Does Isaiah 53 Teach Penal Substitution?

        "Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. " (Isaiah 53:4-6)

         This text states in cause-and-effect manner that man's sin brought about Christ's suffering. It contains substitutionary language, with Him bearing the consequences of our actions instead of us being dealt with by God for them. He was offered up in the same manner as an unblemished lamb for our sins (1 Peter 1:18-19). His innocent blood was shed on our behalf (1 Peter 3:18). Our sins are forgiven by His wounds, not our own merit (1 Peter 2:24). The Apostle Paul in Philippians 2:7-8 alludes to the humility and humanity of the suffering servant (Isaiah 53:7). The idea of vicarious atonement finds its basis in the sacrifices performed under the Mosaic Law:

         "When he finishes atoning for the holy place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who stands in readiness. The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness." (Leviticus 16:20-22)

         Animals paid the price for the sins of the people with their own lives. Similarly, Jesus Christ gave up His life in bearing the penalty for our actions. The animals did nothing to deserve their fate. Thus, they served as an innocent substitute in the place of the offerers. Similarly, Christ did not deserve to die but suffered in our place anyway. Though animal sacrifices temporarily held off the judgment of God, the Levitical sacrificial system pointed to the one perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:1-2). He has the power to spare us from eternal condemnation. Richard L. Mayhue provides this helpful synopsis of Isaiah 53 emphasizing the substitutionary elements contained therein:

         "1. v. 4 - "our griefs He...bore" 2. v. 4 - "our sorrows He carried" 3. v. 5 - "He was pierced... for our transgressions" 4. v. 5 - "He was crushed for our iniquities" 5. v.5 - "by His scourging we are healed" 6. v. 6 - "caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him" 7. v. 8 - "He was cut off...for the transgression of my people" 8. v. 11 - "He will bear their iniquities" 9. v. 12 - "He Himself bore the sin of many"

         The people who betrayed Christ and had Him executed thought that He was receiving due punishment for His own crimes. They thought God was exacting justice on Him, even though He was really suffering for the sins of those wounding Him. Jesus was treated unjustly by the Jews for their own benefit, even though they did not realize it. He allowed Himself to undergo undeserved pain in order that we not receive due punishment for our own sins against God. While contrary to human expectations, matters went exactly as God intended them to be. The suffering of this humble Servant is a foundational part of God's plan.

         The New English Translation has this footnote on Isaiah 53:5:

         "tn The preposition מִן (min) has a causal sense (translated “because of”) here and in the following clause. tn Heb “the punishment of our peace [was] on him.” שָׁלוֹם (shalom, “peace”) is here a genitive of result, i.e., “punishment that resulted in our peace.”sn Continuing to utilize the imagery of physical illness, the group acknowledges that the servant’s willingness to carry their illnesses (v. 4) resulted in their being healed. Healing is a metaphor for forgiveness here."

         It was because of things we did that Jesus Christ suffered. Our own actions resulted in Him bearing the weight of our sins and their penalty. He did this with the intent of restoring us back to a proper relationship with God. Christ died a criminal's death in order that enmity between man and God be resolved. This hostility does not originate from God to us, but us to God. Human nature has a bent of rejecting Him, which accounts for the Jews rejecting their own Messiah.

         The New English Translation has this footnote on Isaiah 53:6:

         "tn Elsewhere the Hiphil of פָגַע (paga’) means “to intercede verbally” (Jer 15:11; 36:25) or “to intervene militarily” (Isa 59:16), but neither nuance fits here. Apparently here the Hiphil is the causative of the normal Qal meaning, “encounter, meet, touch.” The Qal sometimes refers to a hostile encounter or attack; when used in this way the object is normally introduced by the preposition -בְּ (bet, see Josh 2:16; Judg 8:21; 15:12, etc.). Here the causative Hiphil has a double object—the Lord makes “sin” attack “him” (note that the object attacked is introduced by the preposition -בְּ. In their sin the group was like sheep who had wandered from God’s path. They were vulnerable to attack; the guilt of their sin was ready to attack and destroy them. But then the servant stepped in and took the full force of the attack."

