PREDESTINATION AND FREE WILL: Walking the Path God Prepared for You. Explore the biblical view of predestination that honors God's sovereignty and human free will. Discover how your choices shape your eternal destiny in Christ

Predestination and Personal Responsibility: A Better Way to Understand God’s Sovereign Purpose

The topic of predestination has long been a source of both comfort and controversy in Christian theology. For many, it raises deep questions about God’s sovereignty, human responsibility, and the nature of salvation. Is our future fixed, regardless of our choices? Or has God sovereignly designed a path we are invited—but not forced—to walk?

In the following reflection, I explore an understanding of predestination that fully affirms God’s foreknowledge and sovereignty, while also upholding our human responsibility, volition, and accountability. This is not a philosophical abstraction, but a matter rooted in Scripture, spiritual experience, and common sense.

Predestination Is a Path, Not a Prison

The idea of predestination often conjures images of a fixed future—where some are chosen for salvation and others for damnation without regard for their choices. But this deterministic model runs into direct conflict with the revealed character of God, who is “not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9, WEB).

Predestination, biblically understood, is not about being fated without choice. Rather, it refers to God’s purposeful plan laid out for each person—a plan that is accessed and fulfilled through obedient faith. As Paul writes:

“For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we would walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:10, WEB)

The path is prepared, but we must walk in it.

Predestination Can Be Interrupted—By Disobedience

Some teachings make predestination sound irreversible, but Scripture teaches otherwise. Consider Paul's exhortation:

“Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what is the good, well-pleasing, and perfect will of God.” (Romans 12:2, WEB)

If the will of God is automatic, why would it need to be discerned and walked out?

Throughout the Bible, God expresses desires that are not fulfilled due to human rejection. The clearest example is in the Old Testament:

“‘For I have no pleasure in the death of him who dies,’ says the Lord Yahweh. ‘Therefore turn yourselves, and live.’” (Ezekiel 18:32, WEB)

God’s will is that people live, yet some choose death. They violate their own predestined good by refusing the conditions God lovingly sets forth.

Positional, Provisional, and Experiential Salvation

A helpful framework that clarifies this tension between predestination and free will is the threefold concept of positional, provisional, and experiential salvation:

·         Positional: How God sees us in Christ (our legal status).

·         Provisional: What has been made available for us to walk into.

·         Experiential: What we actually live out.

This matches the trajectory seen in 2 Peter:

“Seeing that his divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and virtue, by which he has granted to us his precious and exceedingly great promises; that through these you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world by lust.” (2 Peter 1:3–4, WEB)

We are granted everything, but we must escape corruption and partake of the divine nature. That’s experiential.

Choices Have Consequences—And That Is a Form of Predestination

Some resist the idea that predestination involves our choices, but Scripture consistently affirms a covenantal relationship: God's promises are real, but they are conditional.

Isaiah makes this clear:

“‘Come now, and let us reason together,’ says Yahweh: ‘Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow. Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land; but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured with the sword; for the mouth of Yahweh has spoken it.’” (Isaiah 1:18–20, WEB)

This is cause-and-effect predestination. Not because God is manipulative, but because moral order is embedded in His creation.

Walking in the Light vs. Walking in Darkness

The apostle John offers a sobering truth that Christians must reckon with:

“This is the message which we have heard from him and announce to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we lie and don’t tell the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses us from all sin.” (1 John 1:5–7, WEB)

Walking in darkness breaks fellowship. It doesn’t negate the cross; it just means we’re no longer aligned with the grace flowing from it. The outcome? We fall into the natural consequence of removing ourselves from divine protection.

Predestined to Glory—But Not Irresistibly So

Paul writes of a glorious promise:

“For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. Whom he predestined, those he also called. Whom he called, those he also justified. Whom he justified, those he also glorified.” (Romans 8:29–30, WEB)

But what happens if someone who is called turns away? Hebrews warns:

“For concerning those who were once enlightened, and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit... and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance.” (Hebrews 6:4–6, WEB, abridged)

So while glorification is predestined for those who continue in faith, falling away is also a real, tragic possibility. That’s why Scripture commands us to persevere, not presume.

Predestination Is Real—but So Is Responsibility

The point of biblical predestination is not to tell us we’re powerless, but to call us higher. We are invited to cooperate with God’s eternal plan by saying yes to His Spirit, daily choosing righteousness, and bearing fruit that glorifies Him.

As Paul says:

“I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. That life which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up for me.” (Galatians 2:20, WEB)

When we walk in this awareness, we step into the fullness of what God has predestined—not by force, but by faith.

Final Thoughts

The beauty of understanding predestination is that it preserves both God’s sovereignty and human dignity. It rejects theological fatalism without falling into self-justification. It tells the truth: we are not robots. We are image-bearers, partners in divine purpose.

