Archives - Redeeming God

In Romans 9, Paul writes about the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart for the purposes of making God’s glory known. This seems rather harsh to some.

What does Paul mean?

Who Hardened Pharaoh’s Heart First?

In this debate, Calvinists say that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart first from eternity past because God needed a vessel of destruction through whom to reveal His wrath. They say that the text is quite clear in teaching that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8).

Non-Calvinists respond that in the Exodus account, the text frequently states that Pharaoh hardened his own heart before God hardened it (Exod 8:15, 32; 9:34). There are also several references which state that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened without giving indication about the source of this hardening (Exod 7:13, 14, 22; 8:19; 9:7, 35).

But in response to this, Calvinists argue back that although the text says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart before God hardened it, before Moses even went to speak to Pharaoh, God told Him that He planned to harden Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 7:3).

As one is reading all the exegetical and theological arguments surrounding this debate about who hardened Pharaoh’s heart first, it begins to sound a bit like the question of which came first: the chicken or the egg.

It Doesn’t Matter Who Hardened Pharaoh’s Heart First!

Rather than summarizing all the exegetical and theological arguments on both sides of this debate, it seems best to avoid all the rhetoric and cut through to the main question which neither side seems to be asking.

The real question is this: “What does it mean for Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened?”

The issue is not about who hardened Pharaoh’s heart first—though that is where most of the ink has been spilled—but rather about what it means for Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened.

People on both sides of the debate often assume that the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart means that Pharaoh was solidified in his status as an unregenerate person headed for hell.

But what if the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart doesn’t mean this at all? What if it simply refers instead to the resolve in Pharaoh’s heart to keep the Israelites as his slaves, and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Pharaoh’s eternal destiny?

What if God, in His desire to make His glory known to both the Israelites and the Egyptians, made certain that Pharaoh would resist the will of God to deliver the people of Israel from Egypt, so that all those who witnessed and heard of these events would know that the God of Israel alone was God?

Could not God, in His gracious sovereignty, harden Pharaoh’s heart without affecting whatsoever Pharaoh’s ability to believe in God’s promises and thus become part of God’s redeemed people?

Of course He could!

Dr. J. Sidlow Baxter makes a similar point:

The awesome words to Pharaoh can be faced in their full force—“Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show My power in thee, and that My name might be declared throughout all the earth.” The words “raised thee up” do not mean that God had raised him up from birth for this purpose: they refer to his elevation to the highest throne on earth. Nay, as they occur in Exodus 9:16, they scarce mean even that, but only that God had kept Pharaoh from dying in the preceding plague, so as to be made the more fully an object lesson to all men. Moreover, when Paul (still alluding to Pharaoh) says, “And whom He will, He hardeneth” (Exod 9:18), we need not try to soften the word.

God did not override Pharaoh’s own will. The hardening was a reciprocal process. Eighteen times we are told that Pharaoh’s heart was “hardened” in refusal. In about half of these the hardening is attributed to Pharaoh himself; in the others to God. But the whole contest between God and Pharaoh must be interpreted by what God said to Moses before ever the contest started: “The king of Egypt will not” (Exod 3:19). The will was already set. The heart was already hard. The hardening process developed inasmuch as the plagues forced Pharaoh to an issue which crystallized his sin. … Pharaoh’s eternal destiny is not the thing in question (Baxter, Explore the Book, VI:88-89).

This means that the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, whether it is done by God or Pharaoh, or by some symbiotic combination of the two, has absolutely nothing to do with Pharaoh’s eternal destiny.

Even if the Exodus account laid all the responsibility for the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart upon God Himself, and none upon Pharaoh, this still would tell us nothing about whether or not Pharaoh concluded His life as one of God’s redeemed.

Pharaoh’s eternal destiny is not under discussion in Exodus or in Romans, and so Pharaoh’s heart can be hardened so that God’s purposes are achieved, while still leaving plenty of room for Pharaoh to believe in God’s promises and become one of God’s people.

If you want a longer and more detailed explanation of why God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, check out my new book: The Re-Justification of God.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

The Grand Paradox by Ken Wytsma

By Jeremy Myers

21 Comments

Ken Wytsma recently sent me his new book, The Grand Paradox, for review. I really, really wanted to like this book, since it came so highly recommended by numerous authors and scholars that I deeply respect.

