Pragmatic vs. Kingdom Outcomes

It seems that in many of these political discussions on the upcoming election, we tend, as a group, to think a lot about political policy outcomes but think little to none about Kingdom outcomes. Here is what I mean:

What if our witness to the world depended (in large part) on how we collectively vote as Christians? The world is definitely watching. How many "Christians" would be willing to give up their vote for their candidate if they knew it meant, by the grace of God, more people coming to Christ? ... but in exchange we knew we would have to live under a much more oppressive state. I obviously do not know God's secret will, but my point is that obedience, instead of pragmatism, is definitely more aligned with God's revealed will and His redemptive plan, especially when much of the world would see mass evangelical votes for Trump as an obvious and blatant hypocrisy. As followers of Christ, our choices should be based, not on their perceived outcome, but in our trust that wherever God leads is always right, even if the results may temporarily appear worse politically.

Since both candidates are just awful, at this point God appears to be bringing us as a unit to a place where we are stripped of all hope in an ideal outcome ... so we can only, in utter dependence, pray for Him to intervene and faithfully serve Him by doing what we know to be right.

Just consider where our culture wars have gotten us so far.  How many decisions were made by pragmatism rather than trusting in God along the way? Have you ever read Crime and Punishment? Doing something evil hoping that good may result? No, that shouldn't be an option for us. Obedience is our job. But how the results fall into place are His. A pragmatic choice may, for the moment, appear to further Christian principles the legal realm, but at what cost? Perhaps the cost is lost opportunity on souls.

Mon, 08/01/2016 - 18:13 -- john_hendryx

Which Flavor or Ice Cream Do Atheists Prefer?

If morality is relative and based on personal preference, as atheists claim, then their moral judgments of others carry no more weight than if they told you which flavor of ice cream they prefer.

There is an inconsistency here. To claim to know what's right for everyone requires universal moral absolutes. So every time moral relativists declare how other persons OUGHT to believe or behave they are demonstrating their underlying belief in God (because they are appealing to universals we ALL SHOULD believe in) and their simultaneous suppression of that truth (since they claim there is no God) Their beliefs, therefore, betray the confession of their lips.

In moral relativism there are no universal "shoulds" or "oughts" to abide by. If there were it would no longer be relativism.

As an atheist you can be a morally upright citizen but you could also be a morally debauched rapist or murderer - in both cases you are being consistent with atheism. Good or bad are equally evanescent and equally valid expressions of atheism. But atheists often tell me they will do what is best for human flourishing ... but another atheist will do what is harmful to human flourishing. What is the difference? Both are being consistent atheists ... in equal measure. There is no better or worse in moral relativism.

Do I have any examples of atheists espousing moral absolutes?

Sun, 07/31/2016 - 14:58 -- john_hendryx

Does Belief in Effectual Grace Make God's Universal Call of the Gospel a Deception?

"All that the Father gives to Me will come to me..." (John 6:37)

VISITOR: This means He gives the ones whom he knows will come. I used to be a Calvinist, so I know all the philosophical reasonings that go on.

RESPONSE: You said, "He gives the ones whom he knows will come". UMM, Who is using philosophical reasoning here? These are YOUR words, not the Texts. You added them. And you do it as if you really believe its okay to do that. That is called self-deception. You are playing with fire by adding your own words to the Bible in order to to fit it to your viewpoint. Again, Jesus said, "ALL" (not some), of those the Father gives him will come [to faith] in Him...the giving of the Father to Him precedes their coming to faith in Him.

In addition, God is very sincere in calling us to what we OUGHT to do, even if we cannot ... because we will not ... the fault is ours because we are captive to our own sin. He is not coercing people or holding them back. They run from God because they love darkness and hate the light (John 3:19, 20)

VISITOR: Calvinists makes God insincere and deceptive- God commands all men everywhere to repent, yet made no plans to make the atonement for most and never had any intention of giving faith to most. That's like me inviting all my neighbors to a big party, but only making enough food for my next door neighbor because I never really planned on my whole neighborhood coming and never made food provisions for the entire neighborhood. Ridiculous, to say the least.

Thu, 07/28/2016 - 15:28 -- john_hendryx

Holy Perfection Demands Holy Perfection.

