Month: December 2017

God is NOT Outside of Time Says Matt Slick

by

Major Turnaround: CARM’s Matt Slick Concedes On God Not Being Outside Of Time

by Bob Enyart
blogged by Jesus Preacher 12/30/2017

In the two weeks before his debate with Will Duffy (between Nov. 15 and Dec. 1, 2017) Matt Slick made a major turnaround in his Calvinism and a huge concession to open theism. As a popular theologian, he now rejects the position he has had held for decades, namely, the settled-view belief that God exists outside of time.

CARM.org, Slick’s website, has many repeated statements claiming (erroneously) that God is outside of time. (His videos say likewise.) Yet in his opening statement, Will Duffy established by the Incarnation that God does not exist outside of but lives inside of time. In response to that, Matt Slick stated, thankfully but shockingly, “I don’t say that God is outside of time. I don’t say that God exists in an eternal now.”

That is a major turnaround for this popular Calvinist. A Dec. 27, 2017 Google search of his CARM website shows that the phrase “outside of time” appears 44 times on Matt’s site including in articles that he has written, updated, or posted recently. For example:

carm.org/how-can-jesus-pay-for-all-our-sins-past-present-future by Matt Slick, dated May 31, 2016: “Since God is outside of time…”

carm.org/did-god-create-himself by Matt Slick: “…we do not relate to God in His time frame… He exists outside of our time reference. He exists [present tense]… before He created [the universe]. Therefore, the issue of eternity, which deals with time, does not apply to God because God is outside of time.” Contrary to such philosophy, the Bible repeatedly applies eternity to God. See kgov.com/time#everlasting. Matt goes on to wrongly argue that God cannot cross an infinite amount of time. This is false because He has and we demonstrate that at kgov.com/time#crossing-infinity. Also, consulting archive.org it appears that this article also was written or at least posted online in 2016, and not 22 years ago as Matt had stated in the debate.

Why Did Slick Misstate When He Changed His View? Matt misstated the timing of when he changed his view to obscure the historic significance of his paradigm shift. If it had been decades prior to this debate when he rejected the belief that God was outside of time, then he could argue that adopting this new view, dramatic as it is, had nothing to do with the persuasiveness of open theism. However, he changed his position while he was watching and reading Will Duffy’s and Bob Enyart’s open theism debates during his two weeks of preparation to meet Mr. Duffy. It would have been a beautiful display of humility (and still would be) for Matt Slick to say, “I had always taught that God exists outside of time, but these open theists have encouraged me to reconsider that doctrine in light of the Incarnation, and I’ve realized that, at least on this point, they must be correct. God cannot exist outside of time.”

carm.org/logical-refutation-open-theism by Matt Slick and first appears at archive.org in 2011: “Time exists… as a relationship to things that change” and Matt claims that God is utterly immutable, that is, that He does not change. Thus by his description, God would be outside of time. Matt continued, “God is not restricted by nor contained within time, nor is He restricted by a continuous succession of events from the past, through the present, and into the future, nor is time an attribute of God’s nature. …  time is not a part of God and God is not restricted by time. … we can see that God cannot be restricted by time and is outside of it.” In the debate with Mr. Duffy, Slick also conceded to open theism that God acts in sequence. Yet in this article, he wrote, though it is a non-sequitur, “If we stated that God exists relative to time, then God exists as a sequence of events”. He thereby concludes again that God must not exist relative to time. (But see kgov.com/time.) Matt also present a false definition: “time is a sequence of events”. And then he writes, though the sentence contradicts itself, “God has always existed and continues to exist outside of time…” He concludes then, wrongly, “past, present, and future… are irrelevant to God’s nature and existence since He exists outside of time.”

carm.org/if-god-all-knowing-and-he-knows-our-future-then-how-free-will by Matt Slick [this article or its posting may be rather new for it has not yet been “crawled” by archive.org] “…God is outside of time. Our question deals with a situation from a perspective inside of time where[as] God is outside of time.”

carm.org/if-god-knows-our-free-will-choices-do-we-still-have-free-will by Matt Slick, [this article first appears on archive.org in 2010]: “God has no beginning, and since ‘beginning’ deals with an event in time, God is outside of time.”

carm.org/does-god-have-body by Matt Slick [this article first appearing on archive.org in 2009]: “Since God is outside of time, eternal, He could not be material.”

carm.org/evolutionist-says-evolution-fact by Matt Slick “God is outside of time”

carm.org/did-jesus-know-the-future by Matt Slick “Being God… and because He is outside of time…”

carm.org/false-prophecies-of-joseph-smith by Matt Slick: “This is because God, who is outside of time… makes no mistakes…”

Also, at CARM, dozens of blog posts by his supporters claim, unchallenged and with obvious agreement from Matt, that God is “outside of time”.

Eternal Now: There are fewer instances on his site for the phrase “eternal now” but one of those in in an article carm.org/atone-past-present-future by Brad Huston, “God, who is infinite, exists in the eternal ‘now’” which claim, of course, by Matt’s newfound understanding and by the Scriptures, is false.

