Do Atheists know anything about the Bible?

World Net Daily (WND) posted an article by Chuck Norris, “Founders vs. NBC, New York atheists, Part 1” on June 27, 2011 at
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=315777

Below the article are some reader comments:

Darrell Reeves • Top Commenter

How far we have slid in such a short time. A hundred years ago we wouldn’t be having this conversation. The Bible was taught in school, the Ten Commandments were in all courtrooms and in most classrooms. I’m 57 and remember praying in the name of Jesus at SHS. The demonic progressive left along with their demonic aclu did away with that. Someone please tell me how after 200+ years of praying in the name of Jesus at school, its becomes illegal. The Founder’s would never have imagined a mosque or a buddist temple being erected in America. I’m just sad, this wonder country that has given so much to all Americans is being dismantled by a demonic radical mob.

John Richard Cunliffe • Top Commenter

The Bible is a book of fiction written by men on a power trip as a manual to control the superstitious sheep. Most of the texts are plagiarized from ancient pagan texts and stories existing long before “”biblical “” times.

Dawn Stone

We shouldn’t be having this conversation. Every science proves the bible false. It’s pure ignorance. It tells tales of dragons, unicorns and witches. It promotes gamg raping women, sacrificing children, genocide and slavery. Anyone who profits from teaching ignorance and false fears should be jailed.

The second and third comments which I have cited above appear to be written by individuals who consider themselves atheists.

Do Atheists know anything about the Bible?

Surely these two individuals, judging by their remarks about the Bible, indicate a serious deficiency when it comes to Bible knowledge.

Their ignorance is so glaring, I need hardly comment further.

But I do invite, even dare, any atheist to join this conversation here and redeem their flawed image.

So far, despite my several invitations, atheists have been mighty silent here. As I said before, their silence is both telling and deafening, indeed.

The Bible, understood literally, declares that atheists are fools:

Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

This entry was posted in Apologetics Issues--Atheism and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Do Atheists know anything about the Bible?

  1. Christen Zimecki says:

    Dear Jerry,

    Sorry to bother you again. I usually would read a post and share it with a friend, but since finals are over I have a lot more free time.

    About the second comment: I’ve heard that there are many pagan stories that predate biblical accounts and are very similar to them too. I’ve even checked a couple of them out. Although, as you’ve put it before in another place, historicity doesn’t accompany these accounts as do biblical accounts, it still bothers me.

    There is a guy, whose name is Peter Joseph, and he put together a video to turn people against their religion and their government.

    Here’s a link to one of his videos if you want to check it out. He really attacks Christianity here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guXirzknYYE

    Have you heard these stories before?

  2. Jerry says:

    Dear Christen,

    My Internet connection is too slow to watch the video you linked. I only listened to the first 4 minutes and 28 seconds. But here is an interesting comment by someone given below the video:

    Name books/historians where Jesus is mentioned except the Bible. He isn’t. And if you don’t think religions adapt to make the transition from one religion to another, answer me this: Why isn’t easter on a set date?

    I have an entire book devoted to providing quotations from original sources outside the Bible that make reference to Jesus Christ.

    Once again, Atheists are sometimes lacking when it comes to having done their homework.

    As for Easter, that question could probably be found in any good encyclopedia, even on line. It is not a question which poses any objection to the truth of the Bible or Christianity.

    Claimed resemblances and inferred borrowings of the Bible from pagan sources are overstated, for the differences in such accounts are ignored. What makes the Bible stand out from all other sources is that it is not contaminated with the mistaken contemporary scientific knowledge or rather lack of knowledge present in the culture that surrounded the Bible writers. That is a remarkable fact which I believe strongly vouches for the divine inspiration of the Bible and its writers.

    I think it is more likely that Pagan sources copied the Bible, rather than the reverse.

    I have a whole four-foot shelf or more behind me devoted to writings of atheists against the Bible and Christianity. I also have more shelves devoted to careful answers to the problems atheists think they find in the Bible. The trouble is, atheists have been bringing up the same criticisms of the Bible for centuries, as if those objections had not already been thoroughly answered by careful scholars.

