The Age of Accountability: A Loophole Created to Answer Bad Doctrine

​You may be eagerly waiting for a verse of scripture which defines “the age of accountability”.  There is no need to jump ahead to the end of the article; as I will not keep the reader in suspense.  There is no such verse.  The reader who has been raised in church is probably thinking at this point, “Well, there may not be a specified age in the scriptures, but certainly the scriptures would state that prior to a certain point in life; a child who dies, is guaranteed to go directly to Heaven!”  Again, no, you will not find such a verse.

​Preachers who believe that at least some (if not, “most”) of the descendants of Adam will be forever lost to God have attempted to provide people with palatable answers to tough questions.  Sometimes it is a grieving parent or other family member, who has lost a child.  The parent was raised in church themselves and having heard the teaching that all who “do not accept Jesus Christ” will go to hell are understandably terrified that their child; whom they loved with all their heart may be tormented forever and ever and ever and ever and ever. Sometimes, it is a curious Bible student who will ask such questions.  I have often wondered if the preacher or theologian varies his answer depending on who is asking or depending on the audience.  Many preachers will go on and on about eternal torment but suddenly sound like a “Universalist” at a funeral.

​I can remember, as a child, hearing a preacher who was preaching about hell, and he described “eternity” in the following manner:  “When you die, eternity begins (which is nonsense, but it gets worse).  And if you can imagine a seagull that takes a single grain of sand, at a time, from the East Coast to the West Coast and back, after the seagull has moved all the sand from the East Coast to the West Coast and all the sand from the West Coast to the East Coast; that amount of time would be the first second in eternity!”

​The question of where children, the mentally handicapped, and people who have never heard the gospel, “end up” has very likely been asked as long as the topic of “hell” has been taught.  It may interest you to know that this is not a question asked by people in the Bible.  But, if Jesus “preached more about hellthan He did about heaven’ (as so many preachers love to say, and which is also, incorrect), certainly some concerned parent would have asked Jesus Christ or pulled one of the disciples off to the side and asked them.  But, no, the scriptures record no such conversation.

​Those, like me, who believe that all will eventually be saved through the Plan God carried out through Christ Jesus are accused by many Christians of “inventing a way to God, other than His Son”.  They will quickly refer to Christ’s words in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life:  no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”, as if we disagree with that.  I have yet to meet a believer in biblical universal reconciliation who does not believe that Jesus is the way.  We simply, readily believe that passages like Philippians 2:10 are referring to everyone eventually coming to the truth, and gladly making acclamation of the fact that Christ Jesus is Lord, to the glory of the Father.  1Corinthians 12:3 says no one can make that acclamation apart from the Holy Spirit.  Paul states in 1 Timothy 2:3-6 that God wills that all will be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.

​In actuality, it is evangelical doctrines like the age of accountability which make “another way to God”.  Think about it.  I haven’t heard one Christian who believes in the age of accountability say that a child is not born with sin.  They will also say that the only way to Heaven is to “accept Jesus”.  Well, it is the only way, unless you fit into one of evangelical Christianity’s loopholes.  With the age of accountability doctrine, they have created the loophole of “incapacity”.  The child or mentally handicapped didn’t have the capacity to “accept Jesus”, therefore, incapacity is the way they “go to heaven”.  Some have created a similar loophole for those who died never hearing of the gospel.  For them, the loophole is “ignorance”.

​Instead, I think it is safer to go with what the scriptures actually say.  Below is one such statement from scripture:

“Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life” (Rom. 5:18)

​I can’t think of one person group that the “all” of both clauses above, does not cover.​

​

Does the Bible address the death of infants?  King David lost an infant son, prior to the birth of Solomon.  The two verses which record what David had to say about this are quite interesting.  

“And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?  But now he is dead, wherefore, should I fast?  Can I bring him back again?  I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” (2 Sam. 12:22-23)

​When we read this passage, what is not said is as informative as what is said.  David doesn’t say, “My child is in a better place.”, nor does he say, “My child is walking the streets of gold.”, nor does he say, “My child went to be with God.”  Instead, David shows a contrast between his actions when the baby was still alive, versus, after the baby had died.  He says that there is no point in fasting or praying now.  He also says that the baby will not return to him, but “I will go to him.”  Go to him, where?  Surely, David is saying that he will go to heaven to be with his baby, right?  To read that into the passage would be to take great liberties with the passage.  There is no joy hinted at with David’s saying.  As a matter of fact, that kind of language is used throughout the scriptures as a figure of speech for the death state.  Throughout the Old Testament, when it speaks of someone who died, this kind of language is used.  Thirty-six times, when someone died, the scripture states that person “slept with his fathers”.  The writer of Genesis records that God spoke to Abram, saying:

“And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.”

