The Unpardonable Sin

On another website, someone asked about the famous "unpardonable sin." Below is my response (starting with the full context of the passage).

Then a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute was brought to Jesus, and he healed him, so that the mute man spoke and saw. All the crowds were amazed, and were saying, "This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?"

But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "This man casts out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons."

And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, "Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand. If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges. But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can anyone enter the strong man's house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters. Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." [Matthew 12:22-32; NASB]

We find another miracle of Jesus, one wherein he casts out a demon that had rendered a poor man blind and mute (v. 22). This causes the people to wonder if he was the "Son of David" - in other words, the Messiah (v. 23). The Pharisees hear this, and, out of jealousy, come up with the excuse that Jesus is only doing this by the power of Beelzebul (another word for Satan) - in other words, he's casting out demons by using a demonic authority (v. 24). Interestingly enough, the rabbinical sources that speak on Jesus do talk of his miracles, and they too attribute his miracles to witchcraft and demonic power.

Knowing their thoughts, and obviously desiring to nip all this in the bud right away, Jesus addresses them and presents two reasons why their logic does not work:

1) They believed demons were pitted against demons (vv. 25-26) - While it is possible for exorcisms to be faked by demons (for we cannot assume that Muslim or Hindu exorcisms are legitimate, as demons fear no one but the true God), the Pharisees were not arguing that Jesus was in league with the demons to create ruses, but rather that Jesus was using a higher demonic authority to expel demons who were going about their job. By this logic, Satan's house was divided, and there was a demonic civil war going on. This is what Jesus means by "If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?" Later on, in verse 29, Christ will give a more accurate view of the situation: it is actually another, non-demonic power at work against the demonic powers.

2) They had disciples who exorcised demons too (v. 27) - Jesus was not the only one known to cast out demons, though he was certainly the only one to cast them out of his own authority and by his own command. In any case, the Pharisees did not attribute every single exorcism to demonic power, but were seeking to disprove Christ's Messianic status. When Christ says "they will be your judges," he does not necessarily mean that the other Jewish exorcists will stand up and judge them, but rather that the Pharisees' hypocrisy in holding up Jesus to one standard and the other exorcists to another standard will be used against them when they are judged. To explain this phraseology, imagine if someone says, "This video tape that recorded your crime will condemn you." This doesn't mean the video tape is going to bang a gavel and pronounce sentencing, it simply means the video tape will be a damning piece of evidence used in the court of law.

Having proven this logic does not work, Christ now presents the only conclusion: "If I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you" (v. 28). In other words, Christ's exorcisms were part of the prophecies foretold about the Messiah, and what expelled the demons was not Satan, but God the Holy Spirit, working with God the Son in accordance with the Trinitarian work. Note that earlier (see vv. 17-21), Matthew had quoted Isaiah 42:1-4, which said that God's "Beloved" (the Messiah) had had the Spirit placed upon him, and he would do all the work he was meant to do. This story is one such example of Christ fulfilling that. The people in verse 23 were correct - Christ was the Son of David. And he was proving that by the work of the Spirit against the demons.

Here now, during Christ's response, we have the mention of the "unpardonable sin." Christ outlines that those who are not with him are against him (so much for inclusivism!) and  those who are not gathered with him scatter (v. 30). There is no neutrality. Christ is drawing a line in the sand at this point, for both the benefit of the people listening and the Pharisees. He takes it even further by saying that all sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven, but "blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven" (v. 31), going on to say that "whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him" - but those who speak "against the Holy Spirit" will not be forgiven either "in this age or in the age to come" (v. 32). For many who quote these few verses in isolation, they come to similar erroneous conclusions:

1) The Post-Death Judgment Error - Some believe that this means that God will forgive sins after a person dies. What they do is they take the "either in this age or in the age to come" and read it backwards into "it shall be forgiven him." The problem with this is two fold: a) Christ is not arguing that some sins can be forgiven after death, only that the blasphemy against the Spirit is very serious - he's emphasizing how gosh darn serious it is by adding "either in this age or in the age to come" to demonstrate it; b) the "ages" here refer more so to the pre-Messianic age and the Messianic age - that is, Jews of Christ's time had in mind that you would have the old covenant, then the coming of the Messiah, and then the new age under the Messiah's rule. This is how Christ's listeners would have understood it. 

