Jonathon van Maren: Don’t Give Your Children A Smartphone

download

I’m not a technophobe by any means but I am worried when I see primary school children with phones. Even teenagers are too connected to the world “out there.”

From Lifesitenews.com

The horror stories are real. Don’t give your children a smartphone.

Oct. 4, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – After spending four days at the Coalition to End Sexual Exploitation Summit in Houston, Texas, my brain is very tired. We heard lectures on neuroscience, human trafficking, sexual abuse, child exploitation, and so much more. And we heard many, many lectures on the poison that is seeping in everywhere, fueling sexual abuse, destroying relationships, breaking down the ability of men to function, and obliterating childhood: pornography.

I’ll be writing a lot more about what I’ve learned (read my reports from the conference here, here, and here) but for now I’d like to make one simple plea to parents, something nearly every speaker and every lecturer advised: don’t give your children smartphones.

This advice has made me very unpopular in some circles—one teenager greeted me at a high school presentation by saying balefully, “So you’re the one who told my parents I shouldn’t have a cellphone.” But it is essential. Children, and most teenagers, do not need a phone with Internet access.

It’s crazy to think that a decade ago, smartphones were uncommon. Many people didn’t even own a cell phone. Now, as we heard from Vanity Fair journalist and author ofAmerican Girls: Social Media and the Secret Lives of Teenagers Nancy Jo Sales, nearly every social interaction – and sexual interaction – of teenagers is shaped by the tiny, always-throbbing devices they carry with them wherever they go. This has given rise to cyber-bullying and a spate of suicides, sexting and sexual exploitation of teens by teens, and the nearly non-stop viewing and amateur production of pornography. Teenagers – and children – are pulled into the social webs woven from Facebook to Instagram, from Snapchat to a half-dozen other underground cyber-settings, the interactions and content curated only by the children who populate them, free of parental or adult supervision.

Teenagers know that it’s making their lives miserable. The girls Sales talked to told her so. They also said that they had no way of getting out. Much of life is now lived online, and to opt out is to engage in voluntary isolation. The currency is often nude or sexually explicit pictures or “selfies”—and increasingly, that’s often non-optional, too.

Parents cannot control the new world of teenagers. In many cases, they cannot even penetrate it. That is why one man was so bewildered when his daughter hung herself after a teenager cruelly posted a video of her in the shower on Snapchat—that was the first time the girl’s bereaved father had ever even heard of Snapchat. For parents who wish to rescue their children from the cyber-jungle or spare them the pain that is engulfing millions, there are a number of answers. Open communication and open conversations. Attempted oversight of social media use. Accountability software and filters on all technological devices.

But for today, I just want to push one: Don’t give your children smartphones.

This advice has made me very unpopular in some circles—one teenager greeted me at a high school presentation by saying balefully, “So you’re the one who told my parents I shouldn’t have a cellphone.” But it is essential. Children, and most teenagers, do not need a phone with Internet access. They do not need nonstop access to social media sites that put them under the influence of their peers rather than adults. They do not need the social pressure that inevitably – inevitably – comes with entering a cyber-world of teenagers with new standards and new currency. And above all, they should not have access to all the pornography the web can offer, vile material that is setting new sexual standards teenagers across North America and beyond are beginning to conform to, through pressure, through force, or by choice.

I heard dozens of stories this weekend of parents finding children on smartphones, watching hardcore pornography. Children younger than the former average age of first exposure to porn, which used to be age eleven. It’s now age nine. These children, in a few gawking, horrified moments, are robbed of their childhood. Their worlds change in that moment. They cannot unsee what they have seen. And they should never have had access to it in the first place.

Don’t give your children smartphones.

I understand that teenagers are more likely to actually need a cell phone. My parents signed for a cell phone for me when I got my driver’s license—not so I could interact with my friends or go online, but so they could contact me and I had a way of communicating with people when I was out and about. My first cell phones had no Internet capability, and I didn’t miss it. I sometimes wish my current phone didn’t have Internet either, because I’m as guilty as the rest of this generation of wasting time on my phone when I could be doing something – or anything, really – more productive. But when teenagers need a phone, they still don’t need a phone with Internet access. A phone that allows them to make phone calls and text is good enough. They don’t need nonstop social media connection, they don’t need SnapChat (a “sexting” app that destroys photos in seconds), and they absolutely should not have access to the twisted pornography that they will almost inevitably find.