    Atheists are ignorant of the Bible and its Christ. It would help them if they would read the Bible itself, and read what has been written in its defense.

    I participated in the debate program when I was a student at Cass Technical High School. I participated extensively in the debate program in college. We were taught to carefully learn the best, strongest arguments on each of several sides of a question, and were required to be able to debate either side of the debate proposition with the intent to win the debate.

    Atheists have not done their homework in that manner.

  3. Christen Zimecki says:

    Dear Jerry,

    I agree with you. Usually the atheists that I run into have recycle arguments–they’re only repeating what they’ve heard. I definitely need to read more, though.

    Do you have any blogs on eternal security?

  4. Jerry says:

    Dear Christen,

    I have refuted the doctrine of unconditional eternal security several times over on this very blog. One of the articles I wrote here is titled “Doctrines of Grace or Doctrines of Demons?” In that article I offer Biblical refutation of all five points of Calvinism.

    In brief, the commonly believed doctrine among many Evangelicals or among Bible believing Christians known as “Once saved, always saved,” is heresy of the worst sort. That is absolutely NOT what the Bible teaches.

    That is what I was TAUGHT by faithful Sunday school teachers, youth group leaders, and pastors, but that is not what I learned when I began to read and study the New Testament for myself. I was very shocked by what I learned from studying the Bible itself.

    The chief proof-text used to support so-called “Eternal Security” is John 10:28.

    Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

    The emphasis is always placed upon the clause “they shall never perish.”

    And the focus within the clause is on the word “never.”

    What these very sincere but very mistaken interpreters have failed to do is ask the question, “To whom does the term ‘they‘ refer?” that begins the clause “they shall never perish.”

    Had this question been asked and properly attended to, the false doctrine of unconditional eternal security may not have taken the firm hold that it has on the Evangelical and Bible believing community at large.

    The “they” has, of course, reference to what comes immediately before in John 10:27.

    Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

    Properly taking John 10:27 into account, we may justly conclude that those who will “never perish” are those who (1) “hear my voice” and who also (2) “follow me,” Jesus said.

    The words “hear” and “follow” are in the Greek text verbs that are in the third person plural, present tense, active voice, indicative mood. In Greek the present tense signifies continuous action. A literal translation would then say “My sheep keep on hearing my voice” and “keep on following me.”

    So, the proper formulation of the security of the believer is to teach “the absolute eternal security of the believer, not the unbeliever.”

    Jesus most clearly taught that it is possible to stop believing when He said,

    Luk 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

    Jesus did not say that these individuals failed to believe. He said they did believe–for a while. That surely demonstrates it is possible to stop believing. If they stop believing, they fall away. To fall away is to be guilty of apostasy. A careful study of the doctrine of apostasy will show it is of two kinds: (1) moral apostasy, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, and (2) doctrinal apostasy (1 Corinthians 15:2).

    By the way, I have yet to see clarity upon the doctrine of apostasy taught by any individual or group that holds to the false doctrine of unconditional eternal security, commonly called “Once Saved, Always Saved.” The necessity of suppressing a well-defined and clearly taught New Testament doctrine, the doctrine of apostasy, demonstrates the falsehood of the mistaken view of unconditional eternal security.

  5. Christen Zimecki says:

    Dear Jerry,

    Eternal security is something that I have been studying lately. I am familiar with both sides of the argument, but you bring up some very interesting points.

    In John 10:27: couldn’t Jesus’ response contextually be refering to those who are physically there and are following him at that moment? He said in just the verse before, “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.”

    Could it be that he was just drawing the distinction between them who believe not and them who were his sheep, which, fundamentally, is the difference between being unable or able to hear and follow him relative to your heart? When I say, “unable”, I’m simply referring to Matthew 13:13.. I don’t mean to say that they are unable volitionally, but that their hearts are hardened and needs to be prepared as fertile grown for planting.

