The Ancient Doctrine of “Once Saved, Always Saved.”

Kevin Cauley

We all know people who believe the doctrine of “Once saved, always saved.”  This is the idea that once a person becomes a child of God, there is no sin that they can commit to lose their salvation.  Many people today find this doctrine to be of great comfort, because it in essence relieves them of all personal responsibility in their relationship with God.  After all, if I am saved, and there is nothing that I can do to be lost, then it doesn’t really matter how I behave or act, so I need not worry that much about it.  The truth is that this is a most dangerous doctrine when it comes to matters of religion, because it deceives people into thinking that their relationship with God is secure, when it really is not.

Interestingly enough, this false doctrine has been around for quite a long time.  In fact, early Christians had to deal with it in the 1st and 2nd centuries.  During that period of time, there was a false doctrine known as Gnosticism.  Of the Gnostics, one sect taught the doctrine of once saved, always saved.  A Christian named Irenaeus lived during the 2nd century A.D. (130-202).  He wrote a book titled, “Against Heresies” in which he called attention to this particular fact.  In this work (Book I Chapter 6) he said the following regarding Gnostic teaching:

But as to themselves, they hold that they shall be entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but because they are spiritual by nature. For, just as it is impossible that material substance should partake of salvation (since, indeed, they maintain that it is incapable of receiving it), so again it is impossible that spiritual substance (by which they mean themselves) should ever come under the power of corruption, whatever the sort of actions in which they indulged. For even as gold, when submersed in filth, loses not on that account its beauty, but retains its own native qualities, the filth having no power to injure the gold, so they affirm that they cannot in any measure suffer hurt, or lose their spiritual substance, whatever the material actions in which they may be involved.

Wherefore also it comes to pass, that the “most perfect” among them addict themselves without fear to all those kinds of forbidden deeds of which the Scriptures assure us that “they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”

And committing many other abominations and impieties, they run us down (who from the fear of God guard against sinning even in thought or word) as utterly contemptible and ignorant persons, while they highly exalt themselves, and claim to be perfect, and the elect seed. For they declare that we simply receive grace for use, wherefore also it will again be taken away from us; but that they themselves have grace as their own special possession, which has descended from above by means of an unspeakable and indescribable conjunction; and on this account more will be given them.

Now, let’s compare what was stated regarding Gnosticism with some more recent quotes.  Notice the following quotation from Billy Graham in answer to the question, “Will I lose my salvation if I sin?”

When we do sin, God does not reject us or disown us. Our fellowship with Him may be broken, but our relationship is not; we are still members of His family if we have truly committed our lives to Christ” (h**p://www.billygraham.org/qna/qna.asp?i=484)

In response to another question, “How big a sin do you have to commit before you lose your salvation?” Billy Graham said:

I am convinced that once a person sincerely and honestly trusts Christ for his or her salvation, they become a member of God’s family forever — and nothing can change that relationship. (h**p://www.billygraham.org/qna/qna.asp?i=1777)

Edward Hiscox in “The Standard Manual for Baptist Churches” says it this way:

We believe that the scriptures teach that such as are truly regenerate, being born of the Spirit, will not utterly fall away and perish, but will endure unto the end; that their persevering attachment to Christ is the grand mark which distinguishes them from superficial professors; that a special Providence watches over their welfare; and that they are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation (Hiscox, pg. 67, 1939).

The Westminster Confession of Faith states regarding the perseverance of the saints:

I. They whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.

II. This perseverance of the saints depends, not upon their own free-will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ; the abiding of the Spirit and of the seed of God within them; and the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.

III. Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevelancy of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their perseverance, fall into grievous sins; and for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.

The point of these quotations is not to prove that Calvinists teach this doctrine, because they freely admit it.  The point is to show the similarities between what the Gnostics taught and what Calvinists teach.  There are some differences, but the essence of the teaching is the same.

