The Righteousness Of The Best Of Us - The Saints Struggle With Original Sin

"Things About Bellevue That Embarrassed Me!" I posted in March

NASS' comment on her blog "... Then Steve Gaines had to do what he does nearly every week and make it about him. He jumped up and immediately broke into an "impromptu" a cappella solo and the congregation soon joined him. Please, pastor, I'm trying to give you some helpful advice here. It's not about you! (Nor is it about Jamie, but The Jamie Show has become a Bellevue staple.) These little spur-of-the-moment, pastoral solos, tacked onto the end of a congregational hymn or inserted into the middle of a sermon are not "impromptu," they unnecessarily and inappropriately call attention to yourself, and IMO they are not conducive to a positive worship experience."

TN Lizzie said...
"One guess where she got the tiara. "There's no telling ~ Craig or her sons? Her DIL's? Any of the Mamas who have been drawn closer to Christ through the Moms ministry? No, I was thinking from Donna Gaines. Do you really think Donna would let go of her tiara?
1:02 AM, December 16, 2008

My comments about Joyce Rogers, NASS' comments about Steve Gaines and Jamie Parker and TN Lizzie's about Donna Gaines are abrasive comments perhaps bordering on unacceptable. However they do point out the consequence of original sin in the lives of the best of believers. They point to the hold that "him who has the power of death" still has over the "not yet glorified" believer. These comments point to the inclination "concupiscence" to evil of even the sanctified. In our battles against the evil of the world and Satan, the least victorious is the battle against the flesh! We can renounce abortion and denounce Satan all the while giving place to the flesh, perhaps the most deceptive of our enemies. We ourselves are our greatest enemy. The sin of Adam and the sin of the world resides potentially in our souls. It is a daily battle to keep ourselves in humble obedience to all God has for us. These failures are so easily hidden until people like NASS, TNLizzie and myself so abrasively point them out.


So often we neglect this aspect of original sin, if we believe in it at all, that not only are the worst of humanity very evil but the best of humanity share in this heritage as well. Scripture says we all have sinned and fallen short of the kingdom of God.


Joyce Rogers, singing to her husband, the pastor of a great church, was drawing attention from the worship of God to the worship of a man. Dr Rogers should have stopped her from this awful show of flesh. If the best of us don't know how to contain the base elements how can the rest of us expect to do the right thing? This is a battle we all must fight and it requires the help of the Holy Spirit daily to do the right thing.

In Praise Of Prevenient Grace"

"And can it be that I should gain"
Charles Wesley


Long my imprisoned spirit lay
Fast bound in sin and nature's night
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light
My chains fell off, my heart was free
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

This verse is declaring the wonder of prevenient grace not the new birth. It is praising the enabling grace of God whereby a sinner rises to his feet to make a choice to follow Christ. If a Calvinist sings this song he has to change not the words but the sense of the verse. The Wesley brothers kindly requested that anyone of nonsensical theology please note in the margin or at the bottom of the page that they are not a part of such "dog­ger­el" men who would seek to mend their theology. I beg leave to men­tion a thought which has been long up­on my mind, and which I should long ago have in­sert­ed in the pub­lic pa­pers, had I not been un­will­ing to stir up a nest of horn­ets. Ma­ny gen­tle­men have done my bro­ther and me (though with­out nam­ing us) the hon­our to re­print ma­ny of our hymns. Now they are per­fect­ly wel­come to do so, pro­vid­ed they print them just as they are. But I de­sire they would not at­tempt to mend them, for they are real­ly not able. None of them is able to mend ei­ther the sense or the verse. There­fore, I must beg of them these two fa­vours: ei­ther to let them stand just as they are, to take things for bet­ter or worse, or to add the true read­ing in the mar­gin, or at the bot­tom of the page, that we may no long­er be ac­count­a­ble ei­ther for the non­sense or for the dog­ger­el of other men. -John Wesley

Naturally in our day of "it doesn't really matter what you believe anyway" such issues are of no importance. The next time you sing this hymn in Church, unless you just sing praise choruses, remember who wrote it and make a mental note that this is not the new birth nor regeneration but a Wesleyan song about prevenient grace leading to a sinner exercising his will to decide for Christ.

