Transubstantiation: Biblical or Non-Biblical

Pretty much everyone who has ever been to church knows about the Lord’s Supper.  Different denominations partake in the Lord’s Supper in different ways. Some have grape juice and wafers, some have grape juice and a loaf of bread, some have individual cups, some dunk the bread in one cup, some drink from the same cup, and so on. Catholic churches call the Lord’s Supper the Eucharist, and it is considered to be a sacrament. They believe that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Jesus Christ through a process called Transubstantiation.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church it is a Holy Sacrament and is necessary for eternal salvation. Most non-Catholic churches do not believe that the bread and wine actually turn into Jesus’ literal body and blood. They view those passages in scripture as purely metaphoric, as many of Jesus’ teachings are. Most non-Catholics do not believe that the Lord’s supper has anything to do with eternal salvation. They view it as more of a way to remember Jesus’ sacrifice.

With different churches believing vastly different things regarding this subject and its connection to eternal salvation, it is important to see what the actual Word of God says.

The original event from which the Lord’s Supper originated is most often referred to as “The Last Supper”. It is the final meal that Jesus shares with His disciples in the “upper room”. It served the dual purpose of venerating Passover, the escape of the Jews from slavery in Egypt, and the establishment of a new tradition, Christianity.

Matthew 26:26-30

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

Mark 14:22-26

The next record of the “Last Supper” is in the Book of Mark. It is almost identical to the description in Matthew’s gospel.

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.”

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it.

“This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many,” he said to them. “Truly I tell you, I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”

When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

Luke 22:14-20

When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”

After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

John 6:25-63

John records the event of the Passover meal on chapter 13, but he does not mention the Lord’s Supper ceremony. Although he neglects to mention that event, he does, in fact recite a very similar statement by Jesus in chapter 6. The context of this passage is that Jesus has just fed the 5,000 by multiplying the bread and fish. After that He and His disciples go across the lake to Capernaum. The large group of Jews, eager to see Him perform more miracles, follow him there.

When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?”

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”

Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”

Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

“Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.”

Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.  All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”

“Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”

Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life.

Further practices of the Lord’s Supper

Following those accounts of the original teachings pf Jesus before His crucifixion, there are several more passages where the tradition of the Lord’s Supper is practiced.

Luke 24:30-35

On the road to Emmaus, two of Jesus’ followers encountered Him, in His resurrected body. They did not recognize Him as they walked with Him telling Him about their disappointment that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb. Jesus calls them foolish and explains to them what the prophets said about Jesus having to suffer. He continued walking with them and they invited Him to eat with them.

When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”

They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.

Acts 2:42

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

Acts 2:46-47

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Acts 20:7

On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.

Acts 20:11

Then he went upstairs again and broke bread and ate. After talking until daylight, he left.

Acts 27:33-36

Just before dawn Paul urged them all to eat. “For the last fourteen days,” he said, “you have been in constant suspense and have gone without food—you haven’t eaten anything. Now I urge you to take some food. You need it to survive. Not one of you will lose a single hair from his head.”  After he said this, he took some bread and gave thanks to God in front of them all. Then he broke it and began to eat. They were all encouraged and ate some food themselves.

1 Corinthians

We see in Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth that One of the many things he is reprimanding them for is their failure to properly observe the Lord’s Supper. There are two passages that deal with that issue.

10:14-22

Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.

 Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? Do I mean then that food sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons. Are we trying to arouse the Lord’s jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

11:17-34

In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval. So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, for when you are eating, some of you go ahead with your own private suppers. As a result, one person remains hungry and another gets drunk. Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? Certainly not in this matter!

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world.

So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together. Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.

Assessment

There are two possibilities of the Lord’s Supper we can gather from scripture.

1.     Jesus literally changed the bread and wine into His own flesh and blood

2.     Jesus was using a metaphor to describe His death as the means of life for us.

In the synoptic Gospel’s account of the Last Supper, there is no indication that Christ miraculously turned the wine into blood or bread into His flesh. At the wedding in Cana, when He turns the water into wine, there is indication that a miracle has occurred. There is nothing of the sorts in any of these passages.