1.    If a person is saved, it is not by means of his own conduct, but on account of his nature.  While Gnostics and Calvinists differ in the origin of that nature, the doctrine is still the same.  Gnostics say that it is due to a special spiritual nature.  Calvinists say that they are infused by the nature of Christ.
2.    One is saved on account of one’s election to be saved.  The Gnostics said that they were of the “elect seed.”  Calvinists say that they are elected by God.  Both agree that being elected precludes their actions from affecting that election in a negative way.
3.    While one may sin in the flesh, that does not affect the relationship that one has to God and salvation.  The third part of the Westminster Confession of Faith (as quoted above) makes it plain that Christians may even live in sinfulness, yet not affect their salvation.  The Gnostics just went one step further and stated that it was there desire and practice to do so.
4.    Grace overcomes all sins regardless of the individual’s attitude toward sin.  Calvinists state that grace is irresistible and the Christian cannot help but fall under it.  Gnostics say that regardless how much sin they willingly commit, grace flows upon them freely for every sin they commit.
5.    Both agree that there is nothing that can cause the one who is saved to lose their salvation.  Gnostics take this to the ultimate conclusion and pursue their own lusts and passions without constraint.  Calvinists, however, take another approach.  They say that the Christian who is saved generally won’t choose to live like that, even though if they did, they couldn’t lose their salvation.  In essence giving mere lip service to practicing righteousness.

The parallels are striking.  How many times have we heard the person who believes in this doctrine of “once saved, always saved” say that the child of God cannot fall from grace?  How many times have we heard those who believe this doctrine say that the child of God cannot lose their spirituality?  How many times have we heard them say that the child of God cannot sin in such a way so as to lose his salvation?  The similarities between this form of Gnosticism and the doctrine of “Once saved, always saved” are too numerous to ignore.

It was indeed the teaching and practice of the apostles to reject the doctrines of Gnosticism, including this doctrine.  The book of Colossians was written by Paul in rejection of Gnosticism.  John’s account of the gospel of Christ and his book of 1 John were also written as a response to the doctrines of Gnosticism, and particularly, 1 John was written to refute the idea of once saved, always saved.  One cannot honestly read through this book and ignore that conclusion.  In addition, the following passages in the New Testament clearly indicate that Christians may sin so as to fall from grace: Galatians 5:4; Hebrews 6:4-6; Hebrews 10:26; 2 Peter 2:20-22.

If you know of someone who believes this doctrine, then I urge you to take this article to them, invite them to study it with you and help them to come to understand that believing this doctrine is not in harmony with God’s word.  If one truly believes this doctrine they will be eternally lost, because they will not regard sin as the awful and terrible thing that it truly is.  A Christian may be forgiven after having committed sin based upon repentance and confession, but one will not be forgiven while actively pursuing a life of sin.  The Christian can so sin as to fall from grace.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Ancient Doctrine of “Once Saved, Always Saved.”

Gift of the Holy Spirit

1.    Before His ascension, Jesus promised to the apostles that the Holy Spirit called (“the promise of the Father”) would come upon them in Jerusalem (Acts 1:4,5).
2.    This was based upon the statement of Jesus in his early ministry, “John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.”
3.    Jesus promised that the apostles would receive power after the Holy Spirit came upon them (Acts 1:8).
4.    On the day of Pentecost, they were all in Jerusalem and the Holy Spirit came upon them (Acts 2:4).
5.    The power of the Holy Spirit was the power to do miraculous things such as speak with tongues (Acts 2:4).
6.    In verse 33 Peter says that what Jesus told them in Acts 1 had now been fulfilled; the promise of the Holy Ghost (also called the promise of the Father in Acts 1:4) was given to the apostles.
7.    Peter said that this is now what you “see and hear” (i.e. the miracle of tongues).  This promise was the miraculous gift of tongues.
8.    Peter reiterates that promise in verse 38, “And, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
9.    In Acts 10:45 we find the exact same wording, “gift of the Holy Spirit.”
10.    The gentiles in Acts 10:44 received the Holy Spirit.
11.    It is clear that the gift of the Holy Spirit here is the miraculous gift of tongues for verse 46 says they heard them speak with other tongues and magnify God.
12.    In verse 47 Peter said that they had “received the Holy Spirit as well as we.”
13.    In Acts 11:15, Peter is rehearsing the events at the house of Cornelius.  He says that the Holy Spirit fell on them as on us “at the beginning.”
14.    In Acts 11:16 he applies the same quote that Jesus used in Acts 1 to describe the events of Acts 2.
15.    If the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:45 is the miraculous gift of tongues, then the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38 must be the miraculous gift of tongues.

