Are My Future Sins Forgiven?

            You and I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ because we are sinners. When we believe in Christ, we offer our lives to HIM as a living sacrifice. We are then saved, forgiven, and declared righteous and holy.

            When we believe in Christ, we are forgiven of all our sins – the past, present, and the future.

            Wait!

            Does this mean that the sins I am going to commit (in the future) would be forgiven?

            Yes, God would forgive the sins that you and I would be committing in the future, said the late Rev. Billy Graham:¹

One of the Bible’s greatest truths is that Christ died to take away all our sins–not just part of them, but all of them: past, present, and future.

This is why you shouldn’t fear that you will lose your salvation every time you commit a sin. If that were the case, you and I would lose our salvation every day–because we sin every day. Even if our actions are pure, our thoughts often are not. And even if our actions and thoughts are pure, we still sin because of the good things we should be doing but fail to do.

Never forget: Your salvation does not depend on you and how good you are.

It depends solely on Christ and what He has already done for you through His death on the cross. The Bible says that Christ “appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26).

Does that mean it doesn’t matter whether or not you sin? No, of course not. Sin is serious; it is an offense to God, and it breaks our fellowship with Him. Sin also compromises our witness for Christ. The Bible is clear: “Be holy, because I am holy” (1 Peter 1:16).

But you cannot live the Christian life in your own strength. You need God’s help–which is why He has given His Holy Spirit to you. When you sin, confess it immediately, and then seek the Holy Spirit’s help each day to live as you should.

            We are saved by the grace of God through our faith in Christ. The inherent beauty of the gospel of Christ is that we do not fear to lose our salvation as and when we commit sins. (This, however, does not offer us a license to sin.)

            Dr. Michael Brown’s explanation will enable us to understand this better:²

…it is true that God doesn’t save in installments, meaning that the moment He says, “I forgive you,” you become a child of God and you pass from death to life, from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of God, from condemned to not guilty, from wicked to righteous, from lost to saved, from having a debt of sins bigger than Mt. Everest to being totally and absolutely forgiven – all in a moment of time. That is grace in action. That is the power of the blood of Jesus. It is a free gift, and it is yours forever.

That also means that if you sin tomorrow and get upset with a coworker, you do not become unsaved and go back to death, back to the kingdom of Satan, back to being condemned, back to being wicked and lost. Instead, as a child of God who is still in the “forgiven” column – meaning, God looks as you as His beloved child, a former guilty sinner whom He has pronounced forgiven – you now need to apply the blood of Jesus to your life and receive fresh cleansing. But you do not do this as a lost sinner being saved. Rather, you do it as a child of God who is in the “saved-righteous-holy-forgiven” column, freshly applying that source of forgiveness, the blood of Jesus, to your life again.

…God deals with us as His children, which means that we don’t get saved one moment, lost the next moment (the moment we commit a sin), and then “resaved” the moment we ask for forgiveness. This kind of spiritual schizophrenia is not only totally unbiblical but it is totally maddening. Who can possibly live like this?

So, it is crucial that we find a place of security in the Lord, remembering that we are saved by grace, not by works, by God’s goodness, not by our goodness. It’s also crucial to understand that when God forgives, He forgets – meaning, He doesn’t keep a record of wrongs against us – and that when we are forgiven, we are really forgiven. And it’s crucial to understand that Jesus paid the price for every sin we will ever commit, and when we come to Him in sincerity, asking Him to wash us clean, He will do it without hesitation. The price has already been paid.

This means that if God isn’t bringing up our past we shouldn’t bring it up either, and if He says we are forgiven, we really are forgiven. We must receive it, no matter what we’ve done and no matter how far we’ve fallen: “I am God’s child and I am forgiven!”

… So, we can rest assured that, as far as our salvation is concerned, we have been forgiven of our sins, and God remembers them no more. How mind-boggling is that? And as far as our ongoing relationship with God, forgiveness is applied whenever we need it and ask for it. 

            The grace of God that forgives us of all our sins does not offer us a license to sin. Dr. Brown refers to Pastor Joseph Prince’s words, “"If you hear of any 'grace' teaching that tells you it is all right to sin, to live without any regard for the Lord, and that there are no consequences to sin, my advice to you is to flee from that teaching. You have just been exposed to counterfeit grace. Genuine grace teaches that believers in Christ are called to live holy, blameless, and above reproach. It teaches that sin always produces destructive consequences and that it is only through the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ that one can be set free from the dominion of sin."”³ 

            When we are caught in sinful habits, our relationship with God is disrupted (cf. Psalm 15). But when we confess our sins and repent to God, HE forgives us and our relationship with HIM is restored. Believers who are caught in sin(s) will truly desire to be delivered and grow in holiness.

            A true believer will hate his sins. He/she will pray eagerly for deliverance from sins so to grow in holiness. This is the hallmark of a serious or a sincere Christian.

Endnotes:

¹https://billygraham.org/answer/does-god-forgive-the-sins-we-will-commit-in-the-future-or-just-those-from-our-past/

²https://askdrbrown.org/library/future-sins-forgiven-advance-fundamental-error-hyper-grace

³https://www.christianpost.com/news/hyper-grace-setting-the-record-straight-with-pastor-joseph-prince.html

Websites last accessed on 24^th January 2019.