If the bread and wine is literally turned into his flesh and blood, then there are some elements in the scripture that do not line up. In both Matthew and Mark, Jesus takes the first takes the wine, then says it is His blood, and then refers to it as wine again (fruit of the vine). If it literally was turned into His blood, then this seems to indicate that it turns back into wine, or else He wouldn’t have referred to it as wine the second time.

In Luke, Jesus states “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”

 If it really were His blood in the cup, that would seem to contradict Hebrews 9:15 which states,

“Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.” The Hebrews text states that His death on the cross was when the New Covenant happened, thus meaning that the cup was merely a symbol of Christ explaining what was about to happen on the cross.

Furthermore, the Catholic church teaches that the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper) is a true sacrifice. If that were true, then Christ Sacrificed Himself twice within hours. Once in the upper room, and again on the cross. If it were a real sacrifice of His literal body and blood, then His sacrifice on the cross was not needed.

Hebrews 10:11-14 tells us that “every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.” If the Eucharist really were a sacrifice that we were to partake in over and over again to cover our sins as part of salvation, as the Council of Trent suggest in Sess. XIII, cap. ii, this passage would be false. Jesus was the final sacrifice that takes away all sins forever. And by that sacrifice, He has perfected (justified) those who are being sanctified. Notice the tenses there. “Perfected” (past tense), and “are being sanctified” (present and future tense). This means that we are are made perfect, or justified, in God’s eyes. We know from countless other verses that we are made perfect when we believe in His death and resurrection as the final payment for our sins. That is something that is in a believer’s past. The moment we believe, Christ’s righteousness is imputed to our account and we are seen as Christ’s perfection. To be sanctified means “to be made holy or to be set apart as holy”. We know from scripture that sanctification is an ongoing process in a believers life. It begins the moment we believe, and as we follow the Lord’s commands and life a life pleasing to Him with our works, we become more and more sanctified, more like Christ. This passage is saying that Christ’s once and for all sacrifice is what saves those who have believed and are being made more like Christ. We have nothing to offer as part of salvation. Christ paid the price because He knew that we never could. That is His grace.

Looking at the Book of John, his purpose statement of writing the book is written in chapter 20 verses 30 and 31,

Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

His stated purpose of writing the book is that we may believe, and by believing, we may have life in His name. The Greek word “pisteuo”, which means “to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to place confidence in” is translated into English in the New Testament as the words “believe” “faith” “trust in”. In the Book of John alone, the word pisteuo is used approximately 76 times to as the sole means by which man receives eternal life. Not once are any of those uses paired with any type of action or work.

In the lengthy conversation Jesus has with the Jews in John 6 he reiterates to the Jews that they will not have eternal life unless they eat His flesh and drink His blood. This disturbs them and they think He is crazy and they leave.

The context of this passage, as previously stated is that Jesus has just fed the 5,000 by multiplying the bread and fish. After that He and His disciples go across the lake to Capernaum. The large group of Jews, eager to see Him perform more miracles, follow him there. Six times in this chapter Jesus says to these people that eternal life (salvation) is received by by faith alone (6:29,35,36,40,47,64). He even states several times that He knows that these people do not believe in Him. From their attitude and words and from what Jesus says to them, it is obvious that they are only drawn to Him because of the miracles. They chase Him all the way across the lake to see more miracles after being miraculously fed by the fish and bread. They were in awe and amusement over the miraculous things, yet they did not seek salvation or to follow Him as God, they simply wanted a magic show. You can tell in their exchanged that Jesus is obviously getting frustrated with them. After He has told them 6 times that they must believe in Him alone for eternal life, they still do not understand and ask for more miracles. It is then that He makes the statements about eating His flesh and drinking His blood. That really confuses them and disgusts them and they leave. After that the disciples are confused as well, but unlike the thousands of followers, they remain with Jesus. They ask Jesus about it and He responds with “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

So, after saying that they have to eat His flesh and drink His blood in order to have eternal life, Jesus then turns to those who did not leave him and tell them that it is the Spirit that gives life, not the flesh, the flesh counts for nothing. The messages He has spoken to them are spirit and life.