The basic argument is this:

Peter says in Acts 10 and 11 that “the gift of the Holy Spirit” was given to both the Apostles and the brethren at the beginning in Acts 2.

All of the apostles were apostles who received the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2.
All of the apostles and some of the brethren were people who received the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2.

All the references to the Holy Spirit in Acts 1-2:37 were references to the Apostles’ reception of the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
No references to the Holy Spirit in Acts 1-2:37 were references to the brethren’s reception of the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Some of the brethren were brethren who received the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2.
Therefore, some of the brethren received the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38-44.

If all of the references to the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 1 and 2:1-37 are references to the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Apostles, and if Acts 10 and 11 says “the gift of the Holy Spirit,” was given to both the Apostles and brethren in Acts 2, then “the gift of the Holy Spirit” in Acts 2:38 must be the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the brethren.

It is true that all of the references to the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 1 and 2:1-37 are references to the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Apostles.

It is true that Acts 10 and 11 says that these references were to “the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

Therefore, the “gift of the Holy Spirit” in Acts 2:38 must be the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

All references to the Holy Spirit in Acts 1-2:37 were references to the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

No references to the Holy Spirit in Acts 1-2:37 were references to any non-miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

There is no evidence in the immediate context that forces us to the conclusion that “the gift of the Holy Spirit” is anything other than the references to the Holy Spirit in Acts 1-2:37.

“The gift of the Holy Spirit” in Acts 10:45 was the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The “gift” that Cornelius received was the same “gift” that the Apostles and believers received in Acts 2. (Per Peter Acts 11:17).

The apostles received the “gift” in Acts 2:1-37.

The believers received the “gift” in Acts 2:38-41.

Therefore the “gift of the Holy Spirit” in Acts 2:38 was the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Gift of the Holy Spirit

Friendship

Friendships are an important part of our lives. Ever since we were young, we have formed these relationships with other individuals and they have brought us times of sadness and happiness, exhilaration and frustration. Some of these friendships have been more shallow and superficial while others have been much more strong and long-lasting. As we grow and mature, we discover that these strong, fulfilling friendships require much effort and work to maintain. That’s probably why most people have so few of them. I’ve heard many individuals say, on a number of occasions, that they can count the number of good friends they have on one hand.

So, what does it mean to be a friend? A “friend,” according to the dictionary, is “…1 a person whom one knows well and is fond of 2 an ally, supporter, or sympathizer.” (1) This, in turn, inspires some questions. Since these relationships are such an important part of our lives, who do we choose to be our friends? Who are we attracted to and want to know more about? Who do we select to fulfill that necessary role of the one who offers us support, encouragement, and when things go wrong, the shoulder to cry on?

Sadly, we many times turn to people of the world to be our “true” friends. We become attracted to and nurture these relationships and they fulfill our needs in these areas. Is this the right decision? Should, we, as Christians, have close, intimate relationships with those who are outside the kingdom of Christ? What do we really have in common with them? What are our shared interests? We are warned, on several occasions in scriptures, to not place our affections on things of this world. In James 4:4, it states: “…Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” (NKJV) The apostle John offers the following admonition in I John 2:15: “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” Having close friendships with “worldly” individuals should be difficult for Christians for we are, as it states in II Corinthians 6:14, “…unequally yoked together.” We have objectives and interests that are diametrically opposed to those of the world.

Instead, we should have a close relationship, a “friendship” with God, our Creator. What a compliment was given to Abraham in James 2:23 that he “…was called the friend of God.” We need to follow the example of Abraham. He trusted and obeyed God. He had a strong friendship with His Creator and God blessed him and his descendants. Like Abraham, we need to put God first in our list of priorities and strive to obey Him and do His will. Obedience is the key! We see in John 15:14 – 15, Jesus tells His disciples: “You are My friends if you do whatever I command you. No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you.” With that sort of attitude, we will be able to have a close relationship with our heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.