Do not give the pornographers the access to your children that they seek. They know that children and teens are most likely to find porn on phones, and that’s why they’ve made a gargantuan effort in recent years to create porn that can be viewed and streamed on mobile devices. They know how to access your children—through a smartphone.

Don’t give them one.

Doug Mainwaring: The Fight Against Marriage

The heart of the Same Sex Marriage war is spiritual not political or legal.

 

A former gay activist now a christian reflects on this. From lifesitenews.com Doug Mainwaring writes:

If you think the gay ‘marriage’ fight is over, you don’t understand the nature of the war

September 27, 2016 (Public Discourse) — Up until now, I’ve used only secular arguments involving logic, reason, and experience to address the issue of same-sex marriage. That’s how I first came to think about the issue. But as I explained at Public Discourse last year, once I began thinking, reasoning, and examining my life, an extraordinary thing happened: I couldn’t stop. Reason led me to acknowledge natural law, which led me to begin rejecting some of my former ways of thinking and acting. Reason then led me to recognize God.

I am now a Christian, and even though I am same-sex attracted—or, more likely, because I am same-sex attracted—I marvel at the extraordinary significance of marriage in God’s eternal plan. Marriage is under siege because it stands at the heart of the Good News of the Gospel.

I am neither a philosopher nor a theologian, and I possess no advanced degree, but I try to be an informed observer and reasoning contributor as best I can. As a former apologist for the sexual revolution, and as a gay man who once promoted same-sex marriage, here’s what I’ve concluded.

No matter what you read or hear, the heart of the battle over the redefinition of marriage and genderlessness in culture is not found in our courts, legislatures, ballot boxes, or media. This is not a tug of war between political parties, between left and right, conservative and liberal. Likewise, this is not a battle of “gay versus straight.” And while focusing on religious liberty is an absolutely necessary pursuit, if it stands by itself, it too misses the mark.

Taken as a whole, this is a war of one kingdom against another. At its heart, this is a spiritual battle.

Accepting this as a spiritual battle has profound personal ramifications. We must each examine and deal with our own spiritual passivity and culpability in casually embracing the ways of the world. Each of us bears responsibility. This battle hinges on one thing: the creation of a vibrant marriage culture based on the participation of millions of individuals who value and commit themselves to the spiritual truth about marriage. These people must commit themselves not only to the structural, traditional aspects of marriage, but also to its vitally important spiritual component. The future rests on our shoulders—yours and mine.

Many now chide those of us who oppose the notion of same-sex marriage, telling us, “The battle over marriage has been decided. Move on.” And for the time being, as a political reality, this may be true. However, there is a much larger, far more important reality that must be acknowledged: spiritual reality. While the political battle may be over for a brief time, the spiritual battle is just beginning.

 

 

Read the rest here

Of Gerberas, Grief and Dogs

Twenty days ago, ironically enough on Father’s Day, we received one of those late night door knocks that only ever bring bad news. Our daughter, just 10 weeks or so from giving birth to our first grandchild, had noticed that the baby had stopped moving. The doctors at the hospital had been unable to find a heart beat and the fate of the baby would be confirmed with an ultrasound the following morning.

Sometimes the journey that we think we are travelling is abruptly ended, changed to a completely different one with a destination that nobody could foresee and that nobody wants.

Last week at the memorial service for baby Henry we were to  release a helium balloon. As I left to collect it Margaret asked me to buy some small flowering plants to put near the water feature near the church door to add some colour. A couple of pots of gerberas with bright yellow flowers were perfect.

 

gerberas

After the service was over, I planted them in some pots in the garden expecting them to be here to remind us of the grandson who isn’t here. But this morning I found this:

img_8464_1

 

img_8463_1

 

There was no doubt who the culprit was.

img_8465_1

I was so angry, sad and despondent.

