summarize Ptr. Griffin's argument (the way I understand it), the unborn and born babies who die will not go to hell because they can't be liable for the sin of our first parents. While they are, as all humans, conceived with a sinful nature, they are still somewhat worthy to enter heaven in that they haven't done any actual sins, and for this reason the notion of baby-faith (i.e. that saving faith is mysteriously infused by God in the unborn and dying babies before their death) should be regarded as unnecessary.

His own words (original emphasis replaced with mine):

To be sure we are not born neutral or innocent or pure. We are born sinners by nature. But are we, as preborn/born babies, sinners by choice? That is, do babies enact their wills to transgress God’s law? “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4). Do preborn/born babies willfully transgress the Law of God? Are they immoral when they awaken their exhausted parents just because they’re hungry or startled? Are they being sinfully selfish? 

(Please note: I am not speaking of children who have the mental/moral capacity to lie, disrespect/disobey their mommy and daddy, or hurt others; I am referring to preborn/born babies.) 

Hence, I think it germane to our conversation to distinguish between sinful nature and sinful behavior. Because of Adam’s sin we are born with a sinful nature, a propensity for evil. We are born sinners. But is the sinner damned to hell because of Adam’s sin? It seems the sinner shall be judged, not for the sins of Adam, but for his own transgressions of the law. 

“And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books” (Revelation 20:12). What evil works have preborn/born babies committed? It would seem the answer to that question is “none.” (In so saying, we are not denying or even addressing our sin in Adam per Romans 5:12; again, c.f. Romans 9:11).

Ptr. Griffin denies that humans are damned merely on account of Adam's original sin, but what of Romans 5:18 which says that Adam's "trespass led to condemnation for all men"? (see also Romans 5:12). The traditional interpretation of this verse (see Council of Orange AD 529, Canon 2) is that all of mankind are actually one with Adam when he sinned, and so we are as much as liable (and worthy of condemnation) for his transgression. This is why Ephesians 2:3 says we are "by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind." If we cannot be condemned for Adam's sin, then what is the basis of this wrath which is upon us by nature/birth?

It is true and I agree that all men will be "judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books" (Revelations 20:21), but in so far as Adam was mankind's federal head and representative of the human race (just as Christ is the federal head and representative of the race of the elect - Romans 5:12-19), his sin was also OUR sin. It's as though we have actually committed the same sin ourselves. According to the London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689), under the 6th Chapter, acrticles two and three:

2. Our first parents, by this sin, fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and we in them. For from this, death came upon all: all becoming dead in sin and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. 

3. They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and their corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. Their descendants are therefore conceived in sin, and are by nature the children of wrath, the servants of sin, and the subjects of death and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus sets them free.

I'm not sure if Ptr. Griffin's a subscriber of LBCF. But I assume he is, since he claims himself to be a reformed baptist and that I saw some of his posts where he also quotes from the confession.

Anyway, the Bible is clear that in Adam we all sinned. Actual sins increase our guilt, but we are deserving of condemnation on account of original sin alone. This does not excempt unborn humans and those who die in infancy. Yet of course I believe none of those little ones really end up in hell by God's mercy. Though I admit I can't find any explicit statement from Scripture which says so, nonetheless I believe God is able to save them. While Ptr. Griffin believes dying infants can go to heaven without being born again and having faith, I would stick with what the Bible says in John 3:3 and Hebrews 11:6. Nothing is impossible with God, and this is clearly seen in Luke 1:41.

Praise God!

-Jeph

BATA PA

Batang Bata Ka Pa

Batang-bata ka pa at marami ka pang
Kailangang malaman at intindihin sa mundo
Yan ang totoo
Nagkakamali ka kung akala mo na
Ang buhay ay isang mumunting paraiso lamang

Batang-bata ka lang at akala mo na
Na alam mo na ang lahat na kailangan mong malaman buhay ay di ganyan
Tanggapin mo na lang ang katotohanan
Na ikaw ay isang musmos lang na wala pang alam
Makinig ka na lang, makinig ka na lang

Ganyan talaga ang buhay lagi kang nasasabihan
Pagkat ikaw ay bata at wala pang nalalaman
Makinig ka sa ‘king payo pagkat musmos pa lamang
At malaman nang maaga ang wasto sa kamalian


Batang-bata ako at nalalaman ko ‘to
Inaamin ko rin na kulang ang aking nalalaman at nauunawaan
Ngunit kahitganyan ang kinalalagyan
Alam mo na may karapatan angbawat nilalang kahit bata pa man, kahit bata pa man

Nais ko sanang malaman ang mali sa katotohanan
Sariling pagraranas ang aking pamamagitan
Imulat ang isipan sa mga kulay ng buhay
Maging tunay na malaya ‘sang katangi-tanging bata


 -Apo Hiking Society


Gustong gusto ko ang awiting ito. Kapag naririnig ko ito lumalakas ang  paniniwala ko na ang mga kabataan pa din ang pag asa ng ating bayan.