Let us also nurture the relationships that we have our brethren, our brothers and sisters in Christ. We are part of the same spiritual family! We have so many things in common with each other. We have the same principles and goals for our lives. We have the same Lord and Savior. Thus, we should, naturally, want to have close friendships with our fellow Christians. The apostle Peter exhorts us in I Peter 2:17: “Love the brotherhood.” He later states in I Peter 4:8:“And above all things have fervent love for one another…” We need to truly appreciate the common bond that we share as Christians and consider our spiritual brothers and sisters worthy and qualified to be called our “friends.”

References
(1): Michael Agnes, ed., Webster’s New Dictionary (Cleveland, Ohio: Wiley Publishing Inc., 2003), 261.

Posted in Erik Smith | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Friendship

They Took Him Aside

They Took Him Aside

Have you ever heard someone teach, preach, or say something that didn’t sound right? It was incorrect. It didn’t seem to agree with what you had been taught in the past. What was your response? Hopefully, like the Bereans of old in Acts 17:11, you picked up your scriptures and carefully searched through them and studied them to confirm what had been said. What did you do next? Some will remain silent and say nothing. Others will use this as an opportunity to spread gossip or rumors about the teacher/speaker in question with the intent of “tearing them down” and damaging their reputation. Of course, we see that these types of responses are so very common in “worldly people.” Sadly, these actions/attitudes are also sometimes exhibited by “so-called” faithful members of the Lord’s church. The scriptures, however, offer us a better, righteous alternative to these responses.

In Acts 18:24 – 26, we read of an eloquent speaker by the name of Apollos who was preaching and teaching in the city of Ephesus. He was, evidently, a sincere, dedicated man who had been educated in the Old Testament scriptures and was known for his forceful teaching style. Nevertheless, he had a problem. His knowledge was lacking in some areas, especially in parts of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and this affected the accuracy of his teaching. According to Acts 18:26, a Christian husband and wife, Aquila and Priscilla, heard his teaching and noticed that his knowledge was limited in these subjects. Notice their response! It says: “…they took him aside.” (KJV: “…they took him unto them.”) The word “took” that is used here is translated from the Greek term “PROSLAMBANO” which means: “to take to oneself…lead(aside).” (1) Instead of staying silent or saying disparaging things about him to other folks, this Christian man and wife took the time, made the effort to discuss privately with Apollos the truths of Christ’s gospel. Clearly, they did not want to embarrass him in front of others.

Through their proper, righteous response, Aquila and Priscilla displayed their true care and concern for him as a person (a precious soul) and those he would influence through his future teaching. Their teaching apparently was well-received by Apollos. Strengthened and encouraged by this good instruction, he later, as it tells us in Acts 18:27 – 28, went to southern Greece and “…greatly helped those who had believed through grace; for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.” Their effort had paid great spiritual dividends!

May we, as Christians, learn from the “approved example” of Aquila and Priscilla in their willingness to teach the gospel of Christ with the proper loving attitude. When we are confronted with someone who is teaching something that appears wrong or mistaken, let us take the time to “take them aside” and, in kindness, try to show them the glorious truth related in God’s holy scriptures. This will not only strengthen their faith but ours. Of course, some will not listen to kind instruction. If they continue in teaching erroneous things, we must then watch out for and avoid them (Romans 16:17 – 18) But always, let us have the proper attitude. Remember: We are not here to win arguments but to win souls for the cause of Christ!

References:
(1) James Strong, A Concise Dictionary Of The Words In The Greek Testament, in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990), 61.  Used by permission.  All rights reserved.