The logical conclusion to this passage is that Jesus, talking to a group of Jews that He knows is only following Him for a magic show, after telling them half a dozen times that the only way to eternal life is believing in Him, uses a metaphor that He knows with freak them out, in order to get them to go away. He then tells His disciples that it is not the flesh, but the spirit and message that He teaches that gives life.

I find it really neat that even though He knows they aren’t there for Him, and that they don’t believe in Him, He still takes time to share the gospel with them six times before He scares them off. This really shows us the patience of God and that no matter how annoying we are and how much we don’t want anything to do with Him, He still shares with all the way to eternal life.

If what the Catholic teaching says is true, and it is His literal blood and body through the Lord’s Supper that gives us eternal life, then this passage would show Jesus contradicting Himself six times about salvation. And it would have an additional 70 contradictions about salvation being by faith in Christ’s finished work alone. If Jesus contradicted Himself, then that makes Him a liar, which makes Him sinful, therefore disqualifying Him from being God, thus making Christianity not true. Additionally, if their teaching of the Lord’s Super being part of salvation is true and that contradicts 70 other places in this book, that begs the question, how can we trust any of the Bible as true if there are so many contradictions? The very belief of anything other than salvation by grace through faith alone in the finished work of Christ, completely unravels Christ’s deity and the very fabric of Christianity as a whole.

If it literally was Christ’s actual blood and body, why didn’t the disciples call it that? We see in the Book of Acts that they still refer to it as “breaking the bread”. If it were really His body, wouldn’t they say “breaking His body”?

In 1 Corinthians we see Paul reprimanding the church in Corinth for partaking in the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner. They came together for a feast, as was the custom, and some were being greedy and eating too much, and some were drinking too much of the wine and getting drunk. Paul tells them that as they partake in the feast, they are supposed to do it in remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice for them. He points out that they were clearly not doing that. They were just being as Corinthians usually were. Another point here that seems to contradict the claim of the literal blood of Christ being present in the Lord’s Supper is that the people are getting drunk off of the Cup of the Lord. If it truly were Jesus’ literal blood, they wouldn’t be getting drunk off of it.

The lack of any indication of a miracle in these passages, combined with the obvious contradictions of this particular belief in scripture seems to indicate that the phrases spoken by Christ in these passages are a metaphor. It is not unreasonable to view this as metaphoric. Throughout scripture we see Jesus talking in metaphors quite often. If they were not metaphoric, then that brings into question many other passages where Jesus speaks. If the Catholic teaching is true, then, logically, these other passages must also be taken literal. It would mean that Jesus is a literal door and gate that opens and closes (John 10:19), a literal vine (John 15:5), a literal shepherd (John 10:11), a literal light (John 8:12), and a literal temple (John 2:19). Additionally, we, as Christians would be literal branches (John 15:5), literal sheep (John 10:11), and literal light, salt, and a city (Matthew 5:13-16). Taking these literally opens up a whole other series of contradictions from Jesus and the Bible, furthering the unraveling of Christianity.

Upon studying the historic records it is revealed that the teaching of Transubstantiation wasn’t taught until 1134 A.D.. The first recorded teaching of this was by Hildebert de Lavardin, over 1,100 years after the death of Christ. Furthermore, it didn’t become official Catholic doctrine until a papal decree in 1215 A.D.. 81 years after it was initially introduced and taught, Pope Innocent III declared it an official Catholic doctrine.

In conclusion, there are countless aspects that disprove the teaching of Transubstantiation. Additionally, there are literally hundreds of passages in scripture that discredit the idea of the Lord’s Supper being part of eternal salvation. When studying scripture, it is imperative that one reads the verses in context of the other verses, that is how to understand the meaning of the text. One must understand what the words mean in their normal sense in the context in which they are written. Not doing so results in confusion, contradiction, and perversion of the Word of God. As previously stated, if this teaching is true, then it opens up hundreds of contradictions in scripture, discredits Christ from being God, and completely unravels the very fabric of Christianity.