Ngunit bakit sinisikil ang boses ng mga kabataan ? Bakit laging sinasabi na "bata pa" ,"ito ay hindi pa ang tamang oras" , "makinig kana lang muna" , "kulang ka pa sa karanasan ".? Tulad ng klasik na awit ng Apo. Kung kabataan ang pag asa ng bayan bakit pinipigilan ang mga kabataan na maki alam sa problema ng lipunan ? Lagi kong na aalala ang laging sinasabi ng mga matatanda na " experience is the best teacher". Kung tama ang kanilang tinuran, bakit nating pinipigilan ang mga kabataan ? Oo alam ko na kulang pa ang aming karanasan at nalalaman. Kulang pa din ang aming mga pagpaplano. Minsan padalos dalos kame ng desisyon. Kadalasan ay nagkakamali sa mga desisyon. Pero ibig bang sabihin nun ay hinde na pwedeng mag desisyon ang mga kabataan. Kung "experience' ang best teacher bakit hinde hayaang maki alam ang mga kabataan sa problema ng lipunan.

Kung kasaysayan ang ating titingnan. Sino ba ang nagdala ng pagbabago sa lipunan ? Saan nagsimula ang mga malalaking mga pagbabago ng mundo ? Minsan nga mas mabilis pa ang solusyon ng mga kabataan kumpara sa solusyon ng mga matatanda.

Ultimo sa Biblia merong mga batang tinawag ang Dios para gamitin Niya at magdala ng pagbabago.

Jeremias 1


7Nguni't sinabi sa akin ng Panginoon, Huwag mong sabihin, Ako'y bata: sapagka't saan man kita susuguin ay paroroon ka, at anomang iutos ko sa iyo ay sasalitain mo.
8Huwag kang matakot dahil sa kanila; sapagka't ako'y sumasaiyo upang iligtas kita, sabi ng Panginoon.
9Nang magkagayo'y iniunat ng Panginoon ang kaniyang kamay, at hinipo ang aking bibig; at sinabi sa akin ng Panginoon, Narito, inilagay ko ang aking mga salita sa iyong bibig:
10Tingnan mo, aking pinapagpupuno ka sa araw na ito sa mga bansa at sa mga kaharian, upang magalis at magbagsak at upang magsira at magwasak, upang magtayo at magtatag. 

Nasaan ang mga matatanda nong panahon na iyan ? Sino ang nautusan para magdala ng pagbabago ?

Ang aking katanungan, gusto ba nating magkaroon ng mga responsableng mga lider sa mga susunod na henerasyon.? Yung matatag ang mga tuhod ? Yung mga "hardcore" kumbaga ? Kung ating sagot ay oo, huwag nating sikilin ang sigaw ng mga kabataan. Huwag nating ipagdamot sa knila ang kanilang kinabukasan.

Kung hinde ngayon... Kelan pa nila mararanasan para mag desisyon para bansa at kinabukasan ?

Kung hinde ngayon ? Kelan pa ?

Statement of Faith

Last night Jeph (the author of this blog) invited me to co-author him in this blog. One of our agreement was to create our statement of faith that we both agree.

Statement of Faith, we can see it on churches, church and para church websites. We can read blogs, forums and discussion groups debating over different statement of faith. 

While I am trying to read the existing statement of faith that is existing on this blog, I have asked myself. What is my statement of faith ? What are the things that I really believe ? Some, if not most of the Christians today don't have a clear knowledge on what we really believe. Because of the rise of post modernist philosophy the importance of "sound doctrine" was almost forgotten by some Christians. Some are "allergic" about doctrines and put correct living as the ONLY way of Christianity. I am not against on the importance of correct living (Matthew 7:21) but we should not forget that for us to live right then we need to believe right.

In this article I will discuss the important of knowing the doctrines of scripture and it's application to our lives. 

