Category: Christianity

As lamented in a previous blog, the daughter unit is persisting upon being re-baptized on Sunday. Frankly, I just don’t get it. To me it’s just more snowflake B.S. from a generation that is hell-bent on putting decorum, tradition, and once common sense in the rearview mirror.

The daughter was baptized in the Methodist Church, confirmed in an Anglican Church, and has regularly taken Communion in these and several other Presbyterian and/or Reformed Churches. She left a Presbyterian church last year with much fanfare and a send-off ceremony by the pastor and began attending a dispensational congregation. She has been regarded as a communicant member in good standing in every Church she has attended for the better part of 20 years.  A minimum prerequisite to receiving Communion in any Church is baptism—although they may require confirmation or other conditions.

The daughter decided to be re-baptized in the new congregation not due to any spiritual change in her life or theology but simply to be a part of the group. My wife is calling this farce of a ceremony an initiation.

Lest you need proof, just ask her, my wife did. The daughter was asked if she had remained at the Presbyterian Church where she was taking Communion weekly would she feel the necessity to be baptized and she replied, “No.”

Knowing that she was a communicant member in other churches, why is the pastor of this new church persisting in letting this go forward? It would be proper for them to accept a letter of transfer from the previous congregation and/or require the daughter to attend a new member class just so she learns the distinctives of their church but re-baptizing is unbiblical—not that they seem to care.

Baptism is a binary thing, either you have been baptized in the Trinitarian formula of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit or you have not.  As stated in my previous post on the subject, there is no such thing in the Bible as being re-baptized—the only exception being those in the New Testament that received John’s baptism and later that of the Apostles.

The chasm of logic required to justify re-baptism in this case cannot be bridged with any amount of verbal and semantic gymnastics. Nothing short of disdain and willful repudiation of the Holy Scriptures and Historic Church justifies this act.

Had someone left the faith in rebellion and subsequently repented and desired return to the Church, I would still think it wrong but at least understandable due to a change in heart. However, in this case no change of heart is alleged thus the act is one of initiation not into the Body of Christ but to be accepted into the Sunday clubhouse.

This act is one of excommunicating the vast majority of the Church on earth and the Church Militant. It also begs the question of what other theology is defective in this group which daughter thinks is so wonderful that she can chuck her birthright for a cup of water.

Oh, her pastor will tell you that baptism doesn’t save you; so again, what purpose does it serve in this case? Nobody can answer that question. What’s more disturbing is that no one thinks to even ask it.

Disclaimer #1 Generally speaking, this blog is about what I think and feel. It allows me to work out issues in my life and vent to the ether about things that I see going on around me. I do think that from time-to-time, other folks will agree with me.

Disclaimer #2 The topic that I’m addressing today is one of the minefields that Protestants tend to inflict on each other much more often than they should; I never hear of these conflicts in Roman Catholic or Orthodox circles. On balance, it seems that Protestants do this way too much and the other two branches of the Church not often enough.

This topic came up at the monthly men’s meeting at my church yesterday. The topic was a most unsatisfying discussion on church membership. As one of my MBA professors used to say, “Quit circling the airport and land the plane.” The discussion was meandering all over without much point.

The conversation tried first to talk about becoming a member of a church. The kneejerk reaction was baptism makes you a member. Then I threw the bomb on the table and said, “What about a person that was already baptized ‘in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost’ and then is told that they must be baptized again because the other baptism is not valid”?

Then one guy piped up, “As an adult”?

I replied, “Why does it matter? The Bible only knows one baptism. There is no biblical warrant for rebaptism.”

Without dealing honestly with my question which is very much something that my wife and I are actively dealing with (see my previous blog on When Baptism Doesn’t Count/ ) the pastor just shut the discussion down and went to another subject.

Soon the discussion was about Church Discipline. Again, the kneejerk reaction was that we should recognize the discipline of other churches. The default position was that someone disciplined by another body would not be welcomed to membership in our church or allowed to Communion. (More on this in a minute.)