*          *          *

Deceitful Phrases Used To Share False Gospels

This past weekend I attended my church's annual Men's Retreat at Land O Lakes in Brooksville, MS. It was a good but rainy weekend. We had about 25 men at the retreat and our guest speaker was Dr Fred Chay. Dr. Chay is the Dean of Doctoral Studies at Grace School of Theology. He did an amazing job talking about the differences between man-made theologies that twist and distort Scripture and what Scripture actually says. It is sad to see that most of the churches in America today hold to what theologies say rather than taking scripture as it is. Whenever I listen to a sermon or read stuff from Christian authors, 9 times out of 10 a false gospel is presented. Sadly, most church laymen won't recognize this false teaching.

As I've previously written, most of these false Gospel presentations combine Justification and Sanctification.  This problem leads to unbelievers thinking they must do good works in order to be saved. Of course the teachers of this confusing false gospel messages have some type of philosophical semantic loophole that they use to explain how their conditions for salvation aren't good works, but that is simply an attempt to make scripture fit their theologies. I believe that many of these teachers of this false Gospel mean well. I think many of them are saved. I just think that their minds have been twisted by false teaching of theologies that do not line up with scripture. I pray for them and I hope that their blinders are taken off and they see the simplicity of the Gospel of God's amazing grace!

Dr. Chay gave a list of the most common phrases used by teachers that teach this false gospel.

1. "Give your heart to Christ"
2. "If any man wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow Me"
3. "James 4:7-10 is the clearest presentation of the gospel: "submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands you sinners and purify your hearts you double minded."."
4. "May the Lord reveal to the sinners that the only way for them to be saved from their sins is to repent with godly sorrow inn their hearts to the Lord."
5. "We have the warning of Christ that He will not receive us into His Kingdom until we are ready to give up all, until we are ready to turn from all sin in our lives."
6. "Do we literally have to give away everything  we own to become Christians? No, but we do have to be willing to forsake all."
7. "Come forward and follow Christ in baptism."
8. "No one was ever saved by simply believing  without a commitment and the manifestation of righteousness."
9. "Repentance, confession, and submitting to the lordship of Christ are the intrinsic elements of gracious salvation and transformation."
10. "Believing in Christ is: believing God is the loving Father and that Jesus Christ is God and that all that He says is true and have an unswerving, unchanging, unquestioning obedience to that belief. That is saving faith."
11. "How are we saved? We must accept Jesus Christ as our Savior. That's the beginning, but then we must come to Him as Lord and commit our entire life to Him. And there must be the manifestation of the fruit of repentance."

In his book, "Desiring God", theologian, author, and pastor John Piper puts forth six conditions for salvation:

"These are just some of the conditions that the New Testament says we must meet in order to inherit final salvation. We must believe on Jesus and receive Him and turn from our sin and obey Him and humble ourselves like little children and love Him more than we love our family, possessions, or our own life. This is what it means to be converted to Christ. This alone is the way of Life everlasting."(pgs. 65-66).

Likewise, another popular theologian, author, and pastor John MacArthur lists three conditions for salvation in his book "Hard to Believe":

"It's pretty simple. Anyone who wants to come after Jesus into the Kingdom of God - anyone who wants to be a Christian - has to face three commands: 1) Deny himself, 2) take up his cross daily, and 3) follow Him." (pg. 6).

Those 11 phrases and the two quotes from these well-known authors are prime examples of how this popular false gospel of faith plus good works is presented.

Scripture tells us many places that the sole requirement for salvation is to simply believe.
Ephesians 2:8-9 tells us: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
In Acts 16:30-31 we read: " 'Sirs, what must I do to be saved?' So they said, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved...'."
John 3:16 says: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

The purpose of the book of John is stated in chapter 19 verse 31: "These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name". With a book with that evangelistic purpose, you would expect for it to tell how to receive everlasting life. If what all the 11 phrases and the quotes from the pastors say are correct, you would expect to see those conditions of good works listed in this evangelistic book to tell people how to be saved, yet not once in the entire book are any of those conditions listed. On the contrary, over 73 times in that book alone the word "belief" or "faith" is used as the sole means by which one is saved.