Difference of truth and lie

Jesus said at John 8:32

32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

For us to be free we need to have a clear distinction between truth and lie. Between good and evil. We can't evade issues about doctrine just because we can't understand those. If Christians will not hold on truth then what will you think will happen ?

There is an attack now to the body of Christ. There are "professing" Christians who are influenced by Post modern thought. One of the prominent of those claiming to be Christian is Brian Mclaren. McLaren said:

I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all!) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu or Jewish contexts … rather than resolving the paradox via pronouncements on the eternal destiny of people more convinced by or loyal to other religions than ours, we simply move on … To help Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, and everyone else experience life to the full in the way of Jesus (while learning it better myself), I would gladly become one of them (whoever they are), to whatever degree I can, to embrace them, to join them, to enter into their world without judgment but with saving love as mine has been entered by the Lord (A Generous Orthodoxy, 260, 262, 264).

If we will not hold the truth we are compromising and denying the Lord Jesus Christ and His Words. He said:

I am THE way, THE truth and THE life.. (John 14:6)

There He indicates that in our faith there is a clear distinction between truth and lie. If our Lord claimed that He is THE truth (it’s an absolute statement) then why we are afraid to hold and to declare the truth of God ?

The Era of lie.

2 Timothy 4

2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage —with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Imagine your (Christian) friend believe in a myth (not true), what will happen ? Imagine that I believe unicorn what will happen ? 

That is what happening now. Because Christians don’t want to preach solid truths from the Word of God, people tend to listen to preachers that are not preaching the cross but preaches motivation and self esteem instead of faith. Because Christians don’t want to make a position about LGBT some tend to listen to Oprah. 

Do we want to live in a place that lie is the basis of life and not truth ?

Conclusion.

Since this is my first post in this blog, I will make a lengthy article. I will by a quote.

A lie repeated often becomes truth

Now Christians, do we want the world to continue to hear lies ?

Dr. Millard J. Erickson on whether the gift of Speaking In Tongues is still being distributed by the Holy Spirit in the Church today

Dr. Millard J. Erickson wrote:

Dr. Millard J. Erickson

In my judgment it is not possible to determine with any certainty whether the contemporary charismatic phenomena are indeed gifts of the Holy Spirit. There simply is no biblical evidence indicating the time of fulfillment of the prediction that tongues will cease. It is questionable at best to conclude on the basis of the differences between the verbs in 1 Corinthians 13:8 that tongues will cease at one time, and prophecy and knowledge at another. Nor is that historical evidence clear and conclusive. The situation here is somewhat like the situation with respect to the doctrine of apostolic succession. There is a great deal of evidence on both sides. Each group is able to cite an impressive amount of data which are to its advantage, bypassing the data presented by the other group. This lack of historical conclusiveness is not a problem, however. For even history proved that the gift of tongues has ceased, there is nothing to prevent God from reestablishing it. On the other hand, historical proof that the gift has been present through the various eras of the church would not validate the present phenomena.

What must we do, then, is to evaluate each case on its own merits. This does not mean that we are to sit in judgment on the spiritual experience or the spiritual life of other professing Christians. What it does mean is that we cannot assume that everyone who claims to have had a special experience of the Holy Spirit's working has really had one. Scientific studies have discovered enough non-Spirit-caused parallels to warn us against being naively credulous about every claim. Certainly not every exceptional religious experience can be of divine origin, unless God is a very broadly ecumenical and tolerant being indeed, who even grants special manifestations of his Spirit to some who make no claim to Christian faith and may actually be opposed to it. Certainly if demonic forces could produce imitations of divine miracles in biblical times (i.e., the magicians in Egypt were able to imitate the plagues up to a certain point), the same way be true today as well. Conversely, however, no conclusive case can be made for the contention that such gifts are not for today and cannot occur at the present time. Consequently, one cannot rule in an priori and categorical fashion that a claim of glossolalia is spurious. In fact, it may be downright dangerous, in the light of Jesus' warnings regarding blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, to attribute specific phenomena to demonic activity.