The next question that was raised was does another body in another church or denomination have the right to discipline someone in our church? Again, the kneejerk reaction was “NO”.

I then cited one of the most well-known examples in Church history. St. Patrick once had to deal with this very issue. A man that the English Church refused to discipline was sailing to Ireland, murdering men, and kidnapping women and children and selling them into slavery.  Oh these men, women, and children were Patrick’s Christian converts. Since the English Church refused to act, Patrick wrote a letter of excommunication for someone that was technically outside of his jurisdiction and not part of his flock. This letter survives to this day. It is the Epistola.

Per Cahill and “How the Irish Saved Civilization” , Patrick’s goal was to isolate Coroticus, hopefully having his Bishop even excommunicate him, until his captives were free. Serving an excommunicated leader would cause his soldiers to fear serving him as they would believe they too would be damned.

Download: Coroticus

I was promptly cut-off with a derogatory comment about Catholics. However, I did retort that the Church in this part of the world was not controlled by the Roman Church until much later. Casting pearls gets me nowhere with this group.

I tried to point to an historical incident because first it is true and second it should not have the emotional response that may be attached to a contemporary example.

It was at this point that everyone started piling on about the problem with the church being that we don’t recognize each other’s discipline and a member can simply move to the church down the street without fear of repercussions. I understand their initial response but if these guys would do an honest examination of how churches use discipline then they might be more charitable.

I can say straight-out that half of the excommunications that I have been in, under, and around were completely unbiblical. Let me cite a few instances.

Disclaimer #3 If you are offended with me mentioning real situations then please stop reading now. Any names mentioned are fictitious, but the events are true.

#1 Gentleman and Lady
Jay was attending a conservative Protestant church. He was a college student (or had just recently graduated). He met a young lady at school and fell in love. He was serious about this girl. She was a Christian but went to the wrong church. Upon finding out that Jay was in a serious relationship with this girl, apparently, he was ordered by the pastor to breakoff the relationship. Jay refused and was excommunicated. Later, Jay and the young lady were wed.

#2 Rogue and Wench
Chris was the pastor of a local church. It was his first assignment out of seminary. One day, as part of the service he pronounced the excommunication of a young girl that to my knowledge had never once attended a service at our church. I know that she certainly was never a member of our congregation. Apparently, she had gone to him for counseling and not heeded his advice. She wanted to keep cohabitating with her boyfriend even after being told that it was sinful.

#3 Damned if you do
Pastor Bob had a small mission church. Over time, Pastor Bob’s study of the Scriptures began to lead him toward different doctrinal positions than his current denomination. Bob was an honest and forthright guy. He went to his church’s leadership and told them that his views on some things were changing and asked to leave the denomination. In response the current church excommunicated him. As a result, the church that he was wanting to associate with refused to take him since he was under discipline in his current denomination.

#4 Damned if you don’t
As a seminary student, Nate was an all-star. His church’s leadership really liked the guy. They told him that in time he would be a great leader in the church. The first church assignment that he had was going very well. The Mission plant was up to about 80 members. Nate had been there for about seven years and was in his early thirties. Nate became the West Coast representative for his denomination. But he had grown restless.

He began associating with clergy from another group. Nate’s doctrine and what he taught in his sermons began changing. As word reached his superiors, they decided to investigate. Nate was removed from the pulpit by his boss—under the bylaws this was allowed because it was a still a mission.

Ten days later, Nate sent a letter to all members of his local church stating that he was now a clergy member in good standing with another church and that we should join him. He took half the local church and three or four other churches on the West Coast with him.

As always, I could list a few more but I think the above covers enough ground for me to make my point.

The Bible knows that humans by nature are all the same, but it also allows for the possibility of change. Unfortunately, we humans like our rote categories so we don’t have to use real discernment as we go through life. We tend to be just like the Pharisees, make a checklist and then follow that. It is much easier than judging righteously.