    In other words, I’m asking, could Jesus be saying, “You’re not my sheep because you don’t believe–you’re not hearing and following me right now as these people are”?
    Could that verse be considered Kingdom truth instead of Church truth (Or Covenant truth)? I’m not sure if you’re familiar with those terms, but I will explain them if you are not.

    I asked that question because, during that time, before Christ was crucified, Salvation was determined by what you thought of Jesus: is he the Christ, is he one with God, is he the Son of God. And moreover, it did not save you from the power of sin, nor did it seal you with the holy spirit. Right now, however, salvation is something entirely different. It involves Christ’s crucifixion and resurestion, and redemption and rebirth and reconciliation–becoming an actual new creature in Christ: being acctepted and adopted. Presented blameless.

    Are we to consider Jesus’ response to refer salvation being undone in the latter sense, or salvation that involved believing that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God, which were it’s means at that time)? Because many did believe initially but left when they were offended and persecuted.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, please. I really want to get this thing correct. But according to your argument, the condition for losing salvation is to stop believing. Not sin. Because in the parable, the one who ‘lost’ their salvation is the one who stopped beleiving. So, as long as I believe, does this mean my lifestyle doesn’t necessarly have to be consistent to maintain my salvation?

    That would be, in a sense, unconditional eternal security. But of course chastisment and correction from the father would occur, as the argument would usually follow. But if someone has sincerly been transformed and born again because of their belief, to suggest that they no longer believe, would suggest that that process either never occured or was undone.

  6. Christen Zimecki says:

    Correction: Last paragraph

    But if someone has sincerly been transformed and born again because of their belief, to suggest that they can lose their salvation when they no longer believe, would suggest that that process either never occured or was undone. Which one?

  7. Jerry says:

    Dear Christen,

    The position you are taking is incorrect. All the promises we have in the NT record that pertain to the promise of eternal life require that we believe in Christ. All of those promises use the form of “believe” that in Greek is in the present tense. That means the kind of belief the New Testament is speaking of is continuing belief, not a one-time act of faith or receiving of Christ.

    Furthermore, the promises of eternal life, starting with John 3:16, involve not only the present tense verb for “believe” requiring continuing belief, but also involve the presence of the subjunctive mood which marks contingency.

    Here is John 3:16 in Young’s Literal Translation which follows the nuances of the Greek text more closely than either the King James Version or modern English versions do:

    Joh 3:16 for God did so love the world, that His Son–the only begotten–He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

    I boldfaced may in Young’s text for that is what marks the subjunctive mood, and that is what marks the statement of contingency. The “may” does not at all suggest doubt. It marks the fact that we have eternal life as long as we continue believing, marked by “that every one who is believing in him.” If we fail to meet the contingency, we fail to receive the promise.

    One must be very careful to frame theological understanding accurately, based upon the grammar of the Greek New Testament. That is one of the 23 Rules of Interpretation I have posted in the Archives for October 2010 on this site.

    I think you read me wrong when you affirm your understanding of what I wrote to suggest that “according to your argument, the condition for losing salvation is to stop believing. Not sin.”

    If you read the verse I cited, Luke 8:13,

    Luk 8:13 `And those upon the rock: They who, when they may hear, with joy do receive the word, and these have no root, who for a time believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

    –notice that “in time of temptation fall away.” Falling away is sin. I explained above that “falling away” is apostasy. I explained apostasy in the Bible may be either (1) moral apostasy, or (2) doctrinal apostasy. Examples of moral apostasy are listed at 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10–

    1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
    1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

    Anyone who practices any of these sins commits moral apostasy, and shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

    Therefore, the willful continuing practice of sin is moral apostasy and results in loss of salvation.