When Jacob was near death, he wanted Joseph to bury him with his fathers and not in Egypt, 

“But I will lie with my fathers, and thou shalt carry me out of Egypt, and bury me in their buryingplace.  And he said, I will do as thou hast said.”

​

​When David’s baby died, he also didn’t wonder if the child were in heaven or hell.  Why is that?  Did the scriptures indicate that babies who die “go to heaven”?  No, they do not.  When studying the scriptures, no Israelite seems to have ever anticipated “going to heaven”.  It’s true.  Nowhere, in the Old Testament scriptures does an Israelite ever mention “going to heaven”.  Also, in the Old Testament, there are no warnings of “going to hell”.  

​The Israelites who knew the scriptures and knew the “One true GOD” knew that the wages of sin, was not “eternity” in a place of torment.  Adam and Eve were never warned about a place of “eternal torment” for disobeying God.  Moses never warned the children of Israel of a place of eternal torment if they disobeyed the laws of God.  The prophets never once warned the Kings of Israel or the priests about a place of eternal torment,not-even-once.

​God warned Adam and Eve of death for disobeying the one commandment given to them.  Moses warned the children of Israel of God removing His blessings from them, bringing judgments against them, and death for disobeying God’s laws.  The prophets warned the Kings and priests of the same things.  All the warnings were temporal and dealing with life and death.

​The reason why David didn’t speak of his baby walking on the streets of gold, or worry that his baby may be tormented forever, was simply because unlike the Christians of today, David knew the scriptures.  The false teachings of “immortality of the soul” and eternal torment have replaced scriptural teaching.  Since death has been made to be just another form of life, or life in another place; the “wages of sin” being death, has lost all meaning.  

​In the New Testament, Jesus Christ spoke of resurrection.  He comforted Martha, the sister of Lazarus, that he would be raised again at the last day.  The apostle Paul encouraged believers not to grieve as those who have no hope.  Paul also, did not talk about dead believers being alive in another place, having gone to heaven, walking the streets of gold, having “gone to be with the Lord”, or any such unbiblical thing.  Instead, like Jesus Christ, Paul used the typical expression of sleep to talk about those who are dead.  Below are some examples of sleep being used as a figure of speech for death:

“Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may wake him out of sleep.” (John 11:11)

“For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption.” (Acts 13:36)

“Behold, I shall show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,” (1 Cor. 15:51)

​In what way can sleep be used figuratively for the death state, if when we die we are fully conscious, aware, experiencing bliss or pain, speaking, thinking, and any other activity people claim the dead are “doing”?  What is the need of resurrection if we are actually alive when we are dead?  It is utter Pagan, unscriptural, nonsense.  It makes resurrection redundant and unnecessary.  It makes death a friend, rather than an enemy (which the scriptures call it in 1 Corinthians 15:26).  

​We experience a type and shadow of death and resurrection every night and every morning; assuming that you aren’t currently suffering from insomnia.  We go to sleep (a figure of death) and then we wake up (a figure of resurrection).

​It is truly amazing to what extent “learned” theologians and pastors will go to attempt to make a biblical case for the age of accountability doctrine.  Dr. John MacArthur does an excellent job of pointing out the buffoonery and twisting of scripture by the likes of Charismatic preachers like Kenneth Copeland and Joel Osteen, but he is no better when it comes to issues like the age of accountability (and other very important scriptural topics).  There is absolutely zero scriptural support for it.  It is actually a knee-jerk reaction to the horrible teaching that if an “un-elect” child dies (even a baby) that child will burn in helljust like any other unsaved (un-elect) individual.  John MacArthur, deep down, knows how repugnant that teaching is; so making a philosophical argument, he clings to the false doctrine of the age of accountability, in the hopes that he can string enough out-of-context scriptures and logic together; to save God’s good name, from such malign.

​MacArthur says, “So, I have always felt that somewhere around age twelve, the transition from childhood to adulthood takes place.”

​The emphasis on “felt” and “twelve” is mine.  “Felt” is a good word for MacArthur to use in this context, because much like the Charismatics who he beats up on, he is arguing from an emotional perspective here.  He picks the age of ‘twelve” to be the approximate age in which the age of accountability may be found.  Interestingly, MacArthur uses the ripped from the context Numbers 32:11 as a quasi-proof text for the age of accountability.  See the verse below,

“None of the men who came up from Egypt, from  twenty years old and upward shall see the land which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob; for they did not follow Me fully” (Numbers 32:11)

​If this passage is a proof of the age of accountability, God set the threshold to be age 20 for those who would not be allowed to enter the Promised Land. MacArthur, on the other hand, believes that age 12 is more accurate.  Maybe kids are more mature today than they were back in the day of wandering in the wilderness.  Of course, depending on when MacArthur remarked on this, perhaps that age is closer to 9 years old now.  Who knows?

​MacArthur grabs another passage to bolster his reason for using the age of 12, and this is an amazing feat of eisegesis and hermeneutic on his part.

“Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover.  And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast” (Luke 2:41-42)

​Rather than reading from the text and recognizing that it is setting the stage to describe the life of Jesus Christ and giving us the background for when, why, and how old He was when a certain key event took place; MacArthur interprets it this way:  

“The Jews had identified about the age of twelve, and that was when Jesus was taken by His parents to Jerusalem for the Passover and the Feast.”1

​Picture the ridiculousness if you will. Joseph looks at Mary and says, “You know, Jesus is twelve now and we really need to be thinking about his eternal destiny.  We haven’t taken Him to the Temple, so we better take Him when we go this year; after all, we Jews have identified about the age of twelve…”  

​So, John MacArthur uses two passages of scripture which use two varying measuring points for a doctrine which neither passage is teaching; to support a doctrine that is non-existent in scripture.  Dr. MacArthur says the following when it comes to infants and children who die prior to making a “decision for Christ”:

“But, I also believe, that up until that point of real saving faith, God in His mercy, would save that child, should that child die.”2

​MacArthur is simply attempting to throw a coat of whitewash onto his very adamant views on salvation being entirely of God, but in his heart of hearts believing it would be unjust of God to allow a child to be lost.  He has spoken and written at length about how it is of God’s choosing; who is elect for salvation.  MacArthur adeptly hits all the pertinent and undeniable passages of scripture which state emphatically that it is not the sinner, but rather, God Who “in eternity past” (another nonsense phrase)determines whom He will harden and upon whom, He will have mercy.  Read MacArthur’s words below about salvation and predestination:

“And I have often said, if you believe the bible, you believe in predestination.  If you believe the Bible, you believe in God choosing who would be saved.  If you believe the Bible, you believe that God determined who would be saved...”3

​MacArthur apparently has no qualms with stating that before a sinner comes into being that God has predestined that sinner for either Heaven or hell; but when it comes to the actual question of what happens to a baby or child who dies, MacArthur’s conscience and emotion take control.  On that philosophical point, he scrounges and scratches and rips any verse from context in the hopes of vindicating God from the vile idea that while a baby may be predestined by God to burn in hellfor eternity; it only becomes repugnant if the un-elect baby actually dies as a baby.  If the baby, whom God chose to harden, grows to adulthood (or the age of 12 or 20) and then dies; it becomes not only just for God to torture the young man in hellfor evermore; but it becomes a part of the mystery of the goodness of God, at that point.  

​That is how depraved most Christians are when it comes to the ultimate outcome of God’s creatures.  They have bought the lie that God will allow any to be forever lost.  Due to the spurious mistranslation of a handful of words, they completely ignore the statements about God’s unending mercy, God’s will that all be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, that anything God wills; He will do; that He charged His Son with taking away the sin of the world, that He charged His Son with finding that which was lost, that He will reconcile all things through the blood of the cross.  No, none of these things will happen in the minds of most Christians who claim to believe the Bible.  For the Calvinist, God’s love, His plan, and Christ’s work was only for the elect.  For the Arminian, these passages are merely the whimsical hopes of a “god” who impotently wants, wills, desires, and hopes, for all to be reconciled to him; but is completely incapable of bringing it to pass; due to his plan’s self -inflicted wound of giving his creatures a free will which can override his will.

​I think that MacArthur naturally recoils at the horror that God would torment a baby who dies without saving knowledge; but does so at the cost of his intellectual honesty.  For MacArthur, in God’s sovereignty, all those who die prior to reaching this mythical “age of accountability” were the elect.  He can’t find a verse for it; but…it just must be so!!!  He has reasoned that all who have died before reaching this age of accountability are elect.

​MacArthur is correct when it comes to God’s sovereignty in salvation.  I do believe that God elects some to belief, during this life.  But, MacArthur, and most other Calvinists make the mistake of assuming that only the elect will ultimately be saved.  On that, he is incorrect.  All the elect are saved; but not all the saved are elect.  It is the job of the elect to bring in the rest.  Who do you suppose believers will reign over when the knowledge of God is to fill the earth (Hab. 2:14)?  God has allowed the elect to have a special role in bringing others to a knowledge of the truth.  This is the “especial” (not “exclusive”) salvation spoken of by Paul in 1 Timothy 4:10.  

​God does not elect a handful and wash His hands of all the rest.  

​For those who have been troubled by the worry that a loved one died and wasn’t a believer; rest in the knowledge that God loves that loved one of yours, even more than you.  While He may have not given him or her faith (Eph. 2:8-9) in this life, He will do so.  Read the below verse and keep in mind that God is not impotent.  What He decrees, will stand.  His Word will not return to Him void.  He will accomplish His good pleasure and we need not invent a “loophole” to have the confidence it will happen.