Everybody says they follow the biblical model of Matthew but do they really?

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

Matthew 18: 15 – 22

Let’s breakdown a few parts of this passage.

Greek word translated “trespass” or “sin” Strong’s #264

The “trespass” or “sin” is a moral violation or breaking of God’s Law.

Greek word translated “tell him” Strong’s #1651

Tell him in the sense of reprove, rebuke, or convince

The person that was sinned against is to go to the offender and point it out in hopes of reconciliation.

To escalate the matter further requires two or three witnesses. This is directly from Old Testament Law.

The next level requires bringing the matter before the church. What this looks like is not defined in this passage.

When all else fails treat the person as a heathen.

This sounds simple enough but is it really?

The next stop on the excommunication train then travels to Paul’s letters to the Corinthians. In I Corinthians, we meet a man that is sleeping with his father’s wife. Paul tells them to eject the guy and turn him over to Satan.

It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.

And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,

In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

I Corinthians 5: 1-5

The above passage is supposed to be the end result of the excommunication train. My only problem with this is that the process outlined in Matthew was not followed. It is assumed that either the Matthew passage was followed or that Paul pulled rank or some combination of both. Unfortunately, there is no proof of this contention.

The second part of the problem of applying the passage in Matthew is what happens next.

But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.

Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.

So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.

Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.

To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

2 Corinthians 2:5-10

Paul tells the Corinthian church to let the guy back in. While the last part of this passage seems to echo Matthew, I don’t see in Matthew anything about reversing the decision. In fact, the next part of Matthew is about forgiving your brother. Then there is the whole issue of turning the other cheek. This isn’t as neat and tidy as some people want us to believe.

In the New Testament, I think you could count everyone kicked out of the Church on one hand and still have a finger or two left. It was rare.

I think it reasonable to narrow the scope of what is an offense worthy of excommunication. The Church has recognized two authorities that have direct bearing on this issue; God’s Law as found in the Ten Commandments and the Historic Creeds. Sorry but breaking the rules of a denomination is an intramural struggle that does not rise to that level. It should be possible to leave a denomination for another without being proclaimed outside of the Catholic Church.

The Creeds are the fence that defines the pastures of God’s People, as long as we stay within their boundaries we can wander into various aspects of Christendom.

God’s Law is the moral and ethical framework in which we live. Excommunication is the most extreme of all possible outcomes, but many lesser remedies are available as well. A careful reading of Old Testament Laws illustrates this principle, but it complicates the Pharisee’s checklist mentality so other remedies are typically ignored.

In example #1, the college student and his girlfriend were behaving in harmony with the Scriptures. Premarital sexual relations were never alleged much less proven. Both belong to churches that say they affirm the Historic Creeds. Thus, excommunication was wrong in this case.

In example #2, the woman being counseled by the Pastor was not a member of his flock, so even though she persisted in living in a sinful arrangement, excommunication was wrong. Why a young, single man is meeting with a sexually active woman for counseling is an issue no one raised at the time.

In example #3, the young Pastor was trying to be honest and open with his denominational leaders and he was blackballed for being truthful. He never went outside the limits set by the Creeds, he was just moving to a different part of God’s pasture.

In example #4, the Pastor never stuck around to see if he would be charged, counselled, or whatever; he just bolted. Even if he had been disciplined, the new church didn’t recognize the validity of the old so, no harm no foul was his viewpoint. It is not that he tried to go to a different denomination that was his problem but how he went about doing it. He snuck around and tried to do it without the notice of his elders. His intention was to take as many of his flock as he could to the new group. Subterfuge and deception are not the hallmarks of a man that deserves to be in the pulpit.

Conclusion
Denominations should not just rubberstamp the results of excommunication by other groups. They should deal with them on a case by case basis. I think until resolved, it is prudent to have a person voluntarily refrain from Communion until his case has been examined or a person has gone through some type of doctrinal instruction or whatever. If the guy in 2 Corinthians can be allowed back in the church as a member in good standing then excommunication should not be viewed as a one-way ticket or an immutable declaration.

