Is Jeffrey Dahmer in Heaven? What Does That Say About God?

 July 22, 1991, was a day when Americans were rudely awakened to the depths of human depravity. On that day, Milwaukee Police searched Jeffrey Dahmer’s apartment after one of his potential victims, Tracy Edwards, managed to escape and flag down a squad car. What they found was the stuff of nightmares. 

However, this was no nightmare. After all was said and done, police found the remains of eleven bodies in that two-bedroom apartment. Some of the remains were found in a 55-gallon drum filled with acid, and others were in the refrigerator. There were also severed heads found in the hall closet, and various body parts in jars throughout the apartment. Keeping things simple and without getting too graphic, Dahmer confessed to seventeen counts of murder. But he also admitted to the horrific details of the murders, which included cannibalism and necrophilia. It’s no surprise that Dahmer’s heinous deeds earned him the title of the “Milwaukee Monster.” Dahmer’s name will forever be remembered among America’s most notorious serial killers. 

Dahmer was murdered by another inmate in November of 1994. But recently, there has been renewed interest in the serial killer due to the new Netflix series Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. Personally, I parted ways with Netflix a long time ago. Sexualizing pre-teen girls and cramming a homosexual character into EVERY SINGLE SERIES was enough for me to cancel my subscription. Therefore, I won’t be watching Monster. 

The reason Monster's release sparked my interest is that, years ago, when I was in college, I had to write a paper on Jeffrey Dahmer. My research led me to a shocking conclusion that I can pretty much guarantee that Netflix won’t mention. My conclusion is that Jeffrey Dahmer became a born-again Christian while in prison and that He is currently in Heaven with the Lord. 

Before people from all sides of the issue get out the pitchforks and torches, let me clarify a couple of things. First, it is true that Roy Ratcliff, the man who baptized and discipled Dahmer while in prison, was a Church of Christ minister. Having grown up in the church of Christ prior to my conversion, I know all too well the heretical emphasis that they place on water baptism. While baptism is extremely important for a believer, scripture is incredibly clear that water baptism is “the answer of a good conscience toward God and not the putting away of the filth of the flesh” (I Peter 3:21). Baptism is an outward showing of an inward salvation. It is a public profession that we are with Christ. It’s like a wedding ring. A wedding ring in and of itself doesn’t make someone married, but it shows the world that the person wearing it is married. Baptism may be evidence of salvation, but it isn’t the vehicle of salvation. 

The bottom line is this: if someone is trusting anything other than Christ and His finished work on the cross to make them right with God and get them to Heaven, they are deceived. They aren’t saved, and they have placed their trust in a false gospel. This is Paul’s entire point in the book of Galatians. We are saved by grace through faith in Christ apart from works (Eph. 2:8-9). Water baptism, the Catholic Mass, the Mormon ordinances, good works, church membership, giving to charity, etc., cannot make us right with God. Good works can never erase our bad works. This is especially true in a legal setting, and our sin is a legal offense against a Holy God (I John 3:4). 

With all of that said, I do not think this was the case with Dahmer. Perhaps the best resource available to better understand Dahmer’s conversion was written by Roy Ratcliff himself in the book entitled Dark Journey, Deep Grace: The Story Behind a Serial Killer’s Journey to Faith. In this book, Ratcliff recalls his firsthand encounter with Dahmer, which includes their initial meeting, Dahmer’s baptism, and seven months of a weekly bible study before Dahmer was murdered. 

Unsurprisingly, Ratcliff includes about a two-page-long section that puts WAY too much emphasis on water baptism. However, by Ratcliff’s own admission, Dahmer came to saving faith in Christ while reading about the gospel in a creation science magazine that his father sent to him while in prison. Upon his conversion, Dahmer requested permission from the prison chaplain to be baptized. The chaplain then contacted a prison ministry that eventually referred Ratcliff to the task.

In the initial meeting between Ratcliff and Dahmer, Ratcliff said some pretty heretical things that could have easily confused a new Christian. But to his credit, he made sure Dahmer was sincere in his faith in Christ before he would baptize him. With the limited information that we have, I firmly believe that Dahmer was a saved man who wanted to be baptized in an effort to be obedient to God. Was Dahmer confused about some things, sure. Were there any red flags about him that I have seen in countless other young Christians? Absolutely. Was he perfect after his conversion? Not a chance. But I believe that he was a saved man. Remember that salvation takes place in an instant, but the work of sanctification in our hearts is a lifelong process.