Adding all these other conditions for salvation is in complete opposition to scripture. Don't get me wrong, all of those things are great things that we should do as believers, but they are all listed in scripture as acts of good works that we should do AFTER we are saved. We are not obligated to do these things. Yet, we should do them out of love and thankfulness to the Lord. These good works are a part of our sanctification, our Christian life, becoming more and more holy and Christ-like. These things are not automatic or inevitable for all Christians.  More times than not this attitude and living a life of good works in service and commitment to the Lord comes from discipleship and spending time in in the word and in prayer.

These things are not conditions for eternal life, but are conditions for walking in fellowship with God, sanctification, and receiving rewards in the Kingdom.

 Eternal life is given freely as a gift from God, received simply by believing in Christ for salvation. Being saved is only the beginning of the Christian life. Yes, many who have simply believed do not grow in their walk with the Lord, they remain as babes in Christ, but Scripture tells us that God wants so much more for us. Although we are saved and will spend eternity with Him, there is so much more that He wants for us. Yes, getting saved is great, and that is how we receive everlasting life, but that is not all that is available to us as believers. He loves us and wants to fellowship with us here and now in our earthly bodies. As believers, if we choose to accept His offer of fellowship, He can bring about amazing experiences for us now.

In his book, "Absolutely Free!", the late Zane Hodges describes this amazing experience that Christ offers specifically to believers:

"The Lord Jesus Christ, therefore, offers Himself to individual believers as a divine Guest. If they will respond to Him, if they will love and obey Him, He will make their hearts and lives His personal habitation so that their experience will be like having supper with their Savior. Across the common 'table' which they share, they can communicate freely and He can make Himself known to them. He can manifest Himself to them... Yes, our bodies are the temple of God (1 Co 6:19-20). But our lives—our earthly experiences—can likewise become His place of residence." 

“For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ... that He would grant you ... to be strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith..." (‭‭Eph‬ ‭3:14, 16-17‬) 

But did not Christ already dwell in their hearts? Most assuredly He did. Yet Paul can conceive of a special kind of inner experience of the Savior, which he associates with inward, spiritual strength (Eph 3:16) and with 'being rooted and grounded in love' (Eph 3:17). "
No, love is not an automatic response which every believer inevitably gives to God. The Christian is not a robot who has been programmed to love the Lord and who can do nothing but what he or she was programmed to do. The very thought is unnatural and abhorrent. 

God did not create machines. He created real flesh-and-blood human beings. And when humankind fell in the Garden of Eden and lost the capacity to love their Maker,  God redeemed them through the cross and re-imparted this capacity to every believer in Christ. Now He calls His children to the kind of loving obedience which is rooted in a gift of life that is absolutely free. 'We love Him because He first loved us' (1Jn 4:19).
But God Himself loves us freely and He loves us with infinite spontaneity. So He obviously desires that our love for Him should mirror His own for us and be spontaneous in return. 

For that reason, in the New Testament Scriptures, God seeks our love. He encourages and invites it, and He promises to meet it with an experience of rich fellowship with Himself. He desires our love greatly, to be sure. But He will never compel it: 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock.' "

This is Ferguson: Emotions over Facts

"Truth is the first casualty of the feelings-driven society." -Ben Shapiro

The streets are filled with angry citizens. Screaming, shouting, chanting words of anger, frustration, and disappointment. "No justice, no peace!" Shouts one citizen. Down the road a car sits on the side of the road engulfed in flames. Police and national guardsmen patrol the streets in full body armor and riot gear carrying military grade rifles and driving heavily armored vehicles. Citizens within inches of policemens' face mask screaming in fits of rage and fury.  An armored national guardsmen throws a canister into the rioting crowd. Tear gas starts building from the midst of the crowd from the canister. Citizens cough and cover their faces, yet their shouting grows louder and their tempers grow hotter. A cool winter's breeze blows through the air clearing the gas. Citizens turn their attention to the police and national guardsmen with hate filled eyes. The law enforcers brace themselves. This is going to be a long night...