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

—Jesus

In our daily lives we use judgement all the time; in fact we couldn’t function at all without the ability. We would be immobile rocks without it. Sometimes we view it in terms of choices or preference or discrimination or options. Vanilla or chocolate, black or white, left or right, start or yield, etc. However, most of the time we use other words for the judgements that we make in everyday life and reserve the word “judgement” for the “big things” often associated with law of one kind or another. In our society, we have two broad categories criminal and civil and possibly a third for moral.

The Bible does not know or recognize these categories. It has Ten Laws and the about 613 explanations of what these laws look like when applied to daily life. They give us principles that have broad application not a check list of narrow statutory rules.

There is a level of societal compliance to the external demands of the law. This is summed up in the story of the rich young ruler.

As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments, ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” And he said to Him, “Teacher, I have kept all these things from my youth up.”

Mark 10: 17-20

External compliance is our definition of a “good citizen”. Any of us can judge people at this level. We know about stealing, killing, adultery, etc.

However, the story does not end there. God looks at the heart not just at external things.

Looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me. ” But at these words he was saddened, and he went away grieving, for he was one who owned much property.

Mark 10: 21-22

Jesus then speaks to his disciples.

And Jesus, looking around, said to His disciples, “How hard it will be for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!” The disciples were amazed at His words. But Jesus answered again and said to them, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” They were even more astonished and said to Him, “Then who can be saved?” Looking at them, Jesus said, “With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.”

Mark 10: 23-27

Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount contains a multitude of examples showing that external compliance is not enough. God cares about the attitude and condition of men’s hearts. Below are selections from
Matthew chapter 5. (Quotes used from New American Standard Version of the Bible)

“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

“It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?

Radio listeners were once asked, “Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!”

In real life, God knows and he left us instructions so that we might be able to discern to some degree the condition of men’s hearts. Basically, the New Testament asks us to compare a man’s walk with his talk. Back in the day, my Baptist friends used to comment about fruit inspections and that is certainly one analogy used in the Bible.

If you claim to be a Christian and habitually break the Commandments then we have reason to doubt the sincerity of your profession.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Matthew 7:15-17

If you claim to be a believer but never have consequences for your disobedience then we have reason to doubt the sincerity of your profession.

For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Hebrews 12:6-8

In some things we are told to walk apart from others

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

2 Corinthians 6:14-15

Jesus said, “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” Matthew 10:16

Clearly we are commanded by Jesus to judge and use discernment in this world, not with arrogance and pride but gentleness and love. God’s Word is the Standard of judgement. The law serves not just the purpose of keeping civil order but also shows us our inadequacy and need of God.

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Galatians 3:22 – 3:25

On the topic of judgement, please don’t forget that not all justice is meted out in this life.

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

2 Corinthians 5:10

Sometimes we are to leave room for God to act on behalf of His people.

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Romans 12:19

We are expected by God to judge based on His Law as revealed in His Word not to condemn the world but to walk in it with wisdom. Further we are to proclaim His Word to those around us as we go. Our prayer should always be that our walk is in harmony with our talk and that it is seasoned with salt.

In response to my recent post on youth fleeing the church Universal Trouble in American Churches I was contacted by someone that took offense at the examples that I used to illustrate youth not continuing with church attendance once they reach adulthood.

Part of the response read, “How dare you sit on your high horse and write about me…or those others that you know who aren’t living the way you think they should. Look in the mirror before you judge others.”

My response to this individual was:

My point is how does someone transmit their faith to the next generation? My other point is nobody in our culture seems very successful at it. No matter their denomination. Sorry you took offense….It grieves me that so many are forsaking the Lord for whatever reason. …I’m concerned about many people. I named no one in my examples but remember them in my prayers. I hope that people will return to their faith in later life but the statistics aren’t supporting that idea. God’s Law is the standard not me on a high horse and by that measure, we all fall short.