2) The Hyper-Charismatic Error - Some in the Hyper-Charismatic and Neo-Pentecostal camp have taken these verses to mean that any time you point to a supposed work of the Holy Spirit (a miracle healing, speaking in tongues, prophecy, etc.) and say "That's not the Holy Spirit," that automatically means you're blaspheming the Holy Spirit. This can't be the case, as scripture is quite clear that we should be on the lookout for demonic counterfeits of spiritual work: Pharaoh's magicians could mimic many of the miracles of God (Ex 7:11, 22; 8:7); the Law warned against those who would perform miracles and wonders and yet attempt to lead you astray from the orthodox path (De 13:1-4); Jesus warned against false christs and prophets who would perform miracles (Mt 24:24); the apostle Paul warned that the "lawless one" would perform signs and wonders (2 Th 2:9-10); the beast in Revelation is described as performing signs and wonders (Re 13:13-14). Declaring something to not be the work of the Spirit, especially when we have grounds to do so, is not in and of itself blasphemy against the Spirit, but just good discernment.

So, what is this verse talking about? Well, let's remember some of the preliminary information given us, and try to follow the flow of the narrative: Jesus, as Messiah, has the Spirit (v. 18); the people are wondering if Jesus is the Messiah, but the Pharisees are denying it (vv. 23-24); Christ states that his work is by the Spirit, which means the kingdom of God has come upon them (v. 28); he then states that blasphemy against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but not blasphemy against the Spirit (vv. 31-32). What then is Christ talking about in these two verses?

It is clear, from the context, that Christ is stating that, when all is fulfilled (that is, the Messianic age has come, and Christ is glorified after the resurrection), those who continue to deny his divine status and role as Messiah, just as they were then, will be condemned. Many "spoke a word" against Jesus as the Son of Man (such as Peter) but were later forgiven, especially at Pentecost and other events recorded in Acts. Most of the Pharisees, however, continued to work against him and denied not only his messianic status, but his divinity - first during his earthly ministry, and then against his church. This is even more clear in Mark's parallel account, where (after the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is spoken of) Mark adds that Jesus said all this "because they were saying, 'He has an unclean spirit'" (Mk 3:30). In denying that Christ's power and miracles were by the Spirit, and attributing it to demonic powers, the Pharisees were blaspheming the Spirit and working against the kingdom of God. It was a sign of their heart (hence Christ's stern warnings about the connection between the heart and words in vv. 33-37, following the "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit" verses) and that they were, in essence, marked off for condemnation. 

This has led many theologians and commentators to argue that, really, the "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit" is no longer relevant for this day. That is, it was only relevant to those who lived during Christ's time, during that tender moment between the two ages, when one could blaspheme the Son of Man but not blaspheme the Holy Spirit. If we were to apply it today somehow, it would, in a sense, be similar to those who, upon hearing of Christ's miracles, attempt to write them off as exaggerations, lies, sorcery, magic tricks, or the like. We should not, however, use these verses to write these people off as damned, and we should treat them with respect and love, and give them the same message of hope and reconciliation which God used to call us. There are many who denied Christ's miracles today who later repented and put their trust upon the Lamb.

What the Crucifixion Meant

The following is from Michael Horton's preface to the 2009 publication of Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible. It comes after his quotation of Romans 1:18a: "The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing."

But in our day, preaching cannot be foolish. It must be "relevant," which is the word we have drafted into the service of market-driven approaches. However, the message of the cross assumes the terror of the law, divine wrath toward sinners (and not just their sins), and the need for a substitutionary sacrifice to assuage divine justice. It assumes that the greatest problem facing humanity is original and actual sin - personal rebellion against a holy God - not stress, low self-esteem, and a failure to realize one's full potential. [pg. ix]

Sympathy in Temptation

The following is from JC Ryle's Expository Thoughts on Matthew, and refer to the temptations of Christ in the wilderness.

The sympathy of Jesus is a truth which ought to be peculiarly dear to believers: they will find in it a mine of strong consolation. They should never forget that they have a mighty Friend in heaven, who feels for them in all their temptations, and can enter into all their spiritual anxieties. Are they ever tempted by Satan to distrust God's care and goodness? So was Jesus. Are they ever tempted to presume on God's mercy, and to run into danger without warrant? So also was Jesus. Are they ever tempted to commit some one private sin for the sake of some great seeming advantage? So also was Jesus. Are they ever tempted to listen to some misapplication of Scripture, as an excuse for doing wrong? So also was Jesus. He is just the Savior that a tempted people require. Let them flee to Him for help, and spread before Him all their troubles; they will find His ear ever ready to hear, and His heart ever ready to feel: He can understand their sorrows.

