Central Church - Who We Are

Question: My friend was in a class at her church that was conducting an "Other Faiths" Bible Study on Sunday nights. One of the lessons spoke about the beliefs of Islam and their view of Jesus. My friend asked, "Well, why do they not believe Jesus is God if they believe He performed miracles." One of the other students said, "The devil can perform miracles." "Even healing?" she asked. The teacher then made the comment, "The devil has the power to heal...even Jesus said so in the scripture." She was so stricken at what she was hearing that she couldn't ask him where in the Bible he was getting this info. I told her that I had never heard of such information as Satan having healing powers. I know that each of us as believers, who are obedient, living in God's will, has the power to declare healing. It's just that oftentimes we don't declare that power.

Answer: In Matthew 7:21-23 Jesus says to some who claim to have prophesied in his name and done many miracles and expelled demons in his name, that he doesn't know them. How did they do those things, if indeed they did (and Jesus does not contradict that part of their testimony), if they were not His?

Deuteronomy 13:1-5 mentions the case of a prophet who foretells by dreams and announces miraculous signs that actually take place, but prophesies of false gods. How can a false prophet do that?

In Revelation 13 we're introduced to the Beast and the False Prophet, servants of Satan who seek to rule and deceive the world by creating an image of the Beast that the False Prophet is able to give breath to so that it speaks and people worship it. Verse 14 says he was "given power" to do this, but it does not say who gave him the power. The most likely answer is that this power was given him by Satan.

Satan was allowed to do powerful ("miraculous") things to harm Job and his children. We read of demons that make people appear to be sick or handicapped (Luke 9:37-42; 13:10-13). It is possible that if Satan wanted to deceive people he might release a demon-influenced person from the demon-caused debilitation and it would look like a healing. However, we are never given an indication that Satan can actually heal a real disease.

I would also suggest that there are times when we cannot declare a healing because God has not willed for us to be healed. When Paul asked God three times to remove a "thorn in the flesh" (a "messenger of Satan" we are told), an unspecified ailment he suffered, God said no, "My grace is sufficient for you" (2 Corinthians 12: 7-10). It seems that only God has the power and the wisdom to determine who does and who doesn't receive healing (Exodus 4:11) and that Satan is not even used as an agent in healing. All he can do is counterfeit God's healing.

As to Islam and it's resistance to accepting Jesus as God, it is true that those who don't know God can do "miraculous" things by the power of Satan, but not things that result in people genuinely turning from sin to the God of our Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus' miracles were indeed miracles of true healing and even bringing dead people back to life and pointed people to the true God. He also claimed to be the Messiah and accepted worship as God. The miracles he performed witnessed to the truth of his self-claims to be the Son of God, in fact, the one known as Yahweh to the Jews, God Himself. Moslems should, indeed, accept this about Jesus but will not allow themselves to accept this truth because it will counter all they have accepted from the teaching of Muhammed, who himself never claimed to do any miracles.

Randall Johnson

Question: My friend says that at Central Church we are not Calvinists. I say we are, we just don't believe all the points of Calvinism. Could you please describe the degrees of Calvinism and the denominations involved? Also, what is Armenianism and what churches are involved in these belief?

Answer: In order to carefully answer this question, let me begin with some definitions. Calvinism is that system of doctrine that purports to represent the basic viewpoint of John Calvin, the Swiss reformer who introduced the reformation movement to its most recognized systematic theology and contributed what many consider to be the first modern commentary on Scripture. Armenians are an ancient people who were the first nation to adopt Christianity as its official religion, became subject to many different nations including the USSR, but now maintain an independent republic. Arminians, on the other hand, are those who purport to represent the theological views of Jacob Arminius, a man who lived many years after Calvin and who taught an alternative view to his.

Many times the views of Calvin and Arminius are contrasted on the basis of a statement created by the Calvinistic Synod of Dordt in response to Arminius. Often an acrostic is used to make it memorable: TULIP. T stands for total depravity, which means that humans are incapable of responding positively in faith to God's truth (Arminians believe that man has the capacity to move towards God on his own). U stands for unconditional election, which means God did not choose anyone on the basis of positive conditions he found in them (Arminians believe God chose those He knew would believe or who had faith in their hearts). L stands for limited atonement, which means Christ died for the elect only (Arminians believe Christ died for everyone, in some way paying the penalty for their sin without yet saving them). I stands for irresistible grace, which means every person chosen by God and to whom he offers salvation does indeed embrace it and is saved (Arminians believe that we have the ability to resist the grace of God offered us in salvation). And P stands for perseverance of the saints, which means believers will demonstrate faith by spiritual growth and never fall away permanently from the truth and so finally be saved (Arminians believe that you can choose to reject the salvation you received and thus be lost forever).

The Cumberland Presbyterian Confession of Faith is the official doctrinal statement of our church. On the issue of man's depravity, the Confession says, "Man, by disobedience, lost his innocence, forfeited the favor of God, became corrupt in heart and inclined to evil. In this state of spiritual death and condemnation, man is still free and responsible; yet, without the illuminating influences of the Holy Spirit, he is unable either to keep the law or lay hold upon the hope set before him in the gospel" (article 36). How do people come to Christ, then? The Confession says, "The Holy Spirit...inclines them to come to Christ....This call of the Holy Spirit is purely of God's free grace alone, and not because of human merit, and is antecedent to all desire, purpose, and intention on the part of the sinner to come to Christ; so that while it is possible for all to be saved with it, none can be saved without it....This call is not irresistible, but is effectual in those only who, in penitence and faith, freely surrender themselves wholly to Christ" (articles 39-41). What this is basically saying is that even though no one is capable, since Adam's disobedience, to move toward God on his or her own, God's Spirit enables every person to come to a place of being able to make a decision one way or the other without His determining what that decision will be. The Spirit does this "through the written word, and through such other means as God in his wisdom may choose, or directly, without means...to enlighten, reprove, and convince them of sin, of their lost estate, and of their need of salvation" (article 39). In effect, God, according to our confession, removes every person's inability to respond to Him when He chooses so they can believe if they want to.

The Confession makes no direct statement as to election or the extent of the atonement. However, it does simply say regarding the atonement: "Jesus Christ...became the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, so God can be just in justifying all who believe in Jesus" (article 31). It may be supposed from this that an unlimited atonement view was in mind. As to perseverance of the saints, the Confession prefers the term "preservation" saying: "Those whom God has justified, he will also glorify; consequently, the truly regenerated soul will not totally fall away from a state of grace, but will be preserved to everlasting life. The preservation of believers depends on the unchangeable love and power of God, the merits, advocacy, and intercession of Jesus Christ, the abiding of the Holy Spirit and seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of Grace. Nevertheless, true believers, through the temptations of Satan, the world, and the flesh, and the neglect of the means of grace, may fall into sin, incur God's displeasure, and grieve the Holy Spirit, and thus be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, and have their consciences wounded; but the Christian will never rest satisfied therein" (articles 60 and 61). It also teaches that "a state of sinless perfection in this life is not authorized by the Scriptures, and is a dogma of dangerous tendency" (article 56).

All in all this may lead us to conclude that our Confession does not endorse true Calvinism, but a modified form of it which gives some credence to the more Wesleyan form of Arminianism and some to Calvinism. It does not really teach total depravity in the way Calvinism does, nor unconditional election, irresistible grace, or limited atonement. It does sound more like Calvinism on the issue of perseverance of the saints.

This is a difficult subject to discuss because there are often strong emotional responses to these views. Methodists and related denominations (Pentecostal and Holiness) are typically Arminian. Presbyterians are typically Calvinistic. The Episcopal Church was originally Calvinistic but has developed many different viewpoints since. Catholics are generally Arminian, though there are factions of a more Augustinian and thus Calvinistic-like viewpoint among some. Baptists are typically a mix of Calvinism and Arminianism, some splitting over these issues, like the Free Will Baptists and the Hardshell Baptists. Typically, if you see the label "Reformed" in front of a denomination or church name, it is representative of a more Calvinistic doctrine. Though I believe it is important to think clearly and correctly about this issue, and not one to just shove to the side because it is controversial, I also am convinced that it is not one to separate over. We should seek to express our love to one another despite our differences of opinion on these matters.

Follow-up Question: I guess I'm still a little confused. I was raised Southern Baptist and always felt I was a Calvinist. But what you are saying is (from this view) that when a baby is born and is not of the elect they don't have a chance to accept Christ? Also if the parents are of the elect, aren't the children under the covenant of their parents until the age of accountability? Or is there such a thing as accountability if they are elected and don't have a choice in the matter?

Follow-up Answer: What the Calvinist is saying is that no one has a chance to accept Christ because even if presented with the truth of Christ by Christ himself, they do not have the ability to submit to and trust God. Unless God chooses to open their hearts to believe the message of truth, they are without hope. Despite this, God still holds us accountable for being unable to choose him. Paul anticipates an objector in Romans 9 saying, "Why does He find fault? For who has resisted His will?" When Paul answers, "Who are you to reply that way to the creator?" it confirms that Paul believes that God does legitimately find fault with us for not believing, yet believes at the same time that no one resists God's will in terms of either being hardened (like Pharaoh) or shown mercy. Consequently God does not take responsibility for our not believing. That is our fault and a consequence of our sin in Adam.

As far as an age of accountability, the Bible makes no mention of such a concept. However, it is obvious that there are times in our lives when we are unable to make wise decisions. Does God take this into account? I don't know how He deals with infants, for example, who cannot believe and who are still, nonetheless, under the curse for Adam's sin. If they die then does that mean they were not elect? I don't know. There is some indication that David believed his son who died a few days after birth, would be with him in Paradise (that portion of Sheol where believers were comforted; see 2 Samuel 12:23 and the article above). I do know that God is fair, good, and wise, and that He will always do the right thing.

As you can see, this issue has far reaching ramifications. It is easily the most debated issue among thinkers in history and relates intimately to the issue of suffering in the world. Our job is to accurately interpret the Scriptures in what they say about it, and leave the rest to God. I believe that only an infinite mind can fully comprehend this issue and that we will have to maintain the outline of truth that God has given us in this area and trust him with the gaps in our knowledge and understanding.

Randall Johnson

Question: The commandment to keep the Sabbath day holy has more of a legal sound to it than the other commandments. Since Jesus abolished the law (in the sense that we don't have to make x number of sacrifices in such and such a fashion, etc., anymore), do we still need to do absolutely no work on the Sabbath? If I do school work, for example, on Sunday, is that wrong?

Answer: It is not wrong to do work on Sunday if your conscience is not condemning you for violating the Sabbath. Paul says in Romans 14:5-6, in regard to matters upon which Christians disagree that are individual concerns of conscience, "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord." He further argues, "Let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way…If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love…Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith" (14:13,15,22).

The ten commandments are all repeated in the New Testament except for the Sabbath command. It is referred to, of course, but we are never told in the epistles to observe it. However, many in the church have chosen to observe the Sabbath on Sunday, the commemoration of Jesus' resurrection and the day the church chose to meet. The Sabbath (Sabbath means 'seventh') day is Saturday, but the church has hallowed Sunday instead. Because we are not under the law of Moses, we are not obligated to keep Sunday as the Sabbath. However, as Paul says, if your conscience tells you that it is wrong to work on the Sabbath (Sunday) you must obey your conscience. If your conscience does not condemn you, you are still responsible for observing the Sabbath principle of trusting God to provide for you when you take time to care for yourself with rest. You may do this some every day, or you may take a day (any day) during the week to do this. There is no New Testament legislation that tells you how you must observe it.

Randall Johnson

Question: I'm teaching this week on the subject of prayer (sr. high students). One topic will be "does God hear all prayers." In the past I've taught that unless one is saved, God will not hear your prayer. I recently heard a very respected preacher (may have been James Dobson, but I can't remember) state that he "would not presume to say that God does not hear the prayers of the unsaved." What do say you on this matter?

Answer: There are at least three unbelievers in the Bible whose prayers God heard. The first one, Jacob, is controversial, I suppose, because most people seem to assume that he was saved when he saw the vision of the stairway at Bethel (Genesis 28:10-22). However, his vow tells me that he was more thinking of God as someone he could use than as a Savior. Balaam, the false prophet whom Balak hired to curse Israel (Numbers 22-24) received prophecies from the Lord that he did not want to utter because he wanted to be paid for cursing Israel and had to bless Israel instead. 2 Peter 2:15 and Jude 11 indicate that he was not a believer. Cornelius, the centurion who had converted to Judaism and to whom the Lord sent Peter to preach the gospel, might be another example, though in a sense he had responded in faith to the revelation that had been given up until that time (Acts 10:1-6).

Anecdotal evidence seems to exist that unbelievers have had prayers answered by God. Why wouldn't God at times show an unbeliever His love, mercy and power to draw them to faith (Romans 2:4)? David said, "If I had cherished sin in my heart, the Lord would not have listened; but God has surely listened and heard my voice in prayer (Psalm 66:18,19). Does this mean that all unbelievers, because they are cherishing sin in their hearts, cannot get an answer to prayer from God? If the biblical examples above are any indication, this statement by David is probably more directed toward believers and even to a specific time in his life when he knew that if he had approached God wrongly in his prayer he would not have been answered.

Judges 2:10-19 paints a discouraging picture of Israel after Joshua. The nation as a whole reverted to worship of idols. God would send enemies to punish them because of His great anger at their heinous sin. But the author of Judges also points out that the Lord "had compassion on them as they groaned under those who oppressed and afflicted them" (verse 18). Even when unbelievers are avowedly against the truth of who God is He still treats them with compassion when they call on Him.

Randall Johnson

Question: I think that it is possible to have many errors in what you believe but still be a Christian. As I see it the fundamentals of being a Christian are that you believe that you are a sinner deserving eternal punishment, that by grace Christ is your atoning sacrifice for your sins, that he was raised from the dead by God himself, and that you actively serve him as your Lord. First, do you agree with this, and also where do you see that the Mormons deviate from this?

Answer: Based on the sermons in Acts it seems to me that you are generally correct in your assessment on what the fundamental gospel is, given no one has special issues about its components. However, none of the messages in Acts where the gospel was being presented include the atonement. They only mention that Christ offers forgiveness for all our sins without explaining what the mechanism is (that is, atoning sacrifice in our place). Also, there doesn't seem to be a need for a clear sense of "eternal" punishment, but only that one's sins have separated him or her from God. This is not to deny that the punishment is eternal, which I believe, but that it isn't an essential component of the gospel.

Nonetheless, when it comes to Mormons, they do have special issues about the components of the gospel. They do not believe that the Jesus one should trust in for forgiveness is, in fact, the eternal God. He was a man who became God, just as the Father was a man who became God. The question then becomes, "Who is the person who is believing a gospel presentation believing in?" The nature of who Jesus was may not have been made an issue when the person responded to the gospel, in which case they fill in the "blanks" with their own conception of Christ. If it is the Biblical conception, they may indeed have been saved, given that they sincerely repented of their rebellion against God and trusted alone in His provision of forgiveness through Christ. If they fill in the blanks with the Mormon conception of Jesus, it is doubtful that they are saved.

Randall Johnson

Question: I was talking to a friend and she shared with me that she had some friends from her church come over and pray over her house. She said that they prayed in every room and that they "found" the "spirit of shame and sorrows" and chased it out through the attic with their prayers. Are there such things? I pray for my own home and its protection, but never actually thought a "spirit" lived there. Also, isn't there just one Spirit, the Holy one? Is this what others might call demons? And, what is the Biblical definition of demon?

Answer: There are two theories as to what demons are. One says they are fallen angels, angels who followed Satan in his rebellion against God and decided they didn't want God's rule over them. They have become Satan's henchmen in carrying out his strategy of destroying God's people. They are not able to be in more than one place at a time and neither is Satan. But with their numbers and being spirits without bodies they are an invisible army he can call on to accomplish his purposes.

The second view is that demons are the spirits of the offspring of fallen angels and human women, based on an interpretation of Genesis 6 which says that the sons of God (fallen angels in this interpretation) had children by the daughters of men (human women). They would have all the characteristics of fallen angels mentioned above, with a desperate desire to be embodied as they once were. Though there is a certain appeal to this view, it does not seem to fit with the general inability of species to reproduce with other species (in this case, angels and humans). Did the fallen angels have the ability to take on human forms, including human reproductive systems and some form of DNA to create a third species (demons)? Seems very unlikely.

So no, there is not just one spirit. Humans have spirits and angels are spirits and God the Father is a spirit, as is the Holy Spirit. A spirit is a personal being without a body, at least, that is a definition suitable for our purposes. God is uncreated spirit, angels are created spirits, humans have created spirits, and bodies that are integrated with their spirits.

Demons can and do make their presence known in certain locations and in certain people (witness the demoniac in Gadara out of whom Jesus cast a legion of demons, Mark 5:1-20). They have been known to cause some illnesses (Matthew 12:22) but not all illnesses are caused by demons (Matthew 10:1,8). Demons are often "flushed out" or forced into the open by the presence of Jesus or his representatives (Mark 1:21-26; Acts 16:16-18). Though there is much in Scripture about demons, there is much not said.

There seems to be evidence that demons can be attached in some way to a home. This is the likely explanation for "ghosts" or supposedly haunted houses. God does not allow the spirits of dead people to remain around to haunt others. The spirits of the dead go either to heaven, if saved, or Hades, if not (Hebrews 9:27; Philippians 1:21-26; Luke 16:19-31). Therefore, the presence of ghostly manifestations will either be a fraud or could possibly be demons masquerading as ghosts.

However, something seems a bit fanciful about chasing a demon through the attic. Demons must submit to the authority of Jesus (Luke 10:17; Acts 19:13-17). We do not need to be searching out demons, or even necessarily be performing rituals over our houses, though there is nothing wrong with commanding demons to leave a premises and expect them to do so in Jesus' name. If you have some reason to believe that there are demons in your home, and there would need to be strong evidence, first try exercising the authority Christ gave us over demons and command them to leave. If the symptoms of demon presence do not cease, gather believing friends or church leaders to pray and fast and then to exorcise these evil spirits in the name of Christ. As Jesus told his disciples, some demons do not come out except through prayer and fasting (Matthew 17:14-21; Mark 9:14-29).

Randall Johnson