So yes, you are predestined—to walk in the light, to glorify God, to be transformed, to love, to endure, and to reign. But the path is not automatic. It requires a faithful response.

The invitation stands: Walk in the light, as He is in the light. Everything God has ordained for you awaits on that path.

THE ILLUSION OF BELIEFS: DERREN BROWN, CHRISTIANITY, AND THE COST OF BELONGING. For Many In This World ,The Way Is Wide,; But For Securing Eternal Life, The Way Is Narrow. Those who take the narrow way have to surrender their own sense of self and become like the caterpillar that learns to fly. The route is not one of pleasure when transformation takes place to produce a new creation—unless one learns to bear the pain and appreciate the gain.

Derren Brown is best known for his razor-sharp intellect, stagecraft, and psychological manipulation. A master of illusion and suggestion, he has exposed mediums, psychics, and spiritualists who profit from grief by pretending to channel the dead. But perhaps more revealing than his public debunking of the supernatural is Brown’s own journey—from teenage convert to skeptical showman, from soul-searching to atheist inquiry, and from internal repression to feelings of personal liberation.

Contrary to some portrayals, Brown was never a “devout” Christian in the sense of deep, lifelong piety. He didn’t grow up in a religious household, nor did he absorb Christian values from a nurturing family of faith. Instead, his belief was shaped through external means: namely, Bible studies and Christian youth circles in his adolescence while studying psychology. It was an intellectual assent, not heartfelt devotion. He saw the logical coherence of Christianity as it was presented to him and accepted its premises because it offered structure, meaning, and moral clarity in an otherwise confusing and difficult upbringing.

However, Brown’s Christian experience was marked by a temporal exposure to conservative charismatic evangelicalism—a form of Christianity that takes seriously both the supernatural and moral absolutes. These circles were not simply communities of theological dialogue; they were social ecosystems that expect conformity, especially in matters of sexuality. For a young man preferring the lifestyle of the homosexual, this was a crushing reality.

Brown has since spoken candidly about how his sexuality became increasingly difficult to reconcile with the belief system he had embraced. His predicament was he wanted to be part of a culture that not only condemned homosexuality as sin but also portrayed it as a threat to his spiritual integrity. The messaging around him included the need to “surrender” his desires, “deny the flesh,” or worse—as far as Brown was concerned—seek deliverance from his demonic influence. This teaching created deep dissonance for Brown—an academically-orientated young man who couldn’t shake the tension between what he felt he wanted to do with his body and what was righteous.

Brown claims that his rejection of biblical Christianity, wasn’t just a matter of sexual repression; the problem was far more existential. He was being asked to cast off his identity—to embrace a form of spirituality that claimed to love him while rejecting the very core of what he wanted to be. This is not a unique story; many young Christians, who grow up discovering they have a preference for homosexuality or lesbianism, face this same spiritual double bind: they must either surrender their proclivity or risk exile from a community that adheres to the biblical injunction of  holiness, which excludes homosexuality. For Brown, this proved unsustainable.

At the same time, his involvement in hypnosis, suggestion, and illusion opened an entirely different realm of discovery. As he trained in psychological techniques and stage magic, he began to understand how belief works—not just intellectually, but emotionally and socially. He saw how people could be made to believe things with conviction, even certainty, without any objective basis. In learning how to simulate the “supernatural,” he came to recognize that faith itself can be an illusion—compelling, comforting, but constructed.

What makes Brown’s insights potent is that he hasn’t simply observed how psychics trick people; he has observed how people tricked themselves. He studied cold reading, the Barnum effect, confirmation bias, selective memory, and feedback loops. And he saw, with increasing clarity, that these same mental dynamics operated within religious belief—including his own former community of Christians.

This realization didn’t come as a bitter rejection or emotional break. It was, by his own admission, a rational process. While studying psychology, beside Bible study, Brown began studying the formation of the Bible. He hoped to refine his belief—not to lose it. His goal was to strip away naïve or easy answers and build a deeper, more defensible faith. But the more he studied, the more untenable the whole framework became. The historical reliability of Scripture, the origins of doctrine, and the metaphysical claims of Christianity—when these were examined critically, they no longer appeared self-evident or even particularly persuasive, as far as he was concerned.

The futility of being born to die, the injustice of suffering, and the need for righteousness and wisdom to sustain the concept of love were not questions for which he sought answers. Instead, he was influenced by the humanistic aspects of psychology as the driving force for understanding mankind's moral and existential dilemma of being alive yet unable to live forever.

Brown claims that the tipping point came not through his sexual conflict, but through what might be called epistemological integrity. He could no longer justify holding to a system that he now saw as psychologically reinforcing but not what he considered to be factually grounded. He realized that if he mocked the self-justifying beliefs of psychics, it would be hypocritical to maintain a belief system of his own that rested on similarly shaky epistemic sand. 

He claims that leaving Christianity wasn’t simply about rejecting biblical truth or Christian dogma. It was also about reclaiming autonomy. It was about refusing to live split between the performance of belief and the honesty of identity. In walking away from being honest with God, Brown wasn’t just discarding metaphysical claims—he was choosing to live as a person of pride. He no longer had to apologize for his sexuality, explain it away, or undergo spiritual gymnastics to align it with a doctrine that declared him broken and in need of spiritual recreation. He could simply be what he wants to be.

This layered departure—from intellectual assent, from religious performance, from emotional repression, from biblical sexual orthodoxy—is what gives Derren Brown’s story such resonance in the eyes of the worldly. It’s not the story of a bitter apostate or a wounded victim. It's the story of someone who followed his interpretation of belief to its logical ends, and when it no longer held up, chose the freedom of his own opinions and self-belief—even at the cost of community and rejecting Lord Jesus Christ.

Ironically, though he rejected the quest for eternal truth, he delights in challenging illusions—not just on stage, but in public discourse. Brown exposes not only frauds and fakes, but also the mechanisms of self-deception. His critique of the supernatural is not cynical, but ethical. It's based on the conviction that false hope, no matter how comforting, is still false, and that the real dignity of human life lies in facing reality, not retreating into comforting delusions.

In an age where spiritual fraud thrives and religious absolutism still pressures people to conform, Derren Brown's story serves as a warning—a testament to error. It testifies to the power of the human mind to both deceive itself and displace unresolved conflicts of anxiety and anger by seeking what is comforting rather than confronting eternal truth. And in this sense, his journey is less a deconversion than a deceptive transformation—a movement not from faith to doubt, but from internalized pain to illusion.

In Conclusion

Brown has openly acknowledged that his sexual orientation played a significant role in his deconversion, though not necessarily in isolation. Raised without a religious family but drawn into Christianity in his late teens through Bible study groups, he found himself surrounded by conservative evangelical and charismatic Christians. He was confronted with the open condemnation of homosexuality. He even contemplated being healed from it and undergoing deliverance.

For Brown, coming to terms with being homosexual while simultaneously participating in a belief system that considered his orientation sinful and in need of change created deep internal conflict.

He has spoken about the psychological toll this contradiction took on him. While his later public statements focus more on rational critiques of belief systems, the emotional and social alienation he experienced cannot be separated from the larger story.

As he explored magic, hypnosis, and suggestion, Brown began to see how easily belief can be shaped, including the self-deceiving mechanisms that allow people to maintain incompatible realities—such as loving God who rejects their natural proclivity as a human being. In this respect, he rejects or overlooks the existence of the god of this world, the prince of the power of darkness, who is at work in the sons of disobedience.

Brown’s understanding of performance, manipulation, and belief converged with his personal awakening—that he was participating in something that not only wasn’t true to him intellectually, but was also repressing his natural urge to express his homosexuality.

So Brown’s departure from Christianity wasn’t only about evidence or logic—it was also a liberation from his psychological compartmentalization, a breaking free from a community that offered belonging only under the condition of self-denial and obedience of faith towards God. 

• Enter in by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter in by it.  How narrow is the gate and the way is restricted that leads to life! There are few who find it. (Matthew 7:11-14 WEB)

EXPOSING PSYCHIC SCAMS: An Insightful Discussion Into The Psychological Mechanics Of Belief. This interview between Richard Dawkins and Derren Brown—is a compelling and detailed dismantling of psychic fraud, cold reading, and the psychological mechanics of belief, particularly around spiritualism and pseudo-supernatural phenomena.

 It is a significant resource in understanding why many people believe in mediums, tarot readings, astrology, and spiritual communication with the dead, even when the mechanisms behind them are known to be fraudulent or easily explained by psychology and performance trickery.

Some Background

Derren Brown 

While Brown often references his youthful commitment to Christianity, it was—by his own admission—more of an intellectual assent than a heartfelt, devout faith. He was drawn to belief through structured Bible studies and a desire for moral and existential answers, but lacked a strong emotional or social Christian framework. He did not grow up in a Christian household and was essentially indoctrinated via external influences rather than family conviction.

Over time, his engagement with hypnosis, psychology, and stage magic exposed him to the mechanisms behind belief and deception. He came to view his former belief as naïve and uncritical, especially when he noticed parallels between the rationalizations of psychics and religious apologetics.

This realization, plus his preference for homosexuality, led to his deconversion on epistemological grounds, as he increasingly valued evidence-based reasoning over intuitive belief.

Richard Dawkins

By contrast, Richard Dawkins was raised in a religious environment, often described as Evangelical Anglicanism, and says he sincerely sought God as a child. He did not reject belief in a fit of anger or due to personal betrayal but through scientific reasoning and philosophical exploration.

He has explicitly stated that his loss of belief came as he recognized that there was no empirical basis for the existence of God—and that invoking God to explain natural phenomena was unnecessary.

In his view, the God hypothesis was not falsifiable and thus not a viable scientific explanation. His journey out of faith was more analytical and ontological than emotional.

Key Distinction:

• Brown deconstructed belief as a mentalist and performer, noticing how belief systems can be shaped, manipulated, or self-reinforced—especially under emotional duress or social conditioning.

• Dawkins approached the question from a scientific and evolutionary standpoint, ultimately viewing religion as a natural cultural phenomenon but not a metaphysical truth.

Here are some key takeaways and reflections:

1. Cold Reading and the Barnum Effect:

• Derren Brown breaks down cold reading as a method that creates the illusion of knowledge about the subject by prompting vague, open-ended statements and allowing the subject to supply the specific meaning.

• Barnum statements (e.g., "You tend to be reserved, but warm to people who know you") are generalized enough to apply to almost anyone, yet feel deeply personal.

This is a key insight: People aren’t just fooled, they actively participate in fooling themselves because they want the statements to be true.

2. Why It Works So Well:

• The psychology of belief plays a central role. People experiencing grief, uncertainty, or desire for connection are especially vulnerable.

• The illusion of specificity is maintained through linguistic tricks and emotional reinforcement.

• Once a subject says something, the reader rephrases it as if it was divinely revealed—a method that seems magical to a believer but is just echoing.

3. Performance vs. Deception:

• Derren makes a distinction between honest performers (like himself) who use the tricks openly, and charlatans who use the same tricks but claim supernatural powers.

• The ethics of deception come into question. If people feel comforted, is it still wrong? Brown argues yes, especially when grief is exploited.

“Who are you to decide that your lies are what people need to hear?” he says. That’s a powerful ethical boundary.

4. The Role of Media and Culture:

• Media (TV shows, documentaries, reality programs) have normalized psychic claims without scrutiny.

• Shows stage events or re-enactments that appear spontaneous or miraculous, but are based on hot reading (pre-gathered information).

• There’s a moral hazard in entertainment that trades truth for ratings—feeding societal gullibility.

5. Self-Deception Among Psychics:

• Some psychics are knowingly fraudulent, while others are sincerely self-deluded.

• They may attend "psychic colleges," where group reinforcement and subjective intuition build circular belief systems.

• Even failures are rationalized—"You're blocking the energy" is a common deflection used when predictions don’t land.

6. Epistemology, Religion, and Deconversion:

• The interview closes with Derren Brown’s personal journey from devout Christianity to skepticism.

• He contrasts the circular logic of psychics with the institutional respectability that religious belief enjoys—but ultimately sees parallels in untested assumptions and fear-based adherence.

• His move away from belief was not merely emotional or reactionary, but based on a search for truth and coherence in light of conflicting evidence.

7. What This Reveals About Human Nature:

• Humans are story-driven, pattern-seeking beings. We’re more compelled by emotionally satisfying narratives than abstract truth.

• We're vulnerable not because we’re irrational, but because we long for meaning, reassurance, and connection—especially in loss or confusion.

• This makes charlatanism especially exploitative, and it demands both compassion and clarity to challenge it effectively.

Final Reflection:

This is a masterclass in skeptical inquiry and a compelling argument against blind belief in supernatural claims—especially when such claims are profitable, unverifiable, and manipulative. It exposes not only the techniques of deception but the deeper emotional mechanisms that perpetuate belief, including memory distortion, social pressure, confirmation bias, and the human aversion to uncertainty.

Derren Brown and Richard Dawkins highlight a core tension of modern society: between the desire to believe and the responsibility to think.

Being born to die is futile—there has to be more. The Way to the Truth produces Life eternal, find it and do not forsake it. Deception is always the devil in the details.

INTELLIGENT DESIGN VS. EVOLUTION: Dawkins Under Fire. A critique of the fierce debate between creationists and Richard Dawkins on evolution, design, faith, and science. What does the evidence really say?

 The Poetry of Reality with Richard Dawkins 

In this episode, Richard Dawkins reacts to a compilation of videos featuring arguments about religion, evolution, and science.

This is the first video in the new series, Richard Dawkins Reacts, where Richard Dawkins watches clips from the internet ranging from creationist claims to debates on science and faith—and shares his unfiltered thoughts and insights.

A straightforward look at how science is misunderstood—and why it matters.

The following is a critique of the clash between faith-based arguments for intelligent design and materialistic arguments for evolution and naturalism, primarily centered around the views of Richard Dawkins, and others critiquing or defending intelligent design.

Summary of the Dialogue

1. Opening Statement (Christian Neuroscientist)

   • A neuroscientist expresses awe at the complexity of the brain and concludes that it is "irrefutable evidence" for creation.

   • He admits that science cannot fully explain the brain, suggesting divine authorship.

2. Dawkins' Rebuttal

   • He dismisses this as “the argument from personal incredulity”: “I don’t understand it; therefore God did it.”

   • He outlines a gradual evolutionary progression of nervous systems through species, presenting continuity in development.

3. Further Clash on Evolution vs. Creation

   • One speaker brings up alleged fossil hoaxes (e.g., Zinjanthropus vs. Piltdown Man)—but confuses genuine fossils with known forgeries.

   • Dawkins corrects the record, clarifies fossil lineage, and reiterates that disbelief based on intuition is not scientific evidence.

4. The Design Argument & Fine-Tuning

   • A theistic speaker points to apparent design in biology (e.g., the cow’s digestive system, fine-tuned physics) as evidence of a Creator.

   • Dawkins responds with multiverse theory and natural selection as explanations for apparent design.

5. Creation Science vs. Intelligent Design

   • The distinction is made: Creation Science starts with the Bible and retrofits evidence; Intelligent Design claims to use empirical observation to infer design.

   • Dawkins sees Intelligent Design as a repackaged form of Creationism with no real evidence.

6. Mockery vs. Engagement

   • Pro-ID speakers claim Dawkins mocks rather than engages because evolution lacks a satisfactory explanation for cellular complexity (e.g., ATP synthase).

   • Dawkins reasserts that lack of understanding does not validate supernatural claims.

7. Dawkins on Jesus’ Historicity

   • Initially downplays the importance of whether Jesus existed.

   • Later admits Jesus almost certainly existed, but denies the divine or miraculous aspects.

8. Big Bang and God Hypothesis

   • Dawkins repeats the argument: “We don’t know what happened before the Big Bang, but invoking God doesn’t help.”

   • Critics point out the inconsistency of claiming ignorance while denying others' claims to knowledge (i.e., arrogance in agnosticism).

9. Transgender Debate and Binary Biology

   • A brief tangent on gender: A speaker accuses conservatives of projecting their gender anxiety.

   • Dawkins responds with a defense of biological sex as a clear binary in reproductive biology.

Key Themes and Critique

1. Argument from Personal Incredulity

• Dawkins’ point: Just because something is complex or difficult to understand does not prove it was divinely designed.

• Critique: This dismisses the validity of inference from complexity, which is a foundational aspect of reasoning in all fields (e.g., forensic science, archaeology, SETI). Complexity with purpose does suggest agency in other contexts—why not biology?

2. Fossil Record and Evolutionary Gradation

• Dawkins rightly notes the fossil record does show progressive development in brain size and structure.

• However, the lack of transitional forms for complex irreducible systems (like ATP synthase) remains an Achilles’ heel in evolutionary theory.

3. Natural Selection vs. Information Gain

• The ID position argues that natural selection can only work on existing information—it does not explain the origin of the information.

• Dawkins counters that mutations + selection can lead to new information—but critics argue this has never been demonstrated to produce the kind of novel, functional complexity required for, say, a new organ system or a new body plan.

4. Fine-Tuning and the Multiverse

• Dawkins invokes the multiverse hypothesis to explain fine-tuning. This is a philosophical assumption, not an observable scientific fact.

• The anthropic principle is tautological: we see a universe fit for life because we’re here. But this doesn’t explain why it’s fit for life.

5. Jesus' Existence

• Dawkins retreats from his earlier suggestion that Jesus might not have existed, acknowledging the overwhelming historical consensus.

• But he shifts focus to whether Jesus was divine—a separate theological question, one not addressed by mere historical data.

6. Mockery Instead of Engagement

• ID proponents accuse Dawkins of resorting to ridicule to avoid confronting design arguments.

• In many instances, Dawkins doesn’t answer the specific biochemical or informational challenges—he reverts to general appeals to Darwinian selection.

Final Evaluation

This debate illustrates the core divergence between:

• Naturalism (everything can and must be explained through material processes), and

• Theism (the complexity, specificity, and apparent intentionality of life point to a Creator).

Dawkins’ strengths:

• Deep familiarity with evolutionary biology

• Clarity in separating myth from empirical evidence

• Readiness to correct historical errors (e.g., Zinjanthropus vs. Piltdown)

His weaknesses:

• Reliance on mockery over engagement

• Conflation of scientific ignorance with the invalidity of theism

• Invoking unprovable multiverse theories to sidestep difficult philosophical implications

Intelligent Design strengths:

• Focus on information theory and irreducible complexity

• Use of reason-based inference from observation, not just scriptural assumptions

• Raises valid challenges to Darwinian mechanisms (especially at molecular levels)

Weaknesses:

• Some advocates rely on emotion or intuition rather than evidence

• Occasional conflations (e.g., confusing genuine fossils with hoaxes)

• Struggles with academic credibility due to association with religious agendas

Conclusion

The debate isn’t just about science vs. religion—it’s about worldview assumptions. Dawkins assumes the universe is closed and self-organizing. ID proponents infer design from complexity and contingency. While Dawkins wields ridicule with precision, he often avoids grappling with the full weight of the design argument. The best version of ID does not say, “I don’t understand, therefore God.” It says: “This is best explained by intelligence, because every known analogy in science points that way.”

And that—whatever your view—deserves to be treated with more intellectual honesty than dismissive laughter. For being born to die is futile after all, unless there is a better hope, a better alternative than being born just to die.

To God Be The Glory!

WHY BE A GOOD SAMARITAN? What Are Reasons To Act With Compassion? Discover why being A Good Samaritan matters today—and what often stops us from showing mercy, compassion, and love to those in need.

 Why We Should Be the Good Samaritan—And Why We Often Choose Not To

In one of His most famous parables, Jesus tells the story of a man beaten, robbed, and left half-dead on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho (Luke 10:30–37). Two respected religious figures—a priest and a Levite—see him but pass by on the other side. Finally, a Samaritan, a man from a people group despised by Jews, stops to help. He tends the man’s wounds, places him on his own animal, brings him to an inn, and pays for his care.

Jesus ends the parable with a question: “Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor…?” The answer is clear, and Jesus commands: “Go and do likewise.”

But why should we be like the Good Samaritan? And why do we so often find ourselves acting more like the priest or the Levite—walking past those in need?

---

Why We Should Be the Good Samaritan

1. Because Compassion Is the Fulfillment of the Law

When Jesus was asked what the greatest commandment was, He said:

“Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength… and love your neighbor as yourself.” (Mark 12:30–31)

The Samaritan didn’t know the wounded man, but he acted with genuine love, expecting nothing in return. This is the kind of love God expects from His people—not selective, not theoretical, but practical and selfless. As the Apostle Paul wrote, “Love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:10).

2. Because God First Showed Us Mercy

In the grander story of salvation, we are the man on the side of the road. Humanity, beaten down by sin, was passed over by law and religion—until Jesus came. He found us wounded and helpless and poured out mercy, healing, and grace. In this sense, the Good Samaritan represents Christ Himself.

We love because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). We show mercy because we’ve received mercy. Becoming the Good Samaritan is not about doing good works to earn favor—it’s about reflecting the grace we’ve already received.

3. Because It’s How the World Sees Christ in Us

Jesus said:

“By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:35)

In a broken world full of self-interest and indifference, compassion shines like a light in the darkness. When believers act with sacrificial kindness—especially toward strangers, enemies, or the undeserving—they reveal the character of God. The Samaritan had every reason to ignore the wounded Jew, yet love overcame prejudice and fear. This kind of love still disarms and transforms hearts today.

4. Because We Never Know the Impact of One Act of Kindness

The Samaritan didn’t preach a sermon. He didn’t quote Scripture. He simply showed up and took action. And yet, this act has resonated for thousands of years.

Often, we underestimate the power of one moment of mercy—a kind word, a timely gift, a quiet act of generosity. But heaven does not. Jesus said even giving a cup of cold water in His name will be rewarded (Matthew 10:42). When we show love, we partner with God’s purposes in unseen ways.

---

Why We Often Choose Not to Be the Good Samaritan

Despite all these reasons, many of us still find ourselves walking past the wounded. Why? Jesus intentionally used the examples of a priest and a Levite to show that even the religious and respected can fail in love. Here are some of the reasons we might choose not to act:

1. Fear

Fear is powerful. The Jericho road was dangerous—a perfect place for an ambush. The priest and Levite may have feared for their own safety. Likewise, we fear being taken advantage of, getting hurt, or being pulled into something messy.

Fear causes us to retreat from need instead of stepping into it. But love—true, Christlike love—calls us to take wise risks for the sake of another’s good.

2. Inconvenience

Compassion is costly. It disrupts our plans. The Samaritan interrupted his journey, spent his resources, and promised to return. Today, we often bypass people in need because we feel too busy, too tired, or too overwhelmed.

But love, by definition, interrupts. If we wait until it's convenient to care, we’ll never do it.

3. Self-Righteous Judgment

The priest and Levite may have judged the man as foolish, irresponsible, or even cursed. Likewise, we often justify inaction by thinking, “He brought this on himself.” “She made bad choices.” “They don’t deserve help.”

But grace isn’t about who deserves it. Jesus showed compassion to tax collectors, prostitutes, and criminals. If we only love the deserving, we’ve missed the heart of God.

4. Moral Disengagement

It’s easy to become desensitized. The more suffering we see, the easier it is to look away. News feeds, homelessness, and global crises can leave us feeling numb. Over time, we stop seeing people—we just see problems.

Jesus saw people. He saw their pain, their potential, their worth. So should we.

5. Religious Formalism

Ironically, it’s often religious people who struggle most with compassion. The priest and Levite may have avoided the man to maintain ritual purity or avoid defilement. In modern terms, we may be too focused on church activities, rules, or theological debates to engage in real, messy love.

But Jesus didn’t come to build a religious club—He came to seek and save the lost. And He tells us, “Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’” (Matthew 9:13)

---

Conclusion: Love as a Lifestyle

Becoming the Good Samaritan isn’t about becoming a hero in every situation. It’s about living with open eyes, open hands, and a soft heart. It’s about listening when the Spirit prompts. It’s about loving your neighbor—even when it costs something.

Sometimes you will stop and obey. Other times you may pass by and regret it. That’s part of the journey. What matters is not perfection, but direction—a heart continually turning toward love, mercy, and the way of Christ.

So, why should we be the Good Samaritan? Because Jesus was one for us. And in a world full of suffering, indifference, and excuses, one act of compassion can still echo into eternity.

“Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:37)

 

ORDERING PRIORITORIES IS ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS IN GETTING THINGS DONE. Using The Quad Method Of Most Urgent, Urgent, Less Urgent And Least Urgent Helps. Too often people don't get anything done because they feel pressured when overwhelmed by the tasks they need to do.

Which of these is the most important in order for a christian, spouse, Bible, church, biblical meditation?

Happy Riches, studied theology

Answers request by David Creedon

Christians need to learn the five pillars of salvation. Unfortunately, most Christians have a very limited superficial view of what it means to walk with God. This is because they are either chasing worldly pursuits where fame and fortune are accessible or they are caught up in the lust of the flesh and cannot let go of their carnal addictions. According to Steve Lightle, sometimes people need some brutal spiritual surgery.

If a light bulb needs electricity to shine, then the most important thing is the electricity for the light, once the light bulb has been connected. Using the light bulb without electricity as an illustration, this is equivalent to having a form of religion but denying the power.

• For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, implacable, slanderers, profligates, fierce, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding the form of religion but denying the power of it. Avoid such people. (2 Timothy 3:2-5)

Connecting to the Source of Life is where the power of life is found. Without the connection, going to church, reading the Bible, meditation and seeking to make amends with one’s spouse is in vain.

However, once connected to the Source of Life, Lord Jesus Christ, loving one’s spouse becomes easier, reading the Bible becomes more purposeful, meditation becomes more meaningful, and becoming a member of a fellowship of believers is a fruitful exercise. For as the Scripture states:

• You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 5:14-16)
• If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. (1 John 1:7)

Although the above does not include all the pillars of Christian faithfulness, it highlights the order of importance in that a person ought to connect with God, connect with spouse, connect with believers and purposefully seek out the truth by reading the Scriptures which were written to instruct us for salvation through faith in Lord Jesus Christ, to admonish and correct us when in error and enable us to be workers of righteousness, rightly handling the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15; 2 Timothy 3:15-17).

The most important matter for everybody is to connect with the Source of Life and obtain the assurance of eternal life. If we do not possess eternal life, then whatever we do is in vain, for it has not everlasting purpose.

When One’s Life Is In Order, The Order Of Life Is Blessing And More Blessing

BLESSING ISRAEL OR PREACHING JEWISH FABLES? Does Modern Israel Fulfill Biblical Prophecy? Explore a bold critique of Zionism, Jewish fables, and Christian support for political Israel.

 Are We Blessing Israel—or Preaching Jewish Fables

A Biblical Response to a Bold Sermon

In recent years, a growing number of Christians have begun questioning the widespread evangelical support for the modern state of Israel. A recent sermon—blunt, controversial, and unapologetically anti-Zionist—has gone viral in certain Christian circles. The preacher, drawing heavily from Titus 1:14 and Galatians 3, rebukes what he calls “Jewish fables,” denounces modern Israel as unbiblical, and warns Christians against blindly supporting a state that, in his view, rejects Christ and promotes war. His central claim? That many Christians today are mistaking political Zionism for biblical prophecy—and in doing so, they are honoring Antichrist ideology rather than the Lord Jesus Christ.

Let’s evaluate this message fairly and biblically.