May we all know the value of a sympathizing Savior by experience! There is nothing to be compared to it in this cold and deceitful world. Those who seek their happiness in this life only, and despise the religion of the Bible, have no idea what true comfort they are missing.

Animals and Evil

The following post has some spoilers - just a fair warning!

Sometime ago I watched the 1994 German animated film Felidae. Based off a German novel by the same name, the film tells the story of Francis, a domesticated cat whose owner moves into a neighborhood wherein he soon discovers that there's a cat serial killer on the loose. In the investigation that follows, Francis discovers that it's another cat named Paschal, who had gone through animal testing. In the process, Paschal had learned a lot from the humans, including the concept of genetics, from which he designed a plan to create a "super cat" (code-named "felidae") bred from preferred specimens - the murders were to remove the "unwanted" genes from the neighborhood. After a fight in which Francis fatally wounds his opponent, Paschal laments, "Look at me now, and all you see is evil, yet once I was good." Francis later tells a friend, regarding Paschal, "He lost his innocence, as man has lost his."

It's a really interesting film, though definitely not one for kids (but it's a false presupposition to think all animation should be). What I found most interesting was the film's interpretation of mankind's sinfulness. Namely, it recognized that man was inherently evil, and Paschal had been good until he interacted with the teachings and beliefs of men, wherein he became evil. The cat was not corrupt until he encountered, was taught, and embraced mankind's corruption. All the same, the film seems to take a Pelagian mindset near the end, when Francis tells the audience that it's still possible for humans to be as innocent as animals, achieving what ultimately truly is "felidae."

In some ways this mindset is very true. For certain, some levels of cruelty exists in the animal world: ants make war, invade, and even enslave other insect colonies; cats themselves are known to play with their prey before finally killing them; wolves and other predators will purposefully taunt, wound or tease their fleeing prey before finally going in for the kill; some animals will eat their young or the young of other mothers. Yet with animals, there is a certain purpose behind all this. For many, such as ants and cats, it is nothing more than instinct. For others, such as wolves or other predators that gradually kill their fleeing prey, it allows them to weaken their opponent to make for an easier kill. For others still, the eating of children is merely for the purposes of survival or fear of competition with their own young.

With humans, however, there is a greater level of cruelty, because our level of cruelty is mixed with our reason, our emotions, and our intellect. During the climactic defense scene in Straw Dogs, what made the actions of Dustin Hoffman's character so shocking was not necessarily just that he was doing them, but that, early on in the film, he had been established as an intelligent character, and now that intelligence was being used to harm or kill other human beings. Perhaps what still makes the Holocaust the most horrific form of genocide in human history is the fact that it was human ingenuity mixed with human cruelty. The Nationalist Socialists and their sympathizers hated certain undesirables in society, and had now found a way to eliminate them in the most efficient, cheapest, and quickest way possible. While Mendel (who is mentioned, and even depicted, in the film) had no wicked intentions with his study of genetics, he surely would be horrified to learn what man has since done with it. On this level, even the fiercest shark or the meanest wild animal seem far more civilized than humanity.

All the same, that still brings us to the issue of animals as a role model. One difference between mankind and animals is that mankind is able to distinguish between right and wrong on a basis of moral codes. Try discussing why war is ethically wrong to a colony of ants invading a termite hill, and you won't get any where. Try to tell a male stray dog sexually assaulting a female stray dog why rape is bad, and you'll achieve nothing. Certainly animals can be conditioned to feel guilt or remorse, but without this training they would care otherwise. A dog raised from a pup to know not to relieve himself on the carpet will show remorse when you scold him for doing so because he recognizes why he is being scolded; a dog never trained to know whether the grass or the carpet is the bathroom will not care, no matter how much you yell at him.

In fact, Christian tradition has often used animals as an example of what man is like when he sinks low. The reason devils today are often depicted with tails and horns is because early Christian art added such features to depict visually how an "animal-like" state might look. Jude, in his epistle, compares the false teachers and heretics as being "unreasoning animals" (Jude 1:10). If you poke a lion with a stick, he doesn't know well enough to take deep breaths and count to ten - at some point, he will attack you, because that is what his bare animal instincts tell him. In the same manner a human being who lashes out with wild, violent anger that he knows is otherwise wrong is sinking to the level of animals.

