“BOASTFUL BEACH” – CAN HUMAN FREE WILL BE PRESENT IN BIBLICAL SALVATION? – Kerrigan Skelly

BoastfulBeach

One objection Calvinists often pose to non-Calvinists regarding salvation is the involvement of free will in sinners being converted/made right with God. Calvinists would have you believe that the free will of man has absolutely nothing to do with salvation and that if it did, that the man would automatically be prideful or that salvation would automatically be “works salvation,” instead of “salvation by grace.”

In meditating upon this through the years, I have come up with a parable/analogy to show how silly these objections are.  Man choosing to be saved does not mean that he is being prideful, nor does it mean that his salvation is now a “works salvation.”  In my opinion, these silly objections simply consist in Calvinists engaging in the redefining of Biblical words.  They define the terms in light of their theological system, instead of allowing the true definitions of Biblical words to define their theological system.

BOASTFUL BEACH PARABLE/ANALOGY

Two men were at Boastful Beach one day.  They loved the beach, because it fulfilled the “lust of their eyes” as they looked at all the bikini clad women.  They were enjoying their day basking in the heat of the sun and getting a tan in order to fuel their own “pride of life.”  They both knew that in order to get a “hot girl,” they had to have a tan.  One of them began to get a little too warm, so he decided to take a swim in the Sea of Sin.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Martin Luther Quotes – Great Theologian and Hero of the Faith or Wicked Man and Jew Hater?

MartinLuther-HatedJews

Many Christians and most Protestants look up to Martin Luther as a “great theologian,” a “great reformer,” and a “hero of the faith” whose writings should be read and quoted.  Yet, is he really someone who should be looked up to in such a way?  Not according to what I have studied.

Sure, Luther did some good things and had some good things to say.  I don’t deny that.  Yet, Benny Hinn and the Pope might have good things to say at times as well.  Should I then respect them in the same way that many respect Martin Luther?  I don’t think so.

Do the good things he said and did automatically do away with the bad?  Do we just sweep all of the bad under the rug and consider him some kind of “great Saint,” in spite of all the bad?  Well, I’ll let you decide for yourself.

Maybe you’ve never read the below quotes or are ignorant of the bad things he said. Below is a collection of quotes that I have compiled from Luther’s writings. The quotes comes from his books, letters and sermons.  You tell me if he should be looked up to in such a way.

Personally, I can’t in good conscience, look up to such a person.  Those of you who are reading this who aren’t Calvinists, you really need to reconsider looking up to such a man.  I expect this from Calvinists, because it is consistent with their theology, but not from you!  Please reconsider promoting such a man or recommending people to read his writings!

 

Continue reading

Conditional Security Proven From The Bible! Part 1 – Assurance of Salvation by Kerrigan Skelly

LoseSalvation1

Below is a new video, where I teach on the Biblical Doctrine of Conditional Security.  This is actually the fourth teaching of five, on this topic.  The previous three were devoted to properly interpreting the “proof texts” that people use to “prove” Unconditional Eternal Security, also known as Once Saved, Always Saved (OSAS) or Perseverance of the Saints (POTS).

The doctrine of Unconditional Eternal Security is possibly one of the greatest heresies in all of the history of mankind.  It started in the Garden of Eden, when Satan said, “You will not surely die.”  It continues to this day and I consider it to be a doctrine of demons, per 1 Timothy 4:1-2.  It gives people false security and false assurance.

If you want true security, here it is:

Continue reading

Calvinism, Free Will & God’s Expectations | Kerrigan Skelly

vineyard

Isaiah 5:1-4 (NKJV) says, “Now let me sing to my Well-beloved a song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard on a very fruitful hill.  He dug it up and cleared out its stones, and planted it with the choicest vine.  He built a tower in its midst, and also made a winepress in it; so He expected it to bring forth good grapes, but it brought forth wild grapes.  And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. What more could have been done to My vineyard that I have not done in it?  Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, did it bring forth wild grapes?”

Calvinism teaches that God predestines/ordains/decrees/causes all things that come to pass (whether sin or righteousness) and that God did this in eternity past.  If this is true, then no one and nothing has “free will”, by any definition of that word.  And no, I don’t need to add the term “libertarian” before “free will” to explain what I mean by “free will”.  In fact, I refuse to.  To do so, would be to give in to the Calvinist’s redefining of the term “free will”.  I won’t put up with the linguistic revision of Calvinism.  In fact, I have a series of videos that seeks to expose this facet of Calvinism, that is called, “Calvinist CONFUSION“.

The above passage simply can’t fit into a system that says that God has caused all things to happen, in eternity past.  Passages like the one above, won’t fit with Calvinism, no matter how much you twist it.  How could the “god” of Calvinism possibly have “expectations” that are contrary to what He ordained to happen, in eternity past?  How could the “god” of Calvinism possibly be “disappointed”, when things don’t go differently than he decreed them to be?  If the “god” of Calvinism predestined the house of Israel to be like this, how could he be upset with them and punish them for such actions (read on to Isaiah 5:5-6)?

Continue reading

What Is “Works Salvation”? | Refuting Calvinists, Antinomians & Judaizers | Kerrigan Skelly

WorkSalvation

Quite often, I get accused of believing in “works salvation”.  This is not to be unexpected, in this age of apostasy.  False doctrine and false teachers are abounding all around us.  Much of this is happening under the guise of being “true Christianity”.  Because of all of this, many people don’t even understand what the writers of the Scripture mean, when they use the term, “works salvation”.  Usually, people believe one of the following four definitions, for “works salvation”:

1) “Works salvation” is saying that you have any part in your salvation at all.  In other words, if you believe in free will, then you believe in “works salvation”.  If you believe that YOU did the repenting and YOU did the trusting in Jesus Christ, then that is “works salvation”.  If you believe in “synergism”, then you believe in “works salvation”.  This is the position of the Monergist or the Calvinist (at least, most of the ones that I have talked to).  They’ll often quote John 6, Romans 9 & Ephesians 1, giving their Calvinistic interpretation of them.

2) “Works salvation” is saying that you must repent of your sins, in order to be saved.  All you need to do to be saved, is “believe in Jesus” (they’ll quote Romans 10:14-15 for you).  Saying that you must turn from your sins to be saved, is “works salvation”, even though they believe that you must turn from at least one sin (unbelief), in order to be saved.  This is the position of antinomian or typically the King James Only Fundamental Independent Baptist (I have absolutely nothing against the KJV Bible).

3) “Works salvation” is saying that you are responsible for “maintaining your salvation” or “staying saved”.  In other words, if you say that you can “lose your salvation”, “depart from the faith”, “be cut off”, etc., then you believe in “works salvation”.  If you believe that you must live a holy life to be a true Christian, then you believe in “works salvation”. This is the position of anyone who believes in any form of unconditional eternal security, once saved always saved or perseverance of the saints. Some Calvinists may say that you “need to live holy” to be a Christian, but that is just double talk, since they say that we “all sin everyday, in though, word and deed”.

4) “Works salvation” is saying that committing sin can cause you to “lose your salvation”.  Only “completely rejecting Jesus” can cause you to “lose your salvation”, but “sin” can’t.  This is the position of SOME people who call themselves Arminians (NOT all of them).

Continue reading

Were the “Early Church Fathers” Calvinistic, In Their Soteriology? Part 1 (Conditional Security)

Ante-Nicene-Fathers

As I have dealt with Calvinists and Calvinism over the past 7-8 years, they always seem to want to present their soteriology (doctrine of salvation) as “The Historical Christian Faith”.  When a Calvinist says such a thing, it makes me laugh (at least on the inside).  It shows that they are either ignorant of what the Early Church Fathers believed and are just parroting what their favorite “theologian” has said or they are just outright lying.

Either way, such a statement couldn’t be further from the truth.  And just to be clear, when I say, “Early Church Fathers” (ECF’s) I am referring to the Ante-Nicene Fathers.  In other words, I am referring to the Church leaders who wrote extensively, prior to the Council of Nicea (325 A.D.).

With all of that in mind, I want to give you some quotes from the ECF’s regarding one tenant of Calvinism – “Perseverance of the Saints”.  This is also know as the “P” from the acronym “T.U.L.I.P.”, which is used to represent the Calvinistic doctrine of soteriology. “Perseverance” of the Saints is more rightly called “Preservation of the Saints” or “Unconditional Eternal Security”, since God “preserves them” and since there is nothing they can do to “lose their salvation”.

No matter what you choose to call it, it was not what the Early Church believed in.  The only group of people who believed such doctrines during this period of time, were the Gnostics, who were heretics.  Jude 3 says, “Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.”  If this verse it to have any meaning at all, we should be able to see some form of Calvinistic soteriology in the Early Church Father’s writings.  Unfortunately, for the Calvinists, we don’t.

Continue reading