Religions Not From God
Jesus once stated in Matthew 15:9 “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” regarding the religious leaders of his time. Centuries before Jesus spoke these words the prophet Isaiah uttered them in regards to the Children of Israel and their refusal to worship and serve God according to his pattern. In
Isaiah 29:13 the Bible reads “And the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw nigh unto me, and with their mouth and with their lips to honor me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men which hath been taught them.” Just as in the days of the prophet, and the days of Christ, people today still honor God with their mouths but refuse to honor God with their hearts, because they teach, as commands from God, commands from men. Even today the words of Paul ring true as found in Romans 10:2 “For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.” People are religious, but not according to the knowledge that God has revealed through his Holy Word. When people teach as doctrine the ideas of men, their religion is both vain, or worthless, and without knowledge.
Jesus once stated in Matthew 7:21-23 “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” God, who cannot lie, reveals in this passage that many people will be surprised on that Day of Judgment when they learn that the works they did in God’s name, yet without God’s authority, were both vain and without knowledge. Jesus says that people will ask God about all the “mighty works” they did in his name, only to hear Jesus reply, “I never knew you; you worked iniquity”. This fact is made abundantly clear throughout the Bible; we as humans cannot worship or serve God in the way of our own choosing. The prophet Jeremiah states in Jeremiah 10:23 “O Jehovah, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.” God alone decides how his creation will worship and serve him. Anything else is both vain and without knowledge.
Why then do so many religious organizations teach as doctrine the commands or traditions of men? Paul tells us in II Thessalonians 2 that many “received not the love of the truth” and “believed lies because they believed not the truth”. When someone rejects the simple truth found in God’s Holy Word, what else is left but lies? When people teach as doctrine the commands of men, by implication they do not love the truth enough to teach it.
To illustrate this point consider a tract handed out by the Southwest Baptist Chruch of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma by their youth ministry program. This tract, entitled “Are You 100% Sure You Will Go To Heaven?” exemplifies this people’s zeal for God, yet not according to knowledge, their willingness to teach as doctrine the commands and ideas of men, and the emptiness of their religion. In this tract the reader may read about sin, Romans 3:23, what that means, Romans 6:23, and the fact that God has offered a way out of sin, Romans 5:8. It continues by giving “God’s” instructions on how to fix sin; to repent, Luke 13:3, and confess Jesus as Lord, Romans 10:9. It then tells the reader more of “God’s” instructions, as found in Romans 10:13, and his promise of eternal life, Romans 6:23b. Then the tract gives the final step to salvation, the following prayer:
“Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I am sorry for all my sins. I ask you to forgive me of all my sins. The best I know how I am receiving Jesus as my savior right now. In Jesus name, I pray. Amen.”
The fact remains that this tract is correct up to this last point. However, salvation is not received by saying this “prayer”. Why not include in this tract the fact that “Baptism does also now save”, I Peter 3:21, Baptism is “calling on his name”, Acts 22:16, Baptism is how sins are washed away, Acts 22:16, Baptism is how one “Puts on Christ”, Galatians 3:27, Baptism is how one begins “newness of life”, Romans 6:4, Baptism is what follows true belief, Acts 8:37, Baptism is that raises us “with him through faith”, Colossians 2:12, Baptism puts us into Christ’s body, I Cor. 12:13, Baptism follows repentance and remits sin, Acts 2:38. This was left out because these people have chosen to follow the commands of men instead of the commands of God. Any religion that omits any part of God’s commands to his creation is a False Religion and should not be followed.
This article was not written to be mean. This article was not written to bash anyone in his or her beliefs. This article was written to demonstrate this fact: Not all religions come from God. If your religion contains man-made elements, or omits parts of God’s divine plan, then it is a false religion, and no follower of a false religion can follow Christ. No member of a false religion can be acceptable to God. Why not investigate your religion, and if anything is found that is not in accordance with God’s word, get out of it. Or, if any of God’s word is omitted, again, get out of it. One cannot serve Christ in a religious group that does not follow the teachings of God.

30 Comments:
Excellent article Josh. I hope it will be read by many.