    The same is true for doctrinal apostasy, for which I made reference to 1 Corinthians 15:2,

    1Co 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
    1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

    Paul, therefore, teaches as part of his proclamation of the Gospel, that it is possible to believe in vain. Believing in vain would be either (1) to stop believing, or (2) to fall into false doctrine on matters essential to salvation. In this context, Paul is speaking of a doctrine essential to salvation, namely, belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ. This is reaffirmed by the grammar of Romans 10:9, 10,

    Rom 10:9 that if thou mayest confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and mayest believe in thy heart that God did raise him out of the dead, thou shalt be saved,
    Rom 10:10 for with the heart doth one believe to righteousness, and with the mouth is confession made to salvation;

    I cited Young’s translation to call attention to the subjunctive mood of contingency represented by the word “mayest confess” and “mayest believe.” Because of the “if” clause, these things are stipulated as absolute requirements. Should a person cease to believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ, as might happen if they were to fall into the false cult of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, they have lost their salvation. This would be one example of doctrinal apostasy.

    The common argument of those who teach the false doctrine of unconditional eternal security sometimes called “Once Saved, Always Saved,” is that any person who appears to have lost their faith never had it in the first place; they were never really saved. They appeal to 1 John 2:19 as proof. But this would be to force 1 John 2:19 into a position of denying the possibility of apostasy, which contradicts the rest of Scripture. Therefore, such an interpretation of 1 John 2:19 MUST be mistaken. The warning by Peter against heeding false teachers in 2 Peter 2:1 is reinforced by his declaration that these teachers left the faith despite the fact that they had genuine full accurate knowledge of Jesus Christ and salvation. To answer Peter’s declaration by asserting these false teachers only had a “head knowledge” of Christ is nonsense. Peter used the strongest Greek word in the New Testament to assert just what kind of knowledge they had. He could not have used that Greek word if he meant to suggest the knowledge of Christ these false teachers once had was defective or deficient. Therefore, the New Testament clearly warns against the possibility, however remote, of the apostasy of true believers and the consequent loss of salvation. And it might not be so remote a possibility. Both kinds of apostasy are rampant among supposed Christians.

    Could that verse be considered Kingdom truth instead of Church truth (Or Covenant truth)? I’m not sure if you’re familiar with those terms, but I will explain them if you are not.

    I asked that question because, during that time, before Christ was crucified, Salvation was determined by what you thought of Jesus: is he the Christ, is he one with God, is he the Son of God.

    This gets to an important core of the error behind the heresy of “Once Saved, Always Saved,” or unconditional eternal security. You cannot postulate different plans of salvation for different periods in Bible history. Those divisions are not taught in the text of Scripture. Such artificial divisions are necessitated by the false theology we attempt to derive from Scripture when we do deductive instead of inductive study of the Bible.

    The plan of salvation is plainly announced and illustrated starting at least from Genesis 15:6.

    Gen 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

    God also announced:

    Lev 18:5 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.

    But it was well-understood that no one could possibly fulfill this requirement for salvation successfully except Jesus Christ the Messiah Himself.

    Ecc 7:20 For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.

    Pro 20:9 Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?

    Rather,

    Hab 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

    This passage is quoted several times in the New Testament.

    Paul stated:

    Gal_3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
    Gal_3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

    If you choose to use such an argument, you can no longer appeal to John 10:28 to support eternal security, because even by your reckoning this promise was given before the Cross!

    You further asserted:

    “…Salvation was determined by what you thought of Jesus: is he the Christ, is he one with God, is he the Son of God. And moreover, it did not save you from the power of sin, nor did it seal you with the holy spirit.”

    Most Christians today do not believe even yet that Christ truly saves from the power of sin. Practically speaking, the blood of Christ has no more efficacy than the blood of the Levitical sacrifices in terms of working any real change in the life such that “old things are passed away.” My scholar friend Dr. Malcolm Lavender has written quite a book, The Fallacy of the Sinning Christian available from http://www.crisispub.com, I believe, on this very subject. But it is clear that true, continuing faith in Christ results in a change in our moral character. We bear the fruit of the Spirit as taught by Paul in Galatians 5:22, 23.

