Happy Monday, readers! I’m outta here for the week! My youngest son is getting married this weekend, I’m making the groom’s cake, we’re having family in, my grandbabies are coming, and I’m going to take the week off blogging.
If you’re working on my Research Team Request, you can still send in your research, and I’ll look at it as soon as I have time. (Remember, we’re trying to have all the research turned in by this Friday, July 25.)
I hope you and yours have a wonderful week!
Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.
You walk into your doctor’s office for your annual check up—flu shot, cancer, cholesterol and blood sugar screening, blood pressure check—you know, routine maintenance on the ol’ bod. You’ve chosen this doctor because you don’t have health insurance and he’s kind enough to lower his prices and work with you on a payment plan. His office is clean and bright, beautifully decorated, and the staff is always friendly. You even get a lollipop at the end of each visit.
But this year, as you’re walking down the hall to exam room four, you happen to notice that in exam room three, there’s a playpen in the corner with an adorable baby girl in it, cooing away and playing with a toy.
“Odd,” you think, since this is not a pediatrician’s office. You continue to your own room, don that scratchy paper gown, and wait for the doctor. By the time he comes in and begins the exam, you can no longer contain your curiosity. Whose baby is it? Why is there even a baby in the office?
“Oh, yes,” the doctor says matter of factly, “that baby was abandoned by her parents. Nobody wants her, so when I get finished with your check up, I’m going to torture her to death and then sell her organs to medical researchers.”
Your jaw hits the floor. Your stomach turns. You can’t believe the monstrous words you’ve just heard.
“How could you do such a horrible thing?” you scream over your revulsion. The doctor looks surprised that you should ask.
“It’s really no big deal,” he says. “We only do a few of those a week. The vast majority of my practice is providing health care and counseling for patients like you.”
Let me ask you something—would you use that doctor and think that the care he provides you mitigates his atrocious behavior? I hope not. Yet I have heard people defend Planned Parenthood (an organization which has been torturing babies to death for decades, and, we recently learned, profits from the sale of their organs) because Planned Parenthood ostensibly performs a minimum number of abortions and mainly provides health services, such as the ones mentioned above, to women who need them. Somehow, in these people’s minds, the health care Planned Parenthood provides makes up for the heinous murders they commit day after day.
Does it really all balance out? Of course not.
In fact, let’s say, Planned Parenthood had only ever tortured fifty babies to death (instead of the millions they’ve actually killed). And let’s say they provided free health care to everyone on the planet, cured cancer, and brought about world peace. Those are some wonderful things, but does it erase the fact that they brutally ended fifty innocent lives? Do all those good deeds make up for even one murder?
No. They don’t. Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes. Planned Parenthood’s hands are drenched in blood that all the free health care in the world can’t wash away.
They’re hopelessly guilty. Just like we are.
Apart from Christ, we are Planned Parenthood. We come before God with blood on our hands. Not the blood of millions of babies, but the blood of one child. God’s child. Jesus. We are responsible for His death. It was our sin that caused Him to be tortured to death. Our sin that brutally murdered Him.
We come before God with blood on our hands. Not the blood of millions of babies, but the blood of one child. God’s child. Jesus.
Tweet
“Oh, but it’s no big deal. I’m mainly a good person. The vast majority of my life is spent doing good things and helping people. That totally makes up for those few sins I’ve committed. My good deeds outweigh the bad.”
No. They don’t. Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes.
But, grace… But, mercy… But the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior intervenes and wipes away the guilt. Washes our hands of Christ’s blood. Cleanses us from all unrighteousness, if we only turn to Him in the repentance and faith that He is gracious enough to give us.
Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes, but the grace of God can.
But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Titus 3:4-7
Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes, but the grace of God can.
Tweet
Welcome to another “potpourri” edition of The Mailbag, where I give short(er) answers to several questions rather than a long answer to one question.
I like to take the opportunity in these potpourri editions to let new readers know about my comments/e-mail/messages policy. I’m not able to respond individually to most e-mails and messages, so here are some helpful hints for getting your questions answered more quickly. Remember, the search bar (at the very bottom of each page) can be a helpful tool!