Before I get to the main focus of this article, I want to lay out my case for why I think that Dahmer was a genuine, born-again Christian. I go into this fully understanding that I could get to heaven and be proven wrong, but we could say this same thing about pretty much anyone that we know. Here we go. 

First, Dahmer became an incessant student of the Bible. He took Scripture so seriously that he even found it extremely uncomfortable that Ratcliff used an NIV instead of a King James Bible (the NIV is more of a thought-for-thought translation). Please understand that this isn’t a debate about Bible versions (I have already written fairly extensively about that), I only mention it to prove that Dahmer took Scripture very seriously. He wanted to know what the Word of God said and to obey it. 

Second, Dahmer had genuine remorse and repentance over his sin. He never made excuses. He never sought leniency. According to Ratcliff, Dahmer stated that he wished Wisconsin still enforced capital punishment because he deserved death. He was also very distraught that there was nothing that he could do to repay the families of his victims for what he had done. This seems very reminiscent of Zacchaeus in Luke 19. Zacchaeus was a tax collector who offered to repay four times what he had stolen from the people when he came to faith in Christ.  

Third, he had clear moral convictions that he had given no thought to prior to his conversion. Apparently, there was a steady flow of pornography that made it into the prison where Dahmer was incarcerated. The inmates could tell the dirty magazines by the fact that they came wrapped in brown paper. According to Ratcliff, during one of their Bible studies, Dahmer was noticeably distraught. When Ratcliff asked him what was wrong, Dahmer responded by letting him know that he was deeply disturbed by the presence of pornography coming in with his other mail. He told Ratcliff that he used to look at porn as a means of getting amped up to go out and hunt down his victims, and he wanted no part of it. Upon hearing this, Ratcliff suggested that they ask the chaplain to make sure that no more pornography made it in with Jeffrey’s mail, and the problem was solved. This seems to be clear evidence of a regenerated person. 

Fourth, according to Ratcliff, there was an obvious joy about Dahmer that far exceeded what one would expect from a serial killer who was serving life in prison. He seemed like a free man inside the prison walls. Whereas prior to his arrest and conversion, he lived as a slave of sin. 

Fifth, Dahmer had a genuine desire to share the gospel with others. In fact, he risked his life for the sake of the gospel and Christian fellowship. Because of his status as the infamous serial killer, Dahmer had to be kept in solitary confinement for his own safety. One can only imagine the fame that would come to the person who killed Jeffrey Dahmer. But because he wanted to attend chapel and share the gospel with other inmates, he requested that the guards grant him greater access to the general inmate population. They granted his wish. 

Not long before he was murdered, he was assaulted towards the end of a chapel service. An inmate tried to slash his throat with a razor blade that had been taped to the end of a toothbrush. Fortunately for Dahmer, the tape didn’t hold, and the ordeal left him with only a scratch. Even this did not deter Dahmer. But in November of 1994, he and a couple of other inmates were cleaning a bathroom when one of them grabbed a barbell and hit Dahmer over the head repeatedly until he died. Is it too far-fetched to say that Dahmer was a martyr for Christ? Maybe so, maybe not. Keep in mind that Dahmer would have never been in that position if he had not requested to be with the other inmates in order to share the gospel. 

Lastly, and I'll move on (my church knows that this statement is meaningless). Dahmer was not ashamed of the gospel of Christ or biblical trut,h even on a big stage. Watch this short clip of an interview that Dahmer and his father did with Stone Phillips from prison. Ironically, this aired the day after Dahmer’s murder.  https://youtu.be/ZCuGLC3FABI

I do not expect everyone to agree with me and I’m completely fine with that. Again, I could be wrong. The thrust of this article isn’t to argue with those who say that Dahmer could be in hell. I’m here to argue with those who say that he can’t be in Heaven. The truth is that the situation with Dahmer teaches us a whole lot about the gospel. The mere possibility that such a monster could be forgiven and enter Heaven with God forces us to ask some very important questions. Can somebody like Dahmer be forgiven? What does this say about God? Is he unjust for letting off such a predator? What about his victims? Surely all of them didn’t know Christ. Is it conceivable that some of his victims went to hell and their killer ended up in Heaven? Does this make God unfair? Fortunately, the Bible has the answer to all of these questions. 