    The “sealing of the Holy Spirit” is not an irrevocable act for the individual believer, only for the Church which is His Body, as we learn in the writings of Paul. This is because the promise of “sealing” is given using the plural pronoun “you” (which unfortunately is ambiguous in English translation), never the singular, so that the promise applies to the group, but is contingent upon continued belief (which includes obedience) of the individual. If the contingency is not met, the promise will not be received.

    This may not be what you and I were taught in Sunday school, but we must be honest in our presentation of Bible doctrine and be sure that we present it in accordance with the grammar of the Greek New Testament. You don’t have to learn Greek to be saved, but to understand controverted doctrinal matters accurately, one must use resources like Young’s Literal Translation, and Dr. Lavender’s forthcoming N.T. translation to arrive at an accurate understanding about these matters.

    Notice carefully that I do not deny that the Bible teaches eternal security. I simply insist that the Bible teaches the absolute eternal security of the believer, not the unbeliever. That is the correct Biblical statement of what the Scripture teaches.

  8. Christen Zimecki says:

    Dear Jerry,

    You are right about this being contrary to what is being taught in Sunday school, but I really want to know the truth. This response is not to gainsay your latest comment, but I just want to be certain this. It’s an important issue. I hope my tone does not get misinterpreted. I have just a few questions and comments regarding your last response:

    When you talked about the condition for salvation being the act of continuing to belief, and not a one time sort of thing, I think I have misunderstood you. If I accept Christ, then I am saved. Certainly you do not mean to actively believe and accept Christ daily, but isn’t that a one time thing–to believe and accept him once? Once I believe once, how do I continue to believe? This may seem like a silly question, but it is sincere. I’ve read your response two days ago, and I really begin to question the salvation of many around me, and even myself (Ironically, April 30th is actually my birthday, so I got plenty of attention from everyone as they wondered what I was thinking about so heavily. But I didn’t mention this thread to them.)

    Here is what I mean. Someone very dear to me accepted Christ a while back, and I like to believe he was sincere. He and I talk every once in a while about biblical matters, and he tells me that he still believes, but there is no proof beyond what he says. I cannot consider it moral or doctrinal apostasy because that would suggest that he fell away from a position he once occupied, but it is not so; although the desire was/is there, he never fully conformed. But he believes in Jesus, and understand the personal implications of the his crucifixion.

    Is he a immature just Christian, or has he lost his salvation and can he get it back? Should he re-accept/believe Christ daily to maintain salvation? The idea of losing salvation has caused so many bothering questions.

    1 John chapter one has also becomes very confusing as a result. As my salvation is contingent on my believing now, is my being cleansed from all sin contingent on my walking in the light now, and my cleanliness, is it contingent on my confessing now? I thought ‘all sin’ referred to past, present and future. Many Catholics believe suicide will result to one losing their salvation because that person never had the opportunity to confess their sin and receive forgiveness and cleansing.

    Also, can we say that Luke 8:13 refers to salvation? I’m not arguing that it isn’t, but to say that it is, is it inappropriate to suggest that that parable mentioned in all of the gospels do, too? Because Matthew doesn’t refer to the seed that fell in stoney places suffering with temptation, but rather tribulation and persecutions. And this one was offended. So, does Temptation = tribulations and persecutions, and falling away = offended? I guess in this context, what I’m struggling with is reconciling Moral or Doctrinal apostasy with falling away. Can we consider those to be the same based on this text?

    1 Co 6:9 talks about those who practice such thing will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
    But does it mean a lose of salvation? Paul never tells this church to get saved all over again, but rather to not practice this because they have been washed and sanctified and justified.

    And just to clarify my comment concerning Covenant truth, Kingdom truth and Church truth. I did not mean to say imply that those concepts refer to salvation. You’re right, and I was in error. But those distinctions are to help Bible readers to draw the difference between what was said and when–described and prescribed. For example: many people like to claim certain blessings that occur in Deuteronomy, and of course ignore the curses, but fail to realize that that those blesses and curses were written to those under the covenant. I hope I’m not butchering the system with my example. So to your comment,

    “If you choose to use such an argument, you can no longer appeal to John 10:28 to support eternal security, because even by your reckoning this promise was given before the Cross!”