All mankind has, within themselves, some level of judgment. The apostle Paul wrote that men "by their unrighteousness suppress the truth" (Rom 1:18), and likewise "know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die" (Rom 1:32). We see this in the fact that even the most ardent atheists, who might deny some of the moral law, will nonetheless accept much of the moral law (even at times, ironically, to attack God). Even a person who denies moral absolutes will quickly change their tune if you then attempt to vandalize their car or commit bodily harm against them. Even those who might want to argue for a kind of plain "universal" moral law inherent in all people must then answer: 1) upon what basis is this accepted, outside of plain majority (argumentum ad populum); 2) to where is this sense of morality sourced, if not to divine commission nor to moral instincts rooted by a great designer?

The fallen man, therefore, lives in a strange kind of state: he is half true man, half animal. We know the moral law subconsciously, and yet we are enslaved to sin and behave like animals. The apostle Paul writes to believers that, before we were quickened by God, we "lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind" (Eph 2:3). We were like the heretics and false teachers described in Jude's epistle, living as unreasoning animals. There's a difference between animals and humans here, however: we are guilty of our sins before God because we know better and should know better. A shark that eats another fish because he's hungry isn't going to be judged before God for doing that; a man who kills another man out of malice will stand before God as a murderer, and will be judged for every other sin he has committed.

In a sense, there is innocence in animals. In another sense, humans are also animals. Humans by their nature move towards animalistic tendencies which leads them to sin. They are, however, able, by the grace of God, to be regenerated and move further and further away from their animalistic tendencies so that they can, again by the grace of God, be glorified in the truest sense of "felidae." God bless.

Confessing our sins

The following is a brief excerpt from John Bunyan.

"Acknowledge thine iniquity," saith the Lord (Jer 3:13). This is a hard pinch, I know what I say, for a man to fall down under the sense of sins by acknowledging them to be what the Lord saith they are; to acknowledge them, I say, in their own defiling and polluting nature; to acknowledge them in their unreasonable and aggravating circumstances; to acknowledge them in their God-offending and soul-destroying nature, especially when the conscience is burdened with the guilt of them. Yet this is duty: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive" (1 John 1:9). 

Meditations on Edwards

It's always humbling to see that someone who lived nearly 260 years before you was writing on the same things you were meditating on. That's how I felt after spending sometime on a post regarding postmodern religious thinking, and at the same time started studying Jonathan Edwards's discourse Men Naturally Are God's Enemies (source). It's amazing how things never really change over time in regards to the hearts of men and the fallen concept of God.

Regarding the worship of idols other than God:

Man will necessarily have something that he respects as his god. If man do not give his highest respect to the God that made him, there will be something else that has the possession of it. Men will either worship the true God, or some idol: it is impossible it should be otherwise: something will have the heart of man. And that which a man gives his heart to, may be called his god: and therefore when man by the fall extinguished all love to the true God, he set up the creature in his room. For having lost his esteem and love of the true God, and set up other gods in his room, and in opposition to him; and God still demanding their worship, and opposing them; enmity necessarily follows.

Regarding man's hatred of God's Law:

The strictness of God’s law is a principal cause of man’s enmity against God. If God were one that did not so much hate sin; if he would allow them in the gratification of their lusts in some degree, and his threatenings were not so awful against all criminal indulgence; if his threatenings were not so absolute; if his displeasure could be appeased by a few tears, a little reformation, or the like; they would not be so great enemies, nor hate him so much as they do. But God shows himself to be an implacable enemy to their idols, and has threatened everlasting wrath, infinite calamity, for all that they do in the service of their lusts; and this makes them irreconcilable enemies to him.

Regarding unbelievers who do not see themselves as literal enemies of God:

Natural men do not generally conceive themselves to be so bad; they have not this notion of themselves, that they are enemies to God. And therefore when they hear such doctrine as this taught them, they stand ready to make objections. Some may be ready to say, “I do not know, I am not sensible, that I hate God, and have a mortal enmity against him. I feel no such thing in myself, and if I have such enmity, why do not I feel it? If I am a mortal enemy, why should not I know it better than any body else? How can others see what is in my heart better than I myself? If I hate one of my fellow-creatures, I can feel it inwardly working.” To such an objection I would answer,

If you do but observe yourself, and search your own heart, unless you are strangely blinded, you may be sensible of those things, wherein enmity does fundamentally consist. Particularly, you may be sensible that you have at least had a low and contemptible estimation of God; and that, in your esteem, you set the trifles and vanities of this world far above him; so as to regard the enjoyment of these things far before the enjoyment of God, and to value these things better than his love.—And you may be sensible that you despise the authority of God, and value his commands and his honour but very little. Or if by some means you have blinded yourself, so as to think you do regard them now, doubtless you can look back and see that you have not regarded them.