On the one hand it is just $20 worth of plants- another item on this horrible dog’s tally of destruction. But on the other hand, it touched me at a level of my soul because of the connection of these flowers to baby Henry. It is irrational but the destruction of these plants brought to the surface a new collection of emotions that needed to be felt and understood.

Today was a difficult day, but not just for my own grief. I heard of a father who died after an illness of several years whose family has literally been barely surviving for that time. I heard of the struggle of a good friend in a difficult marriage. I know of another young father who is about to die from an aggressive leukaemia.

And over the last few weeks we have heard of people with seemingly happy families and lovely children who have suffered a similar loss to ours.

The worst thing about being a parent is that you can’t fix the really important things in your children’s lives. Love for others allows us to share their joys, but it multiplies our capacity for hurt.

All of this points to the limitless capacity of God’s love to us. While two sets of parents were trying to help their son and daughter through an awful time there were little gracelets that brought light into the darkness. There were smiles in the tears brought to us by a loving Father who knows what it’s like to lose a Son.

So we walk a path we did not choose, and would not if it were ours to choose.

But we know that God is walking with us.

 

 

The Powerful Reason We Keep Getting Out Of Bed

Ann Voskamp captures it with passion and precision to remind us why we get out of bed every morning.

The Powerful Reason Why We All Have To Keep Getting Out of Bed — That Changes a Broken World

When I saw it plastered on a wall somewhere in the city, it brought me up short.

I stepped back a few steps, stood there in front of it like a fool farm hick.

Blazoned across the three panels like a wakeup call:

Why do you get out of bed in the morning? 

Some dare devil’s pictured on the billboard plunges off his surfboard:Fear of Failure 

An astronaut lashes himself in for launch:  The Need to Succeed

Some guy holds a a curling cat:The Love of Your Life

And I mean —

DSC_4546
Untitled
Untitled
Untitled
Untitled
DSC_4553

There’s work towering over you like a toppling avalanche about ready to bury you a couple feet deep, mocking you to go ahead and just try to get of bed. There’s bills stacked up like a deafening demand. There’s people counting on you and you’re counting on someOne stronger than you to get you through.

Why in the world do you get out of bed in the morning? 

Read the rest here

Why Men Should Not Be Pastors

A bit of satirical humour to give you a smile, wry or otherwise.


10 reasons men should not be pastors

“A man’s place is in the army.”

So starts David M. Scholer’s satirical list of 10 reasons why men shouldn’t be pastors. Most of you have probably seen the list before; it’s been around a number of years. We’re sharing it as a reminder that humor can be very helpful when discussing a hot button issue like women in ministry. (And to do our part to keep this great piece in circulation!).

Keep in mind that Scholer’s purpose here is NOT to put men down, but to use satire to show that many of the arguments used to restrict women from pastoral roles are rooted in cultural expectations and gender norms. And so without further ado:

10. A man’s place is in the army.

 

9. For men who have children, their duties might distract them from the responsibilities of being a parent.

 

8. Their physical build indicates that men are more suited to tasks such as chopping down trees and wrestling mountain lions. It would be “unnatural” for them to do other forms of work.

 

7. Man was created before woman. It is therefore obvious that man was a prototype. Thus, they represent an experiment, rather than the crowning achievement of creation.

6. Men are too emotional to be priests or pastors. This is easily demonstrated by their conduct at football games and watching basketball tournaments.

 

5. Some men are handsome; they will distract women worshipers.

 

4. To be an ordained pastor is to nurture the congregation. But this is not a traditional male role. Rather, throughout history, women have been considered to be not only more skilled than men at nurturing, but also more frequently attracted to it. This makes them the obvious choice for ordination.

 

3. Men are overly prone to violence. No really manly man wants to settle disputes by any means other than by fighting about it. Thus, they would be poor role models, as well as being dangerously unstable in positions of leadership.