June 28, 2005 6:24 PM
I agree on the importance of baptism, but that alone does not save. You are wrong in stating the idea behind the prayer is not biblical, however. We are told to ask God for forgiveness time and time again in the Bible. Here is what this prayer means: I am a sinner, and I know I can only be saved through you, Jesus. Please forgive me of my sins and be with me until the end of my life. Isn't that a biblical idea? Of course it is. We actually do the same thing. When we are baptized, we accept Jesus into our hearts. If we don't accept Jesus, then all we are doing is getting wet. Immersion is a critical step to our salvation, but believing in the "ideas" put forth by this prayer is also very critical for us to live holy, Christian lives.
June 29, 2005 11:01 AM
The idea behind this prayer is that it is all that is needed to save the soul. This is not Biblical in anyway. A prayer for forgivness after salvation is Biblical. I hope you see the difference, as it is a huge one.
June 29, 2005 11:16 AM
There are three men named Billy who are most responsible for the perpetuation of the "sinner's prayer" for salvation:
Billy Sunday
Billy Graham
Bill Bright
Those three have inoculated more people against the true plan of salvation in the last 100 years than we can imagine.
One should note that after a person has obeyed the gospel and has been forgiven...he is no longer a "sinner."
The -er ending indicates one who actively and wilfully participates. Scripture teaches that when one has become a Christian he has died to sin and no longer lives therein. He is no longer under the dominion of sin.
This is not to say that he will not occassionally slip. But he is not one given to sin... a sinner. He is a child of God.
June 29, 2005 2:18 PM
And the Lord in the day of judgement will separate the sheep from the Billy Goats.
June 29, 2005 2:23 PM
Perhaps I should have included this in the article. Many, many people in the religious world have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. Many are like this because, even though they claim to love God, and love the scriptures, they fail to study the Bible for themselves. They take what their pastor, elder, preacher, or convention says as if it was God's own word. They fail to study for themselves to be approved of God, 2 Tim. 2:15. They fail to 'search the scriptures daily' to make sure what the preacher says is true, Acts 17:11. Again, they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. If people would only open their hearts and minds to the truth and see it as it is.
June 29, 2005 7:24 PM
I agree with the article, but many who have come to the Lord in the way described have studied on their own and realized their conversion was incomplete and upon that realization they confess Jesus as Lord and are baptized into Him. I have studied baptist history and the SBC of today has left the heritage of their tradition by subtle changes in doctrine. The early baptists preached the gospel message and apostolic kerygma that is still heard today in some baptist congregations and in most churches of Christ. When people see the truth of Scripture for themselves or someone shows them they usually accept what the Word teaches but they will not listen if they are condemned outright before any dialogue begins.
Rather than point out the error and condemn we should reach out in Christian love and show the way. There are many things in the church of Christ that could be condemned from those on the outside looking in. None of us have achieved perfection in our faith and practice. We must keep a humble spirit and not take a condescending self-righteous pedestal to look down upon all others from.
June 30, 2005 11:30 AM
Many have been converted because of the religious debates we have held over the years with varius denominational preachers.
June 30, 2005 1:06 PM
I would like to see the numbers of those who have converted because of debates. I doubt it is that high.
June 30, 2005 1:58 PM
Guy N Woods debated a baptist in western Oklahoma and converted all most all of the baptist church in that town. I believe it was in Mountain View,OK. It was many years ago, sorry I do not have more information. Perhaps someone could ask Johnny Robertson how many people can be converted by debate and straight forward preaching.
June 30, 2005 2:41 PM
How can you say that so many people are wrong and have not a love for the truth? Why can't your interpretation and their interpretation both be correct? God is a forgiving God isn't he?
July 02, 2005 9:40 PM
"Not evryone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
July 03, 2005 5:33 AM
I think Rick is off-base here. God has the ability to bless whomever God chooses to bless. Remember, Rahab was a whore who was blessed by God. The sinners prayer is not wrong, as no prayer is wrong in the eyes of God, except those shouted from the rooftops. But that alone does not provide salvation, as Christ commanded baptism on any who would wish to be disciples.
July 03, 2005 5:37 AM
Pat-
Remember that Rahab the harlot was blessed by God because of her active faith. She did something worthy to be blessed by God. Under the New Covenant Jesus states that God causes the rain to fall on the just and unjust, so some of God's blessings are for all men. However, the spiritual blessings we find in Christ are solely for those that have put on Christ, Gal. 3:27, and are faithful to him.
But I think that you agree with this. So, No sinner, separated from God by sin and lack of obedience, has his prayers heard by God. I believe the bible states this. Perhaps we should dedicate some time to studying and discussing this issue on here?