In the final analysis, whether the Bible teaches that the Spirit dispenses special gifts today is not an issue of great practical consequence. For even if he does, we are not to set our lives to seeking them. He bestows them sovereignly: he alone determine the recipients (1 Cor. 12:11). If he chooses to give us a special gift, he will do so regardless of whether we expect it or seek it. What we are commanded to do (Eph. 5:18) is be filled with the Holy Spirit (a present imperative, suggesting ongoing action). This is not so much a matter of our getting more of the Holy Spirit; presumably all of us posses the Spirit in his entirety. It is, rather, a matter of his possessing more of our lives. Each of us is to aspire to giving the Holy Spirit full control of our lives. When that happens, our lives will manifest whatever gifts God intends for us to have, along with all the fruit and acts of his empowering that he wishes to display through us. It is to be remembered, as we noted earlier, that no one gift is for every Christian, nor is any gift more significant than the others.

Of more importance, in many ways, than the receiving certain gifts is the fruit of the Spirit. These virtues are, in Paul's estimation, the real evidence of the Spirit at work in Christians. Love, joy, and peace in an individual's life are the surest signs of a vital experience with the Spirit. In particular, Paul stresses love as more desirable than any gifts, no matter how spectacular (1 Cor. 13:1-3).

But what is proper procedure with regard to an actual case of modern-day public practice of what is claimed to be the biblical gift of glossolalia? First, no conclusions should be drawn in advance as to whether it is genuine or not. Then, the procedure laid down by Paul so long ago should be followed. Thus, if one speaks in tongues, there should be an interpreter, so that the group as a whole may be edified. Only one should speak at a time and no more than two or three at a session (1 Cor. 14:27). If no one is present to interpret, whether the speaker or some other person, then the would-be speaker should keep silence in the church and restrict the use of tongues to personal devotional practice (v. 28). We must not prohibit speaking in tongues (v. 39); on the other hand, we are nowhere commanded to seek this gift.

Finally, it is to be noted that the emphasis in Scripture is upon the one who bestows the gifts rather than upon those who receive them. God frequently performs miraculous works without involving human agents. We read, for example, in James 5:14-15 that the elders of the church are to pray for the sick. It is the prayer of faith, not a human miracle-worker, that is said to save them. Whatever be the gift, it is the edification of the church and the glorification of God that are of ultimate importance.

-Christian Theology, pp. 880-82 under chapter 41

Divine Predestination: A Southern Baptist Teaching

The first SBTS classroom, formerly the Greenville First
Baptist Church. (Photo courtesy: SBTS official website)

It's really sad when self-professed "Bible-believing" Christians reject God's truth revealed in Scripture in exchange for man-made ideas that the world would deem more logical and palatable. About a week ago, I had a nice intellectual discussion with a good friend concerning the doctrine of predestination. This godly lady, a fellow Southern Baptist whom I have known for quite some time now, claimed that if my interpretation of Romans 9 is correct, then it is pointless to go and preach the gospel to all nation. If God "has mercy on whomever he wills" (Rom. 9:18) and in fact chooses to show mercy only to some with regard to salvation (Rom. 9:18-24; i.e. Matt. 13:11; Luk. 10:22; Jn. 6:63-65) and that none of those whom God has chosen will finally perish (Jn. 6:39-40, 44-45), whatever change would it make whether or not we fulfill Christ's Great Commission? I had anticipated this kind of objection from her, and I have responded by saying that as far as my personal experience is concerned, this glorious doctrine of election never killed my passion for reaching the lost, but instead rekindled it. The doctrine of predestination should not be regarded as a strange doctrine that Christians should fear or avoid. Aside from its being clearly taught in Scripture, it has been in fact a Southern Baptist teaching ever since (though neglected by many Southern Baptists today). Unfortunately very few Southern Baptists are aware of their theological heritage that used to be "reformed." Even for the most part of today's Christianity, the humanistic (and erroneous) notions of Pelagianism (i.e. that man should first turn to God before God can do any move) is widely embraced.

In this paper I will try by the help of God's grace to provide a brief presentation of the fact that the doctrine of Predestination is indeed a Southern Baptist teaching. May God use this simple work for His own purposes.

Predestination in the SBTS Abstract of Principles (1858)

I won't be citing very long references here, but would focus only on a single old document from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary archive. The name of the document is Abstract of Principles formulated in 1858 before the official founding of the SBTS a year later. The intent of the document was to maintain doctrinal purity among the teachers and leaders of the seminary, and to oppose all kinds of false teaching and doctrines. Affirming all the doctrines stated in the document was mandatory to all Southern Baptist scholars who would want to assume professorship in the seminary. In its introduction, we read (emphasis mine):

Every professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist church; and all persons accepting professorships in this seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be considered grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees, to wit:

So, what's so special about the Abstract of Principles? It is the fact that the document is essentially Calvinistic in its anthropology and soteriology. For example, concerning the fall of man it states (emphasis mine):

VI. THE FALL OF MAN

God originally created Man in His own image, and free from sin; but, through the temptation of Satan, he transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original holiness and righteousness; whereby his posterity inherit a nature corrupt and wholly opposed to God and His law, are under condemnation, and as soon as they are capable of moral action, become actual transgressors.