Consider then these 10 seconds:

And then these 20 seconds:

And from the Q&A, Bob Enyart’s question to Matt Slick:

 This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now
Click on the image below for Bob Enyart’s debate with James White the founder of Alpha-Omega Ministries:

 

Christmas is a Pagan Holiday?

by

by Adam Bishop
afterword by John McGlone
Dec 25,  2017

 A nice chart which debunks the myth of claims by Zeitgeist and other New age disinformation propaganda material.

Note: I do believe that Jesus was born on December 25th.

Biblically speaking, it’s really based off of the conception of John the Baptist and the annunciation of the Holy Spirit to Mary.

The Archangel Gabriel appearing to Zachariah in the High Temple when he was serving as high priest on the Day of Atonement (Luke 1:8). This placed the conception of St. John the Baptist during the feast of Tabernacles in late September, as the Archangel Gabriel said (Luke 1:28) and his birth nine months later at the time of the summer solstice.

Since the Gospel of Luke states that the Archangel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary in the sixth month after John’s conception (Luke 1:26), this placed the conception of Christ at about the time of the spring equinox, that is, at the time of the Jewish Passover, in late March. His birth would thus be in late December at the time of the winter solstice.

Historically speaking, we see numerous examples.

Saint Telesphorus, Bishop of Rome, who reigned from 126-137 AD, instituted the Lord’s Supper on Christmas Eve. Liber Pontificalis, shows that he was already keeping Christmas, and then added the Supper right before the day occurred.

Theophilus (115-181 AD) was a Bishop in Caesarea who lived under the reign of the Roman Emperor Commodus. Within 100 years of the Apostles, he wrote:

“We ought to celebrate the birth-day of our Lord on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” Magdeburgenses, Cent. 2. c. 6. Hospinian, de orign Festorum Chirstianorum

Hippolytus of Rome (170-240 AD), in his commentary on Daniel, wrote this in regards to the date of our Lord’s Birth:

“The first coming of our Lord, that in the flesh, in which he was born at Bethlehem, took place eight days before the calends of January, a Wednesday, in the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus, 5500 years from Adam.” (Commentary on Daniel 4:23)

The eighth before the calends of January is the twenty-fifth day of December, and the forty-second year of Augustus counting from the death of Julius Caesar was 2 BC.

Clement of Alexandria (160-215 AD), also wrote concerning our Lord’s Birth:

“And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon.” (Stromata, I, xxi)

Counting from the death of Antony in 30 B.C., the 28th year of Augustus would have been 2 B.C. The first month of the Egyptian calendar was Thoth, answering to late August (Thoth 1 = August 29). The ninth month was Pachon. The 25th of Pachon answers to the 20th of May. However, this is usually explained by the fact that the months originally took their names from where they occurred in the year. Hence, October, November and December were the eighth, ninth, and tenth months counting from March in the original Roman calendar, which had only ten months. But the Greek Fathers frequently took April, instead of March, for the first month of the year, as we see expressly in St. Chrysostom, in Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch, the Apostolic Constitutions, in Macarius, Stephanus, Gobarus, and other of the ancients. This would make December the ninth counting from April.

Irenaeus of Lyons (120-202 AD), in his works “Against Heresies” believe that March 25th was the date of the annunciation of the Holy Spirit to Mary in Luke 1. Since He based this off of John the Baptist’s birth. Since John the Baptist, was born on the day of atonement, he then set the date of it to September 25th as the day of the feast. Add 9 months later (as you would typically see in a mother giving birth to her child) and you have December 25th

See: Irenaeus: Against Hereseis, 3.10.1-2

Tertullian (160-220 AD), links and equates the equinox with the birth of Christ:

“And the suffering of this “extermination” was perfected within the times of the lxx hebdomads, under Tiberius Caesar, in the consulate of Rubellius Geminus and Fufius Geminus, in the month of March, at the times of the passover, on the eighth day before the calends of April [March 25th], on the first day of unleavened bread, on which they slew the lamb at even, just as had been enjoined by Moses”.(An Answer to the Jews, 8.18)

In 221 AD, you have the Christian Historian Julius Africanus who in his work “chronographai” which lists all of history dating back from 5500 B.C. to the time he wrote this work, lists the conception of Jesus Christ on March 25th.

In the Apostolic Constitutions, which were completed around 380 A.D., lists and dates back all the way to the beginning of the Church, says this about the date of Christ’s Birth:

In the Fifth book, Sec. III, we find:

“Brethren, observe the festival days; and first of all the birthday which you are to celebrate on the twenty-fifth of the ninth month.”

The ninth month counting from Nisan (April) is Casleu in the Jewish calendar. Transferred to our Roman calendar, the ninth month answers to December.