Dirty Worship Team (The Existential Dilemma In The Churches)

            In his article entitled “Drunken Worship Leaders and Mercenary Musicians,” Dr. Brown launched a scathing attack on the hypocrisy of certain worship leaders, “If there’s anyone in the body of Christ who should be an example of purity of heart and purity of life, it is the worship leader, the man or woman who leads God’s people into his holy presence. Yet it is increasingly common to hear about worship leaders getting drunk after church services and dropping f-bombs while they boast about their “liberty” in the Lord. Some churches even hire unsaved musicians to play on their worship teams because of their talent. How can this be happening in the house of the Lord?”¹

            This crisis could be experienced by many churches, if not all, for the simple reason that all are imperfect. Worship leaders are not immune to imperfection.

            However, expectation of a high moral standard for a Christian leader is reasonable and biblical (Cf. 1 Timothy 3). Christian leadership includes worship leaders, and those in the worship team should also be deemed a part of the church leadership (secondary leadership, if you may) because they are upfront and leading the congregation, in worship - albeit passively; not interacting directly with the congregation.  

            It’s not just the drunkenness and/or the F-bombing members of the worship team that’s the bane of the local church. The imperfection extends far beyond that.

            Consider the anger issues or the rebellious attitude of some in the worship team or the gossip machinery laden with unjust judgment or the groupism predicated on every frivolous possibility or the trampling of the lesser talented members by their more talented counterparts. Each problem mentioned above is not inferior to drunkenness or F-bombing, from the perspective of sin, because it neither glorifies God nor elevates the worship team members to a higher moral standard.

            So there is an existential dilemma in the church (with respect to the worship team). Godly wisdom is absolutely mandatory to resolve this dilemma.  

            Without implying that Christians are way better than non-Christians, should the church hire non-Christian musicians for their worship team? Having non-Christians to play in the church worship team is a risky proposition from a spiritual perspective. Dr. Brown emphasizes this aspect, “…What? A God-mocking atheist playing guitar on a church worship team? And what happens when they pray together and seek God’s heart? Or do they even pray together at all?

            Little did I realize that it is becoming more and more common for churches to hire musicians who have no connection to their church—and sometimes no connection to the Lord—to play in their Sunday morning services. Forget about unity in the Spirit. Forget about harmony in the Lord. Forget about ministering under the anointing. The show must go on!

            Oh yes, it’s important that we do things with excellence, and I know that a poor musician or an off-key singer or a lousy sound system can drag down a whole service. And as a musician myself, saved as a 16-year-old, heroin-shooting, LSD-using rock drummer in 1971, I fully understand the power of music, especially anointed music. And I believe that the laborer is worthy of his hire and that those who sacrificially serve should be compensated. But I also understand that God hates foreign mixtures, that a little leaven leavens the whole lump, and that the spirit of the world and the Spirit of worship are incompatible.” (Emphasis Mine).²

            Should the church accept (into the worship team) only those who do not show any outward imperfections? This is one possibility. An entailment of this principle is that those accepted into the worship team should have been an active member of that church for a minimum period of one or two years or more. The one year (minimum) active membership could reveal the moral credibility of that member to the church.

            But what if a musically anointed person joins the church and desires to be a part of the worship team immediately? Would the church management provide an exception for this member, thereby antagonizing those who are in the shelf waiting for their chance to participate in the worship team? This is for each church to deal with.

            If a church is dogmatic about allowing members without any outward imperfections (so to speak) into the worship team, then it is quite possible that the church ignores or overlooks the other imperfections of that person. There could be hidden sins in that person as well (e.g. if that person plays dirty politics at the workplace and the church does not have any clue whatsoever about this imperfection or if he/she abuses his/her spouse or children, and the abused parties are silent…the list is endless).   

            How should the church respond when their worship team members are found in sin? This is a gazillion dollar question for every church.

            The easier option is to fire those who are caught in sin from the worship team. But then the Lord’s gracious response to the woman caught in adultery would haunt the legalistic decision of the church management, “Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”” (John 8: 11b, NASB).

            But the church management would argue that the lady caught in adultery was not an elder, overseer or a deacon in the local synagogue or the church. Hence, they may further argue, that the instance of Christ’s gracious interaction with the woman caught in adultery does not apply to the decision of the church, in our context.

            Very well!

            Did Jesus employ sinless people as HIS disciples? No. There were horrendous imperfections in every one of HIS disciples, even to the every end of Christ’s earthly life.

            God chose imperfect people to accompany HIM day and night while HE was on earth! What a great honor and an awesome privilege rendered to imperfect people by God! And these were the very imperfect people whom Christ trusted (so to speak) to carry out HIS great commission to the very ends of the earth.

            In other words, the Lord Jesus was extremely gracious. HE did not focus on the imperfections of HIS disciples. HE kept forgiving them seventy times seven (Cf. Matthew 18: 21-22). Therefore, the church does have the option to forgive the sinning member as long as he is truly repentant of his/her sins.      

            The member found in sin should be corrected. Forgiveness notwithstanding, the church should also encourage and monitor the sinning members to quit their sinful deed. Whether the church suspends or allows the worship team member to participate in the team while he/she is on the corrective path is up to the church.

            But what if one or a few in the Church leadership (Pastor, Elders, Overseers, Deacons) are also guilty of the sins committed by the errant worship team member? Would the church then deal with the errant worship team member with a high-handed approach while being soft by overlooking the sins of the influential leader of the church? It goes without saying that the church should be consistent in its operations.

            There is another element of risk in this business and in this very context. Consider a pastor or an elder who drinks in moderation (I have no idea whatsoever about the precise definition of “moderation,” but then that topic is for another day!). It is quite possible that a worship team member could follow the footsteps of this pastor / elder by drinking in moderation and still retaining the hallowed halo of holiness upon himself. But in due course of time, the member could become a victim to drunkenness.