         In Isaiah 53:6-7, the imagery of sheep is deployed with a contrasting effect. We are likened to sheep that have strayed from their shepherd. We have stepped out of line and merited for ourselves condemnation by God. The imagery of sheep in this case stresses our rebelliousness to His commandments. Jesus Christ is likened to a sheep that is totally obedient to its master. He obeyed the will of God in every jot and tittle. He was obedient even to the point of death. The imagery of sheep in this case emphasizes the humility and gentleness of Christ.

How Catholic Apologists Deal With The Thief On The Cross

• Discussion:

          -Catholic Nick wrote an article in an attempt to rebut the common citation of Luke 23:39-43 as a proof text for the doctrine of justification by faith alone. The author briefly comments on the potential faith background of the thief, grasps at straws by saying that nowhere is personal faith brought up, and other issues. Following are excerpts from Nick along with a critique of his assertions:

          "We don’t know his faith background, e.g., if he was ever baptized in the past or if this was his first time meeting Jesus. His prayer “Jesus remember me when you come into your kingdom” shows he had some knowledge of the Gospel, since no such “kingdom” details are given in this passage."

          It is doubtful that the thief would have been baptized if he continued living as a thief, a crime for which he was being punished. By the way, folks who say that the criminal did not need to be baptized due to being under the Old Covenant would simultaneously argue that Nicodemus needed baptism in order to be justified (John 3:5), who was also under the Old Covenant. That is a glaring logical inconsistency.

          "Terms such as ‘faith’ and ‘belief’ are not used in this passage, so there’s no reason to think ‘faith alone’ is even the focus, just as the Parable of the Pharisee & Tax Collector (Lk 18:9-14) doesn’t use such terms, but rather highlights the virtue of “humility”.

          What good works did the thief on the cross do for salvation? The words “faith” and “belief” do not need to be specifically mentioned in order for such to be present. Further, the way that the thief spoke to Christ implies that he had faith in what He proclaimed. While the convict did have a penitent heart, all that we see from the context is him placing his trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Humility is not a work, but a state of heart.

          As for the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector, Christ was clearly addressing self-righteous individuals. The tax collector humbly trusted in God for justification, whereas the Pharisee relied on his own efforts to please Him. The first went home justified, whereas the latter was not. This parable is obviously about justification and the forgiveness of God.

          "In fact, we see a range of virtues being expressed here, including ‘Fear of the Lord’ (23:40; cf Prov 1:7), Repentance (which Jesus distinguishes from belief, see Mark 1:5), Warning Sinners (2 Thess 3:14b), Public Professing (John 10:42; Rom 10:10b), as well as Hope of going to Heaven and certainly Love for Jesus. The thief was even willing to suffer and die for his own sins, not to be freed from them, which means he carried his own cross (Lk 9:23). So this was *far from* faith alone."

          God has not prescribed the various things listed by the author as being requirements for getting a right standing with God. Repentance from sin is not a work, but an expression of faith. It presupposes faith and stems from it. Only one whose heart has been changed by the grace of God would exhibit fear of Him. These things are inextricably associated with justification before God, but they do not make up its essence. It appears some sort of a watered-down concept of faith has been attacked.

          "This was a unique situation, it isn’t the norm for how people typically accept the Gospel (see Acts for the norm), and as such it has its limits. For example, Jesus had not yet Resurrected, Ascended, or sent the Holy Spirit yet, so Dismas probably didn’t profess faith in these, whereas these aspects of Jesus’ mission are required for us to profess (Rom 10:9b). Even the command to “baptize all nations” wasn’t even given until *after* Jesus resurrected (Matt 28:19), so pointing to this as an example of ‘not needing baptism’ is kind of moot."

          The "norm" that we observe in the New Testament is people believing on the gospel before getting baptized. In fact, there are over one hundred instances of the word faith being used in the New Testament, and none of them bring up the doing of good works to earn a right standing before God.

            "Plus, can we take this one example as an excuse to ‘not really have to’ obey the many teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, including getting baptized, gathering to worship with others, being subject to your pastor, sharing our possessions, etc?"

           This is a complete misrepresentation of the position that the author attempts to prove to be wrong. Obedience to God is done out of love for Him and gratitude for His atonement sacrifice for us. The heart of a saved person is transformed through the power of the Holy Spirit.

A Biblical Showstopper For Catholic Eucharistic Theology

Introduction:

The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation teaches that during the mass, the bread and wine are transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. This transformation is said to occur under the appearance of bread and wine, while their substance becomes Christ Himself, body, blood, soul, and divinity. While this belief is central to Catholic worship, it faces serious theological challenges when examined in light of Scripture, particularly Acts 17:24–31.

In this passage, the Apostle Paul addresses the philosophers of Athens with a sweeping declaration of God’s transcendence, self-sufficiency, and spiritual nature, a declaration that stands in stark contrast to the idea of God being localized or physically consumed through ritual.

God Is Not Contained Or Controlled:

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. Nor is He served by human hands, as if He needed anything…” (Acts 17:24–25)

Paul’s words dismantle any theology that suggests God can be summoned, manipulated, or made present through human ritual. The Roman Catholic claim that a priest can consecrate bread and wine into the literal presence of Christ implies that God responds to human action in a way that contradicts Paul’s teaching. If God is not served by human hands, then He is not dependent on liturgical formulas or priestly invocations to manifest Himself.

This passage is not merely a rejection of pagan temple worship. It is a sweeping theological statement about the nature of divine presence. Paul presents a God who is radically independent of human mediation, who “gives everyone life and breath and everything else.” To suggest that God’s presence is triggered by ritual action reverses this relationship, making the creature the initiator of the Creator’s manifestation.

The Divine Nature Is Not Material:

“We ought not to think that the divine nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by human skill and imagination.” (Acts 17:29)

This verse challenges the notion that God can be physically present in created elements. Bread and wine are tangible, earthly substances, crafted by human hands and subject to decay. To claim that these elements become the full presence of Christ equates the divine with material form, a concept that the Apostle Paul explicitly rejects.

Roman Catholic theology attempts to resolve this tension through Aristotelian metaphysics, distinguishing between “substance” and “accidents.” Yet this explanation introduces a philosophical framework foreign to Scripture. Paul appeals to the universal intelligibility of God’s nature, not to hidden metaphysical categories that require philosophical decoding. Why should a first-century Jewish audience understand Jesus’ words through a fourth-century Greek lens?

Moreover, Acts 17 presents a God who “commands all people everywhere to repent,” not a God who hides behind appearances. Transubstantiation introduces a kind of sacramental opacity, where what appears to be bread must be believed to be Christ, despite all sensory evidence to the contrary. This stands in tension with Paul’s emphasis on clarity and accessibility in divine revelation.

Symbolism, Not Transformation:

Catholics often cite Jesus’ words at the Last Supper, “This is my body… This is my blood,” as evidence for a literal transformation. However, Jesus frequently used metaphorical language (“I am the door,” “I am the vine”), and He was physically present when He spoke those words. The bread and wine served as symbols of His impending sacrifice, not as transformed substances.

The eucharistic elements do not become Jesus Christ, but an image of Himself. They are only an earthly depiction of the divine. This point is a springboard for a separate objection: if the bread and wine remain materially unchanged, then the act of worship directed toward them becomes indistinguishable from the kind of image-veneration Paul condemns.

Since the bread and wine are still bread and wine in substance, then worshiping them constitutes a form of idolatry. Paul’s warning in Acts 17:29 against thinking “the divine being is like gold or silver or stone” could just as easily be paraphrased: “or bread and wine.” The theological implication is unavoidable: worship directed toward created elements, however well-intentioned, violates the very nature of God’s transcendence.

The Spirit Of Christmas Present

"Good Spirit,' he pursued, as down upon the ground he fell before it:' Your nature intercedes for me, and pities me. Assure me that I yet may change these shadows you have shown me, by an altered life.'

The kind hand trembled.'

I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year. I will live in the Past, the Present, and the Future. The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me. I will not shut out the lessons that they teach. Oh, tell me I may sponge away the writing on this stone.'

In his agony, he caught the spectral hand. It sought to free itself, but he was strong in his entreaty, and detained it. The Spirit, stronger yet, repulsed him.

Holding up his hands in a last prayer to have his fate aye reversed, he saw an alteration in the Phantom's hood and dress. It shrunk, collapsed, and dwindled down into a bedpost."

A Christmas Carol, by Charles Dickens; Stave 4: The Last of the Spirits, pages 10-11

A Biblical Critique Of The New Apostolic Reformation

Defining The Issues:

A powerful and controversial movement has taken root within global Christianity, one that claims to be the vanguard of a new spiritual age. Known as the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), this movement asserts that God has restored the offices of apostle and prophet to the church in order to bring about the transformation of society and the establishment of God's kingdom on earth. Its ideological architect, C. Peter Wagner, envisioned a post-denominational Christianity led by charismatic leaders who receive direct revelation from God and wield spiritual authority over nations, institutions, and cultures.

Though not a formal denomination, the NAR is a sprawling network of independent churches and ministries united by a shared dominionist theology. Its adherents believe that the fall of man resulted in the forfeiture of dominion over the earth, and that Christ’s redemptive work was not merely salvific but also restorative in terms of earthly authority. This theology, often referred to as "Seven Mountain Mandate" teaching, calls for Christians to reclaim control over seven spheres of influence: religion, family, education, government, media, arts and entertainment, and business. The goal is not simply to evangelize but to conquer, not merely to disciple but to dominate.

The movement has gained significant traction in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, regions where rapid church growth has often outpaced theological depth. It has even infiltrated established denominations, such as the Assemblies of God in Australia, blurring the lines between classical Pentecostalism and neo-charismatic innovation. The NAR’s mission extends far beyond preaching the gospel or making disciples; it seeks to establish a global theocracy under the spiritual governance of modern-day apostles and prophets.

Apostolic Authority: A Closed Canon And A Completed Foundation:

The NAR’s central claim, that the offices of apostle and prophet have been restored, is a direct challenge to the historic understanding of ecclesial authority. Scripture teaches that the apostles and prophets were foundational to the church, not perpetual offices to be revived at will. Ephesians 2:20 states that the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.” The word “foundation” implies a once-for-all laying down of doctrinal groundwork. Foundations are not repeatedly laid; they are established once to support the superstructure.

In Ephesians 4:11–13, Paul writes that Christ “gave” apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers for the equipping of the saints. The verb tense used here indicates a completed action in the past. The apostles and prophets were given to the early church to establish doctrine and bear witness to the resurrection (Acts 1:21–22; 1 Corinthians 9:1). Their role was unique and unrepeatable. Paul himself, in 1 Corinthians 15:8, refers to himself as the “last” of the apostles, underscoring the finality of the apostolic witness.

Moreover, the qualifications for apostleship are clearly delineated in Scripture. An apostle had to be an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ and personally commissioned by Him (Galatians 1:1). Paul’s apostleship was validated by his direct encounter with the risen Lord and by the miraculous signs that accompanied his ministry (2 Corinthians 12:12). No modern claimant to apostleship can meet these criteria. The canon of Scripture is closed, and with it, the apostolic office has ceased.

Prophetic Claims And The Test Of Scripture:

The NAR’s prophetic wing is equally problematic. Its prophets claim to receive ongoing revelation from God, often in the form of dreams, visions, and impressions. Yet Scripture provides stringent tests for prophetic authenticity. Deuteronomy 18:22 declares that if a prophet’s word does not come to pass, it is not from the Lord. The standard is 100% accuracy. Even a single failed prophecy disqualifies the prophet. Furthermore, Deuteronomy 13 warns that even if a sign or wonder accompanies a prophecy, if the message leads people away from the true God, it is to be rejected. The content of the message must align with revealed truth. Isaiah 8:20 affirms that if a prophet does not speak according to God’s Word, there is no light in him.

The New Testament also urges discernment. Paul commands believers to “test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21), and the Bereans were commended for examining the Scriptures daily to verify Paul’s teaching (Acts 17:11). The NAR, by contrast, often discourages scrutiny, promoting a culture of spiritual elitism in which apostles and prophets are above question. This authoritarianism is antithetical to the New Testament model of mutual accountability and doctrinal fidelity. Isaiah 8:20 affirms that if a prophet does not speak according to God’s Word, there is no light in him. The NAR’s prophets often issue vague, ambiguous, or failed predictions, and their teachings frequently deviate from biblical doctrine, emphasizing personal empowerment, political conquest, and mystical experiences over repentance, faith, and holiness.

The Old Testament provides further criteria for evaluating prophetic legitimacy, and these criteria are devastating to the claims of the NAR. First, if a prophetic utterance fails to come to pass, the prophet is false—regardless of charisma, sincerity, or accompanying signs. Second, if the content of the prophecy contradicts previously revealed truth, it is to be rejected outright, even if the prophet performs miracles. In the context of Deuteronomy, this included leading Israel to worship other gods, but the principle applies broadly: any deviation from God’s Word is a disqualifier. Third, the moral character of the prophet must be consistent with the office. A true prophet is marked by humility, integrity, and reverence for God, not self-promotion or manipulation. Finally, the message of a true prophet exalts God, not the prophet. False prophets draw attention to themselves, demand allegiance, and often build personal empires. These biblical standards expose the spiritual bankruptcy of the NAR’s prophetic movement. There are no well-documented, verifiable prophecies or miracles that validate their ministries. Their utterances are often vague, subject to reinterpretation, and devoid of theological substance. If Scripture is already the complete revelation of God, then the need for new prophets and apostles is not only unnecessary, but dangerous. 

The Kingdom of God Is Not Of This World:

Perhaps the most egregious error of the NAR is its redefinition of the kingdom of God. Jesus declared unequivocally, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). This statement affirms that Christ’s reign is spiritual, not political. The kingdom is not built through legislation, cultural dominance, or institutional control. It is manifested in the hearts of believers through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Luke 17:20–21).

The NAR’s dominionist agenda conflates the church’s mission with political activism and cultural conquest. But the Great Commission is not a mandate to seize power; it is a call to make disciples of all nations through the proclamation of the gospel (Matthew 28:18–20). The early church did not transform the Roman Empire through legislation or revolution but through suffering, witness, and love. The weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds (2 Corinthians 10:4).

The mission of the church is not to bring heaven to earth through human effort but to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, His death, burial, and resurrection, as the only hope for salvation. The kingdom of God advances not through coercion but through conversion. It is the Spirit who regenerates hearts, not apostles who legislate morality.

Scripture Alone Is The Final Authority

The sufficiency of Scripture is a bedrock doctrine of the Christian faith. Paul writes that “all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16–17). This affirms the divine origin and authority of Scripture. It is not merely inspired; it is the very voice of God. To claim ongoing revelation is to imply that Scripture is insufficient, that God’s Word needs supplementation by fallible human impressions.

The NAR’s embrace of the Passion Translation, a paraphrase riddled with theological bias and lacking scholarly rigor, is emblematic of its disregard for biblical fidelity. By altering the text to fit its agenda, the movement undermines the clarity, authority, and trustworthiness of Scripture. This is not reformation; it is deformation.

A Call To Discernment:

The New Apostolic Reformation is not a harmless renewal movement. It is a theological Trojan horse, smuggling in doctrines and practices that erode the foundations of biblical Christianity. It redefines apostolic authority, distorts the nature of prophecy, politicizes the mission of the church, and undermines the sufficiency of Scripture. Its influence is growing, particularly in the Global South, where explosive church growth is often accompanied by shallow theology and susceptibility to charismatic authoritarianism.

The church must respond with clarity and courage. We must recover a robust doctrine of Scripture, a biblical understanding of the church, and a Christ-centered vision of the kingdom. We must test every spirit, examine every teaching, and hold fast to the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3). The gospel is not a call to cultural conquest but to spiritual transformation. Christ alone is King, and His Word alone is our final authority.

Answering The Mormon Claim Of Total Apostasy

• Introduction: 

          -Mormonism is a religious sect that was founded by Joseph Smith in the woods of Palmyra, New York, in the year 1820. He claimed that God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him and told him to establish a completely new church. In other words, he had visions that gave him allegedly new revelations to restore the church back to the original teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles. The loss of divine truth is said to have occurred sometime after their deaths. The Mormon church was officially recognized in 1830.

          -Smith claimed that the "Angel Moroni" gave him some golden "Nephi Plates" so that he could translate them into English. This religious text is known as the Book of Mormon. The three other religious texts used by the Mormons are the King James Version, Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants. The underlying assumption of Mormonism is that the entire Christian church has gone totally astray. The message of the Bible has been corrupted and lost, to be trusted (to borrow a Mormon phrase) only "as far as it is translated correctly."

• Examining Claims Of Total Apostasy In Light Of Biblical Teaching:

          -If Mormonism is correct in claiming a total apostasy, then Jesus’ promises in Matthew 16:18 and 28:20, and Paul’s declaration in Ephesians 3:21, must be false, which would make God a liar, an unthinkable conclusion for any Christian. Jesus explicitly said the gates of hell would not prevail against His church and that He would be with it always, even to the end of the age. Paul affirmed that God would be glorified in the church throughout all generations, world without end. These are not vague spiritual sentiments. They are declarations of divine continuity and protection. To assert that the church ceased to exist for over 1,700 years until Joseph Smith restored it is to deny the very words of Christ and the enduring work of the Holy Spirit. Scripture consistently shows that God preserves a faithful remnant, not through reinvention, but through continuity. The Mormon narrative of total apostasy and restoration contradicts the biblical witness and undermines the trustworthiness of God’s promises.

          -While the apostles spoke of the coming of false teachers, they nowhere spoke of a total apostasy. It is one thing to say that the church became unrecognizably dirty throughout history, but it is another to claim that the church essentially disappeared from the face of the earth.
          -His Word endures forever, unlike the things of man (Isaiah 40:8; Proverbs 30:5-6; 1 Peter 1:23-25). The Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35). The Word of God has not been lost, corrupted, or forgotten. Divine providence rules out that possibility. 

          -Those who present strange doctrine are to be deemed heretics (1 Timothy 1:3-4; 2 John 9-11), of which the Mormons teach several science fiction sounding ideas. Further, angelic visions are not an acceptable method of drawing attention to oneself (Colossians 2:18).

          -The Apostle Paul in Galatians 1:8-9 wrote a categorical condemnation of any different gospels that could arise during his lifetime or in the future after his death. He even issued an anathema to angels who could theoretically arrive to preach differently from the doctrine originally delivered by the apostles. 

          -So, even granting that Joseph Smith had an encounter with the Angel Moroni, Mormonism is a false religion because it preaches a different message of salvation. According to Paul, another gospel is no gospel at all (Galatians 1:6-7). The gospel never needed to be restored because it was not lost to begin with.

• Examining Claims Of Total Apostasy In Light Of History:

          -When did the Christian church go into the state of total apostasy? If this happened, one should be able to chronicle the steps at which it took place and how it happened. One should be able to refer to established facts, writings, history, etc. However, this has never been done successfully by Joseph Smith or Mormon apologists.  

          -The New Testament is supported by thousands of different manuscripts and manuscript fragments. Further, a creed summarizing the gospel message that the Apostle Paul recounted in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 has been dated back to the first century. The teachings of Jesus and the apostles have not been lost or altered, disproving the claims of Mormonism.
          -Why would Mormons use the Bible at all, since they maintain that the whole of Christianity became irredeemably corrupt after the first century and the canon was assembled by an (allegedly) apostate church? Which parts of the Bible have been corrupted?

A Micro-Refutation Of Mormonism

• Discussion:

          -Joseph Smith claimed to have received divine revelation from God to establish a new sect that possesses the fullness of lost truth. This encounter has been described as a face to face dialogue between a so-called prophet, God the Father, and God the Son. Consider the words spoken by God to Moses during the journey to the Promised Land:

          "And he said, Please, show me Your glory. Then He said, I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. But He said, You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live. And the Lord said, Here is a place by Me, and you shall stand on the rock. So it shall be, while My glory passes by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My hand while I pass by. Then I will take away My hand, and you shall see My back; but My face shall not be seen.” (Exodus 33:18-23, emphasis added)

           No man in his present condition can look into the fullness of God's glory and survive. God cannot be looked at by the eyes of a sinful mortal. Moreover, the New Testament tells us that no man alive on this earth has seen God the Father:

          "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known." (John 1:18)

          "No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us." (1 John 4:12)

          The mere fact that Joseph Smith came out of the woods of Palmyra, New York, testifies to the falseness of his claims. He certainly would not have been able to walk and talk in his flesh. Thus, he is a liar and a deceiver. Smith received no divine revelation.

Is The Watchtower Society Correct In Asserting That Jesus Was Created?

          The following excerpt from a Jehovah’s Witnesses Watchtower publication outlines their view of Christ’s origin and role in creation:

          “God created Jesus before creating Adam. In fact, God created Jesus and then used him to make everything else, including the angels.”

          This claim—that Jesus is a created being who assisted God in creation—stands in stark contrast to the testimony of the Old Testament. Scripture affirms that God alone is the Creator, unaided by any part of the created order:

          “Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb: I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad the earth by Myself.” (Isaiah 44:24)

          Here, God explicitly declares that He created the universe by Himself. No subordinate being, no intermediary, no created helper participated in the act of creation. He is both the source and the agent of all that exists.

          Malachi 2:10 reinforces this truth:

          “Do we not all have one Father? Has not one God created us?”

          The biblical Creator is unique—set apart from the false gods of the nations. He alone is worthy of covenantal faithfulness and worship.

          If Jesus were merely a created being, as Jehovah’s Witnesses claim, then He could not have participated in creation. Yet Scripture teaches that He did.

          “For by Him all things were created—in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible... all things were created through Him and for Him.” (Colossians 1:16)

          This verse does not describe a created agent assisting God. It identifies Jesus as the Creator Himself. He is not part of creation—He is the origin of it. He sustains all things by the power of His word (Hebrews 1:3), a divine prerogative.

          Further evidence of Christ’s divinity is found in the messianic prophecy of Zechariah 12:10, where God declares:

          “They will look on Me whom they have pierced.”

          In the New Testament, this prophecy is fulfilled in Jesus’ crucifixion (John 19:36–37; Revelation 1:7). Isaiah 53:5 also foretells that the Messiah would be “pierced for our transgressions.” The implication is profound: the one who was pierced is none other than God Himself. But God, being spirit, cannot be pierced—unless He takes on human flesh.

          This is the mystery and majesty of the incarnation. Jesus Christ is not a created being. He is God in the flesh—the eternal Son, coequal with the Father, and the Creator of all things.

A Problem For Roman Catholic Mariology

The Roman Catholic Church teaches two dogmas about Mary: that she was conceived without original sin (the Immaculate Conception) and that she remained a virgin for her entire life (the Perpetual Virginity). These doctrines are held as essential truths. However, when examined together in light of Scripture, they present a theological contradiction.

In 1 Corinthians 7:2–5, the Apostle Paul commands that spouses must not deprive one another of sexual intimacy, except temporarily and by mutual agreement for spiritual purposes. He states that each spouse has authority over the other’s body and that withholding intimacy invites temptation and sin. This is not presented as optional advice. It is a moral directive grounded in the nature of marriage.

If Mary and Joseph were truly married, and Mary permanently withheld sexual intimacy, then by Paul’s standard, she violated the moral obligations of marriage. That would constitute sin. But Catholic doctrine insists that Mary was sinless. Therefore, one of two conclusions must follow:

• Mary was not sinless, which contradicts the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
• Mary was not truly married to Joseph in the full sense, which contradicts Scripture and tradition.

Or, Paul’s moral directive does not apply to Mary and Joseph, which undermines the universality of apostolic teaching.

To affirm both dogmas simultaneously, one must carve out an exception to Paul’s teaching, an exception not found in the text itself. This requires assuming that Mary and Joseph had a unique, divinely ordained marriage exempt from normal moral obligations. But such an assumption is theological special pleading: it introduces an exception to resolve a contradiction without scriptural support.

Therefore, the tension remains unresolved. Either Mary sinned by withholding what Paul calls a marital duty, or she did not remain perpetually virgin. Both cannot be true without redefining either sin or marriage in a way that departs from the ordinary meaning of Scripture.

Is Your Sin Beyond The Forgiveness Of God?

        There are Christians who feel burdened and disheartened in their journey of faith as a result of previous shortcomings in their lives. There are those who feel guilty on a constant basis for sins committed in the past, seemingly unable to find comfort in the forgiveness that God provides. There are people who feel hopeless, utterly beyond the point of redemption. Further, the reality that we cannot change our past can be a difficult one to accept. That haunts the minds of certain people. It is also a basic fact of life that all decisions we make have consequences. However, this does not mean that all hope for us is lost. We must take responsibility for bad choices made by us rather than make excuses to justify them or shift the blame on to other people or things.

        We do have the present moment in life. That is the mode in which we all operate. Any vague notion about hope for the future is nothing but an empty delusion without a focus on the here and now, with single steps being taken at a realistic pace. Eternity is to be our biggest focus, in which God guides and shows grace to us. The deliverance that He gives from sin is complete, and without cost to us. We must trust God at His word. Our problem is sin, which is rebellion against Him who made us. It cannot simply be pushed aside or ignored. Sinners must either receive forgiveness from God or face divine judgment. That is the reason Christ came to this earth. He died for our sins. Consider the words of King David in the Psalms:

         "The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever; he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed, he remembers that we are dust." (Psalm 103:8-14)

         Those words came from a man who was guilty of adultery and murder. To be "slow to anger" means to not speedily express wrath. God gives people time to repent of sin. When God is said to "abound in love," it means His love exists in great quantity and makes itself known in action. If God did not have compassion for sinners, then He would not have spared the Israelites who repeatedly turned against Him. He would have destroyed David the instant that he sinned, and had every right to do so. God would simply not pardon our iniquity. He is not under obligation to save us. Nobody is deserving of His salvation. The mercy of God has no limits. 

          Jesus Christ came to earth so that those who hunger and thirst for righteousness could live life more abundantly (John 10:10). The kind of life that we experience in Him is a higher quality of life. It is spiritual life that God gives. It is not a matter of having millions of dollars in the bank or living in a mansion. Countless believers throughout history, the apostles included, did not have access to earthly comforts or luxuries. We must turn not to ourselves, but to God who resurrects the dead (2 Corinthians 1:9). If one is still struggling with how God could possibly forgive his sins after reading all this, then he needs to consider the notorious example of the Apostle Paul:

         "I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life." (1 Timothy 1:12-16)

         If Paul, who even had put to death God's own people, could be saved, then so can anybody else who calls upon His name. If God can forgive two murderers (i.e. King David and the Apostle Paul), then He certainly has the power to forgive more. There is no such thing as a cut off point for the mercies of God, except physical death. As long as there is life, there hope remains. It was that same man who uttered these refreshing words:

         "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8:38-39)

         If this kind of a description of the love of God does not suffice to remove doubt from a man's heart, then nothing else will. It is safe to assume that he has no faith in Him. The Apostle Paul exhausted the words of his finite vocabulary in an effort to convey to readers the depth of God's love for sinners. Things cannot be broken down any further than they have.