Have you ever heard someone teach, preach, or say something that didn’t sound right? It was incorrect. It didn’t seem to agree with what you had been taught in the past. What was your response? Hopefully, like the Bereans of old in Acts 17:11, you picked up your scriptures and carefully searched through them and studied them to confirm what had been said. What did you do next? Some will remain silent and say nothing. Others will use this as an opportunity to spread gossip or rumors about the teacher/speaker in question with the intent of “tearing them down” and damaging their reputation. Of course, we see that these types of responses are so very common in “worldly people.” Sadly, these actions/attitudes are also sometimes exhibited by “so-called” faithful members of the Lord’s church. The scriptures, however, offer us a better, righteous alternative to these responses.In Acts 18:24 – 26, we read of an eloquent speaker by the name of Apollos who was preaching and teaching in the city of Ephesus. He was, evidently, a sincere, dedicated man who had been educated in the Old Testament scriptures and was known for his forceful teaching style. Nevertheless, he had a problem. His knowledge was lacking in some areas, especially in parts of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and this affected the accuracy of his teaching. According to Acts 18:26, a Christian husband and wife, Aquila and Priscilla, heard his teaching and noticed that his knowledge was limited in these subjects. Notice their response! It says: “…they took him aside.” (KJV: “…they took him unto them.”) The word “took” that is used here is translated from the Greek term “PROSLAMBANO” which means: “to take to oneself…lead(aside).” (1) Instead of staying silent or saying disparaging things about him to other folks, this Christian man and wife took the time, made the effort to discuss privately with Apollos the truths of Christ’s gospel. Clearly, they did not want to embarrass him in front of others.

Through their proper, righteous response, Aquila and Priscilla displayed their true care and concern for him as a person (a precious soul) and those he would influence through his future teaching. Their teaching apparently was well-received by Apollos. Strengthened and encouraged by this good instruction, he later, as it tells us in Acts 18:27 – 28, went to southern Greece and “…greatly helped those who had believed through grace; for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.” Their effort had paid great spiritual dividends!

May we, as Christians, learn from the “approved example” of Aquila and Priscilla in their willingness to teach the gospel of Christ with the proper loving attitude. When we are confronted with someone who is teaching something that appears wrong or mistaken, let us take the time to “take them aside” and, in kindness, try to show them the glorious truth related in God’s holy scriptures. This will not only strengthen their faith but ours. Of course, some will not listen to kind instruction. If they continue in teaching erroneous things, we must then watch out for and avoid them (Romans 16:17 – 18) But always, let us have the proper attitude. Remember: We are not here to win arguments but to win souls for the cause of Christ!

References:
(1) James Strong, A Concise Dictionary Of The Words In The Greek Testament, in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990), 61.  Used by permission.  All rights reserved.

Posted in Erik Smith | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on They Took Him Aside

Who is My Brother?

Who is my brother?

A firestorm has broken out regarding comments by Republican Governor Robert Bentley, who at his inauguration made some statements meeting backlash. The comments were religious in nature and analyzing those comments as well as some of the responses to it will be examined in this article. First, however, who made the following comments?

“My faith teaches me, that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won’t be fulfilling God’s will unless I go out and do the Lord’s work.”

“I felt I heard God’s spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will and dedicated myself to discovering His truth and carrying out His works.”

“The final thing that I think the Moses generation teaches us is to remind ourselves that we do what we do because God is with us. You know, when Moses was first called to lead people out to the Promised Land…the Lord said I will be with you. Throw down that rod. Pick it back up. I’ll show you what to do. The same thing happened with the Joshua generation.”

And now, perhaps the statement which will make the speaker obvious:

“America is no longer a Christian Nation”.

This speaker is a famous politician. These words are his and they were said while acting as an official of the United States. Was there a big back lash by atheists, liberals, or Muslims? What did they think about all of this religious talk? Barak Hussein Obama spoke these words. He spoke them as he often speaks about religion and often has picked up the “preacher voice” as did Al Gore. While there may be doubts about his Christianity vs. his dedication to Islam, in general, the only backlash Mr. Obama received were from the false words in regard America no longer being a Christian Nation.

Now consider Mr. Bentley. Here are the words which he has spoken and has been attacked over:

“if you’re a Christian and you’re saved … it makes you and me brother and sister,”

“Now I will have to say that, if we don’t have the same daddy, we’re not brothers and sisters. So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother.”

It has never been a secret that Robert Bentley is a religious man. His own website bio describes him as a being a deacon and teacher at the church he attends. His views appear to be in accordance with his faith. It is these views by which he was elected by the fine people of the state of Alabama. What needs to be asked, despite outcry from those who don’t share his views, is whether or not he was speaking the truth with the words he shared? Was he being consistent with who he portrayed himself to be?