As humans, how does God see us? Does He look down from Heaven and marvel at our good works, our charitable donations, church attendance, or volunteer work? Is he impressed by our careers, education, income, or athletic accomplishments? Many may be surprised to find out that the answer is a resounding NO. In fact, He sees us all as criminals, every last one of us (we may have more in common with Dahmer than we thought). Not once in Scripture from the fall of Adam in Genesis three until the end of Revelation does he say a good thing about humankind. Romans three probably gives the Lord’s clearest diagnoses, “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they have become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes….For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:1-18, 20). 

It’s not just that people make mistakes; they do bad things on purpose because they want to. Take an honest walk through the Ten Commandments and see how you fare. If you have ever told a lie (all of us have, and not just white lies), that makes you a liar. If you have lusted in your heart after another person (we all have), you are an adulterer at heart. If you have stolen (we all have at some point in our lives), you are a thief. If you have taken God’s name in vain in any form (we all have), that makes you a blasphemer. I could continue, but I think that the reader gets the point. Our righteousness is a stench in the nostrils of God. If we stood before God and were judged strictly based on the Ten Commandments, all of us would be guilty and on our way to hell.

But wait a second, if we are all condemned sinners in the eyes of God (and we are), then does God see no difference between a Jeffrey Dahmer and, say, a Mother Theresa? For all practical purposes, the answer is no. Certainly, there are different degrees of sin, but at the end of the day, the wages of sin ultimately lead to death (Romans 6:23). Ratcliff stated that he heard repeatedly through the years that, “If Jeffrey Dahmer is in Heaven, then I don’t want to go.” My response to that is, if that’s the way you feel, then you don’t have to worry about it. 

 

This is what we absolutely have to get about the holy nature of God. That sick, disgusted, angry feeling that we get from hearing about Dahmer’s heinous crimes; God is a trillion times angrier and more disgusted about our sin than we are about Dahmer’s. Just because we aren’t disgusted by our own sin doesn’t mean that God isn’t. 

This brings us another question. If God is so Holy that He hates and must punish sin, and we’re all sinners, then how does anyone make it to Heaven? How can God pardon any of us without Himself becoming unjust? I mean, judges don’t just let criminals off Scott free, do they? No, they don’t. This is where the cross comes in. 

God is so Holy that He must punish sin, but He is so loving that He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into the world to pay for our sin. Christ was born of the Virgin Mary. Therefore, He walked this earth as fully God and fully man. Christ lived the sinless life that we could never live. He fulfilled the just demands of God’s law. And when Jesus laid down His life on the cross, God the Father placed our sins in Jesus Christ and then poured His wrath out upon Him for that sin (Isaiah 53, I Peter 2:24). In other words, God the Father punished Jesus for the sin that we committed! At the cross, God’s justice was satisfied, and His love was magnified, so that God can forgive sinners on the basis of Christ and His finished work with Himself becoming unjust. Christ paid the penalty for our sin. Nothing was swept under the rug. He promises to save any and all who repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to cleanse them from sin (John 3:16, Romans 10:9-13). 

What Does it Say About God If Jeffrey Dahmer is in Heaven? Let’s just say for the sake of argument that Dahmer is in Heaven. What do the heavenly hosts think as they see him walking the streets of gold? Do they think, “God is such a perverse judge, how in the world could he have let the likes of him in here?” Do they think, “I worked so hard to get here, and then someone like him makes it in?” No. If Dahmer is in Heaven (and I think that he is), he is a walking, talking trophy of the grace of God. The Heavenly hosts marvel at such a Savior, the one who wore the sins of such as Dahmer! The one who died for those sins and rose victorious three days later! What a Savior, that He can save even the likes of Jeffrey Dahmer! What does it say about God if Dahmer is in Heaven? It says that He is an almighty Savior who can descend to the lowest hell and save the most depraved of sinners. No one is outside of the reach of God’s grace.