 

2. Men can still be involved in church activities, even without being ordained. They can sweep paths, repair the church roof, and maybe even lead the singing on Father’s Day. By confining themselves to such traditional male roles, they can still be vitally important in the life of the Church.

 

1. In the New Testament account, the person who betrayed Jesus was a man. Thus, his lack of faith and ensuing punishment stands as a symbol of the subordinated position that all men should take.

 Read the full article at The Junia Project

Christian and Lesbian?

One woman’s journey into faith and out of a sinful lifestyle


She Considered Herself a Christian & a Lesbian—Then She Was “Struck by Lightning” With a Stunning Realization

“I actually considered myself a Christian at that point, though I had no desire to read God’s Word, let alone conform my life to his will.”

emily

By Emily Thomas

The Girl in the Picture

Recently I came across the photo on the left and did a double take. The girl in that photo, with her hollow eyes and hopeless heart, no longer bears any resemblance to me. She was dead in her sin (Eph. 2:1). (To be clear, I amnotsaying everyone who looks like the girl on the left is dead in sin, or that everyone who looks like the girl on the right is not. Spiritual reality runs far deeper.)

I was always the type to push boundaries. Even as a child, I never really had a moderate pace. I tried everything once but most things at least twice for my own curiosity. Growing up in a small town, there wasn’t much to do, and I acted out often. In high school, I met my need for attention by constantly “going against the grain,” but in a way that maintained my popularity. I partied, slept around and by 15 I came out as a lesbian to some friends.

By the time I was a young adult, I fully embraced the LGBT label. I cut my hair short, wore boy clothes, and used men’s bathrooms and dressing rooms. I enjoyed the thrill of doing and being what was outside the norm—trying harder drugs, exploring even more taboo sexual acts and getting a couple of regrettable tattoos.

By 22, I had settled down a little. Shock value, though still something I enjoyed, was a lower priority. While still smoking weed and having sex with women, I maintained an outward appearance of morality. I considered myself a good person; I worked full-time, loved my friends and usually balanced my budget. Family relationships were improving, and I was finally attempting to lead a relatively respectable life.

Surprised by Attributes

In March 2014, a group of coworkers started a Bible study and invited me to join. Because my aunt was part of the group, I agreed to participate. I actually considered myself a Christian at that point, though I had no desire to read God’s Word, let alone conform my life to his will. I told myself that at the first mention of my “lifestyle” I’d quit the study, and I felt pretty confident that moment would come.

Thebook we studiedwas on the attributes of God. For the first time I was confronted by the justice, holiness and sovereignty of God. The more I read and understood, the bigger God became and the smaller I felt. I knew what the Bible said about homosexuality and other things, but I hadn’t cared before. I had little understanding of the God I was sinning against.

This study was slowly shifting my perspective. I would catch myself, just before falling asleep, questioning who I was and why I made these choices. I asked myself,Am I sure that gay behavior is as much of my identity as my gender or my race? But I’d wake up and laugh and say,Of course you can embrace your homosexuality—that’s who you are! It felt like I was almost convincing myself it was okay to continue on that way.

Two weeks later, a friend (also a lesbian) waited for me at my apartment after work to smoke marijuana and hang out as usual. After we smoked, I asked her, “What if they’re right?” She knew I was doing the study and understood immediately what I meant and said, “I don’t want to talk about it.” I pushed further. “We have to. If this is true, we need to talk now and not later.” She left soon after, so I picked up my book and read.

 
Read the rest of the article here

Reflection on Luke 14:25-33

afamily2977.jpg

Passage: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+14.25-33

Scripture

Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.”

Observation

Jesus teaches the crowds about the cost of discipleship.

Love for Jesus must take priority over all family duties. In comparison we must “hate” father and mother, even life itself. We must die to ourselves as surely as a condemned man carrying a cross is dead.

Before we start the path of discipleship we must first count the cost. A man building a tower first works out if he has enough money to complete it. A king going out to wage war must first consider if he has the army to defeat the enemy. Likewise, following Jesus will cost everything we have.

Application

Jesus does not sugar coat His message. He makes it clear that there is a cost to following Him.