MacArthur, John, “The Age of Accountability” last modified on unspecified date.

https://www.gty.org/library/Articles/A264

2 MacArthur, John, “The Age of Accountability” last modified on unspecified date.

https://www.gty.org/library/Articles/A264

3 MacArthur, John, “The Doctrine of Election, Part 1” last modified September 19, 2004.

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-273/the-doctrine-of-election-part-1

A Look At Paul’s Final Letter

​*NOTE:  Before getting into this study on 2 Timothy I want to point out that in places, you will see that the word church is placed in quotations.  You will also see instances in which the word “God” is not capitalized. This is intentional. I will leave it to the reader to consider and ponder the instances of those occurrences.*

​I need to reference at the onset of this article a terrific book.  It’s been probably four years since I have read “The Church in Ruins” by Clyde Pilkington, Jr. but it is an excellent work.  If you find this article interesting, challenging, or especially “shocking”, I encourage you to go to studyshelf.com and obtain a copy of “The Church in Ruins”.  There were times (while writing this article) that I was tempted to go back to Clyde’s book and get his opinion on a particular verse in 2 Timothy but I refrained.  I wanted to honestly look at 2 Timothy, coming off the heels of reading 1 Timothy and give my take on it.  This article does not go to the depths that Pilkington’s book does and it is a more exhaustive look at 2 Timothy.  However, perhaps I provide a different take on elements of 2 Timothy or reach slightly different conclusions.  At any rate, after reading this article, please read the letters of 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy in their entirety.  They are short letters, but reading them in their entirety and together, (I think) will validate many of the points I make in this article.

“thou hast known this, that they did turn from me—all those in Asia, of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes;” (2 Tim.1:15)

Who in Asia had turned from Paul?  The only people who could turn from Paul are those who were once turned toward him.  Was it Paul, himself, who people turned from?  Was Paul just a jerk who couldn’t maintain friendships?  It seems that the case is that people who once believed in Paul’s gospel (the gospel of God’s grace) turned from it; and thus from Paul.  

​Paul wrote two letters to his son in the faith, Timothy.  I encourage you to read these letters in their entirety in one sitting.  They are short letters.  The first letter is less than 6 pages total.  Note the marked difference between the two letters.  In his first letter to Timothy, he is instructing Timothy in how to administer, structure and order the ecclesia (church), laying out instruction for church officers.  This is also seen in the letter to Titus.  1Timothy 3, for example, covers in great detail the qualifications for an elder (overseer) and deacon (servant); as well as their wives by-the-way.  1 Timothy goes on to speak of practical problems, administration issues, the question of whether or not women should teach, caring for widows, matters of defending doctrine, etc.  The point is, the first letter to Timothy handles matters of the structuring, order, and administration of a church.  Then comes along Paul’s final letter (believed to be written during his second and last imprisonment in Rome) which is completely different.

​This article will go through the letter of 2 Timothy, pointing out highlights.  It is my contention that Timothy is being instructed to turn his back and purge himself out of what he had earlier been   instructed to structure and administer.  Further, it is my contention that institutional Christianity (and not the secular, unbelieving world) is what Paul is describing to Timothy throughout this letter.

​Done away with, were any references to church offices to serve the assemblies.  Now, the focus is the individual carrying the gospel to faithful men who will hear it and believe.  Reading 2 Timothy, you will not find any reference to administration or structure of a church.  That time is passed when this letter was written.  Instead, Paul urges Timothy to find faithful men in which to entrust the gospel.  At this point, I think Paul knows that believers will be few and far between.  There was certainly an evolution to the apostasy from the faith that was evident in earlier Pauline letters.

​In Paul’s church epistles, (particularly in his letters to the Corinthians and Galatians) we see some of the turning from truth that Paul encountered and attempted to correct.  Apparently, by the time he penned this final letter, the turning from truth was beyond righting.  As a matter of fact, the entire letter to the church in Galatia was doctrinal correction.  This letter also jumped immediately into the problem rather than the flowery greeting which Paul’s other letters contained.  He leads off in Chapter 1 verse 6 with:

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel;” 

​

 ​The primary problems that Paul encountered in Galatia, Corinth, and Colossae were doctrinal issues of major significance.  He encountered with the Corinthians, those who were teaching that there was no resurrection of the dead or that the resurrection had already happened. The church at Corinth were also becoming sectarian; some claiming to be “of Paul’ and others claiming to be “of Apollos”.  This was the infancy of modern denominations.  

​The strongest rebuke from Paul toward believers was written to the church at Galatia.  As we read earlier, he asked them who had removed them from the gospel they had received.  He went on to warn them about heeding “another gospel” (Gal. 1:8), and similarly warned the Corinthians about following after “another Jesus” (2 Cor. 11:4).  In Galatia, Judaizers, would come in after Paul had left and began to push onto them, works, religious observances, and the maintaining of Sabbaths forsalvation.  