This is perfectly in agreement with what the Scripture says about the man's fallen nature being "hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:7-8; see also Rom. 3:9-12, 1 Cor. 2:14, 2 Cor. 4:4, & Eph. 2:1-3). Being spiritually dead in Sin, the fallen man is not able to fulfill any spiritual duty accompanying salvation (i.e. faith & repentance) unless he is first quickened by God monergisitcally. This means we are spiritually regenerated by God, not in response to our faith, but in order that we may be drawn to saving faith in Christ. The Abstract of Principles agrees with this teaching, and I quote (emphasis mine):

VIII. REGENERATION 

Regeneration is a change of heart, wrought by the Holy Spirit, who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the Word of God, and renewing their whole nature, so that they love and practice holiness. It is a work of God’s free and special grace alone.

Again, this is in total agreement with Scripture which says: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Pe. 1:3). Note the verse didn't say, "we first had our living hope (saving faith) and then God made us born again," but rather, "he has caused us to be born again *TO* a living hope." Thus, our conversion (i.e. saving faith & repentance) is not our own doing. It is God's gift of grace, and this humbling truth is affirmed in the next two articles in the Abstract of Principles (emphasis mine):

IX. REPENTANCE 

Repentance is an evangelical grace, wherein a person being led by the Holy Spirit, made sensible of the manifold evil of his sin, humbleth himself for it, with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrence, with a purpose and endeavor to walk before God so as to please Him in all things. 

X. FAITH 

Saving faith is the belief, on God’s authority, of whatsoever is revealed in His Word concerning Christ; accepting and resting upon Him alone for justification and eternal life. It is wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and is accompanied by all other saving graces, and leads to a life of holiness.

The Bible says, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (Jn. 6:29). Again, "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" (Php. 1:26). Again, "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). Again, "And they glorified God, saying, 'Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life'" (Ac. 11:18). And again, "...correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will" (2 Tim. 2:25-26). Clearly, we have nothing to boast of our own conversion because it was God who has granted us this gift according to His gracious predestination (1 Cor. 1:28-31; Eph. 1:3-5, 11). The Abstract of Principles states clearly (emphasis mine),

V. ELECTION 

Election is God’s eternal choice of some persons unto everlasting life-not because of foreseen merit in them, but of His mere mercy in Christ-in consequence of which choice they are called, justified and glorified.

By "foreseen merits," the AoP refers to all kinds of human worth. Merits always means worth, and anything given according to worth cannot be properly called grace (Rom. 4:4, 11:5-6). Thus, when the Bible says God predestined us "for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace" (Eph. 1:5-6), it actually denies all kinds of human worth as basis for its attainment. In other words, it is unconditional. "For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy" (Rom. 9:15-16). Moreover, this choice is not merely a divine initiative in an attempt to save sinners, but it is the basis upon which the saving benefits of Christ's work is communicated effectually to those chosen of God:

[29]For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. [30]And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. [31]What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? [32]He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? (Rom. 8:29-32)

Hence, none of those whom God has chosen for Salvation will totally fall away and perish. All true Christians, being chosen of God from eternity past and preserved by God through His grace, will persevere in the faith unto the end and finally attain to final glorification (Jud. 1:24). The 13th article of the Abstract of Principles reads,

XIII. PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS 

Those whom God hath accepted in the Beloved, and sanctified by His Spirit, will never totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere to the end; and though they may fall through neglect and temptation, into sin, whereby they grieve the Spirit, impair their graces and comforts, bring reproach on the Church, and temporal judgments on themselves, yet they shall be renewed again unto repentance, and be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.

Paul expressed the same confidence in his words: "And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Php. 1:6). And again, "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 8:38-39).

Does this mean men have no freedom of choice? Nope. Back in the third (3rd) article of the Abstract of Principles, we read (emphasis mine):

IV. PROVIDENCE 

God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not in any wise to be the author or approver of sin nor to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures.