Regarding the supposedly "religious" who believe they are not God's enemies.

That much of that seeming respect which natural men show to God, is owing to their education. They have been taught from their infancy that they ought to show great respect to God. They have been taught to use respectful language, when speaking about God, and to behave with solemnity, when attending on those exercises of religion, wherein they have to do with him. From their childhood, they have seen that this is the manner of others, when they pray to God, to use reverential expressions, and a reverential behaviour before him.

Those who are brought up in places where they have, commonly from their infancy, heard men take the name of God in vain, and swear and curse, and blaspheme; they learn to do the same; and it becomes habitual to them. And it is the same way, and no other, that you have learned to behave respectfully towards God: not that you have any more respect to God than they; but they have been brought up one way, and you another. In some parts of the world, men are brought up in the worship of idols of silver, and gold, and wood, and stone, made in the shape of men and beast. “They say of them, Let the men that sacrifice, kiss the calf.” Hos. xiii. 2. In some parts of the world, they are brought up to worship serpents, and are taught from their infancy to show great respect to them. And in some places, they are brought up in worshipping the devil, who appears to them in a bodily shape; and to behave with a show of great reverence and honour towards him. And what respect you show to God has no better foundation; it comes the same way, and is worth no more.

That show of respect which you make is forced. You come to God, and make a great show of respect to him, and use very respectful terms, with a reverential tone and manner of speaking; and your countenance is grave and solemn: you put on an humble aspect; and use humble, respectful postures, out of fear. You are afraid that God will execute his wrath upon you, and so you feign a great deal of respect, that he may not be angry with you. “Through the greatness of thy power shall thine enemies submit themselves unto thee.” Psal. lxvi. 3. In the original it is, shall thine enemies lie to thee. It is rendered therefore in the margin, shall yield feigned obedience to thee. All that you do in religion is forced and feigned. Through the greatness of God’s power, you yield feigned obedience. You are in God’s power, and he is able to destroy you; and so you feign a great deal of respect to him, that he might not destroy you. As one might do towards an enemy that had taken him captive, though he at the same time would gladly make his escape, if he could, by taking away the life of him who had taken him captive.

And again:

The affections of natural men often arise from wrong notions they have of God. They conceive of God after the manner they do of men, as though he were a being liable to be wrought upon in his affections. They conceive of him as one whose heart could be drawn, whose affections can be overcome, by what he sees in them. They conceive of him as being taken with them, and their performances; and this works on their affections; and thus one tear draws another, and their affections increase by reflection. And oftentimes they conceive of God as one” that loves them, and is a friend to them: and such a mistake may work much on their affections. But such affections that arise towards God, as they conceit him to be, is no argument that they have not the same implacable hatred towards God, considered as he really is. There is no concluding that men are not enemies, because they are affected and shed tears in their prayers, and the like. Saul was very much affected when David expostulated with him about pursuing after him, and seeking to kill him. David’s words wrought exceedingly upon Saul’s affections. “And it came to pass when David had made an end of speaking these words unto Saul, that Saul said, Is this thy voice, my son David? and Saul lift up his voice and wept.” 1 Sam. xxiv. 16. chap. xxvi. 1,. &c. He was so affected that he wept aloud, and called David his son, though he was but just before seeking his life. But this affection of Saul was no argument that he did not still continue in his enmity against David. He was David’s mortal enemy before, and sought his life; and so he did afterwards, it was but a pang: his enmity was not mortified or done away. The next news we hear of Saul is, that he was pursuing David, and seeking his life again.

Our Victory by Christ's Cross

In Romans 7:24-25, the apostle Paul declared: "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin" (NASB).

The following is taken from Charles Spurgeon's sermon on these two verses.