On the Day of Dahmer’s Funeral two sisters of one of Dahmer’s victims came to the service. They were so angry and bitter. They weren’t even sure why they came, maybe to bury their hate, possibly to find answers. During the service, Roy Ratcliff rehearsed Dahmer’s conversion and talked of their friendship. After the service, the two sisters came up to him and said, “We came here bitter and angry at Jeffrey, but after hearing you talk about him, we believe that God has forgiven him, and we have too.” 

“If a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought, anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing, and I’ve since come to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is truly God, and I believe that I, as well as everyone else, will be accountable to Him.”  Jeffrey Dahmer

The Multi-layered Problem of Abortion in America

    

    The year was 1953. The average cost of fuel was 28 cents per gallon, while the average cost of a house was just slightly above $18,000. The post war economy was booming and the vast majority of the men went to work to support their family, while 2/3 of the women stayed home and raised their children. Prayer and Bible reading were still allowed in public schools. School shootings were unthinkable, and the teacher's worst complaint was kids chewing gum in the classroom. 

    To be sure, we don't need to be disillusioned by thoughts of the "good ole days." The 50's definitely had issues, namely in the area of segregation and Jim Crow laws in the South. But one thing is undeniable, whether white or black, the family unit was the bedrock of society in America. More than three out of every four children grew up with both their father and mother in the home. So it comes as no surprise that no one was out passionately protesting in favor of abortion, or holding up signs saying that abortion is a human right, or "my body my choice". At best they wouldn't have been taken seriously. At worst they would have been seen as crazy. It would have been unthinkable in the mind of the American family. 

    However, 1953 was the year that everything changed. In December of that year Hugh Hefner released the first issue of Playboy magazine. The first issue featured Marilyn Monroe and quickly sold out of the 50,000 copies of the original printing. Hefner didn't even date the magazine because he wasn't sure that there would even be a second issue. He didn't know if it would sell, or if there would be a public backlash against such open lewdness. He had no idea that his magazine would become a multi-million dollar empire. 

    Now, I'm not so naïve as to believe that sexual sin wasn't taking place prior to Hugh Hefner. It was. However, it wasn't celebrated. Pre-marital sex was seen as taboo and immoral. Hefner changed all of that. His whole life was dedicated to presenting a persona of the "bachelor life." Playboy changed sex from an intimate, procreative union between a husband and wife into a pleasure act. If you get hungry, you eat. If you're in the mood, you have sex. Sacred wedlock was being challenged by a doctrine of care free, commitment free, "guilt free" sex. 

    It is no coincidence that less than a decade after the release of Playboy that the sexual revolution of the 60's blew in like a hurricane. All of this, coupled with the release of the first FDA approved birth control pill in 1960 was a perfect storm. Not only were people buying into the idea of commitment free sex, but now they could do it without the fear of unwanted pregnancy. "The pill" changed the game in that it separated sex from procreation. The idea of getting married, having children, and raising a family was becoming more archaic by the year. 

    But as we know, the pill isn't full proof. This created an avalanche of unwanted pregnancies. Babies are the enemy of the bachelor life. Babies mean responsibility, dedication, commitment, financial burden and sacrifice. That simply can't be tolerated in such a loose society. So what could be done about that? Enter Roe. 

    I keep using the word "coincidence", but I think that the reader is clearly seeing the sequence here. But it is no coincidence that immediately following the sexual revolution of the 60's that Roe vs. Wade was passed in 1973, making abortion a constitutional right. Prior to that time, such a legal opinion would have been scorned as pointless and evil. But thanks to the sexual revolution, abortion was now in high demand. There is no doubt that cultural pressure, and the new epidemic of fatherless babies played a major role in the SCOTUS' decision. 

    A few facts about Roe need to be pointed out. First, the whole case was based on a lie. The attorneys for Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) claimed that she was pregnant due to being gang raped. Roe admitted years later that this was a flat out lie. Her attorneys played on the heart strings of the SCOTUS. How could she be expected to carry and give birth to the child of her rapist? Even is she had been raped, and even if SCOTUS concluded that Roe should not have to carry the child of her rapist, it doesn't follow that abortion on demand should become a constitutional right. (A side note; because SCOTUS took so long to pass Roe vs Wade, Roe gave birth to a daughter and gave her up for adoption. No one knows where she is or even if she is alive. No one even knows if she or the adoptive parents know that she is Roe's child.) 