​The letter to the Galatians spotlights the most pronounced departure from truth that Paul witnessed and attempted to correct.  In his later statement to Timothy, “all in Asia have turned away from me”, the departure from the faith was complete.   

Chapter 1.

“All in Asia have turned away from me”

​Paul greets his son in the faith with a heavy heart in theopening verses of this letter.  In verse 8, he implores Timothy not to be ashamed of the testimony of Christ or of Paul, “His prisoner”.  Paul urges him to partake in the sufferings that this gospel will bring.  This is likely pointing toward persecution from friends and family as well as from enemies of the cross.

“Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim.1:13)

​There is much to say about the above verse.  One hallmark of Christianity is its use of unscriptural words, phrases, concepts, and theology which will not be found in scripture.  Sometimes words and phrases cannot be found in scripture, but the concept can be found.  Not so with many.  Many of the phrases that pepper Christian orthodoxy are based in false teachings which actually run counter to the teachings of scripture.  Biblical illiteracy and fear to speak against traditionally accepted doctrines prevents many from asking probing questions; much less denying them.

​Let’s look at some of the unbiblical phrases found in Christian denominational creeds and statements of faith that will not be found in scripture and teach a false doctrine:

Spiritual death, physical death, immortality of the soul, bodily resurrection, substitutionary atonement, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Trinity, triune God, personal Lord and Savior, prayer circle, free will, eternal death, eternally begotten Son, spiritual Israel, accountability partner, separation from God, hell, godhead, house of the Lord, etc.

​When the early church turned from the truth, and began to adopt Pagan, it became the “church” we have now.  Since, the deception and false teachings have become so systematized through seminaries and popular tradition that truth is now called heresy. 

​Some of the false teachings built off of a departure from a “form of sound words” deny foundational elements of the gospel.  While it is beyond the scope of this paper to evaluate and refute every false teaching found in the modern “church”, let’s look at how the “immortality of the soul” doctrine causes one (cleverly) to deny the gospel they claim to believe.  The simple message of the gospel of the grace of God is encapsulated in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 (see below):

“For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:”

​The immortality of the soul doctrine, teaches that people do not ever really die.  You live on in a different place.  In fact, when speaking of the dead, most Christians but the dead in a state of life, such as: “he went to a better place”, “he graduated to eternity”, “he is walking the streets of gold”, “he awoke in hell”, etc.  How does this undermine the gospel?  If one believes that Jesus, himself, never really died and only his body died, but was himself, alive; how can one believe Jesus died for their sins?  This is not small issue.  This is a slick deception.  It harkens back to the first lie ever recorded in the scriptures, “Ye shall not surely die.”  The death state is a state of oblivion where nothing is known.  Below are just a couple of scriptures, stating that death is not another form of life:

“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.” (Ecc.9:5)

“The soul that sinneth, it shall die…” (Ez.18:20)

“The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.” (Ps.115:17)

“His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” (Ps. 146:4)

“Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.” (Acts 2:29)

Chapter 2.

“And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”

“Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.” (2 Tim.2:1-2)

​The above passage is not a call to begin a new “church”.  It isn’t a call to begin a bus ministry.  It isn’t a call to begin a youth program.  What we have here is Paul telling Timothy to share the gospel with faithful men.  It is an individualistic call.  As the opportunity presents itself, share the gospel.

“Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel” (2 Tim. 2:8)

​The words here, “my gospel” are actually quite key.  No apostle, other than Paul, referred to the gospel they heralded as “my” gospel.  Paul’s gospel was unique to him.  It was revealed to him by the risen and glorified Lord.  It is not the gospel of the kingdom heralded by The Lord during his earthly ministry or the 12, who carried on that gospel.  Believing that the Lord was raised from the dead was specific to Paul’s gospel.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Tim.2:15)

​If we want to know the truth of scripture and know what God’s program for today is, we must rightly divide.  A “church” who is appointing deacons and elders, is not rightly dividing.  That time is passed.  Many “churches” divide between the Old and New Testaments, some make no division at all; while the student of scripture strives to make distinctions where God has made them.  For example, most “churches” teach the Sermon on the Mount as marching orders for the believer today.  But, who was Jesus speaking to in this famous sermon?  Who did He say were the only people He was commissioned to?  What gospel did The Lord preach?  The sermon was delivered to Jews, to whom the kingdom of the heavens was promised.  The kingdom of the heavens was the gospel heralded during Jesus’ lifetime and by the twelve apostles to Israel, after His resurrection.

​By not rightly dividing, we exchange truth for a lie.  