No, this isn't a scene from the newest Hollywood blockbuster, this is reality. This is Ferguson.

This all stems back to an incident in August in Ferguson Missouri. A white police officer named Darren Wilson  shot and killed an 18 year old black man named Michael Brown. When this happened, accusations of racism were thrown saying that this was a racial crime of hatred. Whites killing blacks. While it is true that awhile man killed a black man, there were no indications of it being racially motivated. 

When the incident happened, riots broke out in the city and across the country. Black citizens rioting and looting claiming that it was injustice and that it was all about the racist whites wanting to kill blacks. Infamous instigators like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson took the stage and pushed the racial killing perspective. Their speeches and words encouraged the rioters to continue the riots. 

On Monday, November 24th, the grand jury announced that Wilson would not be charged with anything. They heard his testimony along with over a dozen eye witness accounts and concluded that Wilson was acting well within the bounds of the law for a police officer to defend himself against an attacker. For the days leading up to the grand jury decision, the media anticipated a riot to occur, and that is just what happened. Looting, property damage, fires burning buildings down. Citizens attacking each other and cops. Citizens blowing up cop cars, ect... 

Th night of the verdict The New York Times reported the following:

"At a news conference on Monday night, President Obama urged protesters to be peaceful, saying that is what Michael Brown’s family wanted.

“Michael Brown’s parents have lost more than anyone,” he said. “We should be honoring their wishes.”

President Obama appealed to law enforcement to show restraint in responding to the protests. "

For a timeline of events that took place that night you can visit: http://tinyurl.com/news-blogs-nytimes

All of this brings me to my point. As I scrolled through my newsfeed on Facebook and Twitter that Monday night almost every post was talking about the verdict. The views were split. About 50 percent were angry statuses disappointed with the verdict, believing that it was an act of racial violence. About 40 percent were those who approved of the verdict and were mad at the allegations of racism. About 10 percent were people, like myself who stepped back from the high emotional tensions of the issue and looked at the solid facts and evidence and acknowledged the tragedy of a young man dying but also believe that the officer did nothing wrong and that there were no racial motivations. People in the latter category urged for prayers and peace and non violence and pleaded with others to see the truth of the facts. 

The group that was upset with the verdict was majority blacks and white liberals. The people who agreed with the verdict were majority whites and black conservatives. The people in the third group were white and black conservatives and liberals who had actually examined the facts and weren't emotionally charged.

Many of the blacks who were upset with the verdict took to posting statuses and links about how white people were hateful bigots and how white cops were racist and how black people are always the victims. Me, being white, am hurt by these claims. I love blacks as much as I love any race. One of my biggest heroes has always been MLK. I have always advocated against racism and for Civil Rights. I believe in everything MLK stood for. I believe that we are all humans and all deserve equal rights and none should ever be discriminated against. I openly criticize those whites i hear making racist remarks. If I were alive during the civil rights era, I would've been standing with the blacks fighting for equal rights. I try not to have a lot of hate in my life, but I hate racism. It infuriates me. So to hear black people say all these things about whites really upsets me, because I, and many others, are not like that at all. Truth be told, Not all cops are bad. Not all black people are criminals. And not all white people are racist.