    Even in this brief history of the sexual changes in the U.S., it is clear that abortion is a multi-layered problem. It is also clear that abortion is evil. There is no way to sugarcoat it. Everyone knows that it is the death of a baby in the womb, a baby with its own DNA and heartbeat. Abortion is a crime against nature itself. A mother's natural instinct is to risk her life if need be, in order to protect her children, not to kill her own flesh and blood while in the womb. 

    It is for this reason, among many others that we can rejoice that Roe vs Wade was reversed this past Friday after almost 50 years. Even apart from its sinister implications, Roe vs Wade was just a bad law. Regardless of where someone falls on the issue of abortion, we should all agree that we don't want the SCOTUS reading things into law that simply aren't there. The word "abortion" isn't found anywhere in the constitution or the Bill of Rights. Nor is it implied. And nobody would attempt to claim that our founding fathers could have envisioned such a thing. When the judicial branch begins to invent law instead of simply interpreting it, we're all in trouble. 

    The reversal of Roe vs Wade is a huge step in the right direction, but it's extremely naïve to think that the battle is now over. The question is, what do we do now? I will attempt to answer this question with another question, why is abortion so celebrated and revered? Think about it. Even if a woman had an unwanted pregnancy and she went to get an abortion, why not just do it and keep it hush hush? The reason is that in the last 70 years, the culture has bought into the idea that marriage and motherhood are forms of slavery, and abortion offers a way to break those chains. Women now believe that it is honorable to work for an employer for 40 plus hours a week, but slavery to serve her husband and children. Abortion also provides freedom for men to be promiscuous without the fear of having to step up and be a father. In this way abortion is seen as liberating and empowering. 

    This is why we can't simply trust the reversal of Roe vs Wade to end abortion in this country. The depravity of man will find a way. Abortion is a multi-layered problem that requires a multi-faceted approach. So again I ask, what is the church supposed to do now? For starters, we need to fall on our face and repent for over a century of apathy. The reason that the church is losing the culture war is because we're the only side that hasn't figured out that we're actually in a war. This war can't be won at the ballet box alone. Again, we must change the culture. 

    We must ask God to help us do the following things. First, Christian men must grow a spine and be willing to go against the flow of culture. Single men need to respect women and treat them as sisters. Commit to honoring your future wife by saving yourself for marriage. Refuse to be a slave to pornography and commit yourself to purity by God's grace. Married men need to be the prime example of faithfulness, commitment and love towards their spouse. We need to be the priest of our home and lead our families in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. We need to love and cherish our daughters so that they won't fall for the first goofball that pays them some attention. There is a famine of strong, Godly men in this country. We need to make family great again. Make marital sex great again. Make church attendance, family devotion, and public service to the Lord great again. 

    Single women need to respect themselves and be confident of their value in Christ. If a man isn't willing to commit his life to you in marriage, respect you, love you, work a job and care for your needs, and be a father to your children, don't go to bed with him. Married women need to teach their daughters that the most empowering thing that a woman can do is to raise her children. It’s unthinkable that the church has bought into the feminist idea of women keeping up with men to the point that they have come to feel ashamed about literally the only thing that women can do, that men can’t, bringing life into the world. In all of human history, there has never been a single man that has given birth to a child. What greater place of power and influence could there be? There has never been a king, president, doctor or anyone else that didn’t have a mother who brought them into this world. 

    It would have been unthinkable even a hundred years ago for a woman to hire someone to murder their children in the womb for the purposes of independence, career or anything else. So either today's feminists have it completely wrong, or they are literally the only ones in history to get it right. I’m going with the former. Only the modern feminists would celebrate a woman for working forty plus hours a week for an employer, and yet criticize that same woman for choosing to have children, and opting to raise them and serve her husband instead. 