“But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” (2 Tim.2:16-19)

​What are “vain babblings”?  It is usually taught as if this is speaking of gossip or of being a busy-body.  But the context tells us.  It mentions two believers who turned from the truth and what they spoke of in particular.  Believing in resurrection in general and the resurrection of our Lord, in particular is at the heart of the gospel.  Paul told the Corinthians that Jesus is not raised from the dead; our faith is in vain (for naught).  The areas of error that the “church” has found itself are the vain babblings that I believe Paul spoke about to Timothy.   These vain babblings are deadly.  Most of them undermine the gospel in some way.  The “church” is completely inundated with lies that have been adopted in creeds and doctrinal statements.  

​

“Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.  22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.” (2 Tim.2:20-21)

​The above passage is one of the most important in instructing what the believer in Christ should do in the overall context of the turning away from the truth.  In all likelihood, you have never heard this passage ever taught in “church”, even if you have been sitting on a pew for over 50 years.  Could it be that the passage all too well describes the “church”? Does a “great house” outfitted with vessels of gold and silver not seem to be the picture of the “church” of Christendom?  

I have found that when pastors and teachers pull verses from 2 Timothy which talk about fleeing “iniquity”, “youthful lusts”, etc. they take them out of context and apply a different meaning to the words.  Take “iniquity” for example.  What “iniquity” is Paul speaking of based on the context?  False, religious teaching is the context.  The phrase “youthful lusts” is almost always assumed to be associated with sexual desires.  However, the context doesn’t indicate this.  Could the desire for inclusion, not losing friendships, and not being considered an outcast from the “church” community be a “youthful lust” Paul spoke of?  In the section on chapter 1 of 2 Timothy, we looked at how we are to hold to a “form of sound words”.  How many times have you heard your “church” called “the house of the LORD” or “the house of God”?  Do these terms not completely contradict Acts 17:24 which states that the Lord does not dwell in buildings made with hands?

Paul says that the man, who wants to be fit for the Master’s use, should purge himself from this great house.  This is why I believe that in verses 1 and 2 of this chapter, Paul instructs Timothy to entrust the gospel to faithful men.  He doesn’t instruct him to start small groups, or have one “traditional” worship service and one “contemporary” worship service, or other such thing.

The context and scope of chapter 2, beginning with verse 15 and continuing on, is that of correct doctrine versus false doctrine and how to be used by God.  False doctrine is the backbone of the “great house”.

Chapter 3: 

“Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

​

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. ” (2 Tim.3:1-5)

​The above passage is extremely interesting.  Look at verses 2 through 4.  Paul shows the characteristics that will accompany men who should be turned away from.  But, have people like this not always been plentiful? While these characteristics have always characterized the ungodly for eons, Paul was stating that these would become indicative of many who claim the name of Christ.  That is the difference.  How do we know that Paul is speaking of those who claim the name of Christ?  That is the scope of this letter in general and this 3rd chapter in particular (as we will see).  This letter to Timothy is completely about the institution he had previously instructed him to structure and was now, instructing him to abandon.

​The entire letter has dealt with those who have turned fromthe truth (meaning, they once had the truth). 

​How exactly does one have a form of godliness, yet deny the power thereof?  Consider the doctrine of salvation via free will as just one example.  It sounds godly.  The doctrine is dressed up with many words speaking of Jesus, the cross, God’s love for the sinner, God’s will, etc.  Yet, for all of the flowery Christianese, it denies the power of the cross, the sovereignty of God, God’s will to reconcile all of creation back to Himself, and the work of Jesus on the cross.  In the final analysis, the work of Jesus accomplishes nothing, apart from the will of the sinner.  It is the sinner’s choice that saves him, not the Savior.

​

“For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. (2 Tim.3:6-8)

​If one can lead captive, the woman of the house, the children, and the husband will follow.  That’s just the dynamic. The prototype of this model was the serpent in the garden.  He got to Eve, thus ensuring, he would get to Adam.  Beginning in Genesis 3, Satan’s realm of activity has dealt with casting doubt on God’s goodness and twisting His words. 

As stated earlier, when the word ‘lusts” show up, we tend to think of sex but lusts can be any type and lusts can be the feeling of being included, not being ostracized, etc.  

​With all of the various doctrines that are ingrained into people at the “church”, it is astonishing that anyone ever comes to the knowledge of the truth.  There is another time Paul references that same phrase and it occurs in his first letter to Timothy in chapter 2, verses 3-6.  See below:

“For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”

​Knowledge of the truth is essential to having life in the eons to come.  What we believe matters and the institutional “church”, through generations of teaching and peddling in false teachings, has made the truth appear as heresy.  It truly is a work of God when faith is given.  It requires that faith to overcome years of incorrect teaching.

​Paul says that these resist the truth and have corrupt, reprobate minds when it comes the knowledge of the truth.  What is more reprobate than slandering the character of God and teachings of scripture with teachings like eternal torment?  And when scriptures are pointed out, teaching that God will have all men be saved and that His work through Jesus will accomplish this, it is met with contempt.