And now, turning aside for a minute, I shall conclude by making an observation or two to many now present. There are some here who say, "I am never disturbed in that fashion." Then I am sorry for you. I will tell you the reason of your false peace. You have not the grace of God in your hearts. If you had you would surely find this conflict within you. Do not despise the Christian because he is in the conflict, despise yourself because you are out of it. The reason why the devil lets you alone is, that he knows you are his. He does not need to trouble you much now; he will have time enough to give you your wages as the last. He troubles the Christian because he is afraid of losing him; he thinks that if he does not tease him here, he shall never have the chance to do it in eternity, so he will bite him, and bark at him while he may. That is why the Christian is vexed more then you are. As for you, you may well be without any pain, for dead men feel no blows. You may well be without prickings of conscience; for men that are corrupt are not likely to feel wounds, though you stab them from head to foot. I pity your condition, for the worm that dieth not is preparing to feed upon you; the eternal vulture of remorse shall soon wet his horrid beak with the blood of your soul. Tremble; for the fires of hell are hot and unquenchable, and the place of perdition is hideous beyond a madman's dream. Oh that you would think of your last end. The Christian may have an evil present, but he has a glorious future; but your future is the blackness of darkness for ever. I adjure you by the living God, you that fear not Christ, consider your ways. You and I must give an account for this morning's service. You are warned, men; you are warned. Take heed to yourselves, that ye think not this life to be everything. There is a world to come; there is "after death the judgment." If you fear not the Lord, there is after judgment eternal wrath and everlasting misery.

And now a word to those who are seeking Christ. "Ah!" says one, "sir, I have sought Christ, but I feel worse than I ever was in my life. Before I had any thoughts about Christ I felt myself to be good, but now I feel myself to be evil." It is all right, my friend; I am glad to hear you say so. When surgeons heal a patient's wound, they always take care to cut away the proud flesh, because the cure can never be radical while the proud flesh remains. The Lord is getting rid of your self-confidence and self-righteousness. He is just now revealing to your soul the deadly cancer which is festering within you. You are on the sure road to healing, if you are on the way to wounding. God wounds before he heals; he strikes a man dead in his own esteem before he makes him alive. "Ah," cries one, "but can I hope that I ever shall be delivered?" Yes, my brother, if you now look to Christ. I care not what your sin nor what your despair of heart; if you will only turn your eye to him who bled upon the tree, there is not only hope for you, but there is a certainty of salvation. I myself, while thinking over this subject, felt a horror of great darkness rush over my spirit, as I thought what danger I was in lest I should be defeated, and I could not get a glimpse of light into my burdened spirit, until I turned my eye, and saw my Master hanging on the tree. I saw the blood still flowing; faith laid hold upon the sacrifice, and I said, "This cross is the instrument of Jesu's victory, and shall be the means of mine." I looked to his blood; I remembered that I was triumphant in that blood, and I rose from my meditations, humbled, but yet rejoicing; cast down, but not in despair; looking for the victory. Do likewise. "Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners: believe that. You are an awakened, conscious and penitent sinner; therefore, he came to save you. Believe his word; trust him. Do nothing for your own salvation of yourself, but trust him to do it. Cast yourself simply and only on him; and, as this Bible is true, you shall not find the promise fail you—"He that seeketh findeth; to him that knocketh it shall be opened."

May God help you, by giving you this new life within! May he help you to look to Jesus, and though long and hard be the conflict, sweet shall be the victory. [source]

Self-Examination and Scripture

The following is from Jonathan Edwards' Christian Cautions; Or, The Necessity of Self-Examination.

Evermore to join self-reflection with reading and hearing the word of God. When you read or hear, reflect on yourselves as you go along, comparing yourselves and your own ways with what you read or hear. Reflect and consider what agreement or disagreement there is between the word and your ways. The Scriptures testify against all manner of sin, and contain directions for every duty; as the apostle saith, 2 Tim 3:16. "And is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Therefore when you there read the rules given us by Christ and his apostles, reflect and consider, each one of you with himself, Do I live according to this rule? Or do I live in any respect contrary to it?

When you read in the historical parts of Scripture an account of the sins of which others have been guilty, reflect on yourselves as you go along, and inquire whether you do not in some degree live in the same or like practices. When you there read accounts how God reproved the sins of others, and executed judgments upon them for their sins, examine whether you be not guilty of things of the same nature. When you read the examples of Christ, and of the saints recorded in Scripture, inquire whether you do not live in ways contrary to those examples. When you read there how God commended and rewarded any persons for their virtues and good deeds, inquire whether you perform those duties for which they were commended and rewarded, or whether you do not live in the contrary sins or vices. Let me further direct you, particularly to read the Scriptures to these ends, that you may compare and examine yourselves in the manner now mentioned.

Peter Popoff and Debt Cancellation

There are some things that provoke you in the spirit to the point where you simply have to do something. That's about how I felt as I caught Peter Popoff and his wife on television trying to give away these miracle spring water gifts to potential followers. What they said simply shocked me, so much so that I felt compelled to make a short video about it.

Apologies ahead of time for the quality. I recorded the episode with my digital camcorder, then edited all of it in Adobe Premiere. In the meantime, enjoy.