Yet I must confess that as I read the book, I had trouble understanding what the book was about. And after having read the book, I am still not sure I know what “the grand paradox” is. I failed to see how one chapter led to another, or how each chapter contributed to an overall big picture theme or idea.

Don’t get me wrong, Ken Wytsma is a good writer with great ideas. Each chapter individually (except for one … more on that in a bit) is a good on a particular topic. I really enjoyed the chapters on justice and doubt. I just didn’t see how the chapters moved the reader toward any sort of cohesive idea, decision, insight, or new understanding.

There were several insights and ideas I found inspiring throughout the book, such as this one on love and justice:

For those who truly care about love and justice, one of the most disappointing experiences in religion is when it becomes a man-made system of conformity and standardization that we use to judge each other. (p. 95)

On the other hand, I disagreed with much of he wrote in chapter 12, titled “Mother Kirk.” Like many Christian leaders today, Wytsma is aware that countless Christians around the world are seeking to follow Jesus outside the four walls of institutional Christianity. That is, they want to follow Jesus without doing the “church thing” on Sunday morning.

Being a pastor of a megachurch himself, Wytsma naturally tries to discredit this way of following Jesus. But in doing so, he reveals that he doesn’t understand the heart or motives of these people, and even resorts to demeaning them with the derogatory label “terminal Christians” (p. 136). He goes on to make this absolutely shocking statement:

When I see someone in the church who is beginning to develop a critical view of church, … I know I am looking at a “terminal Christian.” That individual might not be dead yet, but she is on a trajectory that leads to separation from the people of God, and separation from the people God has identified with will ultimately mean separation from God himself. And separation from God is death (p. 137)

So according to Wytsma, if you decide to stop attending church, or if you are critical of various aspects or elements of the church, you are on your way to becoming separated from God Himself.

As the institutional church continues to suffer a slow and agonizing death, this is the sort of rhetoric we can expect to hear more of from those whose income and notoriety depend upon the institutional church.

I imagine that in Wytsma’s mind, I might be one of those he labels as a “terminal Christian.” But if he were to sit down and talk with me and my wife, or with almost anyone who is on this same journey with God, I think he would discover that we are not falling away from God, but are drawing closer to Him and His people in ways that we never before thought possible–in ways we had only dreamed of when we were part of the institutional church.

Yes, it is true that people who leave the institutional church are often critical of what they left behind. I have contributed to that criticism myself. But this is not criticism of “the church” as much as it is the forms of church which we believe are keeping people from experiencing all that God has for them.

But watch this… if we who no longer sit in a pew on Sunday morning are also part of the family of God through our faith in Jesus, our commitment to follow Him, and our regular fellowship with other travelers on this road, then we too are part of the local and universal church, which means that when Wytsma criticizes us, he is criticizing “the church,” which means that according to his definition, he too is a terminal Christian and headed toward separation from God.

Look, I don’t believe in terminal Christians. I don’t think Wytsma is a terminal Christian. I am just pointing out that when Christians in institutional churches criticize Christians who are not in institutional churches for criticizing the institutional churches, many of their own criticism fall back upon their own heads, just as it does upon us who have left. I am not saying we shouldn’t criticize. We can and we should, for this how we learn. But we must remember what we all learned in kindergarten: “Whenever you point the finger at someone else, three fingers point back at you.”

What am I saying? If you read this book, maybe just skip chapter 12, or if you do read it, just recognize that Wytsma is circling the wagons in an attempt to prop up a dying institution.

If you are part of a fellowship where they say that if you leave their church, or if you question or challenge what the church does or what the pastor says, that you are leaving God or challenging God’s ways, recognize that this is the guilt-based, fear-based, control-based system that forms the foundation of much of the modern “church,” and does not reflect the heart of Jesus for His Bride.

So what can I say about this book? Well, many of the chapters are insightful and helpful. I LOVED his chapter on justice. And if you want to read some thought-provoking s on various Christian topics from a leading church communicator, this might be a good book to try. Just be careful with chapter 12…

Why did God love Jacob and hate Esau?

By Jeremy Myers

27 Comments

Paul writes a difficult statement in Romans 9:13:

Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.

Scholars debate whether or not God actually hated Esau. There are two main opinions on this question.