“But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim.3:13-15)

​I think in the overwhelming majority of cases, those of the institutional “church” are sincere, but sincerely wrong in fundamental aspects of the gospel.  Most are well meaning, good people who are deceived themselves, thus unintentionally, deceiving others.  Most are very active and help in the community and do really good works.  But, that is what makes the falsehood so seductive.  People aren’t fooled with evil; they are fooled with righteousness that actually takes them away from the truth.  That is the most effective and we are told that this is precisely the method Satan now uses to take people away from the truth.  His ministers masquerade as apostle of Christ and “dispensers of righteousness”:

“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”(2 Cor.11:13-15)

​E.W. Bullinger, a very learned scholar of the scriptures, and expert in the ancient Hebrew and Greek had the following to say:

​“Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere and not the spheres of crime or immorality… We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ (seminary) chairs.”

​Really think about the passage above.  These ministers,who are actually carrying out the deception, are using righteousness, not evil.  That is how slick the deception is now and it has had nearly 200 centuries to become “truth”, and become institutionalized error.  What a better way to lead people away from God and the truth than by purporting to teach God and the truth, with plaques on the wall from the trusted institution’s school of higher learning?  Most feel ill-equipped to question any teachings, much less the doctrines considered to be etched in stone and non-negotiable.  But, if you have such questions, if what you are taught in “church” doesn’t make sense to you, there is likely a good reason for it.  Perhaps, it is that “still small voice” informing your conscience that something isn’t right.

Chapter 4:

“and shall be turned unto fables”

“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Tim.4:1-4)

​As most scriptures are not taught within the scope and context of the full writing, it is likely that you have heard the above passage taught but I would wager you have never heard it taught in the context of what Paul was telling Timothy.

​I always heard Pastors use this verse as a proof of being in the “last days”.  However, we have been living in the “last days” to some extent for 2,000 years now.  People forget that this “book” was a letter written to a man about things for him to be on guard against.  Those who are looking from the watchtower for the eventual slide away from sound doctrine don’t realize that this sliding away occurred back in the Apostle Paul’s day and is so prolific, it is now considered established truth.

​In the church letters referenced earlier, it is evident that many were departing from the truth and that was a real problem in the earliest days of the church.  Paul’s message to Timothy to abandon what the church became due to the turning away from truth came before Paul’s ministry even ended.

​With the gospel going to the Greeks and Romans, the potential for Pagan influence to corrupt the simple truth of the gospel was all too real.  The Roman and Greek cultures were the perfect fertile ground for the mixing of truth with fables and myths.  

​Myths and false teaching are now the hallmark of the “Christian” faith.  Many of the core teachings as described in the creeds of Christendom and “church” statements of faith have much more in common with Pagan concepts than doctrines grounded in scripture.  To help illustrate this, let’s look at an example of a Pagan symbol, common to most “church” buildings.  Do you attend a “church” building that has a steeple sitting atop it?  Have you ever considered the significance of the steeple and where the idea came from?  The early church met in homes up until roughly 300 AD.  Frank Viola and George Brana, in their book,“Pagan Christianity?” state, “When Roman Catholicism evolved in the fourth to sixth centuries, it absorbed many of the religious practices of  both paganism and Judaism.  It set up a professional priesthood.  It erected sacred buildings.  And it turned the Lord’s Supper into a mysterious sacrifice.”

​The steeple has very Pagan origins.  Ultimately, the steeple can be traced back to the Mystery Religion of Babylon (the mother of most Pagan concepts) and is further traced to the obelisks of ancient Egypt.  

​The website biblicaltruth.net says the following about the “steeple”:

​“While the “Church” considers them a staple in architecture, they are deeply rooted from the Pagan worship of the sun god Ra. They are found on just about every continent in the world and were around long before the Church started using them.    These are officially called Obelisks.  They were constructed as a sort of memorial or statement by the Pagans in their worship of Ra.  It is representative of fertility as it resembles the male reproductive organ which is forever “fertile”.   Ask yourself this:  Why would any Church knowingly construct an Obelisk knowing God commanded us not to???  If you were to ask your local Church, “would you be okay with creating a building with a symbol of Ra/Baal as its focal point” and they would immediately say no.  We believe we are so far removed from the days of Ra/Baal worship that we overlook how it was used.  We are warned by God from the beginning to beware of doing things or worshipping HIM in the way the Pagans worshipped their gods as stated in Deuteronomy, this includes constructing Pagan Obelisks.”

​

​

​Phillip, why are you giving us this history on steeples on “church” buildings?  If you tell people that what they believe is myth, they will not believe you.  Tell someone that what granddaddy and maw maw believed was actually Pagan, and you better bring some evidence.  The reason for this short rabbit trail is to provide an easily confirmable example of how Paganism is rooted in a structure that most would say is definitely “Christian”.  If Paganism lies at the heart of the architecture of a “church” building, do you honestly suppose that the Pagan influence is limited only to the building structure?  It is not, so limited.  As Paul states in verse 4 (above) they turned from the truth and turned to myths and fables.  

​Paul says that they will have “itching ears” and will heap up teachers in keeping with this.  There are a few teachings that are extremely prolific and they certainly are for the “itching ears” crowd.  One such teaching is the “name-it; claim-it” prosperity gospel, made famous (or infamous) by Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland, Joyce Meyer, et al.  People love to hear how they can become financially prosperous (with little to no work required) and this crowd of wolves answers the call.  The formula for the prosperity gospel is really quite simple.  The charlatan preys on the weak (and biblically illiterate), provides verses out of context, and then says to have faith and utilize the power of positive thinking.  Like most fortune cookies, this almost never pans out.  You would think the jig would be up but that is when the charlatan pulls his trump card.  “You just didn’t have enough faith.”  The charlatan himself, is the only one who prospers with the prosperity gospel 

​The other end of the spectrum is the hellfire and brimstone crowd.  These preachers are constantly sending people to a cosmic torture chamber in their sermons.  This gains and keeps a crowd through fear.  If you don’t believe what they say, you aren’t saved and if you change your mind on it, you only thought you were saved.  I encourage you to take the time to do a word study on the word “hell” if you believe that the scriptures teach eternal torment.  

​Both of the above teachings are false and are thus “false gospels”.  What about the “heaping up” of teachers for themselves?  Unlike the teachers and pastors of the early church, beginning with the rise of the Roman Catholic church, began the rise of a “clergy”.  The early church understood that they were all to study the scriptures for themselves and if so gifted, teach.  These teachers and pastors of the early church were not “professionals”.  When you pay someone and certainly when you have a board of directors who decide to keep a professional “pastor” employed or not, that person better toe the line when it comes to what he teaches.  Pastors who preach something controversial can quickly find themselves out of a job.  That is a very real threat.  When your family depends on your paycheck and the roof over your head, it is easy to have conflict over principles.

​Needless to say, pastor “search committees” were unheard of in the early church.

“But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.” (2 Tim.4:5)​

​I would point out briefly here that Timothy is encouraged by Paul and exhorted to do the work of an evangelist.  He isn’t instructed to be a pastor here or be an overseer, or an elder.  That time for church structure is over now.  In keeping with Paul’s instruction in chapter 2, to entrust the gospel to faithful men, Timothy is to carry the gospel with him, preaching,”in season and out of season”.

“For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.” (2 Tim.4:6-8)

​In Michael Riley and James William’s book, “Is God Fair? What About Gandhi?”, they write this about Paul:

‘By whatever method he perished, he had at least the comfort of knowing that he passed on to succeeding generations an unadulterated Christianity, free from the tainted influences of the will-worshipping, legalistic thought that had so corrupted Judaism.  For once, the religious world was at peace.  God’s message of Grace and Peace was totally accepted throughout the company of believers; the bright light of hope, relying on God’s grace instead of human effort, glowed in the hearts of an undivided Body of Christ.  Even the might of Rome would be unable to conquer the spirit of those who carried on this glorious mission of love…He had been faithful to his office and he had not died in vain.  There is only one thing wrong with this last paragraph…it simply isn’t true.”

​Paul’s last letter shows what the state of his ministry was and also, the state of the church (what was left of it).  His ministry was at its end and the church was but a remnant.  This final letter was instruction on what to do now, what to guard against, what believers had turned aside to, and a warning of worse to come.  Commit the gospel to faithful men.  That was Paul’s advice to Timothy.  If a vessel be fit for the Master’s use, purge yourself (the vessel) from this “great house”.  Avoid vain babblings, flee youthful lusts.  Turn away from those who have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof.  In season and out, preach the word and with longsuffering and doctrine, reprove, rebuke, and exhort.  Do the work of an evangelist.

​Finally, what is laid out in this article and the conclusions reached regarding what is called the “church” may be uncomfortable and it may make you angry.  I would challenge you to read 2 Timothy on your own and pray for discernment and not to read into the text, but to read out of it.  

​In light of 2017 being the 500th anniversary of The Reformation, I would be remiss in not addressing the Reformation and departure from the Catholic Church.  The Reformation was a start.  There were lost truths (such as justification by faith alone) which were recovered.  However, The Reformation brought much of the poisonous man-made doctrines of the Catholic Church with it.  

​For purity of teaching, we cannot go back to The Reformation, we cannot go back to the “church fathers”, we cannot go back to even the 1st Century “church”.  The departure from the faith and turning away from truth and to myth started before Paul’s death.  Apostasy from the faith is not a sign of the last days; it has been ever present since the gospel was first communicated to others.  For truth, we must rely on diligent study of the scriptures and prayer to be guided by God’s Holy Spirit into truth.

​