I never cease to be amazed at the arrogant self-righteousness and presumptuous attitude of the legalists with whom I used to associate.
An excellent example of a false prophet who presumes to enlighten the rest of us, while understanding nothing himself, is the proprietor of alittleleaven.com. This fellow is so full of ... um, "understanding" that he cannot resist sharing it with us poor, darkened souls.
Catch, for starters, his rant about Mark Kelly, who has posted a very thought-provoking online book about the doctrines of eternal security and apostasy. He shows how both are based on Bible teachings and that the biblical teaching on each position is different from the common misunderstandings called "once saved, always saved" and "losing your salvation." He makes an excellent case that a person does not have to—indeed must not—choose between the teachings. Sanctification is as much a part of salvation as regeneration, and the consequences of abandoning the process of sanctification are serious indeed.
The luminaries at alittleleaven.com and ChristianResearchNutwork, however, prefer jumping to conclusions to actually reading the entire series of posts. They rant at Kelly for what one claims is "the very real contradiction that exists between the Reformed doctrine of Eternal Security and the biblical warnings regarding apostasy and its consequences." No matter that he clearly shows there is no contradiction, once a person understands what the Bible actually teaches on both subjects.
This guy wants to have his unleavened bread and eat it too. On the one hand, he criticizes Kelly for not believing in eternal security, then he minimizes that doctrine as merely a "Reformed" position, contrasted with the "biblical" teaching of apostasy. He tries to stir up the "once saved, always saved" crowd against Kelly, while all the time he does not believe in eternal security himself! The other pharisee presents himself as a Southern Baptist pastor; his accomplice's teaching appears to be closer to that of the Church of Christ.
And he understands so little that he actually chose the metaphor of leaven for his site's name—apparently clueless about the irony.
Quoting from Kelly's post on The apostasy of legalism:
"The most insidious legalism presents itself as a defender of orthodox doctrine. After all, the Church has always had to oppose false teachers who threatened to corrupt the Faith. What could be more honorable than identifying heresy to protect the faithful? As Paul reminded the Corinthians, “A little bit of yeast makes the whole batch of dough rise.” (1 Corinthians 5:6 TEV)
"When Jesus used the metaphor of yeast, he was warning people about the legalistic teachings of the Pharisees. (Matthew 16:6) And while Paul’s warning to the Corinthians about yeast related to immoral living, he used exactly the same words to warn the Galatians about the danger of legalism. (Galatians 5:9)
"It’s a subtle deception indeed that sneaks yeast into the dough while warning about the danger of yeast."
The Purveyor of Yeast rants:
"Mark Kelly’s two posts contradicted each other so badly that we have no idea what he actually believes on the matter."
Presumably these powerhouse intellects would be incensed at an atheist who selects isolated passages from the Bible and uses them as "proof" of a contradiction, all the while ignoring a context that proves there is no contradiction. Somehow it is acceptable for them to pick and choose selections from a series of postings and throw them up as "proof" of Kelly's "confusion." What they have in fact done is demonstrate their own confusion—and lack of integrity.
A little advice for the Lovelorn: If you read a selection and don't understand, read the whole thing—and for Heaven's sake, don't broadcast your confusion on the Internet. Don't waste everyone's time by complaining about what someone else believes that you don't understand because you are too lazy or dishonest to read what he has written; take a position and explain what you think the truth is.
A man of godly courage meets untruth with truth, not with carping and criticism.