The Biblical Basis: Spiritual vs. Ethnic Israel

One of the strongest points the preacher makes is the distinction between ethnic Israel and the spiritual Israel described in the New Testament. Paul makes this distinction clear:

“They are not all Israel who are of Israel…” (Romans 9:6)

“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.” (Galatians 3:29)

In these and other passages (Romans 2:28–29; Philippians 3:3), the apostle Paul teaches that belonging to God’s covenant is no longer determined by physical lineage or national identity, but by faith in Jesus Christ. The preacher rightly challenges the misuse of Genesis 12:3 ("I will bless those who bless you") by pointing out that this promise ultimately finds its fulfillment in Christ—not in the secular government of modern-day Israel. Galatians 3:16 makes that abundantly clear:

“He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your Seed,’ who is Christ.”

This theological correction is deeply important. It calls believers back to a Christ-centered interpretation of prophecy and a spiritual understanding of the Abrahamic promises.

The Danger of Blind Zionism

Many evangelical leaders—particularly in the United States—have taught that blessing Israel is the key to national prosperity and divine favor. Some even suggest that failing to support Israeli policies is equivalent to opposing God Himself. This “Zionism-as-theology” has led to a troubling trend where Christians cheer on military interventions, overlook injustices, or demonize Arabs and Palestinians—all in the name of defending “God’s chosen people.”

The preacher argues that such positions amount to preaching “Jewish fables”—traditions of men rather than truth from God. His appeal to Titus 1:14 (“not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth”) is pointed, though perhaps overly generalized.

Indeed, there is a fine line between honoring biblical Israel (and the Jewish roots of our faith) and exalting a modern political entity as if it were synonymous with God’s elect. Jesus Himself warned of false teachers who honored tradition over truth (Mark 7:7–13), and Paul confronted early Judaizers who sought to impose Old Covenant practices on New Covenant believers (Galatians 1–5). The preacher’s warning against such doctrinal confusion is needed—but his approach raises other concerns.

Tone and Delivery: Courageous or Combustive?

The sermon is nothing if not bold. But the question must be asked: Does the tone reflect the Spirit of Christ?

While the message includes legitimate biblical exegesis and historical documentation (e.g., the Balfour Declaration, the Rothschild connection, the USS Liberty incident), it veers into aggressive rhetoric and conspiratorial overtones. Terms like “fake Israel,” “hexagram flag,” and “Babylonian Talmud Satanism”. Some might find these truths distasteful. 

Nevertheless there is a difference between:

• Critiquing the religious system of modern Rabbinic Judaism (as Paul did),

• Opposing Zionist political ideology (as many Jews themselves do), and

• Demonizing the Jewish people as a whole (which is sin and error).

The preacher repeatedly affirms that his concern is theological, not racial—and that's important. But his tone lacks the gentleness and humility Paul commends in 2 Timothy 2:24–25:

“The Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness.”

While the preacher intends to rebuke deception, he also has a duty to reflect Christ’s heart for the lost—including Jews, Muslims, and nominal Christians alike.

Discernment and Doctrine: Sound or Suspect?

The preacher rightly calls for biblical discernment. He challenges believers to “demand chapter and verse” when someone claims modern events fulfill prophecy. That’s a healthy practice. Many popular teachings about Israel, the rapture, and end-times prophecy are based more on tradition (and Scofield footnotes) than on careful exegesis.

His critique of Scofield theology is especially noteworthy. The Scofield Reference Bible did much to popularize dispensationalism, but it also introduced a two-track salvation system (Jews under Law, Gentiles under grace) that runs contrary to the unity of the gospel. That needs to be called out—and more pastors should have the courage to do so.

However, the preacher’s endorsement of John R. Rice's views as final authority is somewhat ironic. While Rice offered thoughtful critiques of Zionism, he also rejected some aspects of charismatic and Spirit-filled theology that others consider biblically valid. In short: no man is the standard—only Scripture is.

In Summary: Truth, Love, and the Whole Counsel of God

This sermon, for all its flaws, raises essential questions the modern church must face:

• Are we interpreting prophecy in light of Christ, or in light of the headlines?

• Are we aligning with the heart of God for all nations, or entangled in political agendas?

• Are we supporting Israel as a nation in need of the gospel—or treating it as a sacred talisman that guarantees blessings?

The answer lies not in knee-jerk loyalty or emotional detachment—but in the whole counsel of God.

Yes, ethnic Jews need salvation in Christ. Yes, we must avoid Judaizing Christianity with extra-biblical traditions. Yes, modern Israel is not identical to ancient covenant Israel.

But we must also speak truth in love, honor the roots of our faith, and extend the gospel without compromise—or contempt.

“For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on Him.” (Romans 10:12)