Paul's Passing Thoughts

1Cor 15:26 Death NOT God's will ever; death=God's enemy. Christ died 2 end death+sin. Last enemy defeated is the source of all other enemies

— Paul M. Dohse (@PaulMDohse) June 10, 2017

Maybe more people would be saved if they had a clear picture of what salvation is. Protestantism greatly dampens the gospel by making God’s sovereignty the issue. If salvation is completely out of the hands of people, and people are the way they are because God made them such for His own glory (being glorified through the saved as well as the condemned), why worry about it? In many respects, this approach diminishes the gravity of the gospel.

On the one hand, you have a god who has chosen some for salvation and others for damnation, and this is determined by God making some vessels for glory and others fitted for eternal wrath. People will simply be aloof from the question of religion if God seems capricious because of His hatred of humanity. We hope we can find something else in the other hand.

All in all, though clothed in a scholarly motif, Protestantism is fundamentally mythological with two gods having separate agendas. God the father is a wrathful god who hates mankind, and Jesus is the loving savior god who saves us from being sent to hell by the demiurge god. Do you want to deny this? Rick Holland, former John MacArthur right-hand associate and heir apparent to the Grace to You empire wrote just that in his book, “Uneclipsing The Son” which was forwarded by the MacDaddy himself. If John MacArthur doesn’t represent mainline Protestantism, who does?

And in addition, the book propagates the Reformed tradition that decries the supposed problem of eclipsing Christ with the other two members of the Trinity. Shockingly, MacArthur himself alluded to this supposed problem in the book’s Forward. Instead of the Trinity fulfilling three different roles to attain one goal and a singular love for mankind, God the Father and the Spirit are presented as subordinates to Christ.

All of this nonsense actually decreases fear of God and makes salvation something God has done just for the hell of it or to sport with man. People not only reject the gospel as presented, they aren’t even sure they like God very much. At the very least, His message is unclear and confusing. But what if God loves mankind and gave His only Son to purchase all people for salvation? What if God is a loving God who is offering the gift of salvation to every person, and saying no is tantamount to rejecting the paramount gift from a God who defines all love? Everyone likes love. What if you offered a gift to your wife and she said, “I don’t want it”?

What if “We love Him because He first loved us” means that God loves all people and wants their love in return rather than, “The only reason we love God is because He preselected us.” According to this interpretation, unless God creates some to love Him, none would. Is that because if God created people with freewill His character wouldn’t invoke love? Or is God merely incapable of creating people with freewill? Or does He stop short of that because the results would be unpredictable?

Furthermore, I believe the verses that seem to indicate preselection (an ancient mythological concept to begin with) seem to do so because we have been brainwashed by the traditions of men. What is not within our control is to give birth to ourselves or to make the gift possible, but that doesn’t negate man’s ability to choose the gift. Protestantism makes the ability to choose, the issue, rather than man’s inability to make the gift possible. Salvation is not something man can purchase, it is a free gift.

Wouldn’t all of this Protestant nonsense sell better if inability only pertained to salvation which then resulted in ability to serve God along with OSAS (once saved always saved)? Remember, in Protestantism, inability extends to the “saved” as well because salvation is a “process.” Yes, it would probably sell better, but then what would we need the church for? While you might answer, “for edification and spiritual growth,” that incentive isn’t strong enough to support the monstrous infrastructure of the institutional church and the creature comforts of those who think the following: God is using them to save humanity from itself. No, no, a theology is needed that supports necessary RMR (reoccurring monthly revenue).

And by the way, most unbelievers suspect this is the case.

“how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will” (Hebrews 2:3,4 NIV).

When God and His salvation is clearly seen in contrast to the traditions of men, the gospel is not only attractive, but compels people to fear if they neglect it because God paid an unimaginable price to secure a gift offered to all. If one is not sure the gift is even offered to them to begin with they will likely be uncompelled to address the issue.

And what is the issue? You supposedly commit your life to the church for a chance to obtain eternal life, or to decrease your time in purgatory.

When it’s all boiled down, it’s the gospel of, The only way to the Father is through the church where you have to come at least every Sunday and hear about what a sinner you are and give 10% of your income and hang-out with boring people who judge you.

That’s why people aren’t being born again and churches are chock-full of modern-day Pharisees who ridicule Pharisees.

paul