In other words, God's sovereign kingship over all His creation is perfectly compatible with man's free agency and responsibility (Prov. 19:21). When a sinner is drawn by God to saving faith in Christ (according to His eternal decree of predestination), the sinner freely chooses Christ and attains salvation (Psa. 65:4; Jn. 6:37, 44-45; Ac. 16:14). But when a sinner is passed over by God to be left on his own sinful nature (i.e. not by infusing evil in his heart, but by permitting him to do just whatever he pleases according to the inmost desires of his naturally sinful heart - Jer. 13:23, 17:9; Mat. 12:33), the sinner freely rebels against God and deservedly ends up in hell because of his own sins (Rom. 1:21-26, 3:9-12, 8:7-8). All of these come to pass "according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will" (Eph. 1:11; cf. Rom. 11:35).

Predestination and Evangelism

Now let's turn to the question whether the doctrine of predestination kills the Christian's passion for evangelism. Does it? Perhaps, if you malign or pervert the doctrine. Misinformed people often think of predestination as God's decreeing all the end (outcome) without also decreeing the means to accomplish those end. Thus, they conclude that predestination makes evangelism (and all Christian virtues) completely superfluous. Such is a perverted view of the biblical doctrine of predestination and must be clarified by those who know the truth. The Baptist Faith & Message, Southern Baptist Convention's official statement of beliefs, is clear enough concerning this matter:

V. GOD'S PURPOSE OF GRACE 

Election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which He regenerates, justifies, sanctifies, and glorifies sinners. It is consistent with the free agency of man, and comprehends all the means in connection with the end. It is the glorious display of God's sovereign goodness, and is infinitely wise, holy, and unchangeable. It excludes boasting and promotes humility. 

God's decree of election (i.e. predestination unto Salvation), according to the BF&M, "comprehends all the means in connection with the end." Evangelism is one of the means through which God calls His elect unto salvation (Ac. 13:48l Jas. 1:18), hence the necessity for preaching the Gospel to all men since we don't know who the elect are (Mat. 28:19-20; Mark 16:15). In his book Christian Theology, the basic textbook we used back when I was still studying at the Southern Baptist School of Theology (Makati), Dr. Millard J. Erickson stated:

Predestination does not nullify incentive for evangelism and missions. We do not know who the elect and the nonelect are, so we must continue to spread the Word. Our evangelistic efforts are God's means to bring the elect to salvation. God's ordaining of the end includes the ordaining of the means to that end as well. The knowledge that missions are God's means is a strong motive for the endeavor and gives us confidence that it will prove successful. (Christian Theology, Unabridged one-volume edition, pp. 927-928 under Chapter 43)

The thought that God never fails to bring His elect unto Salvation (when He calls them inwardly by His Word) should be, to a Christian, a ground for motivation to go out into the world to preach the Gospel to the lost, not a license to be idle and unproductive. The doctrine of predestination comforts us whenever our message is rejected by sinners because we are reminded that it isn't our job to convert them; it is God's, and so when we have done our best, we can leave the matter to Him. Jesus Himself didn't win all His hearers (Jn. 6:64), but He found comfort in the fact that all those whom the Father gives Him will surely come to Him (Jn. 6:37, 44-45, 10:3-5, 26-29).

Conclusion: 

The biblical doctrine of predestination held by Calvinists, as shown in the SBTS Abstract of Principles (1858), is a Southern Baptist teaching. In fact, even before the founding of the SBC, it has already been a Baptist teaching tracing back to the London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689), and ultimately, to Scriptures. This doctrine does not kill evangelism but mobilizes it. Many godly men thorough the history of Christendom held to the glorious doctrine of predestination, and are proved to be ardent preachers of God's Word to the lost. I am talking about men like Martin Luther, C.H. Spurgeon, Adrew Fuller, William Carey, John Gill, John Piper, and John Calvin himself, just to name a few.

Again, the main purpose of this paper is not for any Calvinistic triumphalism, but to present a historical truth, namely, that the Southern Baptist Convention is Calvinistic in its theological roots. I'm not saying that one cannot be Southern Baptist if he/she refuses to subscribe to the tenets of Calvinism. The SBC allows for both Calvinists and non-Calvinists to remain in the convention, and neither any of them should pass condemnation to another. My point here is that Calvinism should not be considered heresy by Southern Baptist people. Otherwise, we should be willing to accept that the SBC was born of heretical roots (since it can be proven from history that most of its founding fathers are outspoken Calvinists).

To God alone be the glory!

-Jeph