I understand that this is mob mentality. People are disappointed with the verdict and then instigators like Sharpton and Jackson start talking and people become angry and start rioting and attacking others. Most of these people haven't examined the facts, they have been misled and are full of emotion and anger. Those blind them from the facts. I've experienced mob mentality before when I worked in Washington DC. I was at the Supreme Court awaiting the verdict of the Hobby Lobby case. (The case involved the owners of Hobby Lobby refusing to pay for their employees to get abortions and abortion inducing drugs through insurance. They simply believed that the preborn children were human and that it was wrong to kill an innocent human being. Obamacare called for all businesses provide coverage for 20 different types of "contraceptives". Hobby Lobby owners provided 16 of the 20, but didn't provide 4 because they were against abortion. So the Obama administration was forcing them to provide it or shut down). The Hobby Lobby owners won the case. I was there on the front steps of the Supreme Court setting up a press conference with Students For Life of America. While there abortion supporters showed up to protest. They were furious and were yelling and chanting. Slogans and signs saying things like "Recreational sex is my hobby and I am here to lobby!". The majority of protestors were late teenaged males. Their signs had condoms on them saying that they can't take that away from them and that you can't take contraceptives away from women. I agree with that, we shouldn't take condoms and contraceptives away from them. But these people, just like the angry people in Ferguson refuse to look at the facts. In the Hobby Lobby case, they weren't against providing coverage for contraceptives and condoms to their employees, they were against abortion and abortion inducing drugs (which were only 4). These protestors had been misled into thinking that Hobby Lobby was banning their employees from using any type of contraceptives. When I tried to tell these protestors that, they yelled louder in order to drown out the facts I was sharing. They just wanted to riot and protest regardless of the facts. That is exactly what is going on in Ferguson. Protestors don't even examine the facts, and many of those who side with them refuse to read the facts as well. It's almost like they want the issue to be racism so badly that even though it was proven not to be, they accused those facts as being racist and those telling the facts to be racists because they looked at the facts. Simple mob mentality and disregard for all authority, truth, and opinions that differed from what they wanted the results to be.

I spent over 2 hours reading the grand jury transcript. I read the medical examiner's report, the testimony of officer Wilson, and about half of the eye witnesses. All confirm the accounts told by Officer Wilson. The transcripts can be found here: 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?_r=4

My main point I am trying to get across is that we are all prone to emotional reactions on issues, but we shouldn't allow that to cloud out the truth and solid facts. The facts are unbiased and completely neutral. They are the truth. And you don't have to like the truth, but you should not ignore it or lie about it. John Adams once said:

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

I don't understand why the rioters feel like the verdict justifies robbing stores, attacking people, and burning buildings and vehicles. Even if this were a case about race and the white man got off clean, that still wouldn't justify all of that chaos. I also don't understand why people can't just look at the solid black and white facts. Society would be much better if people were honest and stuck to the facts rather than lie and let their vision be clouded by emotion. I get so frustrated by the ignorance and evil in this world. But I have to keep reminding myself that I was not made for this world and it is not my home. I'm not supposed to be at ease with everyone's attitudes and actions. We are fallen sinful people living in a fallen sinful world. I eagerly await the day where all of the world is perfect and in harmony with God in his kingdom. No more lies, death, tears, sadness, or anger. Oh, how I long for that day. 

Another interesting bit of information about the accusations of white on black crimes can be found here: http://youtu.be/iGTUcS-yQtQ

In Milwaukee, Wisconsin a similar situation happened and a police officer gave this speech, it is equally applicable to the Ferguson situation: http://youtu.be/T7MAO7McNKE

http://youtu.be/T7MAO7McNKE

Here is a good explanation as to why Officer Wilson wasn't charged according to the law:

http://www.policeone.com/Crowd-Control/articles/7782643-Why-Officer-Darren-Wilson-wasnt-indicted/

        This summer I have been living with a couple outside of DC and every Friday I have been going with the husband to his men's Bible Study that meets weekly at Panera Bread for breakfast, fellowship and devotion. They have been going through a book called "In Christ Alone: Living the Gospel Centered Life" by  Sinclair Ferguson, a Scottish professor of systematic theology at Redeemer Seminary in Dallas, Texas. He is a reformed/Calvinist Christian, which as any of you who know me well enough know, I strongly am against that deceptive teaching. Regardless of that, in a chapter of Dr Ferguson's book, he writes about the assurance of salvation. This is something that is totally backed up by scripture that Catholic teachings are against. I have also met many reformed/Calvinists who are against it. Heck, the entire reformed/Calvinist teaching of salvation is completely contrary to having and knowing assurance of salvation. However, I digress... Despite Dr Ferguson's un-biblical beliefs, his writing comes across as very biblical and is spot on. I guess that goes to show that the Lord can work through and speak through even the most flawed teachings and theologies. Anywho, I wanted to share this chapter with y'all.