            In this very situation, it was the pastor / elder’s practice of moderate drinking that led to the worship team member’s drunkenness. This is another dilemma the church has to constantly confront.

            What if the worship team member refuses to acknowledge his/her sins? How should the church engage this situation?

            Confronting a sin should not be based on the witness of a single person. Instead it should be based on the witness of two or three [credible] witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15 & 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1Timothy 5:19). If the member is proven to be sinful and if the said member refuses to acknowledge his/her sins, the church has all the liberty to fire that person (1 Corinthians 5:5, 13b).

            Is firing the only option? No! The church can be gracious in its actions as well. Once again each church has to deal with their situation with the measure of godly wisdom that they seek to perform with.

            Someone said, "the church is not a museum of saints, but a hospital for sinners." Humble and repentant sinners have a great role to play in the church of Jesus Christ. A gracious church is one whose leadership, first and foremost, accepts that they are wretched sinners as anyone else. Grace flows top down.

            A church that rejects a notion that it consists of sinful members, whose leaders are as sinful if not more, rejects the gospel of grace. As Christian theologian Father Hans Küng said, “…The church must constantly be aware that its faith is weak, its knowledge dim, its profession of faith halting, that there is not a single sin or failing which it has not in one way or another guilty of. And though it is true that the church must always disassociate itself from sin, it can never have any excuse for keeping any sinners at a distance. If the church remains self-righteously aloof from failures, irreligious and immoral people, it cannot enter justified into God’s kingdom. But if it is constantly aware of its guilt and sin, it can live in joyous awareness of forgiveness. The promise has been given to it that anyone who humbles himself will be exalted.”

            Therefore, every decision of the local church should be overflowing with the grace of God. Such a church is the need of the hour and that church will overcome all its existential dilemmas by the grace of God and with godly wisdom.

Endnotes:

¹http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/38195-drunken-worship-leaders-and-mercenary-musicians

²Ibid.

F-Bombs and Bikinis: Being Gracious

            A thematically pertinent and a well articulated article entitled, “F-Bombs and Bikinis: What It Really Means to Be a “Christian,”” emphasized the conflict between spiritual pride and grace.¹ However, this article missed emphasizing something of equal value.

            While God’s grace is a fascinating subject to comprehend; the antagonist of grace - spiritual pride - inflicts a greater damage upon Christianity than F-bombs and bikinis.

            Holiness (of a Christian) is an entailment of God’s grace. Holiness cannot be diluted or compromised. But before we get to the aspect of holiness that has been compromised, either intentionally or unintentionally, here’s the article:

            “Christian subcultures are an entertaining phenomenon. Multiple brands of Christianity claim the same Lord and read the same Bible, and yet they promote a set of values sometimes as different as apples and orangutans.

            I once heard a story about a Christian woman from the East Coast who confronted a West Coast youth-pastor, who allowed “mixed bathing” at youth events. “I can’t believe any so-called Christian leader would allow boys and girls to swim together!” She expressed her concern, all the while puffing on a cigarette. The youth pastor couldn’t help but smile, speechless at the irony.

            I attended a conservative Brethren church when I lived in Scotland. Some of the women wore head coverings and none of them spoke in church. When I had our Irish pastor and his wife over for dinner, I asked them what he would like to drink. “Beer please,” the preacher said. “And for you, madam?” “I’ll take a glass of Chardonnay, thank you.” Were they liberal or conservative? I guess it depends on which subculture you come from.

            When you try to cut out Christians with a religious cookie cutter, you not only tarnish diversity, but you trample on grace. It’s one thing for Christian subcultures to cultivate unique values. But it becomes destructive when those values are chiseled on Sinaitic tablets for all to obey.

            It’s even worse when Christians expect instant holiness from recent converts—holiness, that is, in areas where we think we’ve nailed it.

            It’s a shame that some believers have scoffed at some of Shia Labeouf’s recent comments about converting to Christianity, pointing fingers at the fact that he still uses bad language weeks after becoming a Christian. It’s worth noting that some are speculating that Labeouf’s conversion may have actually been more of a rather dramatic example of method acting than a true conversion but, regardless, many Christians chose to focus on his language instead of his heart. God only knows the true believers from the false. But to judge a man’s faith because there’s a residue of potty mouth?

            Bad language may take years to weed out. Even more difficult to extract is the pride that drives judgmental Christians to mock the Spirit’s work in a man seeking his Creator. That sin could take decades to discover. Grace means that we are all works in progress, and God shaves off our rough edges in His timing. Just look at the thugs God works with in the Bible.

            I know we’re programmed to see the 12 apostles as saints with halos and contemplative faces. But actually, they were criminals. These guys were more like prisoners than pastors, and few of them would have been let inside our churches today.

            Take Peter, for instance. Peter walked with Jesus for three years, witnessing miracle after miracle, sermon after sermon. Still, on the night before Jesus’ death, a servant girl asked Peter if he knew Jesus. “I do not know the man!” Peter responded. And he even evoked a curse on himself to prove he wasn’t lying (Matthew 26:74).

            Can you imagine if your pastor did that? “Good morning, church. I just want to say that I don’t even know who Jesus is!” We have a hard time forgiving pastors who commit adultery. I don’t think we’d know how to handle a pastor who had a public bout with doubt.

            Then there’s James and John, whom Jesus nicknames “sons of thunder.” Apparently, they never made it through an anger management seminar. On one occasion, these two hotheads wanted to nuke an entire village because they wouldn’t let them spend the night (Luke 9:51-56). The whole village—women and children. Luckily, Jesus stepped in to prevent the destruction. These two holy apostles would have been better fit as bouncers outside an expensive casino in Vegas owned by a mobster, than preachers of the gospel of love.

            My favorite pair is Simon the “Zealot” and Matthew the tax-collector. How did those two thugs get along?

            Matthew’s vocation was nothing less than political and religious treason. Tax-collectors were Jewish agents of Rome, who mediated pagan oppression through taking money from innocent people. Imagine if you found out that your childhood friend was making a living off funneling money to ISIS. Would you use him to plant a church? Apparently, Jesus did.

            Tax-collectors were more than extortionists. They were known for living excessively immoral lives and hanging out with all the wrong people. Religious Jews, in fact, believed that tax-collectors were past the point of repentance. Matthew didn’t have a moral bone in his body. But of course, after becoming a Christian, he immediately stopped sinning and never used bad language ever again.

            Yeah right.

            Simon, as a “Zealot,” probably grew up on the other side of the tracks. The “Zealots” were named such not because they were prayer warriors. They were just warriors—Jewish jihadists. The “Zealots” were known for killing their Roman oppressors or other Jews who were sell-outs. They were aggressive, violent and they did anything but love their enemies. Had Simon met Matthew on the streets, there’s a good chance one of them would have been found lying in chalk.

            To build His Kingdom, Jesus handpicks what could be compared to the leader of the Black Panther party and the grand wizard of the KKK. I doubt anyone closed their eyes at that first prayer meeting.

            You cannot sanitize grace. You can’t stuff it into a blue blazer and make it wear khakis. Grace is messy, offensive and it sometimes misses church. To expect God to pump prefabricated plastic moral people out of a religious factory is to neuter grace and chain it inside a gated community. If God’s scandalous relationship with the 12 thugs means anything, then we should expect a variegated spectrum of righteousness and be patient—or repentant—when such sanctification doesn’t meet out expectations. God meets us in our mess and pushes holiness out the other side.

            Not anti-mixed-bathing holiness. But the real stuff. The holiness that serves the poor, prays without ceasing, redeems the arts, loves enemies, elevates community above corporate success, and preaches the life-giving Gospel of a crucified and risen Lamb in season and out.”²

            There’s more to holiness. Holiness is transformation; we are being transformed into HIS likeness from one degree of glory to another (2 Corinthians 3: 18, RSV).

            The fundamental transformation in every Christian should enable them to recognize their own wretchedness (cf. Romans 7: 15-24). Unless the Christian recognizes his own wretchedness, he would not be gracious to his fellow Christian.

            A Christian who recognizes himself as the worst of all sinners (cf. 1 Timothy 1: 15) will be gracious to his Christian neighbor. He will graciously offer the “F-bombing Christian” the much needed guidance to grow spiritually without condoning or condemning his sin.

            The fact that Christ worked with “thugs,” does not offer us immunity to continue being a thug. There was transformation in the life of all the disciples – from unbelief to belief and from bad to good.

            In fact, Peter emphasized the need to not curse or swear, “…Whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech.” (1 Peter 3:10, NIV). James, the brother and disciple of Christ, reflected the same thought, “…but no human being can tame the tongue—a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brethren, this ought not to be so.” (James 3: 8-10, RSV).

            Therefore, just as the disciples of the Lord transformed and grew in their spirituality because of their love for the Lord Jesus Christ, we should grow and be transformed into Christ’s likeness. May we also help each other to grow spiritually by not condemning each other’s sins; may we be gracious Christians.

Endnotes:

¹http://faithit.com/f-bombs-and-bikinis-what-it-really-means-to-be-a-christian/, last accessed on 9^th March 2017.

²Ibid. 

Grace vs Karma

            Do we reap what we sow? Do we get what we deserve when we die?

            Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism, India’s contribution to the world, teach that our thoughts and actions have consequences, namely rewards or punishments. Goodness leads to rewards and bad thoughts, words and actions lead to pain and suffering. This, in a nutshell, is Karma.

            On the other end of the religious spectrum is Historic Christianity that teaches the virtual opposite – Grace. The dictionary definition of grace is mercy, clemency or pardon.

            A brief study of Grace and Karma is invaluable to those on either side as well as the honest seeker. Karma and Grace gain utmost significance because they are two fundamental and uncompromising doctrines within their respective worldviews. Christians and Hindus would never compromise the doctrines of Grace and Karma, respectively.

KARMA

            Karma means action, “Karma in Hinduism (Sanatana dharma) is considered to be a spiritually originated law that governs all life. In the Law of Karma even though an individual is considered to be the sole doer and enjoyer of his Karmas and their 'fruits', according to Vedanta, the supreme being (The Divine) plays a major role as the dispenser of the 'fruits' of Karma...”¹

            The following is a listing of the basic facets of Karma:²  

            1. The Hindu Scriptures, Uphanishads, Bhagavadgita and the Puranas, teach Karma.

            2. Karma applies to human beings, plants, animals and microorganisms. Karma also applies to groups such as associations, organizations and nations; this is termed as the collective karma. 

            3. Karma does not apply to God. But gods and celestial beings are bound by the law of Karma. (According to some Puranas, Brahma, Vishnu and Siva attained their position of divine responsibilities because of their meritorious actions in their previous births.)

            4. Sin, according to Hinduism, is an offense committed against human beings and not God.

            5. Karma includes both the physical and the mental actions (thoughts). Man possesses free will to perform a good action, a good word or a good thought, and these would fetch him/her rewards. Anything bad would fetch punishment. (Karma includes even our most natural acts such as sleeping and breathing, hence non-action and deliberate inaction is also a part of karma.)

            6. Hinduism recognizes four types of karma:

                        6.1 Sanchita Karma: It is sum total of the accumulated karma of previous lives.

                        6.2 Prarabdha Karma:  That part of the sanchita karma that is currently activated in the present life and which influences the course of the present life.

                        6.3 Agami Karma (Future Karma): The karma that arises out of the current life activities, whose consequences will be experienced by the individual in the coming lives.

                        6.4 Kriyamana Karma: This is the karma whose consequences are experienced in this very life.

            7. Reincarnation is a necessary aspect of karma. Karma binds its subjects to cycles of births and deaths by initiating the cycle of cause and effect. Rebirth would occur until there is balance in the individual’s karmic account. The soul cannot attain moksha (salvation) without exhausting the accumulated Karmas.

            8. A soul could exist for even a million years to exhaust the accumulated karmas. Thus the individual soul carries the burden of its karma until a permanent liberation is achieved through the renunciation of the doership and detachment from the fruits of actions.

            Hindus are obligated to perform certain duties to neutralize their karma. There are two mandatory karmas every Hindu ought to perform (it is sinful to not perform these duties) and there is an optional karma:

                        8.1 Nitya Karma includes duties every human being ought to perform (sleep, shower, eat, pray etc.).

                        8.2 Naimittika Karma includes duties that ought to be performed on specific occasions such as festivals, solar, lunar eclipses, marriage, funeral rites etc.

                        8.3 Kamyakarma includes optional duties such as going on a pilgrimage, educating one’s children, property purchase, performing a sacrificial rite etc.

            Hinduism also teaches that since man can never develop the sense of being perfectly right or wrong, performing these duties need not necessarily incur merit. Hence spiritual means is necessary for a Hindu to be liberated from his/her karma, “Karma ends when you have perfected yourself in art of doing Karma without attachment. The ability to do Karma without attachment (without expectation of Karma-phala) can be attained by perfecting oneself on the path to the Divine by following various yogas - Karma yoga (yoga of action without attachment), Bhakti yoga (yoga of love for the Divine), Gyan yoga (yoga of knowledge and awareness), Siddha or Kundalini yoga (yoga of divine consciousness), Hatha yoga (purification of the body and mind through Asanas and Pranayama), Laya yoga (yoga of meditating on interior energy centers), Mantra yoga (yoga of Divine or Sacred words, phrases, or syllables) or any combination of these.”³ (Emphasis Mine).   

GRACE

            In the Hindu worldview there is an inexorable connection between man’s actions and consequences, not even death can break this connection, for the law of karma carries over into the next incarnation.

            However, in the Christian worldview, the sin-punishment sequence can be interrupted by repentance and confession of sins, with consequent forgiveness, and death brings a release from the temporal effects of sin. God’s love and grace offer this privilege to the repentant man.

            God does not deal with man based on man’s merit. God deals with man based on HIS own goodness and generosity. God also deals with man based on his nature and need i.e. man’s nature is that he is innately sinful and his perpetual need is to be forgiven.

            Grace means God’s goodness towards those who deserve only punishment. God supplies man with undeserved or unmerited favors i.e. HIS favor is toward those who deserve no favor but only punishment.

            In other words, salvation is a [free] gift from God to man (Romans 6: 23; Ephesians 2: 8-9). Salvation, according to Historic Christianity, is by the grace of God (Ephesians 1: 5-8).The Bible also mentions God’s grace as an extravagant gift (Cf. Titus 2: 11, 3: 3-7).

            Since God’s grace is unmerited, there is only one human attitude appropriate as an instrument for receiving God’s grace, namely, faith (Cf. Romans 4: 16). While it is faith that leads to man’s justification, justification must and will invariably produce works appropriate to the nature of the new creature⁴ that man has become (Ephesians 2: 8-9; James 2: 17).

            The good news of Christianity is that God became man “full of grace and truth” (John 1: 14-17). God did not come in the form of Jesus Christ as a judge and executioner, for if HE had done so, entire mankind would have been found guilty and sentenced to everlasting punishment. But God became man to be gracious to us.

            Hence, Christ died on the cross for the sake of man’s sins. The cross of Christ is a symbol of the fullness of God’s grace.

HARMONY

            A few instances where Grace and Karma harmonize are:

            1. Christianity deems man as sinful [from birth]. Hinduism, by virtue of the law of karma, believes that man would sin in thoughts, words and deeds.

            2. Christianity and Hinduism emphasize the need for punishment of sins.

            3. The Bible also mentions reaping and sowing (Job 4: 8, Psalm 126: 5). However, the act of receiving rewards for our good deeds is in this life and in our life in heaven (Matthew 16: 27; Revelation 22: 12).

DISSONANCE

            The Bible diverges from karma in these aspects:

            1. Every sin merits death and no amount of good works can override our bad thoughts, deeds or words, for man is innately sinful. Hence, man ought to receive God’s grace through repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.    