    I will say it again. WE MUST CHANGE THE CULTURE. It won't happen over night. But we must make steps to call a spade a spade, live God's truth and defeat the lies of the enemy. Think about it. Our culture glorifies laziness, lewdness and a lack of moral courage as "empowering". We must change the narrative. How did this country come to the conclusion that commitment free sex is empowering, but committed marital love is weak and undesirable?  Why is sacrifice seen as slavery, but selfishness is seen as courageous? Why is sacrificing your own child seen as heroic, while sacrificing for your child is seen as degrading? This backwardness is highlighted well in a recent interview with Stevie Nicks. Think about the insanity of what is being said here. 

    In a recent interview with The Guardian, famous Fleetwood Mac singer and abortion rights advocate, Stevie Nicks, talked about the early days of her career when she was dating Eagles singer, Don Henley. She became pregnant in 1979 and chose to have an abortion. This is what she had to say about that event, “If I had not had that abortion, I’m pretty sure there would have been no Fleetwood Mac. There’s just no way that I could have had a child then, working as hard as we worked constantly. And there were a lot of drugs, I was doing a lot of drugs … I would have had to walk away.” Earlier in this same interview she stated that “Abortion rights were my generation’s fight” The incredible irony in these statements is that Nicks is bragging about her empowerment, based on something that she couldn’t do. She openly admits that she could not raise a child because she was a slave to drugs, and to her career. This isn’t a story of empowerment, it’s an admission of weakness. The story would have been much more powerful and praise worthy if Nicks had gotten clean and been a mother to her child. What a story of empowerment that would have been. However, instead of taking a chance of sacrificing her career, she chose to sacrifice her child on the altar of her career. 

    Forty one years later, the glory days of Fleetwood Mac are long gone. In fact, it’s been almost two decades since they released a studio album. Now at age 72, Nicks lives alone and childless in her Santa Monica mansion, when she could be enjoying a house full of grandchildren.  

    The mistake that Nicks and the feminist movement make is that they equate empowerment with the ability to make a choice, instead of the moral fortitude to make the right choice. The renowned German philosopher, G.W.F. Hegel wrote extensively about this form of “empowerment”. He said, “The common man thinks that he is free when he is allowed to act arbitrarily, but this very arbitrariness implies that he is not free.” In other words, the truly empowered person doesn’t need permission or popular support in order to make their decisions. Their choices are based on internal convictions, rather than external circumstances. This is very telling, considering that the very essence of bondage is to be controlled by external circumstances. Yet, feminists have found a way to champion this bondage as a form of empowerment. Hegel went on to say, “A person who does something perverse gives the greatest prominence to his particularity. The rationale is the high road which everyone follows and no one stands out from the rest.” Put into modern terms, if the decisions that we make are dictated by immediate gratification and the easy way out, or if our movement is backed by the media, the vast majority of academia, and society as a whole, then we’re not the resistance. To walk down the smooth path in lockstep with popular opinion regardless of its morality, and then claim the empowerment status of a martyred rebel is the epitome of arrogance and hypocrisy. This is real bondage. Again, we have to change the narrative and promote healthy, honorable goals. 

    Yes, we need vote for serious pro-life (anti-abortion) leaders. Yes, we need to hold those leaders accountable. Those things are great, but if that's all that we do, we are just cutting the head off of the weed. WE MUST CHANGE THE CULTURE. As a church we must get out of the four walls and get busy preaching the gospel. The gospel is the only thing that has the power to change hearts and change the culture. The church also needs to consider ways in which we can help women, adoption, supplies, support, etc. Let's not spike the football over the reversal of Roe vs Wade and not be willing to help. Rise up Church! Let's be the church. Abortion is a multi-layered problem, the church needs a multi-faceted approach. Be the resistance. Save yourself for marriage, have babies, raise them in church and preach the gospel. The Biblical family must make a come back or we are fighting a losing battle. 

 

The Pursuit of Happiness in an Unhappy World

                                                       

 Introduction

Happiness, we all want it. People all over the world can take opposing sides when it comes to just about any issue, but not happiness. We are all united in our desire to be happy. The question is how can happiness be achieved? This is yet another issue on which people find themselves divided, what makes a person happy. 