“The Greatest of All Protestant Heresies”?

by Sinclair Ferguson

"Let us begin with a church history exam question. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621) was a figure not to be taken lightly. He was Pope Clement VIII’s personal theologian and one of the most able figures in the Counter-Reformation movement within sixteenth-century Roman Catholicism. On one occasion, he wrote: “The greatest of all Protestant heresies is _______ .” Complete, explain, and discuss Bellarmine’s statement.

How would you answer? What is the greatest of all Protestant heresies? Perhaps justification by faith? Perhaps Scripture alone, or one of the other Reformation watchwords?

Those answers make logical sense. But none of them completes Bellarmine’s sentence. What he wrote was: “The greatest of all Protestant heresies is assurance.”

A moment’s reflection explains why. If justification is not by faith alone, in Christ alone, by grace alone — if faith needs to be completed by works; if Christ’s work is somehow repeated; if grace is not free and sovereign, then something always needs to be done, to be “added” for final justification to be ours. That is exactly the problem. If final justification is dependent on something we have to complete it is not possible to enjoy assurance of salvation. For then, theologically, final justification is contingent and uncertain, and it is impossible for anyone (apart from special revelation, Rome conceded) to be sure of salvation. But if Christ has done everything, if justification is by grace, without contributory works; it is received by faith’s empty hands — then assurance, even “full assurance” is possible for every believer.

No wonder Bellarmine thought full, free, unfettered grace was dangerous! No wonder the Reformers loved the letter to the Hebrews!

This is why, as the author of Hebrews pauses for breath at the climax of his exposition of Christ’s work (Heb. 10:18), he continues his argument with a Paul-like “therefore” (Heb. 10:19). He then urges us to “draw near … in full assurance of faith” (Heb. 10:22). We do not need to re-read the whole letter to see the logical power of his “therefore.” Christ is our High Priest; our hearts have been sprinkled clean from an evil conscience just as our bodies have been washed with pure water (v.22).

Christ has once-for-all become the sacrifice for our sins, and has been raised and vindicated in the power of an indestructible life as our representative priest. By faith in Him, we are as righteous before the throne of God as He is righteous. For we are justified in His righteousness, His justification alone is ours! And we can no more lose this justification than He can fall from heaven. Thus our justification does not need to be completed any more than does Christ’s!

With this in view, the author says, “by one offering He has perfected for all time those who come to God by him” (Heb. 10:14). The reason we can stand before God in full assurance is because we now experience our “hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and … bodies washed with pure water” (Heb. 10:22).

“Ah,” retorted Cardinal Bellarmine’s Rome, “teach this and those who believe it will live in license and antinomianism.” But listen instead to the logic of Hebrews. Enjoying this assurance leads to four things: First, an unwavering faithfulness to our confession of faith in Jesus Christ alone as our hope (v.23); second, a careful consideration of how we can encourage each other to “love and good works” (v.24); third, an ongoing communion with other Christians in worship and every aspect of our fellowship (v.25a); fourth, a life in which we exhort one another to keep looking to Christ and to be faithful to him, as the time of his return draws ever nearer (25b).

It is the good tree that produces good fruit, not the other way round. We are not saved by works; we are saved for works. In fact we are God’s workmanship at work (Eph. 2:9–10)! Thus, rather than lead to a life of moral and spiritual indifference, the once-for-all work of Jesus Christ and the full-assurance faith it produces, provides believers with the most powerful impetus to live for God’s glory and pleasure. Furthermore, this full assurance is rooted in the fact that God Himself has done all this for us. He has revealed His heart to us in Christ. The Father does not require the death of Christ to persuade Him to love us. Christ died because the Father loves us (John 3:16). He does not lurk behind His Son with sinister intent wishing He could do us ill — were it not for the sacrifice his Son had made! No, a thousand times no! — the Father Himself loves us in the love of the Son and the love of the Spirit.

Those who enjoy such assurance do not go to the saints or to Mary. Those who look only to Jesus need look nowhere else. In Him we enjoy full assurance of salvation. The greatest of all heresies? If heresy, let me enjoy this most blessed of “heresies”! For it is God’s own truth and grace!"