Option 1: Hate = “Love Less”

Some argue that the reference to hate in Malachi 1:2-3 is a Hebrew idiom for “love less.” They point out that Jesus instructs us to love our enemies rather than hate them (Matt 5:44), point to the places where Jesus tells His disciples to both hate and love their parents (Luke 14:26; Mark 10:19), and remind people that God has strictly forbidden the Israelites from hating the Edomites (Deut 23:7).

Greg Boyd succinctly explains this idea:

Some might suppose that God’s pronouncement that he “loved” Jacob and “hated” Esau shows that he is speaking about their individual eternal destinies, but this is mistaken. In Hebraic thought, when “love” and “hate” are contrasted they usually are meant hyperbolically. The expression simply means to strongly prefer one person or thing over another.

So, for example, when Jesus said, “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple” (Lk 14:26), he was not saying we should literally hate these people. Elsewhere he taught people to love and respect their parents, as the Old Testament also taught (Mk 10:19). Indeed, he commanded us to love even our enemies (Mt 5:44)! What Jesus was saying was that he must be preferred above parents, spouses, children, siblings and even life itself. The meaning of Malachi’s phrase, then, is simply that God preferred Israel over Edom to be the people he wanted to work with to reach out to the world (See “How do you respond to Romans 9?“)

Option 2: Hate = Hate

Others, however, argue that God did in fact hate Esau (and the Edomites), for that is what the text clearly states. The Calvinistic commentator John Murray provides a good explanation of this view:

We must, therefore, recognize that there is in God a holy hate that cannot be defined in terms of not loving or loving less. Furthermore, we may not tone down the reality of intensity of this hate by speaking of it as “anthropopathic” … The case is rather, as in all virtue, that this holy hate in us is patterned after holy hate in God (Murray, Romans, 2:22).

So which view is right? Did God hate Esau?

How can we choose between the two views above? Does God hate Esau and Edom, or does He simply love Edom less than He loves Israel?

The solution to the problem of Romans 9:13 is to agree with those who say that “hate” means “hate,” but to also agree with the others who argue that neither Paul nor Malachi are talking about Esau’s eternal destiny (or anyone else for that matter).

More critical still is to recognize that what God hated is not specifically Esau, for Malachi 1:3 was written many centuries after he had died, nor was God saying He hates the people of Edom.

Instead, God hated how Edom behaved toward Israel.

The Hebrew word used in Malachi 1:3 for “hate” (Heb., sanati) is used in various other places to speak of hatred for the sin and wickedness of people (cf. Psa 26:5; 101:3; 119:104, 128, 163; Prov 8:13; Jer 44:3; Amos 5:21; 6:8; Zech 8:17), not hatred for the people themselves. In light of what many other biblical prophets say about the actions and behavior of Edom (cf. Jer 49:7-22; Lam 4:21-22; Ezek 25:12-14; Amos 1:6-11), this is how we can understand God’s hatred in Malachi 1:3.

God does not hate Edom; He hates how she has behaved. Specifically, God hated how Edom treated Israel.

To read more about this, check out my new book: The Re-Justification of God.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

3 Keys to Understanding Romans 9

By Jeremy Myers

28 Comments

Romans 9 has been a battleground text for centuries. Calvinists and Arminians have hotly debated this passage since the days of the Reformation.

Since I am neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian, I want to offer my perspective on Romans 9 over the course of the next few posts so that people who are trying to understand what Paul is saying in Romans 9 about election, Esau, Pharaoh, and the potter and the clay. Note that all of these posts are drawn from the longer explanation in my book The Re-Justification of God.

When it comes to understanding Romans 9, there are three keys which I have found helpful in explaining what Paul is teaching in this text. Let us look briefly below at each of these three keys to understanding Romans 9.

1. Salvation in Romans

To begin with, we must recognize that “salvation” in Scripture rarely refers to receiving eternal life. “Salvation” does not mean “forgiveness of sins so we can go to heaven when we die.” The word simply means “deliverance,” and the context must determine what sort of deliverance is in view.

Most often, the deliverance is some sort of physical deliverance from enemies, storms, and sickness, or from some of the temporal consequences of sin (cf. Matt 8:25; 9:22; Mark 5:34; 13:20; Luke 8:48; 23:35; John 12:27; 1 Tim 2:15; 2 Tim 4:18; Jas 5:15; Jude 5; See “save, saving” in Vine’s Expository Dictionary, p. 547). This understanding of “salvation” is especially true in Romans.

Most of the uses of “salvation” in Romans are in connection with wrath. It is not wrong to say that “salvation in Romans” is deliverance from wrath (Hodges, Romans).

So what is wrath?

Just as salvation does not refer to entrance into heaven, wrath does not refer to eternity in hell. Nor is wrath from God.

Though an imaginary objector to Paul does occasionally speak of “God’s wrath” in Romans, Paul does not understand wrath this way. For Paul, “wrath” is what happens to people (both believers and unbelievers) when they stray from God’s guidelines for proper living.

Today, we would speak of “consequences.” While someone today might say that a destroyed marriage is the consequence of adultery, Paul might argue that a destroyed marriage is the “wrath” of adultery. And as all who have experienced the damaging and destructive consequences of sin know, the fall-out from sinful choices often feels like wrath. Sin brings metaphorical earthquakes, hailstorms, raging fires, and flash floods into our lives, leaving behind large swaths of destruction. What better word to describe this than “wrath”?

So in Romans, salvation is deliverance from the devastating consequences of sin. This is the first key to understanding Romans 9.

2. Election is to Service

The second key to understanding Romans 9 is to see that “election” is not to eternal life, but to service. Just as God elected Israel to serve His purposes in the world, so also, God chose the Church for similar purposes. This understanding of election greatly helps us understand some notoriously difficult texts in Romans 9–11.

For example, Paul writes in Romans 11:17-21 that the elect branches were cut off so that non-elect branches could be grafted in, which in turn will lead to the elect-which-became-non-elect to be re-grafted back in and become re-elect. If Paul is referring to eternal life when he speaks of election, none of this makes any sense. How can a people or a nation whom God elected “to eternal life” before the foundation of the world go from being elect to non-elect and then re-elect?

However, this makes perfect sense when we recognize that election is not to eternal life but to service. God wants to bless the world through His people, and if one group of people fails in this God-given task, then God will simply find someone else to do it while He continues to lead the first group to fulfill His overarching purposes—albeit in different ways than originally intended. If this second group also fails, they too will be moved into an alternative role in accomplishing God’s will (Rom 11:17-21).

If necessary, God could raise up a people for Himself from rocks (Matt 3:9). In this way, when Paul writes about branches being cut off so others can be grated in which will lead to the cut off branches being grafted back in again, he is not talking about people losing and regaining eternal life, but about losing and re-gaining places of privilege and purpose in God’s plan for this world.

God’s plan of redemption started with Israel, shifted to the Gentiles, and eventually will reincorporate Israel so that “of Him and through Him and to Him are all things” (Rom 11:36).

This idea really helps us understand Romans 9. Election is to service, so that God can elect even people like Esau and Pharaoh to service, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with their eternal destiny.

3. Election is Corporate AND Individual

The third and final key to understanding Romans 9 is that election is both corporate and individual.

There is a long-standing debate about election, regarding whether Paul is talking about corporate election or individual election. That is, when Paul writes about the election of Israel, or God’s choice of Jacob over Esau, is Paul talking about the individuals within Israel, and the individual destinies of Jacob and Esau, or is Paul referring instead to the national and corporate destinies of Israel (which came from Jacob) and Edom (which came from Esau)?

Usually, the battle lines over this debate are determined by whether a person is a Calvinist or not. As Calvinists believe and teach the individual election of certain people to eternal life, they are more likely to understand and explain Romans 9 in this light. Those who do not hold to Calvinism tend to interpret Romans 9 as teaching corporate election. Henry Halley, author of Halley’s Bible Handbook, is one such writer:

Paul is not discussing the predestination of individuals to salvation or condemnation, but is asserting God’s absolute sovereignty in the choice and management of nations for world functions (Halley’s Bible Handbook, 527).

So which is it? Is Paul talking about individual election or corporate election?

I believe that in Romans 9 Paul is teaching both corporate and individual election.

Since it is the purposes of God that determine who gets elected and to what form of service they are elected, then it is God who decides when He needs to call individuals and when He needs to call nations or groups of people to perform certain tasks.

Of course, even when election is corporate, it is true that God’s purpose for that group of people is carried out by individuals within the group, and so in this sense, we can say that even corporate election has an individual aspect.

On the other hand, the benefit to corporate election is that even if some individuals within the corporate identity do not contribute to fulfill the purpose of the corporate entity, there will be some within the group that will fulfill their purpose, thus accomplishing God’s purpose in election.

With these three keys before us, the difficult chapter of Romans 9 becomes much less difficult. If you want to read more, you can get my book, The Re-Justification of God.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Why There Will be No Sports in Heaven

By Jeremy Myers

30 Comments

Based on just the title of this post, I can hear lots of people cheering and lots of other people rethinking whether or not they want to go to heaven.

No sports in heaven? For some that is truly heaven, while for others it sounds like hell.

Whichever feeling wells up within you, bear with me…

Someone once told me that since there wasn’t any mention of sports in the Bible, this means that there will be no sports in heaven.

I think that logic is pretty bad, but recently as I was listening to a news update about the passer rating of a certain quarterback, it occurred to me that there was a pretty good theological reason for there not to be any sports in heaven.

Except for baseball…. Kevin Kostner proved that there is baseball in heaven…. 😉

The Theological Reason for No Sports in Heaven

It is often taught in churches that when we get to heaven, we will never get sick, we will never die, we will have all our questions answered, and we will be perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect.

That sounds nice… until you begin to realize what this means…

I like the idea of no more sickness and no more death, but the more I think about having all my questions answered and being perfect in everything, I am not sure I like that at all.

I am not a sports fanatic, but I like watching some sports, and I even play a bit of sports. … Well, no I don’t. Not any more. But I used to.

But here’s the point:

Sports is based on the universal reality that humans are not perfect in everything we do. That’s why we have batting averages. Free-throw percentages. Quarterback ratings.

Imagine if there was a person who always batted 1000, who never missed a free throw, and whose every pass of the football was for a touchdown.

Such a player would dominate the world of sports. Whatever team he was on would always win. Always.

Now imagine that every single player on both teams played just as perfectly. It sounds thrilling for about one second until you begin to think of what that game would be like.

Imagine a basketball game where every single shot was good. The announcer’s job would be easy. All he would have to say is “He dribbles down the court … he shoots … he scores!” over and over and over. Heck, the players wouldn’t even have to dribble down the court to shoot. All the shots would be full-court shots with 100% accuracy. It sounds thrilling to watch … for about five minutes. Then it becomes incredibly boring.

Of course, it is here where we start to run into problems. Take baseball as another example. It is logically impossible to have a player bat 1000 and have a pitcher throw a perfect game.

So you see? Sports are based on the fact that nobody is perfect in everything.

But if in heaven, everybody is perfect in everything, this means that there could be no sports.

So Heaven Sounds Pretty Dull After All…

Frankly, I find this highly depressing. Not because I am such a sports lover, but because I am such a lover of learning.

I love the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. Just as some people love sports, I love the feeling of my mind and heart racing as I encounter a new idea from a book or insight on a particular passage of Scripture.

I wonder what life would be like without this. I think it would be pretty boring.

All in all, heaven is starting to sound like a pretty dull place.

So the only thing I can conclude is that we won’t be perfect after all in our eternal state. We will not be perfect. We will not know it all. We will grow and develop and think and ask questions and learn by trial and error. We will invent, inquire, and inspire.

As it turns out, imperfection is the only way heaven can be real and not be hell.

So maybe there will be sports in heaven after all…

All you football fans can breathe a sigh of relief.

But if Heaven Requires Imperfection…

Then the ramifications of this got me thinking.

If we are not perfect in what we know and what we do, does this mean that we can get injured and hurt after all? If, in heaven, I decided I want to learn to become a tightrope walker, and I become so good I decide to tightrope across the heavenly version of Niagara Falls, what happens if I make a mistake and I fall?

Or, what happens if I decide to become a Master Chef, and in cutting potatoes one day, I slip with the knife and slice my finger? Will it cut? Will it hurt? Will it bleed? I cannot see how it cannot. If I remember correctly, I think C. S. Wrote about this is The Problem of Pain. I don’t have the book in front of me, but I seem to remember Lewis explaining that pain tells us when something is wrong. (If you find the section, let me know!) If I cut my finger with a knife, I need it to hurt so that I can know I should stop cutting! If it didn’t hurt, I would keep cutting, and do great damage to my finger.

If there is no pain in our eternal bodies, does this mean that we will never cut our fingers? That the knife turns to rubber if we try? If we are out for a hike on Pluto, and we fall off a cliff, does that mean we will bounce when we hit the bottom? I cannot see how. But on the other hand, there will be no more death, so will we be like the Wolverine from X-Men or Claire from the TV show Heroes who can regenerate no matter what? That’d be cool…

But this then leads me to the question of God.

Earlier when I said that we will be perfect as God is perfect, I intentionally misquoted Matthew 5:48. Why? Because how I misquoted it is how I sometimes hear others misquote it.

In Matthew 5:48, Jesus says that we should be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. I have written on this text before by saying it is impossible to live perfect lives, but for our purposes here, note that Jesus does not say that we will ever be perfect just as God is perfect, nor does Jesus even say that God Himself is perfect. Jesus simply says that we should strive to be perfect, in the same way that God is, however that is.

Some people point to 1 Corinthians 13:10 as evidence that when we get to heaven we will be perfect, but this verse is talking about spiritual gifts and is not teaching anything about mental or physical perfection when we get to heaven.

Then there is 1 John 3:2-3. Some say that since Jesus is perfect, when we see Him, we will become just like Him, and hence, we will also be perfect. Well again, I am not denying that we will become like Jesus. And I am not denying that through glorification, we will achieve moral perfection.

Hezekiah 2:7: “And God gave us baseball…”

Come to think of it, I cannot think of a verse anywhere in the Bible which says that in our glorified bodies, we will be perfectly perfect in every way, including all our mental, moral, emotional, spiritual, and physical capacities. Can you think of anywhere that teaches this?

If were to achieve this perfectly perfect perfection, then we would be exactly like God.

Or maybe …. could it be? …. maybe God is not like this either? Maybe we constructed a God of our own liking according to platonic philosophical ideas of what “perfection” entails, and God is not like that at all!

Is it possible that God Himself learns, invents, and inquires as well?

Could it be that our creative desire to see and try new things comes from the very nature of God Himself?

Maybe we seek answers to life’s problems because God does.

Maybe we want to explore, discover, and seek because God has these desires too.

Of course, maybe, just maybe, we have no clue what heaven will be like after all, and this whole post is a bunch of malarkey.

One thing is for sure … who ever knew that sports could get you thinking about heaven?

The Greatest PROOF of Christian Truth I have EVER read!

By Jeremy Myers

44 Comments

I was reading the book reviews of a certain Christian book on Amazon yesterday, and stumbled upon the most astounding argument for the truth of Christianity I have ever read.

One reviewer of this book (which will go unnamed) left a fairly negative and critical review. As you may know, Amazon allows you to comment on other people’s reviews. So a Christian who was a fan of this book (and the author) commented that this was the stupidest review they had ever read… Another Christian weighed in and said that the commenter was stupid as well for just using cut-and-paste attacks upon people who write critical reviews.

Then I read this…

I laughed and laughed and laughed! It reminded me a bit of my post from a few weeks ago about Christian hate speech.

But do you see what this person wrote there at the end? It’s GENIUS!

He says:

Actually, it’s an example of one of my two irrefutable points that show Christianity is truth — the continued existence of the Church despite the continued behavior of the members of this Church.

He’s right, you know. We sure can be glad that Jesus said, “I will build my church,” for if He had left it up to us, we would have destroyed ourselves a long time ago… I imagine, however, that sometimes Jesus is shouting at us, “Stop destroying what I am building here!”

I asked him what his other irrefutable point was. I’ll let you know if he responds…

The Re-Justification of God (Romans 9)

By Jeremy Myers

15 Comments

I have just published a book called The Re-Justification of God.

Here’s the cover:

It is probably the ugliest book cover I have ever designed, but if you compare it with the cover from John Piper’s book on the right, you’ll see why I created the cover as I did.

Why did I write The Re-Justification of God?

Ever since I read John Piper’s The Justification of God about twenty years ago, I have wanted to write a book in response called The Re-Justification of God.

Why?

I believe that Piper’s book does more to malign the name of God and His character than uplift and glorify it. To put it bluntly, I don’t think Piper’s book does anything to accomplish “The justification of God” but actually does the opposite!

So I wanted to write a book which explains Romans 9 in a way that presents God in light of Jesus Christ, in a way that does not make God responsible for hating Esau, hardening Pharaoh’s heart, and condemning a large majority of mankind to everlasting damnation in hell.

Look, I have great respect for John Piper, but much of his theology really gets my blood boiling, and this book of his on Romans 9 was no exception.

But it wasn’t just his book. Most of the explanations of Romans 9 I have read from Calvinists seem to be completely off track and do more to undermine the character of God than glorify it.

So in light of all the bad theology that has been taught from Romans 9, I wanted to write a book that explained the text of Romans 9 in a way that truly presents God in the light that Paul presents Him, as a God of light, love, mercy, grace, and longsuffering toward all.

That would be a great book, right?

Well, guess what?

Despite appearances, the book I just published is not that book. My The Re-Justification of God is not a point-by-point refutation of Piper’s The Justification of God. My book is not even a point-by-point refutation of the typical Calvinistic understanding of Romans 9. That is the book I set out to write, but it is not the book I am announcing here.

…Sorry to disappoint you.

However…

…My book IS the first draft in what will hopefully become that book.

While I believe my new book does provide an overall big-picture analysis of Romans 9:10-24 that is neither Calvinistic nor Arminian, and while I believe my book provides logically and theologically sound explanations for why God “hated” Esau, why God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and how God treats the “vessels of wrath” destined for destruction, I was not able to provide ALL the scholarly and exegetical details that a book like this requires.

So this book is the brief summary of the book I initially set out to write so many years ago. It is not finished, however. It is less than half-way done. Oh, the ideas are all there, but the book contains very little of the exegetical evidence which is needed to defend the ideas.

So why am I publishing this book now if it’s not done?

In the opening pages to this new book, I explain why, but in a nutshell, the reason is that if I didn’t publish it now, it would probably never get done. Also, having the book out there allows people to respond to it and interact with it so that in a future edition I can correct or attempt to better explain the ideas I present in the book.

And following the theme in the cover image above, here is an image of some of the edits I performed on this manuscript:

As with many of my books, there are probably still several typographic mistakes in it. If you find some, please send me an email, or use the “Contact Me” section on my About page to let me know where they are so I can correct these mistakes in future editions of the book.

So how can you get and read this book?

This book is available for purchase on Amazon.

Once you have read it, let me know what you think by leaving a review on Amazon.

And hey, would you let others know about this new book by using the share buttons below? Thanks!

What REALLY controls and guides Christians: Fear and Guilt

By Jeremy Myers

34 Comments

Christians like to claim that we are guided by Scripture and controlled by the Holy Spirit.

But I was recently talking to my insanely wise and beautiful wife, Wendy, and she pointed out that the two things which seem to guide and control Christians are actually fear and guilt.

We are guided by fear and controlled by guilt.

My wife used the example of a typical church-missionary relationship. When raising support, some missionaries use guilt to get others to support them. They shows pictures of starving children, or tell stories about how people without the gospel are headed for hell. But then, when they are on the missionary field, and not much is happening through their ministry, they feel compelled to embellish what they are doing so that it the money which people are spending on them is well-spent. They are afraid that if they “tell it like it is,” the money will stop.

But when they send glowing reports of all that God is doing on the mission field back home, those in the pews feel even more guilty because they don’t see God “working” in their own life in the same miraculous ways. They feel guilty that they are not following Jesus overseas.

The missionaries also get put up on a pedestal so that when they return home on furlough, they have to conform to a certain standard of holy behavior which matches the pedestal that has been built for them. Furthermore, even though the missionary may be exhausted from working overseas, they feel compelled to visit people in their homes and go speak in a myriad of churches just so that they can maintain their financial support.

And on and on it goes, in an endless cycle of fear and guilt.

Fear and Guilt in Church

Of course, this cycle goes beyond just the relationship between churches and the missionaries they support. Guilt and fear are at the heart of preaching, of doing what our pastor says, of attending church regularly, and of putting on the smiley face for Sunday services.

The pastor wants to prove that he is worthy of his pay (even though he is afraid he is not), and so must use manipulative practices to keep people coming to church and giving their money. He fears that if he does not keep this up, he will lose his job. He also fears that his sermons are not as good as the ones the pastor down the street preaches, and fears he will lose his people to that other church. The pastor, robbed of life by fear and guilt, uses fear and guilt to control others.

People fear displeasing their pastor, since his is “the man of God,” and so often do what he says without question, because he speaks for God and knows what God wants better than they do themselves. The people, living under fear and guilt of what will happen if they do not obey, do not have the freedom to follow Jesus for themselves.

People are afraid to miss a Sunday service because of what others will think or say about them. Fear and guilt keep us returning to situations where only more fear and guilt get piled upon us.

People are afraid to let others know about their sins, temptations, struggles, and doubts, and so put on a smiley face for church services and Bible studies. Since everybody is doing this, nobody realizes that everybody is afraid that others will discover who they really are, and feel guilty that they seem to deal with issues and temptations that nobody else faces. Fear and guilt keep us from being honest and from opening up to others about our struggles.

What’s the solution?

I think we all struggle with fear and guilt in numerous ways. We experience fear and guilt in our jobs, our marriages, our families, and our finances.

But I also believe that Jesus wants to free us from both. I do not think we were meant to live life wrapped in the chains of fear and guilt.

How do we break free?

We follow Jesus.

He will lead us into freedom. The journey is long, but it is a journey worth taking. As we walk with Jesus, we will discover that the one person who knows everything about us is also the one person who loves and accepts us completely. When we come to that realization, the fear and guilt begin to wash away, and we are able to begin to live in freedom with other people as well.

If you are struggling with fear and guilt, let me recommend three things.

First, don’t become fearful or guilty about struggling with fear and guilt. Just recognize the fear and the guilt.

Second, let Jesus know that you want to be led by Him instead. Just tell Him. And keep telling Him.

Finally, trust that Jesus will lead you. Over the course of the next couple years, as you learn to live in recognition of your fear and guilt, and as you learn to trust that Jesus is leading you to where He wants, you will look back over your life and see how much more liberated and free you have become. You will be shocked at how much more forgiven, loved, and accepted you feel.

Do you struggle with fear and guilt? Do you even know that you struggle with it? Do you use it to control others? What sort of strategies have you found helpful in seeking to liberate yourself and others from fear and guilt? Please share below!

You will never believe how Jesus spent $3,150,000,000 in 2014!

By Jeremy Myers

51 Comments

Arthur Sido recently brought to my attention that in 2014, United States churches spent $3,150,000,000 on church buildings.

$3,150,000,000

And this amount is down 80% since 2002!

I wrote about this in one of my books (I cannot recall which one), and I have written previously on this blog about how churches spend money. See:

But it recently occurred to me that since Christians are the representatives of Jesus Christ on earth, since we are His ambassadors, since we are the “Body of Christ,” this means that when we spend $3,150,000,000 on church buildings in one year, it is Jesus Christ spending this amount of money in one year.

We are spending HIS money.

And it really made me wonder … If Jesus had $3,150,000,000 to spend, do I really think He would spend it on church buildings?

Somehow, I really, really doubt it…

Great Calvinism Debate Videos

By Jeremy Myers

Why did God harden Pharaoh’s Heart?

Who Hardened Pharaoh’s Heart First?

It Doesn’t Matter Who Hardened Pharaoh’s Heart First!

The Grand Paradox by Ken Wytsma

Why did God love Jacob and hate Esau?

Option 1: Hate = “Love Less”

Option 2: Hate = Hate

So which view is right? Did God hate Esau?

3 Keys to Understanding Romans 9

1. Salvation in Romans

2. Election is to Service

3. Election is Corporate AND Individual

Why There Will be No Sports in Heaven

The Theological Reason for No Sports in Heaven

So Heaven Sounds Pretty Dull After All…

But if Heaven Requires Imperfection…

But this then leads me to the question of God.

The Greatest PROOF of Christian Truth I have EVER read!

The Re-Justification of God (Romans 9)

Why did I write The Re-Justification of God?

However…

So why am I publishing this book now if it’s not done?

So how can you get and read this book?

What REALLY controls and guides Christians: Fear and Guilt

Fear and Guilt in Church

What’s the solution?

You will never believe how Jesus spent $3,150,000,000 in 2014!

$3,150,000,000

Great Calvinism Debate Videos

Theological Study Archives

Bible Study Archives

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!