            2. Good works are an outcome of man’s trust and perpetual dependence upon Christ (Cf. Philippians 2: 13).

            3. Outside of God’s love and forgiveness there is no hope for man. Because God loves the sinful man, HE has offered a provision for him to repent and turn to Christ, so that everyone who repents of his sins, declares that Christ is Lord and believes in his heart that God raised HIM from the dead will be saved.

ENDNOTES:

¹http://www.thekundaliniyoga.org/karma/karma_gods_law_action_fruit_rebirth_reincarnation_hindu_perspective.aspx#Types of Karma, last accessed 2^nd Feb 2017.

²http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_karma.asp, last accessed 2^nd Feb 2017. & http://www.hinduwebsite.com/conceptofkarma.asp#fn02, last accessed 2^nd Feb 2017.

³http://www.thekundaliniyoga.org/karma/karma_gods_law_action_fruit_rebirth_reincarnation_hindu_perspective.aspx#Types of Karma, last accessed 2^nd Feb 2017.

⁴Man who trusts and remains in Christ becomes a new creation and will no longer live for himself (2 Corinthians 5: 17), man’s life will become spiritual.

This article was originally posted at http://christianapologeticsalliance.com/2017/02/02/grace-vs-karma-2/

Ungracious Christians

            Philip Yancey, in his classic “What's So Amazing About Grace?” describes ungraciousness as, “Ungrace does its work quietly and lethally, like a poisonous, undetectable gas. A father dies unforgiven. A mother who once carried a child in her own body does not speak to that child for half its life. The toxin steals on, from generation to generation.” Around us, ironclad in their pristine saintly attire, are ungracious Christians.

            A pastor requested prayer for an 80 year old pastor who was beaten up. Instead of sympathizing or offering his prayer support, a Christian responded by asking if the beaten up pastor was living a good Christian life or not.

            Isn’t it fascinating that we love to judge the spirituality of our fellow Christians? We are experts in ignoring the plank firmly lodged in our own eye while we rabidly bark at the speck in our brother’s eye (Matthew 7:5).

            How quickly do we forget that grace is the spirit of Christianity!

            If not for God’s grace, we would be doomed to eternal dungeon. Christ is the embodiment of grace and Christians are called to be Christlike – to be loving and gracious to each other.  

            If grace is at the heart of Christianity, why do Christians morph into ungracious beings to irrationally judge their fellow brother and sister? Who is responsible for this malady in Christendom?

            But unjust judgment and harsh condemnation is common in Christianity. The Bible amplifies this predicament. Even the Lord was not spared. Christ was condemned by the religious leaders.

            Philip Yancey, in “What's So Amazing About Grace?” captures this thought wonderfully, “Having spent time around "sinners" and also around purported saints, I have a hunch why Jesus spent so much time with the former group: I think he preferred their company. Because the sinners were honest about themselves and had no pretense, Jesus could deal with them. In contrast, the saints put on airs, judged him, and sought to catch him in a moral trap. In the end it was the saints, not the sinners, who arrested Jesus.”

            The religious leaders condemned Christ because they assumed greater knowledge. They not only assumed greater knowledge, but they believed that their knowledge was inerrant and infallible. Those religious leaders were proud and egotistic.

            Spiritual pride is the cause for ungracious and judgmental attitude. The super-spiritual Christian basking in spiritual pride thinks more highly of himself than he ought to (cf. Romans 12:3). When sober judgment of oneself is eclipsed by spiritual pride, he condemns his neighbor at every given opportunity.

            Recently I had the privilege of hearing a friend tell me that she lives a perfect Christian life. I was shocked to hear this statement from an ostensibly spiritually mature woman, who is well respected in her church.

            Did she not read her Bible that says that there is no one righteous, not even one (Romans 3:10) or that “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.” (1 John 1: 8-10, NIV). These super-spiritual Christians think that they do not and cannot commit sin.  

            This super spiritual Christian forgets that it is because of God’s grace that he is able to live a righteous life. In this context, he forgets two very important aspects.

            First, his life is a gracious gift from God. Because God offers him life, he is able to live righteously.

            Second, this person is able to live a righteous life because God has placed a fence of protection around his life (cf. Job 1:10). If God had allowed Satan to inflict veridical damage upon this person’s life, this person, even if he had genuinely lived a righteous life, could have suffered under people around him. They could have suspected him of some offense or the other. They would have then showered inordinate malice upon him.

            So the so-called super spiritual Christian cannot be super-spiritual if not for God’s grace. Although he is a product of God’s grace, he remains ungracious to his brethren.

            Who is responsible for this malady?

            There is no dearth of sermons on living a Christian life. The church should not be blamed for emphasizing a holy lifestyle, for Christians cannot be hypocrites. But when we meagerly succeed at living a morally upright life, we, with all guns blazing, condemn sinful people.

            How often do you hear sermons on being gracious to your sinful neighbors? For every sermon about living a Christian life, there should be ten sermons about being a gracious Christian. This is the responsibility of the church.

            The church should take responsibility for the prevalent malady of spiritual pride.

            Being gracious is not to approve the sins of our neighbors. Grace does not encourage sins (cf. Romans: 1-2).

            But God loved us while we were unrepentant sinners (cf. Romans 5:8). So we should love our neighbors while they remain unrepentant.

            How can we share the love of Christ if we do not love our neighbors? Would our neighbors be receptive to a gospel message from people who disrespectfully condemn their sinful lifestyle?

            There is a huge disparity between disapproving a sinful lifestyle and disrespectfully condemning a sinful lifestyle. A sinful lifestyle can be lovingly disapproved.  Condemnation is usually accompanied by hatred towards the person committing the sin.