This is no easy religion of “Come to Jesus to make you happy.” No, we follow Jesus because He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. There is a cost to following the Way, receiving the Truth and living the Life.

Jesus must come first in all things. If that separates us from our family so be it. If it costs us money or even our life, so be it.

We are used to having it easy in the West, but this is changing. Muslims who turn to Christ often lose their family, their jobs and even their lives. The time is coming when christians in Australia may face similar penalties.

Is Christ that precious to you?

Prayer

Lord Jesus, you gave up everything for me. Please give me grace to give up everything for you. Amen.

Is Britain really ceasing to be a Christian country?

Britain and Australia are following very similar trajectories. Only thoroughgoing revivals such as those which established them as christian countries in the first place can save us.

From thedokimos.org

Is Britain really ceasing to be a Christian country?

 

The decline in religious belief has become precipitous in recent years

A landmark in national life has just been passed. For the first time in recorded history, those declaring themselves to have no religion have exceeded the number of Christians in Britain. Some 44 per cent of us regard ourselves as Christian, 8 per cent follow another religion and 48 per cent follow none. The decline of Christianity is perhaps the biggest single change in Britain over the past century. For some time, it has been a stretch to describe Britain as a Christian country. We can more accurately be described now as a secular nation with fading Christian institutions.

There is nothing new in the decline of the church, but until recently it had been a slow decline. For many decades it was possible to argue that while Christians were eschewing organised religion, they at least still regarded themselves as having some sort of spiritual life which related to the teachings of Jesus. Children were asked for their Christian name; conversations ended with ‘God bless’. Such phrases are now slipping out of our vocabulary — to wear a cross as jewellery is seen as making a semi-political statement. Christians are finding out what it’s like to live as a minority.

Just 15 years ago, almost three quarters of Britons still regarded themselves as Christians. If this silent majority of private, non-churchgoing believers really did exist, it has undergone a precipitous decline. Five years ago, the number of people professing no religion was only 25 per cent.

 

Remarkably, the overall decline of religion in Britain has coincided with the arrival of three million migrants who tend to have more religious belief than British Christians. In particular, the visual impact of Islam, most obviously expressed in the proposal for a 9,000-capacity ‘super-mosque’ in east London that was rejected by planners last year, might give the impression that migration has brought a religious revival to Britain. Yet neither the growth of British Islam nor the huge influx of Christian immigrants from Africa and Eastern Europe has spurred a revival in public Christianity.

It is possible that the rise of Islamism has made casual believers less inclined to ally themselves with any kind of organised faith. Say ‘religious’ to many Britons and the next word that pops into their heads is ‘extremist’, or perhaps ‘bigot’ or ‘homophobe’. To the growing population of secularists, religion has become something to be treated with suspicion. Politicians who are religious find their faith used against them. Iain Duncan Smith’s Department of Work and Pensions was known by his critics as the Department of Worship and Prayer, the joke being that his reforms were inspired by a desire to save lives rather than money. In government, to be a Christian can be seen as a personal failing. The ambitious minister keeps his or her faith under wraps. It is unthinkable now that a Prime Minister would do as Mrs Thatcher did on arrival in Downing Street 37 years ago, and quote St Francis of Assisi. All Cameron has dared to say, quoting Boris Johnson, is that his faith comes and goes like the reception of Magic FM in the Chilterns.

The eclipsing of our national religion has deep implications for those who do retain faith, especially those who wish to pass it on to their children. They must now face the reality that they, no less than Muslims, Jews and Hindus, face being treated as oddballs.

As for the church itself, it is no use pretending there is a Christian majority whose non-attendance at church is just down to laziness. If church leaders wish to keep their buildings open, they will have to start from the beginning — with missionary work to recruit parishioners in a now-sceptical country.

Inevitably, the question of what is to be done about our national Christian institutions will arise. Is it appropriate that we are still invited to swear on the Bible in court? (Many new MPs routinely refuse to do this in the Commons.) Is it right that the Lords Spiritual should still have a role in the Upper House, or that church and state should have any formal connection at all? The British regard for tradition will see that such roles are preserved, but for nostalgic reasons. The aesthetics of Christianity — the architecture, the choral singing and so on — still pull in crowds, even if little of the liturgy is inwardly digested.

Christians, for their part, should not automatically associate a decline in religiosity with a rise in immorality. On the contrary, Britons are midway through an extraordinary period of social repair: a decline in teenage pregnancies, divorce and drug abuse, and a rise in civic-mindedness.

We cannot discount the possibility of a Christian revival; the Christian faith specialises in defying the odds. But it seems more likely that Britain will continue to muddle along as a post-Christian country with quaint customs that derive from its history as a deeply religious country. Some will find this sad, others as a sign of progress, but the greater majority will view it with indifference.

Source spectator.co.uk

Stephen McAlpine: I Don’t Follow Football But I Have Football Values

I Don’t Follow Football But I Have Football Values

 

I don’t like football – the AFL type.  Don’t follow it.  Don’t watch it.  Don’t bet on it.  Don’t talk about it on Monday morning in the office (which would basically be a one way conversation).Fit men in tight shorts?  If I want to see that I can go to the gym.  Which I don’t want to see, I might add.

Couldn’t tell you who is second on the ladder (I know Hawthorn is top, they’re always top).   And the last Saturday of September – aka Grand Final Day – is a fantastic stress-free day to go clothes shopping. Could hardly name a player other than the obvious ones such as Nick Fyfe and Nat Nickanui .

I worked briefly as a radio journalist in my youth and part of my job was covering the AFL.  There’s nothing quite as intimidating as being a 60kg Gothic 22 year old standing holding a microphone in a post-match change room interviewing a muscle-bound Gary Ablett Snr and behemoth six foot eleven ruck man Simon Madden, completely in the buff (they were in the buff not I). I hardly knew where to look.  I knew where not to look.

enhanced-buzz-18572-1427408434-5

Phwoar!

So it would be weird if I didn’t follow football, didn’t care for it, but when asked in a survey what my perspective on football was, was to answer “I have football values.”

Read the full article here

Can this really be the gospel of “superabundant grace”?

Can this really be the gospel of “superabundant grace”?

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

But there is a great difference between Adam’s sin and God’s gracious gift. For the sin of this one man, Adam, brought death to many. But even greater is God’s wonderful grace and his gift of forgiveness to many through this other man, Jesus Christ. And the result of God’s gracious gift is very different from the result of that one man’s sin. For Adam’s sin led to condemnation, but God’s free gift leads to our being made right with God, even though we are guilty of many sins. For the sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to rule over many. But even greater is God’s wonderful grace and his gift of righteousness, for all who receive it will live in triumph over sin and death through this one man, Jesus Christ.

Yes, Adam’s one sin brings condemnation for everyone, but Christ’s one act of righteousness brings a right relationship with God and new life for everyone. Because one person disobeyed God, many became sinners. But because one other person obeyed God, many will be made righteous. God’s law was given so that all people could see how sinful they were. But as people sinned more and more, God’s wonderful grace became more abundant. So just as sin ruled over all people and brought them to death, now God’s wonderful grace rules instead, giving us right standing with God and resulting in eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

• Romans 5:15-21, New Living Translation

• • •

In a recent sermon by Pastor Robert Jeffress of First Baptist in Dallas, he said the following:

Listen to me. When you die, you don’t cease to exist. Your spirit is going to live forever. Everybody’s spirit lives forever. It doesn’t matter what you believe. Jew, atheist, Muslim, Catholic, Baptist. Everybody’s going to live forever.

Some are going to live forever in heaven, with God. Others, the majority of people, will be in hell, separated from God. But we live on, after our bodies fall asleep. That’s what the Bible says.

This post is not a knock on Pastor Jeffress in particular. What he said represents mainstream Christian evangelical and fundamentalist teaching. But when I read those words, I gasped, and the thought came immediately to my mind: “If this is true, then the gospel of Jesus is not good news.”

Here’s the line over which I stumbled: “Some are going to live forever in heaven, with God. Others, the majority of people, will be in hell, separated from God.”

The majority of people.

Let that sink in for a moment.

Can it really be that most people who’ve ever lived will be condemned to hell? That is staggering.

What makes it even more astounding to me is that the preacher said it as a passing phrase on the way to making his main points. As though this is just understood, axiomatic, the clear expectation of anyone who reads the plain teaching of the Bible. A few of us happy with God in heaven, the vast majority in hell.

And what will that place be like? Jeffress describes hell in another message as “a place of eternal physical torment, of excruciating physical torment.”  He puts it this way: “Ladies and gentlemen, the awful truth about hell is this: when you have spent ten billion, trillion years in that excruciating pain, you will not have lessened by one second the time you have left to spend there.” He believes the flames of the fires of hell are literal, but warns us that if the Bible is using figurative language it must actually be even more terrible, because the only comparison Jesus could make to it was of human beings being burned in fire forever and ever.

If that’s what you believe hell is, how can you make a passing remark in a sermon saying that the majority of people in this world are going to go there? Wouldn’t that stick in your throat, make you choke up, utterly devastate you and keep you from saying anything else?

How can that thought not drop you dead in your tracks? How can such an image not force you to question everything you think you know about God? How can the prospect not send you running back to the Bible to scour its pages until you’ve ripped them and torn them to shreds in a desperate effort to find some other way of understanding your “gospel”?

That is not good news, and it stupefies me to think it would be to anyone else.

I also don’t think it matches the vision of “superabounding” grace Paul sets forth in Romans 5 (see above). I can’t tell you how it all works out, but the apostle’s unambiguous point is this: whatever sin has wrought, grace accomplishes much more. Whatever terrible consequences Adam brought upon us are overwhelmed by the results of Jesus’ gracious actions.

“Even greater is God’s wonderful grace and his gift of forgiveness,” Paul exclaims. Or, as the older versions put it, “much more.” That’s what God’s grace in Jesus does — much more.

The scriptures envision that this triumph of grace will culminate in a new creation, populated by vast multitudes no person can count (Rev. 7:9). This has been the anticipation of the faithful ever since God promised Abraham descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and the grains of sand upon the seashore.

It greatly diminishes the grace of God and the great victory of our Lord Jesus Christ to argue the opposite: that only a remnant will be with God while the majority of humans are lost to him. How can anyone call this victory? How can that offer any hope worth having? It is not good news.

Even John Calvin, infamous for his strict doctrine of predestination, sees Paul’s logic here, saying that the grace of Christ “belongs to a greater number than the condemnation contracted by the first man, for if the fall of Adam had the effect of producing the ruin of many, the grace of God is much more efficacious in benefiting many, since it is granted that Christ is much more powerful to save than Adam was to destroy.”

A later Reformed scholar, C.H. Hodge agreed: “the number of the saved shall doubtless greatly exceed the number of the lost,” he wrote. Hodge suggested we might grasp the proportion by comparing the general population with the much smaller number who are imprisoned.

I suggest, along with Hans Urs von Balthasar and Richard John Neuhaus, that we might even hope (without asserting as doctrine or certainty) that in the end, perhaps all people will be saved. These things we can never know for certain. But if I’m going to place my bets, I will go with the just grace and mercy of God every time.

Ultimately, I think the problem with the standard evangelical/fundamentalist view represented by Jeffress and others is the soterian nature of the gospel they proclaim. As we have argued often, it is a revivalistic gospel for individuals, grounded most deeply in modern notions of individual choice and autonomy rather than in the gracious Kingdom vision of the Bible, which tells of the God who brings all creation under the authority of King Jesus (Eph. 1:10).

Too often we think of hope in too individualistic a manner as merely our personal salvation. But hope essentially bears on the great actions of God concerning the whole of creation. It bears on the destiny of all mankind. It is the salvation of the world that we await. In reality hope bears on the salvation of all men—and it is only in the measure that I am immersed in them that it bears on me.

• Cardinal Jean Daniélou
quoted in Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved