Does Leviticus 19:20-22 Support Roman Catholic Confession To A Priest?

        Roman Catholic apologists sometimes cite Leviticus 19:20-22 to validate their practice of confessing "mortal" sins to an ordained priest, aiming to receive God’s forgiveness. This interpretation, however, warrants scrutiny. In Leviticus 19:20-22, the focus is on a man bringing a guilt offering to the tent of meeting, where the priest makes atonement on his behalf. The text states, “And the priest shall make atonement for him…before the Lord for his sin…and the sin which he has committed shall be forgiven.” A closer look reveals key issues.

        The passage does not mandate auricular confession or priestly absolution. The sinner brings a guilt offering, and the priest performs a ritual of atonement, in line with the Mosaic system. This was a practice of ritual cleansing, not personal confession. The text does not differentiate between “venial” and “mortal” sins, a distinction upheld in Catholic theology but absent in the Mosaic Law. This suggests that the Catholic interpretation superimposes later theological constructs onto ancient texts. 

        Under the Old Covenant, priests oversaw sacrificial rituals to ensure adherence to the Law. They were mediators in a ceremonial capacity, announcing God’s prescribed means of forgiveness through sacrifices, not through personal absolution. The sacrifices in Leviticus served as temporary coverings, pointing forward to the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10:1-4 clarifies that these offerings could never fully cleanse sin. Only Christ’s sacrifice could (Hebrews 10:10-14). The need for a Levitical priesthood was fulfilled and transcended by Christ.

        With Christ’s atoning death, the priestly system was abrogated. Believers now have direct access to God through Christ, our eternal High Priest (Hebrews 10:19-22). This access negates the necessity of an ordained ministerial priesthood for mediating forgiveness. While the New Testament advocates for the confession of sins (James 5:16; 1 John 1:9), it emphasizes communal confession and divine forgiveness without prescribing priestly intercession. The role of church leaders in the New Testament is about pastoral care and guidance, not sacramental absolution.

Revelation 2:23 And The Deity Of Jesus Christ

        "And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds." (Revelation 2:23)

        It can readily be deduced from this text that Jesus Christ is a divine self. He is the one who rewards people according to their deeds, whether they be good or bad. He is our Judge. We are accountable to God because He is our Creator.

        Furthermore, Christ's right and authority to judge us is rooted in His omniscience. He is divine in the same sense as the Father and Holy Spirit are divine. He is God incarnate. The Lord has fully comprehensive knowledge of everything.

        Jesus Christ searches the hearts and minds of people. He knows everything about us all. There is not a thing hidden from His sight or unknown to Him. 

        Christ in this passage quotes Jeremiah 17:10. God Himself in the verse from the Book of Jeremiah is speaking. Nonetheless, Christ makes a formal application of those exact attributes to Himself. He could do this only if He were God.

Against Claims Of The Four Canonical Gospels Having Anonymous Authorship

        One claim raised to undermine the credibility of the four canonical gospels is that they were not written by the traditionally ascribed authors. Rather, unknown people during the end of the first to early second centuries created embellished records of Jesus Christ ministering and performing miracles. However, there are no good reasons for us to dismiss the four gospel narratives as being circulated legends or myths.

        First of all, any and all available manuscripts of the four gospels have the same titles designating their respective authors. All copies of Matthew have the same name. All copies of Mark have the same name. All copies of Luke have the same name. All copies of John have the same name. The titles of the traditionally attributed authors are present on all of the manuscript copies of the gospel narratives.

        Secondly, we have no early Christian rejection of the traditional authorship of the four gospels. A few examples of patristic support would include Irenaeus, Papias, Tertullian, and the church historian Eusebius. There exists no other tradition which conflicts with conventional claims of authorship.

        Thirdly, the four gospels are named after unimpressive individuals. Matthew was a tax collector. Luke was not even an apostle. If the four canonical gospel narratives were forgeries, then it would have been far more probable that the authors used names of better known people such as Peter or Thomas. After all, that is the pattern we observe amongst heretics who produced their spurious works during the second and third centuries.

         If the four gospels were forgeries, then how come the four gospels contain embarrassing details regarding the twelve apostles? For instance, Peter denied Jesus Christ three times in a row (Luke 22:54-62). Matthew records Christ calling Peter Satan and a stumbling block (Matthew 16:23). Judas betraying Him to the chief priests and students of the Law also serves as a perfect example of embarrassing details. Paul prior to his conversion persecuted Christians. If the four gospel narratives were forgeries, then we should not expect their authors to incorporate such shameful and humiliating details regarding these people.

        Even if it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the original canonical gospels were anonymous, that point by itself would still not rule out traditional authorship attribution. Michael J. Kruger says the following:

        "For one, this did happen from time to time with Greco-Roman biographies. We do have examples of formally anonymous biographies, so this would not have been unheard of (e.g., Lucian’s Life of Demonax, Secundus the Silent Philosopher, Lives of the Prophets, Arrian’s Anabasis, and Sulpicious Severus’ Life of St. Martin ). But, Armin Baum has suggested another, and even more fundamental reason. Baum has argued that the Gospels were intentionally written as anonymous works in order to reflect the practice of the Old Testament historical books which were themselves anonymous (as opposed to other Old Testament writings, like the prophets, which included the identity of the author). Such a stylistic device allowed the authors of the gospels “to disappear” and to give “highest priority to their subject matter.” Thus, the anonymity of the Gospels, far from diminishing their scriptural authority, actually served to increase it by consciously placing the Gospels “in the tradition of Old Testament historiography.”

Ignatius Of Loyola And Submission To The Roman Catholic Church

          "To be right in everything, we ought always to hold that the white which I see, is black, if the Hierarchical Church so decides it, believing that between Christ our Lord, the Bridegroom, and the Church, His Bride, there is the same Spirit which governs and directs us for the salvation of our souls. Because by the same Spirit and our Lord Who gave the ten Commandments, our holy Mother the Church is directed and governed." (Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, Thirteenth Rule)

          Whether or not we understand Ignatius as using hyperbole in this excerpt, is a side issue that does not change the implications of his thoughts about the authority of Rome. It remains clear as day that he taught the almost unconditional surrender of the intellect and will to the Papacy. According to him, that teaching office essentially defines reality. No dissent is allowed on matters it has officially spoken on, no matter how seemingly trivial that they may be. The "infallible" dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church are to be embraced unquestioningly by all the faithful without exception. We have an example of this in play with a more recently defined dogma like the Assumption of Mary. Whether or not one affirms such an idea, it is hard to imagine what kind of harm rejecting that would do. Consider this excerpt from Apostolic Letter Est Sane Molestum, by Pope Leo XIII:

          "To scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]."

          This is the kind of mindset that lies behind the words of Ignatius of Loyola. It gets to the very heart of the nature of Rome's claims to authority. It explains why Roman Catholics can still accept dogmas like transubstantiation, even after they have shown to be philosophically untenable. A similar problem is in play when one confronts Mormons with the reality that all their religious claims about history have been debunked by archeological findings. The issue is not that such people are morons, but they have been conditioned in such a way as to accept ideas that outsiders would quickly dismiss as absurd. Consider this excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), Religious Discussions:

          "By a decree of Alexander IV (1254-1261) inserted in “Sextus Decretalium”, Lib. V, c. ii, and still in force, all laymen are forbidden, under threat of excommunication, to dispute publicly or privately with heretics on the Catholic Faith. The text reads: “Inhibemus quoque, ne cuiquam laicae personae liceat publice vel privatim de fide catholica disputare. Qui vero contra fecerit, excommunicationis laqueo innodetur.” (We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication.)"

          The life of Galileo Galilei is an illustration of how Rome dealt with "heretics." He provided evidence of a sun-centered universe by making observations through a telescope. His rediscovering of the wisdom of the ancient Greeks made him popular in the streets of Italy, but Pope Urban VIII summoned him to answer to a tribunal in 1633 for challenging the status quo or face torture if he did not show up. The latter was issued as a threat, but not carried out. Daniel J. Boorstin, in his work titled The Discoverers, p. 325-326, recounts the letter in which Galileo was forced against his conscience to publicly renounce what he taught. A small excerpt is presented here as follows, "...after an injunction had been lawfully intimated to me by this Holy Office to the effect that I must altogether abandon the false opinion that the sun is the center of the world and immobile, and that the earth is not the center of the world and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach, in any way, verbally or in writing, the said false doctrine..." Jesus and the apostles never in a million years would have dreamed of Christian churches having this kind of power over the lives of people.

          God has ordained the existence of government offices for our own good. They exist to keep the peace and maintain societal order. We should submit to our leaders to the extent that their decisions are sound and godly. Good governments, by our standards, would defend the rights of people to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Autocratic governments, by contrast, dictate the terms by which everybody else lives and imposes harsh penalties on people who fail to fall in line with said orders. Roman Catholic moral theology nowadays emphasizes freedom of conscience in decision making, but one has to wonder whether that was driven by changing times. Rome certainly does not have the same degree of power and influence that it used to have. However, the pope wields a considerable amount of power over loyal followers, a kind that Christ never authorized bishops in the church to use.

          There are other religious organizations in modern contexts which further help to illustrate the futility of Ignatius of Loyola's approach to obeying the pope. The Jehovah's Witnesses Watchtower Society is known for thought control. For example, they are forbidden by their church government to obtain blood transfusions. They have regulations as to what they can even look up on the internet. Mormonism is another example of a group whose leaders have established all sorts of legalistic rules and regulations. Mormons are forbidden to drink coffee and tea because they have caffeine. In the same vein, the Church of Rome has dietary regulations on various holidays as a requirement for salvation. What all three groups have in common is that adherents are made to obey an authoritarian leader. The hierarchies of these three religions claim to play an indispensable role in the salvation of their followers. Rome unwittingly embraces fideism, and its teaching on the eucharist illustrates this point quite well.

          There are harmful effects of authority that is not able to be kept in check. The New Testament gives us the liberty to individually choose whatever days to observe and foods to eat in thanksgiving and glory to God. The original teachings of Jesus and the apostles centered around spiritual enlightenment, compassion, and the individual's relationship with God. The early Christian message was more about guiding people through moral and ethical principles, not imposing a rigid, authoritarian structure. Jesus often challenged the religious authorities of His time, emphasizing inner faith over strict adherence to external rules. The Apostle Paul called out Peter for potentially splitting the Christian church as he ceased eating with Gentiles (Galatians 2:11-16). God is the only one who we owe unconditional submission of the intellect and will (Acts 4:19-20; 5:29; James 4:7). It is to Him alone that we owe unconditional surrender.

Does Colossians 2:8 Condemn Philosophy?

        "See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ." (Colossians 2:8)

        A number of well-meaning Christians understand Paul to be expressing disapproval of us engaging in philosophy. However, this interpretation of his words fails to take into consideration the original context in which this passage was written.

        Earlier, Paul said that we are to teach and proclaim the gospel in a state of wisdom (Colossians 1:27-28). He emphasizes properly knowing the mystery of God, which is the Person of Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:2-3). Philosophy necessarily involves the acquisition of wisdom.

        There exists good philosophy and bad philosophy. The former is rooted in sound theology. The later is rooted in human speculation. Philosophy is not to be developed apart from or against the content of divine revelation. It is bad kinds of philosophy that we must condemn.

        Paul exhorted the church at Colossae not to be deceived by various customs and practices rooted in Jewish and pagan mysticism (Colossians 2:16-23). In so doing, he was very much setting forth a philosophical proposition. Everybody engages in philosophy at some level.

Zechariah 3:1-5 And Imputed Righteousness

       "Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, O Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. And the angel said to those who were standing before him, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” And to him he said, “Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.” And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the Lord was standing by." (Zechariah 3:1-5)

       In this text, we see Satan laying the charge of Joshua the high priest being unfit for his position. The filthy garments that he wore were representative of sin. Joshua was not qualified to be in a priestly office for that reason. It follows that he could not offer up sacrifices for the people. Thus, no forgiveness of sins could be obtained for the Jews.

       The filthy garments had to be removed from Joshua. God gave to him a set of pure garments so that he could fulfill his position as high priest. This turban had an inscription which read as: "Holy to the Lord" (Exodus 28:36-38). God Himself carried out the work of bestowing new garments on Joshua. He saved the Israelites from complete destruction. God clothed them in His own righteousness.

      The act of God providing a new garment for His people gives us a picture of Him putting away our sin and giving to us a foreign righteousness which is His. This incident shows us how God justifies sinners. Instead of giving to us the eternal punishment that we deserve because of our sins committed against Him, God out of His love for us has chosen to exercise mercy. Jesus Christ cloths us in His righteousness in order that we be reconciled to a holy God and render service that is acceptable to Him.

More Than Half Of The Arabian World’s Young Adults Want To Leave

Lack of trust in Islamist governments, spike in non-religious identity are among chief reasons, report finds.

The results of a recent survey in the Arab world show that more than half of the region’s young adults are considering emigrating, and an increasing number of people are identifying as “non-religious.”

The Big BBC News Arabic Survey, a joint assessment by BBC News Arabic and Arab Barometer, a Princeton University-based non-partisan research network, is the largest in-depth survey ever carried out in the region….Fifty-two percent of the respondents aged 18-29 said they were considering emigrating to another country.

The survey indicates that 70% of young Moroccans are thinking about leaving their country and almost half of all the population in Sudan, Jordan and Morocco, and a third of Iraqis, are considering emigrating. “The number itself is alarming and has several components,” Dr. Mohammed Masbah, director of the Moroccan Institute for Policy Analysis in Rabat, told The Media Line.

“Politically, there is a lack of confidence in the government as youth believe the government cannot solve their problems,” Masbah said. “Socioeconomically, youth unemployment is high; the belief is it will get worse.”

However, the desire to emigrate has not increased universally across the region. Since 2013, it has decreased in the Palestinian Territories, Algeria, Sudan, Yemen and, most substantially, in Lebanon.

Abdul-Wahab Kayyali, a research associate at Arab Barometer, explained to The Media Line in an email that the yearning to emigrate in Lebanon might have decreased for several reasons. Some estimates put the number of people in the Lebanese diaspora at 15 million to 20 million people compared to the 5 million Lebanese in Lebanon, he noted.

“Many Lebanese are already immigrants, and many of those who want to immigrate have already done so,” he explained.

Economic factors were cited in the survey as the predominant reason for emigration. Conflict and instability that have recently plagued Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, Libya and the Palestinian Territories have increased the rate of economic deterioration."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/More-than-half-of-Arab-worlds-young-adults-want-to-leave-survey-593746

The Grand Design: Is God Unnecessary?

"To explain our existence on the planet Earth, Hawking and Mlodinow simply claim that there are many planets so one must have the conditions necessary to support higher life forms. This statement is both naive and unscientific for we have enough information about the requirements necessary for a planet to support higher life forms that we are able to do a rough estimate of the probability of finding even a single planet like the earth. Many of the required parameters can be found in the book Rare Earth by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee....The astrophysicist Hugh Ross has done a rough estimation of the probability of finding a single earth-like planet by chance based on 322 parameters known to be necessary if a planet is to support higher life forms. He has taken correlations and longevity factors into account as well as the fact that there are at least 1022 planets in the visible universe. His order-of-magnitude calculation comes up with a probability of 10-282 for finding one planet capable of supporting higher life forms in the entire visible universe. Hawking and Mlodinow are wrong. Even with a lot of planets we should not expect to find one suitable for our existence purely by chance.

Finally, in regard to the laws of physics that seem to be finely-tuned to allow life to exist, Hawking and Mlodinow appeal to M-theory, the most recent and encompassing string theory. String theory proposes that the fundamental entities that make up our universe are "vibrating strings of energy." M-theory holds a lot of promise as a scientific theory, including the development of a consistent quantum theory of gravity, which has been an elusive goal for about 100 years. M-theory requires that there are 11 dimensions of space-time. M-theory has about 10500 possible configurations, and allows for the possibility that there are many universes. If ours is just one of many universes (a multiverse), with different laws and parameters of physics in every different universe, then just by chance one of the universes would have the laws and parameter falling in the necessary range to be able to support life. We are here because we happen to be in the right universe. There are many problems with proposing M-theory as the solution to the anthropic principle problem. Of course, the first problem is that, as with the no-boundary condition, there is no scientific evidence that M-theory is true, so a belief in M-theory is not based on science at all. Second, there are few, if any, definitive predictions of M-theory. For instance, we don't know if any of the "other" universes would actually be created or just have the potential of being created. When The Grand Design was published there was overwhelming criticism that M-theory would be invoked as the answer to the anthropic principle problem. For instance, in Scientific American, John Horgan wrote, "M-theory, theorists now realize, comes in an almost infinite number of versions, which "predict" an almost infinite number of possible universes. ... Of course, a theory that predicts everything really doesn't predict anything... Hawking is telling us that unconfirmable M-theory plus the anthropic tautology represents the end of that quest. If we believe him, the joke’s on us."1

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of The Grand Design is that the attempts made to support Hawking's and Mlodinow's case are, in many cases, simply unsophisticated, unsupportable, naive, and even fallacious. I believe that in a college class on logic, philosophy, or religion, this book would receive a failing grade. For example, the question is posed, "Are there any exceptions to the laws of physics?" or "Are miracles possible." The answer given is, "…the modern scientists answer to question two [exceptions to the laws of physics]…is…a scientific law is not a scientific law if it holds only when some supernatural being decides not to intervene." This is a clear example of the logical fallacy of "begging the question." Hawking is dismissing miracles outright because they don't fit his preconceived definition of what science is. If this were your answer to the question of miracles in a logic class I guarantee you would get an F.

Consider also the quote from the book mentioned in the first paragraph of this blog, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." It doesn't take a rocket scientist, or someone as smart as Stephen Hawking, to realize how ridiculous this statement is. Gravity works within the space-time dimensions of our universe so it is impossible to invoke gravity as the cause of our universe. The physicist Gerald Schroeder wrote, "Therefore if the laws of nature created the universe, these laws must have existed prior to time; that is the laws of nature would be outside of time. What we have then is totally non-physical laws, outside of time, creating a universe. Now that description might sound somewhat familiar. Very much like the biblical concept of God: not physical, outside of time, able to create a universe."2

Many scientists and scholars who read the book The Grand Design were extremely disappointed that the arguments presented were poor and simplistic. In The New York Times, Dwight Garner wrote, "The real news about The Grand Design is how disappointingly tinny and inelegant it is."3 I'm tempted to quote dozens more of the negative reviews to emphasize my point, but I'll let you look them up if you need more persuasion.

Once again, we see that the conclusions most consistent with the known facts from scientific observations and theoretical calculation are that the universe seems to have a transcendent beginning and seems to be designed with humans in mind, two ideas consistent with the teachings about the God of the Bible. This attempt by Hawking and Mlodinow in The Grand Design to circumvent such straightforward conclusions is entirely inadequate, illogical, and invalid. If you are looking for reasons to make God "unnecessary" you will have to look elsewhere."

https://www.michaelgstrauss.com/2017/08/the-grand-design-is-god-unnecessary.html

On The Significance Of The Lord's Supper

• The Practice Of Open Worship Gatherings: 

          -Open worship gatherings within the church context are fundamentally significant, as they create inclusive spaces where all believers are both invited and encouraged to participate actively. Such gatherings foster a profound sense of belonging and community, effectively dismantling barriers that may otherwise inhibit engagement. This collaborative approach highlights the biblical vision of the church as the Body of Christ, as articulated in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27, where each member contributes uniquely to the whole. By providing a platform for open worship, churches become dynamic environments conducive to communal encounters with the divine. This engagement not only enriches the worship experience but also cultivates a deeper understanding of the diverse gifts within the congregation, thereby reflecting the multifaceted nature of God's kingdom.

• The Necessity Of Organization And Harmony: 

          -While spontaneity can invigorate worship practices, it is essential to balance this dynamism with organizational structure and harmony. Such balance fosters an atmosphere conducive to reverence and contemplation, ensuring that each component of the service—from musical selections to Scripture readings—serves a well-defined purpose in glorifying God. For example, selecting hymns that resonate with the service's overarching theme, timing prayers strategically to guide the congregation’s focus, and choosing Scripture readings to illuminate central theological tenets contribute to a well-ordered worship experience. This structured approach facilitates thoughtful engagement with God, enabling worshippers to concentrate deeply on their spiritual journey and the communal experience of faith.

• Integral Elements Of The Worship Service: 

          -A fully realized worship service typically encompasses singing hymns, offering prayers, and reading Scripture, with each element fulfilling distinct roles in fostering a connection to God and encouraging spiritual reflection. Hymns, imbued with doctrinal richness and emotional depth, uplift congregational spirits and unify voices in praise. Prayers and words of praise evoke gratitude and collective intercession, rendering the congregation more attuned to divine presence. Furthermore, the reading of Scripture anchors the service in biblical truth, reminding believers of the narratives and promises foundational to their faith—a reminder that worship is, at its core, rooted in a reverent acknowledgment of God’s Word.

• Edification And Instruction: 

          -At its essence, the worship service is designed as a vehicle for edification and instruction, nurturing spiritual growth and equipping believers for their daily lives. Through expository sermons, scriptural readings, and communal discussions, congregations are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. This process cultivates an environment fostering intellectual engagement with Scripture, facilitating a deeper understanding of sound doctrine and the implications it holds for believers’ lives.

• Fellowship With God And With Brethren: 

          -A key component of worship is the aspect of fellowship, both with God and amongst fellow believers. The worship service serves as a sacred space wherein participants can collectively commune with their Creator, seeking His guidance and presence. Concurrently, this communal aspect strengthens the bonds of community, allowing church members to offer support, encouragement, and love to one another, enhancing the interconnectedness that characterizes Christian fellowship.

• What Worship Is To Be Centered On: 

          -Worship must be directed with a deliberate focus on God as its central object, a theme that resonates throughout the book of Psalms. The Psalmists fervently express their praise and thanksgiving, reminding worshippers that authentic worship transcends personal experience, redirecting attention toward the majesty and holiness of the Creator. This focus cultivates an environment where believers can elevate their praise, aligning their hearts and minds with divine purpose.

• Centered On Christ: 

          -The New Testament sharpens this focus further, directing worship toward the person and work of Jesus Christ. In 1 Corinthians 11:24-26, the vital connection between communion and the remembrance of Christ's redemptive sacrifice is articulated, emphasizing that true worship must acknowledge the significance of His crucifixion and its implications for humanity.

• Glorification Of God: 

          -Authentic worship ultimately culminates in the glorification of God, fulfilling Scripture’s promise that He abides among those who praise Him (Psalm 22:3). This prioritization of divine presence fosters an atmosphere where individual lives can be transformed, as genuine encounters with God lead to profound spiritual renewal.

• Building Love And Unity: 

          -The act of participating in communion reinforces the love of Christ and fosters unity among believers. This sacred ritual not only commemorates Christ’s sacrifice but also encapsulates essential biblical and theological truths about the depth of divine love and the nature of the community that God desires His followers to embody.

• The Bread And Wine: 

          -The elements of bread and wine utilized in the Lord's Supper are laden with potent symbolism, representing Christ’s body and blood. The wine serves as a stark reminder of His brutal execution, encapsulating the seriousness of sin and the costliness of redemption. Conversely, the bread symbolizes His body, broken for humanity, emphasizing both the physicality of His sacrifice and the tangible grace bestowed upon believers.

• Fellowship Through The Elements: 

          -1 Corinthians 10:16-17 elucidates the significance of believers partaking of the bread and wine as a means of fellowship with one another. This communal meal serves as a profound symbol of unity, reinforcing connections among those who constitute the body of Christ.

• Reflecting on Salvific Truths: 

          -The language surrounding the Lord's Supper resonates with the teachings found in John 6, revealing salvific truths that invite believers into a deeper understanding of their spiritual sustenance. Christ’s declaration that He is the Bread of Life underscores the transformative nature of communion, encouraging congregants to draw spiritual nourishment from Him.