When my wife got home from work last night, I asked her to read the post on Universal Trouble and then showed her the response that I had received. She couldn’t see the connection to anything I had written and the person’s reaction. I told her which example in the article was related to the response and the wife’s reaction was one of surprise. We agreed that I should do an edit (which I did) and fix some grammatical errors while I was at it.

I used four examples in my blog post and previously wrote about a two others about a year ago. Of these six examples of youth that left the church, I have been in contact with four after their departure. On the subject of leaving the faith, to a man, every one played the “don’t you dare judge me” card.

This is my dilemma; do you tell folks heading off the proverbial cliff to have a nice trip or do you try to warn them that going the way they are will end in disaster? I’m not advocating being a “busybody” but as I live my life I occasionally have a chance to nudge someone in what I hope will be a better direction. Truthfully I expect more of people that have believed the gospel and then fall short of the light they have been given.

This is the nature of my disagreement with George and Aaron Park, Sue Blake, and a host of others in the political world. They claim to be good, church going folks but their faith does not make a difference in how they treat others. Their friends are treated one way and all others like something they accidentally stepped on in the doggie park. Power politics is their focus instead of Christ.

Those that have left the church are legion and it breaks my heart to witness this phenomenon. I know that it is the result of divine judgement that men’s hearts are hardened. Conversely I know it is divine grace when men are given a heart of flesh. God grieves over those that have forsaken Him and so do I.

This brings us back to Keith Green’s comments:

You see, God is the most hurt and dishonored being in the universe. He could stop all this mess, all the perversion and crime and corruption any time He wishes, but He doesn’t! Why? Because He waits for the souls of men and women. “Regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation,” Peter said. (II Peter 3:15) But the Church, which doesn’t have one millionth of the compassion that God has, has turned around and created a god in its own image and likeness. A carefree, cheerful, above-it-all God. And then the Church has conveniently removed from the “gospel” it presents all reference to the pain and sorrow in God’s heart. The Church doesn’t want a God who’s grieved with sin, because then this God would be grieved with them… (and He is!)

What’s Wrong With the Gospel? Section 1: “The Missing Parts”

To the person who complained about my pervious post, what I stated is true. You left the faith and it has always bothered me. If my wife doesn’t even know who I was referring to then why be angry? I never used your name or anyone else’s. If your conscience is bothering you then your problem is really not with me, it’s with God. Please go to Him, he’s a better friend to you than I’ll ever be.

A few days ago, Stephen Hawking died. To me, Hawking was just a guy in a wheelchair that suffered from an illness. For some reason he seems to many in pop-culture a successor to Carl Sagan. The only thing both men seem to have in common was a disdain and hatred for organized religion—especially Christianity (why is it that Liberal icons never say anything bad about Islam?)—and both claimed that the cosmos can be explained without a Creator.

Stephen Hawking says he’s an atheist, arguing that science offers a “more convincing explanation” for the origins of the universe and that the miracles of religion “aren’t compatible” with scientific fact.

“…if there was a God, but there isn’t. I’m an atheist.”

In 2011, he told The Guardian that he didn’t believe in a heaven or an afterlife, calling it “a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”

Stephen Hawking Says ‘There Is No God,’ Confirms He’s An Atheist

I find it curious that Christopher Hitchens did not get the same send-off when he died. He believed the same things as Hawking and Sagan.

After people die, there is often a bunch of sentimental nonsense uttered in an effort to comfort those left behind. This is doubly true of those with no hope. Much of this sentimentality comes from or about people with no evidence of faith. In such circumstances we often hear things attributed to them that are undeserved.

“Baby Doe is in a better place now.”

“Uncle Bob is in a place with no cancer.”

“Pirate Sven is sailing in a place with fair winds and calm seas.”

“Johnny don’t be so sad. I’m sure Grandma is running through a meadow in her bare feet and she and Grandpa are looking down on you.”