Holy perfection demands holy perfection. When we all fell in Adam, God did not lower His holy standard to accommodate man's sin. No ... God will not compromise His holy character because, to do so, He would no longer be holy and thus no longer be God. So His demand for holy perfection remains even though fallen men are morally impotent to perfectly live up to His holy standard. Left to our flesh we have no power to raise ourselves out of our misery. And the soul that sins must die (Ezek.18:20). What can be done? It sounds hopeless.

In mercy, God came in the flesh in Jesus Christ as the only person to ever live without sin and who died a death He did not deserve, taking the place of all the rebellious sinners who believe in Him. But men STILL love darkness (John 3:19-20) and will not believe (Rom 3; 1 Cor 2:14) That is why, in addition to outwardly calling people to believe the gospel - a gospel which is a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, the Spirit must also inwardly call and quicken (1 Cor 1:23-24; John 6:63) - why salvation must be all of grace (Eph 2:8-9) and why works are woefully insufficient. That is why, in love He set apart a people for himself to save out of the world; people from every tribe, nation, language and people (Rev 5:9). For if He left us all to ourselves to our own desires and fallen wills to make the choice - the choice our own fallen flesh - no one on earth would have hope for eternal life. No he must remake us, renew us in the Spirit if we are to see the truth, beauty and excellency of Christ and so believe in Him.




Thu, 07/21/2016 - 12:34 -- john_hendryx

An Exalted View of Own Goodness

As human beings we have a strong tendency to have an exalted view of our own character, and we flatter ourselves. But a Christian is one who, by the mercy of God, has cast aside all high views of his own character and righteousness. The beginning, middle and end of his hope is found, not in himself, but in the righteousness of Another. He is not one who thinks he is more righteous than others but, exactly the opposite, he is one who, by the grace of God, recognizes he is not righteous. But thanks be to God for His mercy, Jesus comes not to condemn, but to forgive all who acknowledge the truth that they are ill-deserving sinners and whose only credential on their resumes (for acceptance by God) is Christ.

This is perhaps the greatest difference that God has made between the Christian and the non-Christian. The non-Christian either 1) is attempting to work their way to heaven or 2) one who thinks presumptuously that, if there is a God, then they are already good enough to get in or 3) they don't care. In the first two instances they are trusting in their own righteousness. In the last instance, they have abandon themselves to their sin and corruptions. The Christian, in contrast, is one who has beheld the beauty and holiness of God and knows he is undone and no more deserving of heaven than anyone on earth ... and knows, in truth, that he is justly deserving of God's displeasure and that his only hope is in God's mercy toward Him in Christ.


Tue, 07/19/2016 - 14:26 -- john_hendryx

Give Jesus a Try?

Sadly, many of those out there who now call themselves "evangelicals" are really nothing more than deists whose religion is to spread the so-called gospel of Christian values, behavior modification and therapeutic "salvation". It is painful to say but this large amorphous group can no more be identified with the Biblical gospel of grace than can Roman Catholicism. Both are semi-pelagian heretical movements that have only a nominal relation to the redemptive message of the Bible. Therefore, it is imperative that biblical Christianity make a clean break with these groups to make a clear distinction, lest the average man confuse the two and the gospel is completely lost on them.

Take the rally in Washington D.C. yesterday that had Pope Francis as one of the speakers. Pope Francis!!!! Speaking of Christianity I understand that he said, "Give it a try! You have nothing to lose! Try it."

But Christ is not a thing one gives a try like Coca Cola. No, Jesus is Lord and is soon coming to invade with His armies and will overthrow all injustice with the breath of His mouth. He is offering pardon in advance of His invasion to all those who receive Him (John 1:12, 13). Those who, by the grace of God, have joined themselves to Him now before He invades will be considered His ally and He will raise them up to be co-heirs with Christ as sons. Those who refuse will be trampled down in the wine press of the wrath of the Lord almighty.(Rev. 19:5) Trust in Him today and escape the wrath of God. That is a command, not something you "try".

Sun, 07/17/2016 - 12:10 -- john_hendryx

Doesn't the Story of Cain and Abel Overthrow Calvinism?

Question: Doesn't the story of Cain and Abel defeat Calvinism? "The LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.”" -Genesis 4:6-7 (ESV) See God tells him if he does something he will be accepted.

Response: "If you do well" is a phrase with a verb in the subjunctive mood - a conditional statement which asserts nothing indicatively. "if you are willing", "if you hear", "if you do" declare, not man's ability, but his duty - what he OUGHT to do but such statements say nothing of what he CAN do.

While it is true that if Cain did well he would be accepted and that he had a duty to resist sin. But that doesn't mean that he had the moral ability to do so.

The passage also contains the command, " must rule over it." What does the Bible teach about the purpose of Divine commands? According to Paul in Romans 3:19-20, the purpose of imperatives (commands) are to reveal sin, man's inability, and NOT his ability to do what he is commanded. It reveals his impotence and desperate need of grace. This is the reason the Bible ITSELF gives for God commanding us to do things we we are incapable of doing. Therefore any other conclusion is man extrapolating using only his own human reason to conclude that we must have the ability if God commands it. In this case human reason directly contradicts God's word.

So God commanded Cain to do something he was unable to do and the whole time God knew he couldn't do it?

Sun, 07/17/2016 - 10:00 -- john_hendryx

Diversity through Relentless Conformity

Dear friends, there is a great malignancy in our land called secular progressivism - a movement that ironically wants diversity through relentless conformity. But we cannot continue in our attempts to root out the cancer with the band-aid solution of surface arguments. While I do not doubt their sincerity in wanting to resolve the issues of the world, secularists do not know God, history or human nature, so their so-called solutions only serve to exacerbate the world's problems. I think we can all agree that there are serious problems in our world, but we are far apart on how these problems become solved. You and I know that sin cannot be effectively treated with Secularism, Marxism, liberation theology, more laws which increase power to politicians or re-educating our children. These "solutions" are the problem. They are a destructive force. Any view of the world which does not recognize the inherent sinfulness of man will put no limits on man's power. We can already see that the rule of law and balance of power is being torn down piece by piece and replaced by the rule of man. And so the more these "solutions" are forced upon us and our children the greater divisions and corruptions we will see.
So instead of treating cancer with a band-aid we must begin challenging our theological opponents such that they come face to face with their own basic assumptions and presuppositions about life. Socially liberal presuppositions about truth and the nature of humanity are as religious as anyone else. They have created their own narrative of the world and the nature of human beings, about who we are and where we are going. "Progressives" even have a whole narrative of redemption and liberation.
Thu, 07/14/2016 - 09:33 -- john_hendryx

Some Recoil At the Idea that God Ordains Evil or Disasters

It genuinely baffles me that there are professing Christians out there (e.g. Rachel Held Evans, Roger Olson) who, because of moral qualms, reject the biblical idea that disasters in this world are ordained by God. (Exodus 4:10-11, 12:29; Proverbs 16:4; 2 Sam 24:15-16; 1 Sam 15:2-3; Job 2:10; Isa 45:7; Amos 3:6; Eph 1:11) These concepts are so central to the biblical message that it makes the message of Christianity incoherent if they are rejected. Do they not stop to consider that due to the rebellion of Adam, humanity is now fallen and this whole world is under the judgment of God? And that anything that happens to us short of hell in this life is a mercy reminding us of our desperate condition and our need to flee to Christ for forgiveness?  Do these teachers think that we humans are innocent and do not deserve judgment? That a loving God would never do such a thing? Is not God also holy?  I do acknowledge that it is hard to behold the reality of our grim condition in our world, but it is vital if we are going to help those around us.

Some on the theological left contend that a truly sovereign God is a dangerous and un-Biblical concept. They cannot swallow the concept that the God of the Bible does preordain disasters, even disasters and evil that are enacted by men (Acts 2:23), and they can be seen as having been caused by sin, particularly original sin. That original sin puts humanity squarely in a place of judgment. Many of these folks on the left want to know how we can grieve disasters when they are ultimately God's plan. Reason:precisely because they are a punishment for original and continued sin. Ultimately catastrophes cause us to examine our own personal sin as well as the fallen state of the world. (Luke 13:4) Lord have mercy on us all.

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 17:32 -- john_hendryx


Subscribe to Blog Feed

By Topic


By Scripture

Old Testament









1 Samuel

2 Samuel

1 Kings

2 Kings

1 Chronicles

2 Chronicles








Song of Solomon


















New Testament







1 Corinthians

2 Corinthians





1 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

1 Timothy

2 Timothy





1 Peter

2 Peter

1 John

2 John

3 John



By Author

Latest Links