Or maybe I answered your question already? Check out my article The Mailbag: Top 10 FAQs to see if your question has been answered and to get some helpful resources.
This reader’s question is in reference to my article In Defense of Offense: Why Christians Need to Stop Worrying About Offending People.
Would you say offending with the purpose to offend with the truth is the same as what you are saying? So should we ever purpose to offend when we speak the truth from the Bible?
Great question! (And let me take this opportunity to say to all of my readers and followers that if you’re ever unclear about something I’ve written or posted – especially if it seems unbiblical or out of character for me – please, please, please just ask me about it politely, like this reader did, and I will be happy to explain if I’m able. I would much rather you ask than attack me, jump to the wrong conclusion, or worse, assume I’ve apostatized. Genuine, polite questions are always welcome!)
Hon, when you say “purpose to offend,” I’m thinking of a person who gets out of bed in the morning with the primary goal of offending people, making them angry, or upsetting them, not with the primary goal of sharing the gospel or restoring someone from sin.
I’m not sure why a Christian would have the desire, goal, or motive of offending people, regardless of his reason for doing so. That goes against the grain of everything Scripture teaches us both about Christian character and the ineffectiveness of provoking people. The Bible says:
A brother offended is harder to win over than a strong city,
Proverbs 18:19, Romans 12:18
And contentions are like the bars of a citadel.
…if possible, so far as it depends on you, being at peace with all men…
Fathers are told not to provoke their children to anger. One of the qualifications for pastors and elders (which we’re to emulate) is that they not be pugnacious (i.e. “looking for a fight”), but peaceable and considerate. (If not, they’re disqualified from ministry.) We’re not to place a stumbling block or offense before anyone – saved or lost, in order to protect our ministry and so that people might be saved. You’ll recall that Paul devotes significant ink to the idea that if it would offend people for him to eat meat sacrificed to idols, he’ll never eat meat again. We’re told not to be quarrelsome, but kind, patient, and gentle in our teaching and correction so that people can be saved. Titus 3:2 reminds us “to slander no one, but to be peaceable, considerate, demonstrating all gentleness to all men”.
The Scriptures go on and on about this. We’re not only forbidden from trying to offend people, we’re instructed to bend over backwards trying not to offend people. The Bible is offensive enough all on its own. That’s more than enough offense for sinners to try to deal with without us making things harder and piling on personal offensiveness.
And that’s the whole point of my article. Not that we should intentionally be personally offensive in our demeanor, but that we shouldn’t refrain from kindly, yet firmly speaking the truth in love so that sinners might be saved, and saints might be sanctified, just because we’re afraid that biblical truth will offend them.
What do you think about churches using Right Now Media?
I drop in on the RNM website from time to time, and from what I can see, it’s almost all (if not all) false teachers.
Scripture is clear that churches shouldn’t support (financially or otherwise) false teachers, and certainly not those, like RNM, who profit from platforming them and spreading their false doctrine. In fact, if your pastor welcomes false teachers into the church – in person, through their books and materials, via video platforms like RNM, etc. – instead of rebuking them and their false doctrine, he is participating in their wickedness, he is disqualified from pastoral ministry, and he needs to be under church discipline.
Yeah, it’s that serious to God.
And from a stewardship point of view, even if there are a few doctrinally sound teachers sprinkled in at RNM, I don’t see how it could possibly be worth the monthly subscription price for whatever few good teachers they might* carry.
*Visiting the RNM site, I get the impression that they want your money before they give you access to the names of all the teachers they platform. I clicked on several pages, and the teachers they did disclose fell into two categories for me: people I know to be false teachers, and people I’ve never heard of. I didn’t see the name of anyone I know to be a doctrinally sound teacher.
Since it’s a subscription service, not a “pay for the specific video you’re using” kind of thing, there isn’t even the option for pastors to say something like, “We feel like this particular R.C. Sproul video is the best one available on the theology of shoelaces, but it’s only available from RNM. We are recommending ONLY this video at RNM. Avoid everything else.”. No, you’re either in (and paying for everything) or you’re out.
Because RNM is primarily a source of false doctrine and false teachers, and because your church’s offering money would be going to support that – in disobedience to the commands of Scripture – you should be very concerned if your church subscribes to RNM. I would recommend that you and/or your husband set up an appointment with the pastor to discuss it. There’s an underlying issue here in subscribing to RNM – either the pastor is not exercising proper oversight over whoever subscribed the church to RNM, or the pastor is not discerning or diligent enough to know that he’s unleashing false teachers on his sheep.
🚨FRIENDLY WARNING🙂: The following question is related to Calvinism/Reformed theology. Please be reminded that we do not do Calvinism vs. Arminianism arguments here, on any of my social media platforms, or via email. Argumentative comments and messages will be deleted. Please see my Statement of Faith tab in the blue menu bar at the top of this page if you have any questions.
My wife and I just finished watching the taped version of your talk [from the Resolute Conference on Answers TV] and we both agreed that it was extremely helpful! Thank you for pouring your time and effort into what was a clearly well-researched message.
Thank you so much. Yes, some of the teaching sessions (including mine) from Answers in Genesis’ Answers for Women 2025 Conference, Resolute, have been posted to Answers TV. I’m sure the rest will be posted soon, so if you have a subscription, you can watch! If you don’t have a subscription, give it some consideration! It’s only $4.99 a month or $39.99 a year, plus they offer a seven day free trial to get you started! If you’d like to watch my session on the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), here’s the handout that goes along with it.
I do have one question, however. During your gospel presentation you specifically said that Christ died for “you” (i.e., the listener). But if you are saying that to an unregenerate person who has not been predestined to eternal life (according to the “U” in TULIP), how does that work with limited atonement (“The atonement for sin that Christ made on the cross applies only to those who are, or will, in the future be, saved”)?
Respectfully, how could you truthfully say that Christ died for “you,” if that person hasn’t been elected for life? Considering that you [are Reformed] your presentation of the gospel seems to be inconsistent with the doctrine of limited atonement.
I’d like to get your thoughts on this apparent discrepancy between the two. Thank you for your time and consideration!
You’re welcome. I’m glad to explain. I was speaking to about 3000 people that week (plus however many will watch the video, now), the vast majority of whom were already saved. So it is true for those people – Jesus did die for them.
When I gave the gospel presentation, I was addressing it to the elect in the audience – to those who would listen and believe the gospel, either right then, or later in life. (So it was true for them, too. Jesus died for them.) I was not speaking to those who would reject the gospel for the rest of their lives and spend an eternity in Hell – those who aren’t elect (if there were any like that in the audience), even though they could also hear me.
The thing is -and I know I’m not telling you anything new, here – you and I don’t know who’s elect and who’s not. That’s above our pay grade and none of our business. That’s God’s purview. The only way we can know for sure that someone is elect is after she gets genuinely saved and perseveres to the end. If she’s genuinely saved, that means she’s elect. But we can’t know before someone gets saved whether or not she’s elect, so, like the sower, we scatter the seed of the gospel with wild abandon, trusting God’s sovereignty as to what kind of soil it lands on and leaving everything after our gospel presentation up to Him.
I would also appeal to Scripture:
In Peter’s sermon in Acts 3, he’s preaching an evangelistic sermon and says -without knowing whether or not any of his audience is elect:
For you first, God raised up His Servant and sent Him to bless you by turning every one of you from your wicked ways.
Was everyone he was preaching to elect? Probably not.
In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul hearkens back to the gospel he proclaimed to these brothers when they were lost and says he told them that “Christ died for our sins”. At the time he originally said that, he had no way of knowing whether or not everyone he was preaching to would believe.
But all of that being said, I did read back through all of the sermons in Acts and some other evangelistic encounters in Scripture (and also discussed this on Sunday with one of our {unofficial} lay elders at church), and the general approach seemed to be: You’re a sinner, here’s what Jesus did so salvation and the forgiveness of sin could take place, repent, believe it, and be saved. The personal appeal was placed on the “you must repent and believe” part, not on the “Jesus died” part.
So, sure, I’ll tweak things and try to pattern my gospel presentation more in the style of the Apostles, not because of Calvinism as a framework, but because, as Christians – all Christians – we do always want to be as closely aligned with Scripture as we can get. So, thanks for bringing that to my attention. I appreciate the sharpening.
But I’m not going to quibble with anyone who says, “Jesus died for you,” when she shares the gospel accurately with someone. If the person she’s talking to gets saved, it’s true. If the person she’s talking to doesn’t get saved, she’s technically made a good faith, optimistic mistake while earnestly appealing to him to repent and believe the gospel, but she hasn’t sinned, it doesn’t matter to that person, and she hasn’t sent that person to Hell by saying so. And … you know … she’s sharing the gospel.
If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (I’ll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.
“You’re a liar,” he said dryly, the passion in his eyes gleaming through.
“What?!?! HOW DARE YOU call me a liar!” his fellow church member fumed.
“You’re a liar, Joe. You show up at church for an hour a week and claim to be a Christian, yet you’ve been living with your girlfriend for over a year, you’ve told me you use pornography, and I’ve talked to five different people with incontrovertible evidence that you’ve cheated in your business dealings with them. When you say you’re a Christian, you’re lying. Just admit it.”
Have you ever had a conversation like this with someone? Have you ever witnessed a conversation like this?
Most of us would never dream of calling someone a liar who claims to be a Christian yet walks in disobedience to Christ. Goodness, no! It might offend the person or cause her to question her salvation! She might leave the church or walk away from the faith!
You know who wouldn’t be afraid of offending such a person or causing her to doubt her salvation? Someone who would dream of calling a professed Christian walking in disobedience a liar?
The Holy Spirit – via the Apostle John – that’s who.
Whoever says “I know [Jesus]” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which [Jesus] walked.
1 John 2:4-6
Take a moment and let that really sink in. People who claim to be Christians yet habitually and unrepentantly make a practice of sinning are not saved.
People who claim to be Christians yet habitually and unrepentantly make a practice of sinning are not saved.
Tweet
To the Holy Spirit and John that’s as plain and simple and uncontroversial as saying, “The sky is blue, and water’s wet.” But to a false convert, them’s fightin’ words.
And we know it.
So we refrain from lovingly speaking hard, biblical truths to people who need to hear them, usually for one of a handful of reasons:
• We don’t want this person’s wrath aimed at us because it’s a hassle or because we don’t want to lose the relationship with her.
• We don’t actually believe the Bible and trust God’s sovereignty. We’d rather lean on our own understanding, desperately clinging to the irrational hope that this person is truly a Christian who’s hanging by a thread, and we don’t want to be the one responsible for saying anything that might clip that thread.
• We’re worried about how we’ll look to others and that they’ll accuse us of being unloving, unchristlike, and harming the unity of the church.
What do those reasons have in common?
Me. Me me me me me me me.
I want to keep my relationship with this person in tact. I don’t want others to blame me for this person’s reaction to biblical truth or call me unloving or divisive. I don’t want to deal with the aggravation of this person’s emotional blow up.
It’s not exactly the greater love of laying down one’s life for a friend, is it? We’re not even willing to lay down our comfort or our reputation in order to tell someone her walk doesn’t match her talk and call her to repentance. Is that love at all, or is it just plain, old fashioned selfishness? We bow and scrape at the idol of not hurting other people’s feelings while those people careen down the road paved with our good intentions straight toward the gates of Hell. How is that love?
We bow and scrape at the idol of not hurting other people’s feelings while those people careen down the road paved with our good intentions straight toward the gates of Hell. How is that love?
Tweet
Love is valuing, and acting on, what is best for another person over and above our own self interests. You know, kind of like Jesus did during His life, death, and resurrection:
By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.
1 John 3:16
You know, it’s interesting that the Holy Spirit speaks a lot of hard, “you’re not saved if…” truths in a book (1 John) whose purpose is to give true Christians assurance of their salvation. The Third Person of the Trinity – the embodiment of perfect love – doesn’t seem to think it’s unloving to tell false converts they aren’t saved, while at the same time reassuring young, shaky-kneed saints.
But us? We can’t seem to get our act together and do both from a heart of love the way the Holy Spirit does.
We’ve focused so much attention on reassuring anyone who claims the label “Christian” of their eternal security that we’ve lost sight of the fact that there are a great many false converts in our midst who should be questioning their salvation. The gate is wide that leads to destruction, Jesus said. It is the narrow gate that leads to life, and few are those who find it. Test yourself to see if you’re in the faith. How will they know these things if we don’t tell them?
The Bible has hard, sharp edges. It’s a sword, for crying out loud, not a feather duster. The primary purpose of a sword is to cut.
The gospel divides. Jesus – the creator of Christian unity – said, “I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” Jesus – perfectly kind, perfectly loving Jesus – called those claiming to be God’s people yet walking in disobedience hypocrites, vipers, and sons of the Devil. Jesus – the Jesus who was more compassionately evangelistic than we could ever hope to be – didn’t beg, plead, or hand-wringingly water down Kingdom requirements so the rich young ruler would keep a toe in the door of God’s house. Jesus held high the standard of the gospel and let him walk away. Jesus wasn’t a nerdy little wimp offering people a cheap plastic heavenly trinket if they would only be His friend. This almighty King demanded perfection, the highest love, loyalty unto death. And, by the way, you’d better count the cost before deciding to follow Him. Jesus wasn’t worried about offending people with biblical truth.
We need to stop worrying that the Bible is going to offend people who need to be offended by its demands, requirements, and judgments so that they might repent and be reconciled to Christ. Whether it’s a sinner in need of a Savior or a saint in need of sanctification, the ministry of reconciliation Christ has called us to begins with confronting sin.
We need to stop worrying that the Bible is going to offend people who *need* to be offended by its demands, requirements, and judgments so that they might repent and be reconciled to Christ.
Tweet
Every person we would potentially approach with biblical truth is either saved or lost.
If a person is genuinely one of Christ’s sheep, she will hear the voice of her Shepherd calling to her from the truths of His Word, turn from her sin, and follow Him. It may take time. It may take help. It may take teaching and many tears. But sheep love the Shepherd and follow Him. They grow toward Him, not away from Him.
If a person is lost, she isn’t going to get any “loster” when you biblically call her to repentance. Lost is lost, even if that lost person claims to be, or thinks she is, a Christian. There’s no such thing as a genuinely regenerated Christian who’s just barely hanging on to Jesus by her fingernails and you come along and push her out of the faith by confronting her sin with biblical truth. Uh uh. If she abandons Christ in favor of her sin, she was never saved in the first place, I don’t care what she claims to the contrary.
If a person is lost, she isn’t going to get any “loster” when you biblically call her to repentance.
Tweet
All of this nonsense floating around these days about “de-converting” from Christianity, or “I used to be a real, genuine, bona fide Christian, but I’m not anymore.” Hogwash and poppycock. The Bible says if you leave the body of Christ, you were never a member of it to begin with. That God is greater than all (including you) and no one (not even yourself) is able to snatch you out of His hand if you belong to Him. That those who are saved will endure to the end. That Jesus will not lose a single one of those the Father has entrusted to Him. Dare we believe the words of sinners about themselves over what the Word of God says about them? No matter what you say or do, you don’t have the power to be responsible for someone leaving the faith. Whatever circumstance or person they might use as a scapegoat, people “leave” Christianity because they don’t know or love Christ and they’ve gotten tired of pretending like they do.
The people we love enough to lovingly, yet firmly, speak hard biblical truths to are either Christians who will come to love and embrace those truths (and love us for caring enough to speak them), or they’re lost or false converts who need to be confronted with the mirror of God’s Word so they can face up to the fact that they’re lost. Where the Bible speaks plainly and definitively, we must not be ashamed of the gospel and shrink from speaking plainly and definitively in agreement with it.
Stop being afraid of offending people by speaking hard, biblical truths. Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for someone is offend her.
Stop being afraid of offending people by speaking hard, biblical truths. Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for someone is offend her.
Tweet