    You’re right. But my argument, or question rather, doesn’t suggest salvation in it’s nature to differ relative to it’s dispensation. So John 10:28 can still be used to talk about salvation being eternal for the believer. Jesus giving eternal life to his sheep and his sheep hearing his voice and following him is the constant. The only variable that changed since then is doctrine. I never suggested that there are different plans for salvation. Many Jews today don’t believe Jesus death was for sin. So although they are still following Gen 15:6 and Lev 18:5, if they are Christ rejecting, then they are in error. So, although those verse have significance concerning salvation, there is a new context to view them in now that was not always available.

    Last thing.

    “Most Christians today do not believe even yet that Christ truly saves from the power of sin.”

    ‘Power’ as a master over a servant. I guess ‘authority’ is probably a better word, but my intention is probably still a bit unclear. Me deserving death because of my identity in sin is been changed if I’m Christ. Furthermore, when I die, I can be with Christ. However, prior to his death and resurrection, it was Abraham’s bosom because the issue with sin was not totally resolved. This is why I drew a distinction between the church now, and the Jews then. Although both saved, and salvation involved dealing with the issue of sin, there is still a doctrinal difference between the two (Now and Then). And I could be in error. I will wait for your reply.

    I do agree with your correction of this issue though. I was wrong to say that the nature of salvation could be different relative to when it was talk about (Before/after the cross). There has always and only been one plan for us all.

  9. Jerry says:

    Dear Christen,

    The New Testament does teach that Christ has forgiven us all trespasses:

    Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

    The passage in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is decisive on the issue of continuing to willfully practice sin: it leads to loss of salvation. Being excluded from the kingdom of God is to be lost, not saved.

    The trouble is, few understand what the Bible is saying when it speaks of the kingdom of God. Some teach that the kingdom of God is different from the kingdom of heaven. Both are identical. Matthew uses the term “kingdom of heaven” to avoid unnecessary use of the word “God” which as a Jew he knew would be offensive to the Jewish audience he was primarily addressing at the time. Some confuse the kingdom of God with the sovereignty of God. Those are two different things.

    But Paul, writing to a very divided and carnal church at Corinth, still makes the delightful and encouraging observation, “and such were some of you.”

    It is possible for a believer to fall into sin, but a believer will be convicted by the Holy Spirit and will seek forgiveness and strength to overcome the sin “which so easily besets us.” The unbeliever does not care, but willfully practices sin because the unbeliever enjoys it, with no remorse or qualms of conscience.

    Continuing to believe in Christ does not involve re-accepting Him over and over again. It means continuing to believe that Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross provided full atonement for our sin.

    True believers have the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit produces the fruit of the spirit in our lives.

    There are many characteristics of true believers listed and explained to some degree in the book of 1 John. That makes for a most important subject for personal Bible study. I encourage you to make a study of 1 John for yourself. You will probably learn more if you first study 1 John thoroughly for yourself using a plain text Bible. Study Bibles are very helpful, but they should not be the first step in Bible study.

    The Jews who lived before the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, had faith that the Messiah would come. Yet when He came, “his own received him not.” They knew that the Messiah would come because of many predictions given in the Hebrew Scriptures, starting from Genesis 3:15. They also knew that it was necessary for the Messiah to come in order that the promises given in the Abrahamic and the Davidic Covenants could be fulfilled. Paul points to the importance of the Abrahamic Covenant in Romans 4 as the basis and ground of our salvation in Christ. Yet today, most Christians are not well taught about the many provisions in both the Abrahamic and the Davidic Covenants. That is a major underlying cause of so many differing and contradictory views regarding Bible doctrine and especially matters pertaining to Bible prophecy.

    Now that the Messiah has come, it is necessary to believe in Him to be saved. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by me” (John 14:6). Acts 4:12 tells us that “neither is there salvation in any other.”

    Many new believers are in danger of being “stillborn,” if I can put it that way by way of illustration. Scripture tells us “Desire the sincere milk of the word that ye may grow thereby” in 1 Peter 2:2. Many modern English translations differ in one or more ways in the translation they give, but the principle is the same. My purpose in having this site is to encourage people to learn how to feed themselves spiritually by reading the Bible for themselves.

    If we fed ourselves physically with the regularity that we feed ourselves spiritually, some of us would be in terrible shape physically and we would be sick all the time, and soon die. If we don’t get any spiritual food at all from the Word of God, the Bible, would that be comparable to a newborn baby not receiving any milk for physical sustenance? I suspect the baby would not live very long without any food. In the same manner, I suspect a new believer will not live very long spiritually without spiritual food either.

    Is it really possible for a saved person to die spiritually? If they fall into unbelief, if they fall into apostasy, either moral or doctrinal, and remain in that condition, I would think that the warnings against apostasy were not placed in the Bible as a whole, and the New Testament in particular, as filler to take up space. The warnings mean something, and we need to take them seriously. Too many are busy trying to explain the warnings away rather than heeding them.

    1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

    I think Paul writes a serious warning. He is not addressing unbelievers. He is writing to believers and speaking of believers. You cannot depart from a faith which you never had. Clearly Paul indicates it is possible to depart from the faith.

    Heb 12:14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:

    I think Hebrews 12:14 is so plain it needs no explanation.

    Joh 5:24 “I most solemnly say to you, whoever listens to me and believes Him who has sent me possesses eternal life, and will never come under condemnation, but has already passed out of death into life.” (Williams translation)

    I would translate John 5:24 to read, “Verily, verily I say unto you, he that is hearing my word, and is believing on him that sent me, is having eternal life, and shall not come into condemnation, but has already passed out of death into life.”

    The instruction given in this verse indicates we are to keep on hearing and keep on believing. As we do that, we can be absolutely sure that we now have (not may have in the future after we die, like Roman Catholics teach, for example) eternal life. And if this is what characterizes the nature and quality of our life in Christ, we have already passed out of spiritual death into spiritual life. But it is important to take note that the latter half of this wonderful promise of present assurance of salvation is contingent on the first half of what the verse expresses being true in our life. If we stop hearing, and stop believing, we stop having, if this becomes the character of our life.

    Most of us have probably learned 2 Peter 3:18 by heart, which is a good thing. But most of us most likely have not learned 2 Peter 3:17 equally well.

    2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
    2Pe 3:18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

    Notice that Peter is addressing his warning to believers, not unbelievers, for in verse 17 he calls them “beloved.” His book as a whole is addressed to believers. But Peter warns against the very real possibility of “being led away with the error of the wicked,” such that a believer can fall from his own stedfastness.

    Then in the very next sentence Peter shares the corrective which prevents falling from our own stedfastness and prevents us from being led away with the error of the wicked: he tells us to grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. In our day, the best way to do that would be to regularly read and study and obey the Bible. Other factors enter in as we do that: we will find fellowship with other believers as it becomes available, we will take time to pray, and as opportunity becomes available, we will be able to share our faith in Christ with those who “ask the reason of the hope that is in us with meekness and fear,” or in modern English, with gentleness and respect.

  10. Quinson says:

    To God be The Glory. Thank you for this powerful article. It’s important to reach atheists as believers and I think that your article and the comments here give a bit of insight into how to biblically do just that.

  11. Jerry says:

    Dear Quinson,

    I am thankful that you found this site and that you took the time and effort to post a comment here.

    If you visit here again, I hope you will be able to take the time to carefully read the comments posted below the article you read. I just did, and was amazed to see what was asked and what I answered in that discussion thread.

    I have very recently encountered more atheists on the Internet. Some are quite brazen in their remarks against Christianity and the Bible. Once in a while I chime in to make a careful correction to their misunderstanding of the Bible. I have a number of rough draft articles in preparation which I may decide to post soon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.