 

Such was the case for Wonder Woman actress Gal Gadot.

“Rest in peace Dr. Hawking,” Gadot wrote in a tweet. “Now you’re free of any physical constraints. Your brilliance and wisdom will be cherished forever.”

Gal Gadot’s Seemingly Innocent Tribute To Stephen Hawking Offended Some People

I have a number of problems with this expression of sentimentality.

First, I think Gadot was trying to be compassionate towards those left behind in Hawking’s family. In our culture “Rest in Peace” is often used, especially for those who knew no peace in this life or suffered greatly. This expression is an indirect reference to the belief expressed in Revelation 21:4

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Second, atheist Hawking has no reason to hope for any rest. The best he can do is hope for the oblivion expressed in Ecclesiastes 9:5

For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

However, we are assured that all men will stand before God on the last day.

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Hebrews 9:27

The Bible is pretty clear that God doesn’t believe in atheists.

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Revelation 21:8

Gadot received lots of blowback from the Tweet that I just commented on but not from the religious community. It was an attack from disabled leftists and atheists.

People with disabilities and their advocates took offense at Gadot’s statement that Hawking was finally free of his “physical constraints” and said the assertion was ableist, or discriminatory toward people with disabilities.

Gal Gadot’s Seemingly Innocent Tribute To Stephen Hawking Offended Some People

This subgroup of the disabled community who are attacking Gadot are really attacking the foundations of Western Culture. They are denying sin and its effects on the Creation. The Bible is clear that we all have corruptible bodies that are tainted by the effects of sin and that we will get a resurrected body that is incorruptible.

And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.
1 Corinthians 15:49-58

For the disabled community to attack Gadot like they did is a denial that all our bodies are corrupted. When we say ‘disabled” we are talking of degrees of how defective our bodies are. We all age, we all died, we all return to dust. The Bible is clear that no matter how distorted it may be, we are image bearers of God and made in His image. Each of us is created just as God wanted us—even if we are blind or lame we are “fearfully and wonderfully made”.

Another comment on Hawking’s death also got some media attention.

A Texas state representative came under fire on social media Wednesday over a tweet about famed British physicist Stephen Hawking that some found insensitive.

Just hours after Hawking died, Rep. Briscoe Cain, a Republican, tweeted: “Stephen Hawking now knows the truth about how the universe was actually made. My condolences to his family.” Hawking died Wednesday at age 76.

But despite the overwhelming criticism, the lawmaker remained defiant and stood behind his comment.

“While many see him as one of the greatest public intellectuals of the last century, and no one disputes that he was brilliant, the fact remains that God exists,” Cain told the American-Statesman. “My tweet was to show the gravity of the Gospel and what happens when we die, namely, that we all will one day meet the Creator of the universe face to face.

“Stephen Hawking was a vocal atheist, who advocated against and openly mocked God,” Cain continued. “Hawking has said, ‘[T]here is no god. No one created our universe, and no one directs our fate.’ And, elsewhere, `I’m an atheist.’”

Lawmaker’s tweet after physicist Stephen Hawking’s death draws criticism

My first reaction to Briscoe Cain’s comments is preach it brother. God has done everything to necessary to keep us out of Hell but only if we come to Him through Jesus. We can’t live life as we see fit and expect to enter Heaven on our own merit. The best works we could possibly do are called by God “filthy rags”.

But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Isaiah 64:6

But what are filthy rags? The best modern translation is “used tampons”. Here is the Strong’s definition.

In the Old Testament, a woman having her period was ceremonially unclear during that time and for a few days after. So the bottom line is that your best works of righteousness are not just physically unclean but keep you from entering God’s presence. They are fit for nothing but to be burned.

God’s remedy was to send Jesus to die in our place so His righteousness could be used to obtain what we could not, peace with God. But we can only do this on His terms not ours. Only then can we say this:

We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
2 Corinthians 5:8

Stephen Hawking chose poorly.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Romans 1: 18-23