Now if you are saying, "Charles, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. This is just theology and when I worship in church it comes from my heart and as long as I am sincere that is all that matters to God." Remember this we must seek to worship God not just in spirit but truth.

edited to add I found this song in the hymnal at my church yesterday. When the SBC sings this song it is sung in praise of divine enablement that causes a person to rise and make a choice for Christ. When my pastor gives an altar call he assumes that those coming forward have been enabled to come and accept Christ. As a Calvinist I bow my head and pray that the regenerate will come forward confessing their sins. I am also praying for the unregenerate to remain seated until they are called! Salvation does have a protocol. Without this there is confusing destruction evidenced by churches filled with unregenerate members.

God Predestines No One To Go To Hell

Adrian Rogers was a cruel author when he wrote this little booklet, "Predestined for Hell? Absolutely not!" He had to have intentionally misrepresented the Calvinist when he accused them of believing that God arbitrarily sends a little baby to hell. By now we all know that he was constructing a straw man argument to turn around and destroy it thus disarming the Calvinist argument.


But what about his belief? Does he believe that God does not predestine people to hell? According to Rogers who goes to hell? Why, all who do not accept Christ as their personal savior.

Those who are capable of moral action can make a decision with the enablement of God for themselves to go to heaven.


What about children who have not reached this capability? Oops! They created a clause that excludes these children. It has been a historic tradition that has been in existence for as long as there were fundamentalist in Britain and America. What about those who are incapacitated intellectually to make a decision. I think they have included them in this as well.

Where did this belief that God does not predestine anyone to hell come from? In the fifth century a man named Pelagius held that a man by the natural power of free will, without the use of God's enablement, could lead a good life. For him Adam's sin was merely bad example. Augustine refuted this and the Catholic Church convened a council, Orange II, 529 AD. Pelagianism was ruled a heresy and the Church firmed up a position on the transmission of original sin.

One of the practical aspects of this was infant baptism, which was a practice of the early church fathers. The Catechism of the Catholic church states: "Because of this (death of the soul) certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin." CCC 403 Original sin is a "certainty of faith" "closely connected with that of redemption by Christ." 407

Pelagius believed that the problem with sin was surmountable. In the sixteenth century the Protestant Reformers were perceived by the Catholic Church as denying original sin, though Luther affirmed it. They were believing that the reformation was heading toward a Pelagian view and thus the Council of Trent was formed to combat that in 1546 AD. 406 The Church's teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine's reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God's grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam's fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

The Catholics correctly identified the Pelagian views as surmountable sin not affecting human choice and semi-Pelagian view of sin as insurmountable destroying free choice. All this in spite of the fact that they were practicing a semi-Pelagian gospel themselves. Now doesn't this happen all the time. We see the wrong in others while not seeing it in ourselves.

My guess is that the Catholics saw this as a defection from infant baptism. Their belief in OS affirmed the need to care for the less capable among themselves, particularly infants. This belief in baptismal regeneration was erroneous. But what seems to be important to me is a warning to not abandon the less capable among us. The argument over freedom of choice leads to abandonment of those not capable of a moral choice. Though themselves practicing baptismal regeneration they saw the problems in decisional regeneration!

They also saw the problem with Pelagian corruption of God's character. 1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want "any to perish, but all to come to repentance": Father, accept this offering from your whole family. Grant us your peace in this life, save us from final damnation, and count us among those you have chosen.

Pelagianism leads to attempts to adjust the sovereignty and character of God to fit in the scheme of human choice. The Catholics affirm emphatically, God destines no one to hell! They also affirm that God does not send someone to hell for rejecting his own Son's offer of salvation! People clearly go to hell for willfully turning away from God (a mortal sin) persistently to the end. Who go to hell? Those who inherit Adam's sin! Who go to heaven according to the Catholic lip service to doctrine? Those He has chosen! God destines no one to hell and all who go to heaven are destined by his choice to go to heaven! What a definite clear presentation of grace!