The Byzantine Christian, Nicephorus, wrote an ecclesiastical history in which he lists the Roman Emperor, Diocletian destroying a church on December 25th which celebrated the nativity of Jesus:

“At Nicomedia (a city of Bithynia) when the festival of Christ’s birth-day came, and a multitude of Christians in all ages had assembled together in the temple to celebrate that birth-day. Diocletian the tyrant, having gotten an advantageous occasion whereby he might accomplish his madness and fury, sent men thither to enclose the temple, and to set it on fire round about, and so consumed them all to ashes, even twenty thousand persons.”

John Selden in his work, “Theanthropos” (1661, pp. 33, 34), confirms Nicephorus’ report, saying that ancient Greek and Roman martyrologies date this event to Dec. 25th. And that this event occurred in either 303 or 304 AD.

 afterword by John McGlone

I will be updating this section as I have time to finish studying Adam’s fine assemblage of information concerning this divisive issue that rears it’s ugly head every year.  God bless you, and Happy Birthday Jesus!

Legalism: Handle Not, Taste Not, Touch Not! by John McGlone

by

 

Legalism and Antinomianism  are both deadly, fiery, spiritual arrows in the quiver of the devils, unbelievers, and even the elect!  The first puts traditions of men, which God never required to be instituted for salvation. The second states there are no more moral obligations to obey God in any area of our walk because of His grace.  They are opposing ends of theological errors which lead many to condemn brothers or to ruin their pure walks with the Lord through living in sin.  These questions that the world, the devils, doubters, and even sincere believers and unbelievers alike put forth for consideration continually assail the body of Christ to bring about divisions, compromise, and legalism among the fellowship of the saints.  Personally, I have seen such problems enter among the saints in our local fellowship, on the streets preaching, believers on social media, and even in my own earthly and spiritual family.

Legalism is defined several ways.  But, generally is an unbiblical concept that is required to be kept or shunned in order to be accepted into fellowship and considered to be a believer.  The Judaizers of the New Testament were attempting to get the NT Holy Ghost filled Gentile believers to follow the Mosaic law to be saved, ie circumcision, Sabbath, and festivals.

Some examples for legalism that leads to believers condemning others believers are:
1. Only certain colors, lengths, patterns for modest fashions for women and men.  If you wear something different you can’t be part of the church, thus you are condemned.
2. fellowship meetings only on Saturday, though they don’t observe the Shabbat properly according to Jewish oral and written tradition.  This hypocrisy is painfully obvious yet you can’t share without offending their traditions, so they condemn and shun you.
3.  No modern equipment, tires, motors, or technology.  Hmmm, how do I even address this nonsensical thinking?  The technology with which people traveled has dramatically changed from horseback to planes, trains, and automobiles.  The Bible speaks of the idea of in the later days people will be given unto going to and fro and flying in silver eagles.
4.  Only certain foods and drinks, ie vegetables, nothing with ears, ears, or nose, coke products, etc.  Every time you sit to a meal it can not be enjoyed simply because every latest scientific finding must be discussed at length and your food examined and critiqued while you are trying to consume it.

 

 

Antinomianism is defined as a ‘putting away’ of the law of God.  They believe any form of nomas or law does not have to be kept by the NT believer.  If people try, then they are labeled as working for their salvation. 


Some examples of the practices of antinomianism are:
  smoking, vaping, drinking, sexting, tatoos, makeup, immodest fashions, fornicating, pornography, etc.

The antinomian ‘believer’ will simply excuse any and all sin that may be in their lives at the expense of God’s grace.

Col 2:16-23  Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. 18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. 20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Col 3:1-15  If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. 2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. 5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: 6 For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: 7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. 8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. 9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: 11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. 12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; 13 Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. 14 And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.

Many will use Col 2 passage as reasonings to bring in various lowly standards of questionable behaviors and ideologies.  Also, for legalists to bring in traditions of men that God never intended to be standards for believers to live by.

I don’t think vs 5 is an all encompassing list, as we see other lists that show other sins which are not listed here.  But, in comparing all the lists are vaping, tatoos, etc shown in them?  I simply want to ensure as we go forward to that we are not casting aside people for traditions we are making up which are based on our preferences which hate certain tastings, touchings, and handlings of earthy objects or ideas.

I also see in vs’ 12-17 which clearly outlines how believers are to deal with such things.  Very convicting to me to be more long suffering in all things with all people, but especially those of the household of faith.

God’s grace solves the problem!  Titus 2:11-15 was a passage in the Bible I am sure I must have read somewhere over the seven years of my lukewarm walk with Jesus.   But, it never registered in my heart and mind of the blind fool in sin.

The Law of Love solves the problem! Obey the Holy Spirit and walk as He guides and you will find yourself on the narrow and difficult way Jesus taught about.  Resist the temptation to rebuke other believers in the Gospel of Christ who have varying traditions about holidays, festivals, etc.  We are to be an example to the flock not sheep butchers or beaters.  God bless you as you seek to please Jesus supremely and love your neighbor as yourself.

Rom 14:12-17 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way. 14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.  15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil;  17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

 

 

 

JesusPreacher.com © 2015-2019 Worldwide