• Repetition As Renewal: 

          -The ritualistic repetition of the communion meal signifies the ongoing reliance on Christ, highlighting believers’ continuous need for His grace. This act of remembrance transcends mere formality; it represents a vital reaffirmation of commitment to live in light of His sacrifice, inviting ongoing transformation through faith.

• The New Covenant: 

          -The New Covenant signifies an elevation in the worship offered by believers, establishing their role as a royal priesthood under the eternal kingship of Christ. This theological understanding adds depth to worship practices, fostering an approach marked by reverence and humility in encounters with God.

• The Meaning Of Fellowship: 

          -The Greek term "koinonia," which translates to fellowship, underscores the active, friendly associations among church members. This concept signifies the critical importance of community in the believer’s life, as Christians are called to devote themselves to prayer and the breaking of bread together, as seen in Acts 2:42.

• Living Out Koinonia: 

          -A biblically vibrant church exemplifies koinonia through collective acts of service, worship, and love, nurturing authentic relationships and accountability among members. This active expression of fellowship enables congregants to experience the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit collectively.

• Communion With The Holy Spirit: 

          -Koinonia extends into believers' relationship with the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 13:14), establishing a profound connection that influences worship practices, guides decisions, and transforms lives. This integral aspect of communal worship reflects the dynamic interplay between divine presence and human experience, reconciling the sacred and the communal in the life of the church.

Is Penal Substitutionary Atonement Cosmic Child Abuse?

        Liberal theologians object to penal substitution on the grounds that no just legal system would ever try an innocent victim in the place of criminals. It is claimed that this doctrine portrays God as some vengeful and bloodthirsty tyrant who wants to punish His Son for crimes that He never even committed. In other words, one philosophical objection to the penal substitutionary theory of atonement is that it undermines God's love and righteousness. 

        First and foremost, it needs to be understood that Jesus Christ, being God in the flesh, took the punishment of sin upon Himself. The Godhead paid off an infinite debt of sin on our behalf so that we did not have to suffer eternal condemnation. Our problem is that we have sinned against God, who is holy. He enabled a means of redemption through the shed blood of His Son Jesus Christ. It is precisely because of His love and mercy that Jesus came to die for our sins.

        Jesus, knowingly and willingly, took on human flesh to make atonement for our sins (John 10:17-18). He died to make reparation for our sins and to bring glory to God. The members of the Trinity worked together as one to bring about our redemption. So, the claim that penal substitution is cosmic child abuse is a false analogy by its very nature. Our forgiveness came at a great expense: the death of Christ in human flesh. He was raised bodily from the grave, which assures us that we can have a righteous standing in the sight of God (Romans 5:18-19).

        If God does not punish the ungodly, then He cannot simply be regarded as morally right and fair. He would be compromising His holiness if He left evil to its own device. Sin results in judgment, and there is no reason for God not to do so (Ezekiel 18). If God has love for the ungodly, then it follows that there must also be a way for Him to satisfy His justice. There has to be legitimate grounds on which God can forgive us. The penal substitutionary theory of atonement enables God to be just and make sinners just at the same time.

        If people want to be treated fairly by God, then that would mean He show us no graciousness and mercy at all for our sins. That would entail us spending an eternity in hell. Penal substitutionary atonement cannot reasonably be deemed morally repugnant when properly understood. If we are to be saved from the sentence of eternal condemnation in hell, then it is a logical necessity. The fact that an innocent man had to be killed for our sakes should stir our consciences. If penal substitutionary theory is morally objectionable, then so is the gospel itself.

        Love is not a weakness in God's character. He has the power either to judge or forgive our sin. He has the power to use a tragedy for a greater purpose. Jesus Christ, being sinless, was qualified in every way to bear the punishment and guilt of sin that we deserve. He did that on our behalf. Substitutes for rapists and murderers in our justice system are not authorized because we already know that such convicts will most likely continue in their folly. This concept goes beyond how human legal systems work. When we are in heaven, sin will be completely and permanently erased.