The Catholics saw the error in Adrian Rogers' theology hundreds of years ago! They failed to see the truth in the Protestant Reformers in the sixteenth century.

Prevenient Grace

I wholly reject any ideal that PG is scriptural. I was raised in a Wesleyan Holiness Pentecostal Church. French L Arrington wrote, "Unconditional Eternal Security, Myth or Truth?"
He states: "Without Jesus Christ as their Savior, all people share a common spiritual condition - inwardly and outwardly sin dominates their lives. Failing to seek god, they are in a desperate condition (Rom 3:11). But when someone seeks God, it is evident that God through His grace, is seeking that person. This requires the inward prompting of the Holy Spirit and shows a positive response to Jesus Christ. Such prompting is often called "prevenient grace," which is grace that prepares the way for us to receive saving grace or some other other enabling grace."
The Holy Spirit enables unbelievers to repent and to accept God's gracious invitation to salvation. Because the holy Spirit draws all people to Christ, each person is a candidate for salvation and can respond favorably to the call of the gospel, which is God's invitation to receive Christ as Savior and live the Christian life."

You must be born again to see the kingdom of God. Apart from the new birth you are not able to see the kingdom of God. The Holy Spirit baptizes the sinner into the body of Christ. Then the sinner sees the kingdom of God! After that he repents and is baptized in water to receive the remission of sins.

The Spark Of Life

I bought a book at a garage sale: "Doctrines of the Bible," Herald Press, by the Mennonite General Conference, 1925.

The section , "Man in his fallen state" states in clear scriptural support of the fallen state of sinful man. There were five pages with good presentation and then on the sixth page a short final paragraph, "the spark of life": "This is not the 'spark of divinity' which some people seem to think may be found in every human soul. Dismiss that delusive thought, if you have ever entertained it. All unsaved souls are dead absolutely "dead in trespasses and sins," depraved and and defiled, without hope and "without God in the world." Yet there is something in all men that is capable of responding to the goodness and grace of God. As Adam, perfect and sinless, had something within to which the devil could appeal and get a response, so the soul that is "dead in trespasses and sins" has something within which God appeals and may get a response. Yea, the hour "now is, when when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live" (Jno. 5:25).

This is a case of semi-Pelagian's "island of righteousness" - "spark of life." From this mythical spark ignites the choice of the sinner to cry out to Christ. This in spite of so many scriptures supporting the sinner's dead state and depravity.

Why can't men allow the Father the exclusive right to choose whomsoever he wills according to his own good pleasure send the Holy Spirit to impart regeneration and graciously grant life in Christ? In spite of the truth of the Word they insist that man must decide for himself.

Is God gracious without us insisting He be gracious? Can you see the offense to God with this theology?

Can You Spot The Error? (Thought I Had Forgotten?)

"To be true to himself and to his holy standards, God justly sentenced Adam and Eve to death and expelled them from the garden of Eden. Thus, Paradise, happiness, and everlasting life were lost, while sin, suffering, and death resulted. What a tragic development for the human race! However, immediately after sentencing the couple, God promised to undo all the harm resulting from their sin without compromising his own righteous standards.
Jehovah purposed to make it possible for the offspring of Adam and Eve to be freed from sin’s deadly grip. He accomplished this through Jesus Christ. Through him, God will eliminate sin and all its effects and will make the earth into a global paradise, just as he purposed in the beginning." *

Without looking at the source can you detect the error in this passage? There is a hidden error and you may not find it without cheating. It is a disguised message to conceal the error.

edited to add:
This treats the actions of God as an afterthought brought on by the sin of Adam and Eve. There was no need of redemption nor a redeemer prior to this event. My Jehovah Witness friend confirmed this belief and when I ask him about the foreknowledge of God he said that God did not foreknow this event.

* source

God's Delusions

Genesis 18:17 (King James Version) And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do?

Isaiah 66:4 (King James Version) I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.

2 Thessalonians 2:11 (King James Version) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: