Conclusion from Peru and Mexico

email from Randall Easter | 25 January 2008 | Randall Easter

[Manfred the Wonder Dawg]

January 25, 2008

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

In recent days I have spent time in Lima and Sullana Peru and Mexico City and I have discovered that people by nature are the same. Man has a heart that is inclined to selfishness and idolatry. Sin abounds in the remotest parts of the land because the heart is desperately wicked. Thousands bow before statues of Mary and pray to her hoping for answers. I have seen these people stare hopelessly at Mary icons, Jesus icons, and a host of dead saints who will do nothing for them. I have talked with people who pray to the pope and say that they love him. I talked with one lady who said that she knew that Jesus was the Savior, but she loved the pope. Thousands bow before Santa Muerte (holy death angel) in hopes that she will do whatever they ask her. I have seen people bring money, burning cigarettes, beer, whiskey, chocolate, plants, and flowers to Santa Muerte in hopes of her answers. I have seen these people bowing on their knees on the concrete in the middle of public places to worship their idol. Millions of people come into the Basilica in Mexico City and pay their money, confess their sins, and stare hopelessly at relics in hope that their sins will be pardoned. In America countless thousands are chained to baseball games, football games, material possessions, and whatever else their heart of idols can produce to worship.

My heart has broken in these last weeks because the God of heaven is not honored as he ought to be honored. People worship the things that are created rather than worshiping the Creator. God has been gracious to all mankind and yet mankind has hardened their hearts against a loving God. God brings the rain on the just and unjust. God brings the beautiful sunrises and sunsets upon the just and unjust. God gives good gifts unto all and above all things he has given his Son that those who would believe in him would be saved. However, man has taken the good things of God and perverted them unto idols and turned their attention away from God. I get a feel for Jesus as he overlooked Jerusalem or Paul as he beseeched for God to save Israel. When you accept the reality of the truth of the glory of God is breaks your heart that people would turn away from the great and awesome God of heaven to serve lesser things. Moses was outraged by the golden calf, the prophets passionately preached against idolatry, Jesus was angered that the temple was changed in an idolatrous business, and Paul preached to the idolaters of Mars Hill by telling them of the unknown God.

I arrived back at home wondering how I should respond to all the idolatry that I have beheld in these last three weeks. I wondered how our church here in the states should respond to all of the idolatry in the world. What are the options? First, I suppose we could sit around and hope that people chose to get their life together and stop being idolaters. However, I do not know how that could ever happen apart from them hearing the truth. Second, I suppose we could spend a lifetime studying cultural issues and customs in hope that we could somehow learn to relate to the people of other countries. However, the bible is quite clear that all men are the same. Men are dead in sin, shaped in iniquity, and by nature are the enemies of God. Thirdly, we could pay other people or other agencies to go and do a work for us while we remain comfortably in the states. However, there is no way to insure that there will be doctrinal accuracy or integrity. If we only pay other people to take the gospel we will miss out on all of the benefits of being obedient to the mission of God. Lastly, we could seek where God would have us to do a lasting work and then invest our lives there for the glory of God. The gospel has the power to raise the dead in any culture and we must be willing to take the gospel wherever God would have us take it. It is for sure that our church cannot go to every country and reach every people group, so we must determine where God would have us work and seek to be obedient wherever that is.

It seems that some doors are opening in the Spanish speaking countries below us and perhaps God is beginning to reveal where we are to work. There are some options for work to be partnered with in Peru and there could be a couple of options in Mexico. The need is greater than I can express upon this paper for a biblical gospel to be proclaimed in Peru and Mexico. Oh, that God would glorify his great name in Peru and Mexico by using a small little church in a town that does not exist to proclaim his great gospel amongst a people who desperately need the truth.

I give thanks to the LORD for allowing me the privilege of going to these countries and broadening my horizons. The things that I have seen will be forever engraved upon my heart. I will long remember the pastors that I spent time with in Peru and I will never forget Adolfo who translated for me in Mexico. I will relish the time that I spent with Paul Washer and the others. When I think of church I will forever remember being on top of that mountain in Sullana at that church which had no electricity and no roof. I am convinced that heaven was looking down on that little church on top of that mountain and very few people on earth even know that it exist. Oh, God I pray that the things of this world will continue to grow dim and that God’s people will be caught up in his glorious presence.

Because of the truth: Pastor: J. Randall Easter II Timothy 2:19 "Our God is in heaven and does whatever He pleases."(Ps. 115:3) "He predestined us according to the good pleasure of His will."(Eph. 1:5) Those who have been saved have been saved for His glory and they are being made holy for this is the will of God. Are you being made holy? Spurgeon says, "If your religion does not make you holy it will damn you to hell."

[annalex]

where Catholicism fell on that continuum.

In the same place that Kosta describes in 5,208. While St. Augustine is much admired in the West and less so in the East, his view on original sin is at times referred to as "augistinianism" and is not dogmatic. No, Original sin in itself does not condemn to hell. In fact, I doubt if Augustine in fact taught that. He wrote so much that at times he can be read in contradiction to the totality of his views. If he really taught that originial sin condemns to hell, he would not have developed the doctrine of Limbo that teaches differently.

[Forest Keeper]

Speaking of John, the disciple Jesus loved, the Bible uses the word "agape," John 13:23, 19:26, etc. as well as the word "philia," i.e. John 20:2 (both of which are translated as "love")

I did some more digging and it looks like you're right. "Philia", or brotherly love, is the word that helps me, not so much "agape".

Let me try it this way, if you do not see personal love from God, do you see it in your Church? Does your Church give you something that is greater than what God gives you?

Or, if God does not love us personally then how do you explain this:

Gal 5:22-23 : 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

If you would agree that all of these are personal, then how can God give us something He doesn't have?

[HarleyD]

Original sin in itself does not condemn to hell.

I would suggest we look closely at the following text:

Rom 5:12 Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned:

Please note Paul states that all sinned through Adam. We are not simply tainted with the desire to do evil. According to Rom 5:12 we have actually sinned, which is the way God views the matter. God charged Adam's sin to all humanity. All men are guilty of the sin of Adam and therefore all men die.

Sin is what condemns us to hell. Original sin does mean that all are condemned to hell. Death is the evidence of us being sinners, not simply that we are tainted with a desire to sin. Otherwise premature babies would never die since, theoretically, they haven't sinned.

[HarleyD]

I have been away for a while and just look back through some of these post especially the argument about "mortal sin" around 5091. I noticed that you've never answered FK's question about whether a person could live a perfect life according to the law. I would have expected you to say two people have, Jesus and Mary. Isn't that so?

But this is the part that intrigued me:

Sin is what separates us from Christ,Dear FK... Catholic's/Orthodox are taught to TRY and avoid sin!Period!

Protestants believe that since the Holy Spirit resides in us, we don't try to avoid sin; rather the Spirit makes it repugnant to us. That is not to say we don't sin for, like Peter, the flesh is weak. But when we grieve or quench the Spirit, we know about it and He leads us to repentance.

[aruanan]

:12 Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned:

Please note Paul states that all sinned through Adam....All men are guilty of the sin of Adam and therefore all men die.

Then look closely at the passage. Paul said that sin entered the world through one man. He did not say that "all sinned through Adam". He said that death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned."

God is not holding anyone guilty for the sin of another, not even the sin of Adam, otherwise the following quote from God himself in Ezekiel 18 would become untrue:

9 "Yet you ask, 'Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20 The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

[TASMANIANRED]

In those days being a pagan was a rule rather exception.

Unfortunately as a result of secular humanism, liberalism, moral relativism it is becoming the rule again....even to the point of re instituting human sacrifice.

[HarleyD]

God is not holding anyone guilty for the sin of another, not even the sin of Adam

That is not what Romans states:

Rom 5:16-17 And the free gift shall not be as by one having sinned; (for indeed the judgment was of one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses to justification. For if by one man's offense death reigned by one, much more they who receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by One, Jesus Christ.)

The comparison between Adam and Christ cannot be overlooked. Otherwise you would have to say that not everyone in Christ is made righteous. Death comes into the world through "...one man's offense...". Death can only come to those who sinned. Likewise, much more do they receive abundance of grace through Christ. It is simple logic.

I can think of no greater explanation of original sin than Romans 5.

[annalex]

Sin is what condemns us to hell. Original sin does mean that all are condemned to hell.

As Aruanan explained, what we have in Romans 5 is what we also have in Genesis 3:

16 To the woman also he said: I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husband's power, and he shall have dominion over thee. 17 And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life. 18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the earth. 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return. 20 And Adam called the name of his wife Eve: because she was the mother of all the living. 21 And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife, garments of skins, and clothed them. 22 And he said: Behold Adam is become as one of us, knowing good and evil: now, therefore, lest perhaps he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever. 23 And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the earth from which he was taken. 24 And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

The consequence of original sin is toil, pain, death, and exile. The consequence of actual sin is condemnation to hell.

[aruanan]

Death comes into the world through "...one man's offense...". Death can only come to those who sinned.

Again, Paul said 4 things explicitly in that earlier passage: 1. Sin entered the world through one man. 2. Death came through sin. 3. All men die because 4. All men have sinned.

He did not say that Adam's descendants died because they were held to be guilty of Adam's sin. He did not say that Adam's descendants sinned because Adam sinned. He did not say that Adam's descendants sinned because Adam died, though interestingly he does say that sin was in the world and death through sin even though God was not holding anyone accountable for it in the absence of the law. Elsewhere (Romans 8:20) we see that the entire creation was subjected to the bondage of decay and death by God in response to Adam's sin. So everyone, including the creation itself, in between the time that Adam sinned by breaking a direct command and the giving of the law, was experiencing the bondage of decay and death because of God's response to Adam's sin, even though God was holding no one accountable for sin in the absence of the law.

[kosta50]

annalex: Original sin in itself does not condemn to hell.
HarelyD: I would suggest we look closely at the following text:

Rom 5:12 Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned: Please note Paul states that all sinned through Adam.

Please note that this is a matter of dispute. First, +Paul did not use commas or punctuation marks, so, depending where you place a comma or a period or a semi-colong or colon, changes the meaning of the whole sentence. This is actually quite common in the Bible, and ultimately leaves the reader to decide what the Holy Spirit meant.

The statement "ef w panteV hmarton " is not perfectly clear:

The consequences of the Fall spread to the whole of the human race. This is elucidated by St Paul: ‘Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned’ (Rom.5:12).

This text, which formed the Church’s basis of her teaching on ‘original sin’, may be understood in a number of ways: the Greek words ef’ ho pantes hemarton may be translated not only as ‘because all men sinned’ but also ‘in whom [that is, in Adam] all men sinned’.

Different readings of the text may produce different understandings of what ‘original sin’ means.

If we accept the first translation, this means that each person is responsible for his own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression. Here, Adam is merely the prototype of all future sinners, each of whom, in repeating Adam’s sin, bears responsibility only for his own sins.

Adam’s sin is not the cause of our sinfulness; we do not participate in his sin and his guilt cannot be passed onto us.

However, if we read the text to mean ‘in whom all have sinned’, this can be understood as the passing on of Adam’s sin to all future generations of people, since human nature has been infected by sin in general. The disposition toward sin became hereditary and responsibility for turning away from God sin universal. [Consequences of the Adam's Sin, An Online Orthodox Catechism]

According to Rom 5:12 we have actually sinned, which is the way God views the matter

Wow, that's pretty bombastic! The Greeks who read the original in their language disagreed then and do so to this day. This is a perfect example how translations can affect theology and lead to completely divergent conclusions that go to the very heart of our disposition towards faith.

I believe that until this moment no one ever called your attention to the fact that Romans 5:12 do not with any certainty say we have sinned through Adam and bear his guilt for it.

One thing is certain: the words in Rom 5:12 are sloppily wirtten and ambiguous enough to cause different opinions (one more reason to believe that the Holy Spirit may did nto write them!).

All men are guilty of the sin of Adam and therefore all men die.

Are you sure? HD, man was created neither mortal nor immortal, but potentially either one. Through the sin of Adam (and Eve), human nature became mortal and mortal parents have mortal children. Our mortality is a consequence of their sin, not the sin itself. Our mortality is not the penalty, because we bear no guilt for their doing.

A drug-addicted mother gives birth to drug-addicted infants. The infants have the craving for the drug but no guilt for their addition. They are born "wounded" and their will craves the sin of their mother but it is none of their doing, guilt or responsibility. Those who have no guilt are innocent and penalizing the innocent is not in God's realm because it is a vice.

Original sin does mean that all are condemned to hell. Death is the evidence of us being sinners, not simply that we are tainted with a desire to sin. Otherwise premature babies would never die since, theoretically, they haven't sinned.

This is an fine example of how grotesque misinterpretation of the original text can become! It is not the work of the Holy Spirit, for sure. It has human error written all over it.

Premature babies die because their nature is mortal. All Adam's descendants are mortal because human nature became mortal as a consequence of Adam's sin.

[kosta50]

Again, Paul said 4 things explicitly in that earlier passage: 1. Sin entered the world through one man. 2. Death came through sin. 3. All men die because 4. All men have sinned.

Amen, Well, put.

[Forest Keeper]

But you are exaggerating our Father-child relationship with God. God created man to be a rational, moral being, capable of mercy and compassion, not some little child.

You mean sort of like a reasonably independent adult, one who is capable of deciding what is best for himself? This is the same analogy I was talking with MD about recently. Reformers don't see it that way at all. We see man as little more than a toddler next to God. We are totally dependent on Him for everything. We believe that many of the true OT stories of the Israelites reveal this.

...... but it is much more important to come to God freely than to be forced, because forced love in no love.

All Christians DO come to God freely. The difference appears to be with what heart do we come. You appear to come with the fallen heart you were born with. We come to God with a new heart that God GAVE us. Did you choose to be born with your fallen heart? Neither did we choose our new heart. That new heart is the only thing that allows us to freely come to Christ. Reformers are grateful to God that this new heart is of such high quality that God's wishes are accomplished every time. Your side appears to hold the position that it is unfair to use a God-given heart to come to God UNLESS it is defective. :)

[Forest Keeper]

FK, have you ever heard of the concept of “sporoi”? The word means “seeds” and the Fathers spoke of flashes of the revelation of God to mankind among, generally, pre-Christian pagans as “sporoi”. ...

I've heard of it and ran across it when I did a little reading on Hinduism. But I would never compare it to the Biblical concept of "God-breathed". In my limited reading, I found no claim of any kind that sporoi could come close to passing the test in 2 Tim. 3:16-17. For one thing, that verse says "all scripture" and I found no claim that sporoi ever encompass all scripture of any particular faith. I don't see how snippets here and there could compare to a complete and self-contained belief system.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: "... If any other group gets together and comes up with “dogma” or “doctrine”, then it has less weight, but when the Church Fathers did it (with others of the hierarchy), you claim it was from God.”

The Church teaches that God speaks through the consensus patrum. And FK, in Orthodoxy, the hierarchy is not even remotely the final word on dogma, the People of God, the laity, are. You have to get this straight, FK! Its a very important point.

I remembered that, but I reasoned that the way it probably works is that the consensus patrum DECLARES first what God says, and then LATER that is either accepted or rejected by the laity. Is that fair? If so, then I think my original statement stands.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: Sure they do claim that. (Or, the Orthodox Church claims it for them.) Isn't that what defines "consensus patrum"?

Individual Church Fathers never claimed that, FK.

I didn't mean to imply otherwise, but apparently I did. :) I meant "they" in the plural, and then to be sure added the clause in parenthesis.

FK: "If any other group gets together and comes up with "dogma" or "doctrine", then it has less weight, but when the Church Fathers did it (with others of the hierarchy), you claim it was from God."

What "other group?" Heretics? Look, the Church allowed theological opinions, but there are limits. Just as there are some things your tradition will not allow and still consider someone a Baptist. Those other groups as you call them taught things that are not in conformity with what the belief concerning the Holy Trinity and Christ.

I wasn't really thinking along the lines of major heretics, just local churches who may have come to agreement locally on some matter. At least in Orthodoxy, even many Councils were local, weren't they, and thus not "officially" consensus patrum?

[Forest Keeper]

FK: "However, THAT we don't understand something IS NOT prima facie evidence that it is not of God, as you seem to imply."

And, conversely, it doesn't mean it is prima facie evidence that it is of God! Remember, the party that makes the claim must provide the evidence (the more extraordinary the claim the more extraordinary the evidence is required). Doubt is justified until proof is established.

But if the Bible says it is of God, and it doesn't make immediate sense to us, that still IS prima facie evidence that it is of God. The Bible IS proof. Now, I know we part company here, but it occurred to me that I hadn't restated that in a while. It's a position statement I shouldn't neglect. :)

The presupposition is that there is God and now we proceed to prove the presupposition by all means. That's not how one gets to the truth, FK. The cause is established by working retroactively towards the cause, based on available evidence.

Although I offered the possible presupposition that "there is a God", the even better argument is that we don't even have to start with "There is a God". All we really need to start with is the presuppositions of absolutes and antithesis. If we can start with only that, then "a" God being "there" must follow. Trouble is, in our modern, relativistic world, we can't even start there with many people.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: "... works do not produce grace BUT works DO produce faith???"

Works can strengthen faith, absolutely.

Ah, I misunderstood. When you said "produce" I thought you meant "create" or "originate". I agree with your above.

Faith is the instrument by which we receive grace.

Not for salvational purposes it isn't. Without grace first there can be no faith later. Wouldn't the alternative be Pelagian? Plus, look at the words of your quote below. How are we saved? Grace. Yes, but how does God dispense this grace to save us, is it grace creating and going through works? No, it is grace creating and going through faith.

Works is something we are to "walk in". Your translation, not surprisingly, obfuscates this passage.

8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; 9 Not of works, that no man may glory. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them. (Douay)

8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9. Not of works, lest any man should boast. 10. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (KJ)

8. ti gar chariti este sesosmenoi dia tes pisteos kai touto ouk ex ymon theou to doron 9. ouk ex ergon ina me tis kauchesitai...

Note that "of yourselves" (ex ymon) and "of works" (ex ergon) are in the same grammatical case, and both refer to grace, which is controlled by "by" (gar). Your translation made grace and works appear in parallel and controlled by "by", while separating "yourself" and "God" by making these two nouns controlled by different prepositions, contrary to the original grammar.

I'm not sure I am following. Since the topic is salvation, the "it" is "grace through faith", not just grace. Salvation does NOT happen by grace of ourselves, or faith of ourselves, or works of ourselves. Grace through faith is the gift of God. I don't see why your Douay should have any problem with that.

[kosta50]

Unfortunately as a result of secular humanism, liberalism, moral relativism it is becoming the rule again....even to the point of re instituting human sacrifice

If everyone just imitated Christ, the world would be restored.

[kosta50]

We see man as little more than a toddler next to God. We are totally dependent on Him for everything. We believe that many of the true OT stories of the Israelites reveal this

Maybe that's the "problem." We (Orthodox/Catholic) follow the Gospels. Being a Christian means imitating Christ, or those appointed by Him. That's hardly a parent-toddler relationship.

Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me. [1 Cor 4:15-16]

All Christians DO come to God freely. The difference appears to be with what heart do we come.

The Church is made up of sinners, not saints. We come to Christ with wounded hearts in need of healing, and Christ said He would heal them, not replace them.

[kosta50]

In my limited reading [of Hinduism], I found no claim of any kind that sporoi could come close to passing the test in 2 Tim. 3:16-17

And what exactly are the criteria spelled out in 2 Tim 3? Answer: none!. In other words, whatever your heart desires!