July 03, 2005 7:03 AM
Josh, I have an honest, non-belligerent question to ask: How is it that this post has affected the music that you allow to pollute your body? You speak here about people that are sinners not having their prayers answered by God, yet I would contend allowing the sinful and blatantly atheistic content found in Green Day and Willie Nelson to be a sin. If true Christianity is to shine through you, isn't it a primary, and frankly a first, step to rid yourself of such filth, according to Paul? I am interested because the way I view the scriptures concerning "getting the filth out," I see Green Day as espousing nothing but filth. It would be very hard for me to stomach such a blatantly sinful blog and still consider that I was "Contending for the Faith."
July 04, 2005 6:44 AM
*correction
in the last sentence, it should say singing group, not blog. my mind wanders.
July 04, 2005 6:46 AM
I don't know about Green Day but I'm pretty sure Willie Nelson's music is not "atheistic." He has made some gospel albums.
July 04, 2005 9:15 AM
A couple of decades or so ago, a man by the name of Joe Blue lived in the area of Salem, AR.
Joe was a very colorful preacher. If you needed someone debated up in the hills he was the one to call.
When he moved into Salem within a very short time, he had out preached, out taught, and out debated everyone around. For the duration of his life, not one denominational group owned a building or held services in that community.
The truth had prevailed mightily.
Down in the flat lands around Walnut Ridge, you would call on John L. Fry for similar services.
If you ever get the chance read the book by Boyd Morgan...Arkansas Angels.
July 04, 2005 7:54 PM
Anonymous, what I meant by that is you have to say by the live that they lead you can see Willie Nelson and the lead men on Green Day either don't think there is a God, or they don't care. I could not condone either by promoting their names upon my blog.
July 05, 2005 6:15 AM
Pat
It is a fair question. Have you ever listened to Green Day? Could you name some songs that espouse the things you claim? First, I do not listen to every song that group puts out, some songs have cursing in them, some are inappropraite. Others are just fine, happy, energetic songs. I do not let Green Day pollute my body with anything, as some of their songs are simply songs. Pat, you must realize the implications of what you are saying. First, have you ever purchased gasoline? So you support drinking, smoking, and gambling by your logic because you support gas stations. You ever drink Pepsi products? So you are a supporter of the Mormon religion, as they own a vast amount of Pepsi. What about the music you listen to? Even if one song is bad, by your logic, you are allowing the group to pollute your soul. See were this goes? Yes, I enjoy Willie Nelson music, have you ever heard "You were always on my mind"? Could you give me the atheistic filth that will pollute my body found in that song?
Pat, you must realize that just because someone claims or supports something that doesn't mean that if you listen to one thing they do that you are polluted by them. Do you support our President? Do you know that he is a Premillenial, Jesus is coming back to rule in Jerusalem, have to be friends with Israel kind of guy? So you support premillenialism? Did you support Clinton???
I hope I am making sense here. I am at work and very tired from the fourth. Pat, you can listen to a song without endorsing the error of the song writer. I do not let Green Day pollute me as I don't listen to the bad songs Nor do I buy their albums. I do like the upbeat happy fast songs though, they are great to work out to.
P.S.
Pat, the more things you list on your blog, the more people with similar interests will find your blog.
July 05, 2005 7:09 AM
Josh, what I see that as is drawing a sin line in the sand, and then getting as close to it as you can while not jumping over. Paul and Jesus are both very fervent in that there should be "not a trace" of sin in your life. Can a Christian listen to a secular song and not be influenced, yes, but only for so long. If you only like them for their upbeat, happy rhythmic tunes then I would highly suggest some band like OC Supertones who speak of Godly things. Saying that you can listen to some songs by Green Day and not condone them in the whole is synonymous to preaching from the pulpit and saying "I read an interesting article in a Playboy magazine, and I think it has some true life application." You may not have looked at the pictures, but would anyone know that? By saying you enjoy Green Day, you are saying that even though they talk about masturbation and use the "f" word, you think they are okay (I choose this only because it is their most popular song according to their website). Instead, I think one would be better equipped to serve only allowing good wholesome things in your ears. Cement your radio on KLove, or buy CD's that you know to be wholesome. Might I suggest 12 Stone (non-Christian but wholesome lyrics from a Christian).
As for your questions. I do not support any President. I am a pacifist, but more importantly I am a Christian, which means I do not concern myself with "American" things. I do not vote, why would I, my fate rests with a savior, not a nation. I do not salute the flag, I do not promote taking up arms against any nation. I live as a resident alien in a nation which is as foreign to God as the Romans or Assyrians before them.
As for pop, it is a pollutant to the body. I would not drink it, but if I did, I would not choose a Pepsi product, because I do adamantly boycott products that support false religions and homosexuality (Kraft). I do purchase gasoline, because I believe when Paul speaks of eating meat given to idols, he is allowing for money to be given to evil things (you had to pay at the temple of Athena to receive the meat, so eating it presupposes that you bought it, therefore giving money to evil), but if I could go without it, I would. I fear that if I did not buy gasoline, the gospel from my lips could only be heard by a few.
Lastly, let me say, that I do not hang a pharisaical fence around my "pop-drinking," or pacifism (though that one is very much a spiritual issue), because I do understand grace for those who believe differently in the gray. However, I wanted to know how you felt about those things, because I know that you are searching for the right that you ought do, and I do not think it is found in secular music.
July 05, 2005 7:11 PM
Give me exact numbers on those who were "saved" because of debates. I don't want ol' country tales, I want firm fact. I would say many more people have come to Christ through ways other than debate.
July 12, 2005 8:24 AM
Debates have been very successful in winning many souls to the truth. But they have also secured the minds of many disciples who were bothered by militant error.
Jesus and the Apostles both engaged in debate to varying degrees. And besides we are told in scripture to be ready always to give a defense for what we believe.
Remember: Making an argument and being argumentative are not the same thing.
July 13, 2005 11:45 AM
The question is not, "Have debates been effective in winning people to Christ?" but rather, "Are they still an effective use of time in winning people to Christ?"
Certainly there may be instances where a debate would still be helpful, but one cannont assume that because Method A has been effective in the past, then Method A will still be the most effective in the future.
July 13, 2005 1:41 PM
Anonymous
Your comments concerning whether as a method, is debating still effective. I would say that it is still as affective when handled properly.
It must be widely announced.
This issues at hand must be clearly delineated.
The disputants must be the epitome of Christian conduct in every way.
The audience must be prevented from heckling or other misbehavior.
The monitors must be sure that the disputants are handling their arguments properly.
The one detraction in our current culture is the lack of conviction by many that truth actually exists or that it can be known and know that you know it.
July 13, 2005 1:46 PM
I know of a LOT more people who found out about the Truth because they went with a friend to a youth group activity, or to a Christian concert, or because they were helped out financially (or some other way) by the Church. In our time, debates can serve a purpose, but they are not the Number 1 tool to bring others to Christ. Not anymore. In fact, most debates turn others away from what you are saying. (Did anyone see the Presidential debates this past year...pure trash) We have many methods, and I hope we use whatever method necessary to bring people to Christ.
July 14, 2005 4:56 PM
"In fact, most debates turn others away from what you are saying."
This is pure assumption. Debates are useful for their purpose. Debates have converted many, many people. Debates are rare these days, yet still effective.
Gospel Meetings have brought many, many people to Christ as well. Have you ever wondered why Paul said the following?
1 Corinthians 1:21 "For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of CHRISTIAN CONCERTS to save them that believe."
WAIT!!! He said the "Foolishness of PREACHING", which, when one expresses the truth in debate form, is exactly what is occuring. Same at Gospel Meetings. "Christian Concerts" are useful for entertainment, not conversion.
July 14, 2005 6:10 PM
That's pure assumption. "Christian Concerts" are useful for entertainment." Maybe for you, but I know of MANY people whose hearts were moved because of one. We're all entitled to our own opinion, but my opinion is completely different from yours, because I have seen results personally.
July 14, 2005 7:06 PM
Rick,
They are indeed "Christian concerts," built upon righteous lyrics that encourage people to go out and be the Christians they are called to be. One of the main themes of Christian music today is God's grace. How wonderful is that?! One of the most important messages of the Bible is God's grace upon us. Give me dc Talk, Mercy Me, Jars of Clay, P.O.D., Steven Curtis Chapman, etc. over any secular artist any day. I would prefer good, wholesome lyrics along with good music, thank you.
July 17, 2005 12:15 PM
I have never heard of any of these "famous" Christian (a.k.a. Church of Christ) debaters. Perhaps they are not as well-known or "effective" as they have been made out to be.
July 17, 2005 12:17 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home