            If a friend lives a blatantly sinful life, we should continue our friendship with him. We should be kind to him and his family, encourage him in his other noble endeavors, visit, dine with him etc. Yet we should lovingly disapprove of his sinful lifestyle and try to gently talk him out of that sinful lifestyle.

            Christ did not crucify the woman who was caught in adultery. HE empathized with her and lovingly counseled her to not sin. Christ did not disassociate HIMSELF from sinners but HE entered their homes and fellowshipped with them.

            Condemnation raises its ugly hood when our friend commits a sin. We immediately break our friendship with him and vilify him in public and private. This is not an appropriate Christian practice.              

            Here is an intriguing factor while we criticize our fellow Christians, which is wonderfully revealed in the Bible.

            On one hand, Christians are capable of glorifying the blatantly sinning Christian. As a case in point, the Corinthian church was proud of their member who was sleeping with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5: 1-2).

            On the other hand, Christians could condemn those who may outwardly appear as sinners but who are faithfully living a holy life, “For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.’” (Matthew 11: 18-19, NIV).

            If Christ the Lord and John the Baptist were victims to such condemnation, what prevents you and me from being condemned? Persecution is native to Christianity.  

            We will be condemned by our own family. Our dearest friends would flee from us when we are in difficult situations. When we stand for the Lord and HIS word, we will be condemned and persecuted (2 Timothy 3:12). But let us continue to remain in the Lord, love and obey HIM despite the harsh condemnation from our fellow Christians.

            How do we remain gracious?            

            Step into the shoes of those who need grace. First, judge ourselves with a sober judgment. We are as much as a sinner as he is.

            Second, consider our neighbors at par with us or better than us. If we are no greater than him, we have no business to venomously judge him. Instead, love him just as God loves him and us.  

            We will be gracious if we are humble. The fast track to humility is to experience soul-wrenching pain. Unless we experience soul-wrenching pain, it is very difficult for us to remain humble.

            If a friend or an acquaintance asks you for prayer either pray or don’t pray. It is even acceptable if you do not pray, for God will care for HIS people. But please do not insult either the person asking for prayer or the person to be prayed for.  

Do All People Go to Heaven? (Reasoning the Truth of Historic Christianity)

In February 2013, I composed my preliminary thoughts on ‘Universalism’ under the title “Do All People Go to Heaven?” The title remains the same, since I intend to dwell further on Universalism. For the sake of continuity, please observe the synopsis of my previous blog:

1. Universalism is a belief that all people will go to heaven (inherit God’s salvation), irrespective of who, what, why and how they are.

2. All religions are fundamentally different; they contradict each other (E.g. Atheism negates God, and the God of Christianity, Islam and Hinduism are fundamentally different). If religions are poles apart, how can all people go to heaven?

3. Hell is not a literal presence for a Universalist. The Universalist will allegorize passages from the Bible that describes hell.

4. Universalism does not explain evil & justice on earth. Universalism advocates an immoral world. Man can do what he desires (even horrendous evil) and still be saved.

5. The god of the Universalist is evil (not offended by sins and cannot stop evil) and unjust (cannot provide justice to people). So we infer that the god Universalist’s posit is imperfect; in the likeness of an imperfect man. This god need not be worshipped or glorified.

In order to expose the errors innate in Universalism, we ought to establish the foundations of Historic Christianity to reveal its intricate composition and to state the basic contradiction between Universalism and the Historic Christianity. Then we need to understand the nature of truth, and subsequently be convinced to reason out our belief.

Historic Christianity

It is important to know the details of Historic Christianity in order to identify the errors of contradictory truth claims. Please observe the intricate interdependence of the essentials of Historic Christianity:

1. Truth: There is absolute and objective truth.

2. The reliability of the Bible: The Bible is inspired (by God), inerrant (no errors), and infallible (trustworthy). It is the only and the final authority for faith and life. The Bible is absolutely truthful.¹

3. Existence of God: The Bible reveals a holy God.²

4. God’s Trinity: There is one God, in the persons of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

5. Miracles of God: God is supernatural and active, so HE will act. HIS supernatural acts are miracles.³

6. Incarnation: The Savior of the world, the Lord Jesus was fully God and fully man.⁴

7. Total Depravity of Mankind: The Bible reveals the total depravity (sinfulness) of mankind.

8. Condemnation of God upon Sinful Man: The holiness of God entails God’s condemnation (wrath) upon sinners.

9. Virgin Birth: Christ was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. Thus, Christ is 100% God, and does not inherit mankind’s sin.

10. Sinlessness of Christ: Christ lived a sinless life on earth. Only a sinless God can save mankind of all their sins – past, present and future.

11. Grace: The gracious God saves mankind from their sins. Salvation is a free gift, since salvation is not gained by man’s work.  

12. Faith in Christ: Man should necessarily believe in Christ for the appropriation of Christ’s one-time, perfect sacrifice for his salvation.

13. Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ: Christ died and rose again. Resurrection was mandatory for overcoming evil and death.

14. Christ’s Bodily Ascension: Christ’s resurrection was a bodily resurrection and HE bodily ascended to heaven. Our resurrection will also be a bodily resurrection (glorious body).

15. Christ’s Intercession: Christ lives to intercede for all those who believe in HIM.

16. Second coming of Christ: Christ will come again in glory to judge mankind, to eliminate evil forever, and to usher a life of eternal coexistence with God in the new heaven and earth.  

These are the essentials of Historic Christianity. Unbelief /denial of any one essential will nullify the others through a chain reaction (E.g. If one denies absolute truth, then Bible is not absolutely true, so miracles are denied and along with it Christ’s virgin birth, resurrection, and salvation will also be denied.)  Denial of any one of the essentials of Historic Christianity is to deny Historic Christianity. Thus it is a reasonable implication that those who deny one (or more) essential doctrine(s) of Historic Christianity are cults or liberals or postmodern Christians.

We observe that salvation according to Historic Christianity is by grace through faith. Only those who believe in Christ will be saved (Christian Particularism). Those who do not believe in Christ will not be saved. Since Universalism declares salvation of all mankind, it totally contradicts Historic Christianity. The question that demands verdict is whether Universalism and Historic Christianity, proclaiming contradictory truth claims, are true within the same context of salvation.  

Exclusivity of Truth:

Can contradictory statements within the same context be true? This leads us to examine the nature of truth. Please think through with me:

1. Truth is pure. Truth should not contain errors / lies.

2. Opposite of truth is an error / lie.

3. Opposite of an error / lie need not be truth, but it could be another error / lie.

4. An error / lie could contain strands of truth, but strands of truth will not transform the lie to truth.

If you agree to the flow of thoughts mentioned above, then the entailments are:

1. Truth excludes errors / lies.

2. Truth is absolute, singular and exclusive (also consistent). Hence, the opposite of truth is essentially a lie, it cannot be another truth.

3. Simply speaking, 1+1=2, there cannot be another answer to this equation.

If we have two truth claims, one should ascertain if there are contradictions between the two truth claims. Contradictory truth claims will not be true at the same time and in the same context.⁵

If two people are looking at the sky from the same room and at the same time, and if one says that the sun is brightly shining and the other says that there is no sun in the sky, only one of them can be right. In this context, the truth is that the sun is either visible or invisible; the sun cannot be both visible and invisible at the same time.

Moreover, if someone says, ‘there is no truth,’ then his statement is also not true - it’s nonsensical. Someone else could say that ‘truth’ is only a matter of opinion, and does not possess an absolute meaning. In this case, that very statement is also a matter of opinion and does not possess an absolute meaning, so it’s nonsensical as well.

So we can confidently affirm that truth is absolute, singular, exclusive, and objective.

The nature of truth teaches us that truth excludes contradictions. Since Historic Christianity and Universalism contradict each other, both these contradicting worldviews cannot be true at the same time and within the same context (e.g. Salvation). It’s either Historic Christianity or Universalism, not both.

If we believe that Historic Christianity is true, we ought to give reasons for our faith and hope. But why?

Reasons to Offer Reasons For Our Faith:

Just as Apostle Paul reasoned out with the Jews and the Gentiles in Athens and Corinth (Acts 17: 22 – 18: 4), we are to reason out with those of contradictory views. A few reasons to reason out our faith are:

Perspective of Discipleship: We are mandated to disciple others (Matthew 28: 19). Discipling includes answering / clarifying honest questions. Those who disciple others ought to practice their religion seriously. Serious practitioners of religion should have a basic knowledge of other worldviews. Lack of interest in contrasting worldviews, such as Universalism, is valid if discipleship is an insignificant part of our life. But if we are a disciple of the Lord Jesus and practice our religion seriously (seriously committed to it), we should explain the reason for our serious practice and commitment. Reasoning is innate in discipleship.

Perspective of Biblical Mandate: If we cannot explain the reason for our hope, then we are blind in our faith and practice. If ‘unexamined life is not worth living,’⁶ then ‘unexamined faith is not worth believing.’⁷ The unexamined faith cannot distinguish good from evil, and cannot provide reason for the hope we have in the Triune God and the Bible. Every Christian is mandated to demolish arguments and lofty opinions against God, and provide the reason for his belief in Christ (cf. 2 Corinthians 10: 4-6; Hebrews 5: 14; 1 Peter 3: 15). This is the biblical mandate. Failure to provide a reason implies shallow faith and an anticipation to disbelieve Christ when confused and confronted with situations or arguments apparently more powerful than our faith. Moreover, failure to offer reason for our hope in Christ is a disobedience to God and HIS commands.

Perspective of Evangelization: We exist to help our family and neighbors. When we know the truth, we should speak of the truth to our neighbor. We live in the digital era; there are many who evangelize their worldview through digital and other mediums. Transmission of our faith mandates us to offer reasons / evidences for our faith. Failure to offer evidences reduces our belief to a lie. Those who believe in lies are liars. If we are not liars, we ought to substantiate the truth of our belief.

These are adequate reasons to reason out our faith. Let us reason together, says the Lord (Isaiah 1: 18, NASB). Thus we ought to reason the truth of Historic Christianity.

Having established the foundations, I will, in my next blog, provide adequate reasons for Historic Christianity from other perspectives, so to debunk Universalism. Amen.

References:

¹ Every apparent contradiction in the Bible can be reasonably explained. The Bible is the only ancient historic document that possesses a plethora of objective reasonings and evidences for its reliability.

² The existence of God can be independently explained by philosophy and science.

³ Philosopher David Hume’s argument against miracles can be reasonably debunked.

⁴ Thus, Christ’s sacrifice was a perfect sacrifice – both from the divine and human standpoint. The Lord Jesus Christ is God incarnate, the Son of God, and the second person of the blessed Trinity. HE saves mankind from sins.

⁵ Law of Non-Contradiction

⁶ Socrates

⁷ Edwin Navarro