Mark 3:32 – And a multitude was sitting about him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. And he answereth them, and saith, Who is my mother and my brethren? And looking round on them that sat round about him, he saith, Behold, my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

These words are those of Jesus Christ. Jesus makes it clear that only those who are obedient to God are his brothers and sisters. The apostle Paul, a preacher of the gospel which Jesus shared, made the following statement:

Galatians 6:10 – So then, as we have opportunity, let us work that which is good toward all men, and especially toward them that are of the household of the faith.

Paul made it clear there are those that are of the household of God and those that are not. Those of the same household are brothers and sisters. Mr. Bentley was simply pointing out a fact to his audience. More importantly he expressed another truth. All men can become brothers and sisters if they so choose. And Mr. Bentley hoped that they would choose to do so.

Romans 1:16 – For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, the Jew first and also to the Greek.

The term “Greek” in the above verse was a reference to the rest of the world. The Jews being the first to have the gospel be brought to them by Christ as he was also a Jew. Thus, all people are invited to accept salvation through Christ. Mr. Bentley did nothing but share truth and open invitation to all those listening. He wanted to share with them a relationship that is very important.

What did Mr. Bentley not do? Mr. Bentley did not tell someone he would not fulfill his job to the best of his ability and help all people. In fact he stated he was: “governor of all of Alabama — Democrat, Republican and independent, young and old, black and white, rich and poor.”

Ashfaq Taufique a Muslim, was worried about being less important to Bentley than Christians. Christians actually would consider Mr. Taufique more important, because likely, Mr. Bentley considers Taufique a lost sheep. As by the parable of the lost sheep in Luke 15, Mr. Taufique is at the top of the list as far as importance. Jesus Christ himself stated that the faithful to God should love their enemies. This means Mr. Bentely will definitely be concerned about Mr. Taufique.

Taufique made the following statement: “Does he want those of us who do not belong to the Christian faith to adopt his faith?” The answer is yes. He does. In the same way, all Muslims want all non-Muslims to adopt their faith. However, there is a difference. Christianity does not demand anyone be a Christian. Christianity is interested in all men’s physical and spiritual welfare and offers them a choice. Islam, on the other hand demands acceptance. If acceptance is not received, then the individual will be forced into compliance or put to death.

Was the statement Mr. Bentley made unconstitutional? What about the constitutional “separation of Church and State” and government not promoting religion? Here is what the first amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

First, as previously established, all the way to the White House religion is discussed. How? Because it is free speech and free speech cannot lawfully be suppressed. Second, Mr. Bentley did Mr. Bentley establish a law to which Christianity was demanded to be adhered. No. He was simply discussing personal issues which were widely known to the people he represents. This is completely within his right as an American. In no manner, shape, or form was anything Mr. Bentley said unconstitutional.

The final issue to be examined is whether or not Mr. Bentley said something offensive. Consider the words of Jesus:

Matthew 15:10-12 – And he called to him the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: not that which entereth into the mouth defileth the man; but that which proceedeth out of the mouth, this defileth the man. Then came the disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, when they heard this saying?

Woo! Jesus said something offensive! The creator of all things offended someone! The question is: Did he then grovel, beg to be forgiven, state he was wrong, and take courses on being politically correct?

Matthew 15:13 – But he answered and said, Every plant which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up.

In other words, he told his disciples when informed that he had offended someone, “They better get things straight or they are going to have to deal with God in the end”. No apology, no shame, no pc talk, just straight truth from the lips of Jesus. People are going to be offended by the truth. Especially, when it means it contradicts what they believe. What should be offensive is when individuals think they can suppress speech which is protected by law.

There may be those who do not like Governor Robert Bentley, but what he has done is not out of the ordinary. He spoke about religion. He spoke the truth. He expressed a desire for all to come to that truth. He did not reject anyone. He was within his constitutional rights by saying what he said whether or not they offended someone doesn’t make a difference. The bigger question is, will he betray his stated principles when faced with criticism? Hopefully not! If he stands by his convictions that would certainly be out of the ordinary for a politician.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Who is My Brother?