One thing is for sure, a person’s worldview will dictate their pursuit of happiness. It will also greatly influence the way in which counselors instruct their clients as to how to find happiness in this unhappy world. Secular psychology teaches a “doctrine which fervently insists that man is the highest being, the central event in all of history.” In this case, the client would most likely be instructed to dismiss any concept of guilt, sin, or repentance. Instead, they would be encouraged to pursue all of their heart’s desires as long as it doesn’t bring harm to others. To the secularist, the pursuit of individual happiness is the greatest good. 

In complete contrast to secularism, the Biblical worldview holds that God Himself is the highest being and that our happiness comes from our pursuit of Him. Dr. Larry Crabb writes;

     “The wonderful truth is that when we devote all of our energies to the task of becoming what Christ wants us to be, He fills us with joy unspeakable and a peace far surpassing what the world offers. I must firmly and consciously by an act of my will reject the goal of becoming happy and adopt the goal of becoming more like the Lord. The result will be happiness for me as I learn to dwell at God’s right hand in fellowship with Christ.”

The secular worldview also holds to the belief that people are nothing more than the sum total of their parts. Humans are only material and therefore have no eternal soul. Because of this line of thinking, many secularists reject theology as a valuable tool in counseling, or the pursuit of happiness. However, the truth is that everyone has a theology of some kind. There isn’t a single person who doesn’t have some sort of moral code of what they perceive to be right or wrong. All people have an innate sense of justice and injustice. Everyone attempts to make sense of their suffering. So the issue isn’t whether or not theology plays a role in how people view problems and suffering in their lives, the question is what does their theology teach and how can that theology affect their happiness. Dr. Norman Wright said; 

      “A person’s theology will affect how he or she copes with a crisis. Our lives are based upon our theology, yet so many people are frightened by that word. Our belief in God and how we perceive God is a reflection of our theology. Those who believe in the sovereignty and caring nature of God have a better basis from which to approach life.”

Dr. Wright and his wife cared for their mentally retarded son until he died at the young age of twenty two. Mrs. Wright also battled cancer for several years (she eventually died of brain cancer in 2016, five years after the publication of this book), so he isn’t speaking from an ivory tower. Their theology and faith in God got them through those excruciating times.

The purpose of this paper is to define and describe biblical salvation, as well as to prove that Christian theology provides the best and only foundation by which to find true and lasting happiness. A biblical worldview is the only coherent avenue by which to understand anthropology, hamartiology and soteriology. Man isn’t simply a machine that must be repaired, but a living soul that must be brought into a right relationship with the Creator. 

The Theology of Salvation

Biblical terms like “save” and “salvation” beg the question, “saved from what”. The answer is very simple, we need to be saved from the penalty and power of our sin. “Sin must be understood from a theocentric or God-centered standpoint. At its core, sin is a violation of the Creator-creature relationship. Man only exists because God made him, and man is in every sense obligated to serve his Creator.” The word “sin” is actually a legal term because “sin is the transgression of the law” (I John 3:4).  We have all broken the law of a holy God, which means that our sin is a legal offense against Him. This explains why many of the salvific words in scripture are also legal terms. Justification, adoption, atonement, propitiation, imputation and redemption are all legal transactions (more on these later). 

This also raises some other questions (good theology comes from asking questions and finding biblical answers), are all people sinners, and if so, why. The sad reality is that every single person is born a sinner. David said, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” (Psalm 51:5). “There is none righteous, no, not one” (Romans 3:10). “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23).  According to the ferociously holy standard of God, there is no such thing as a good person. In fact, everyone is born a slave to their sinful flesh. “They that are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:8)

The reason that we are all born sinners with a rebellious bend toward God is because of the sin of Adam, the very first man created by God. Man was created in the imago dei (the image of God). But when Adam disobeyed God and ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he died spiritually, along with the entire human race after him. The imago dei was greatly marred in mankind. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” (Romans 5:12). This is known as the doctrine of original sin. Original sin isn’t a reference to the actual sin of Adam, rather it is the effect of that sin upon his descendants. Sin and death passed to everyone. At face value, some have called into question the fairness of original sin. However, Adam acted as our federal head. He was our representative. In other words, we would have disobeyed God in the garden just like he did. That’s why “in Adam all die” (I Corinthians 15:22). 

Original sin is proven by the fact that everyone dies, including babies. “For the wages of sin is death.” (Romans 5:12). If everyone was born neutral and without a sin nature, then surely some would have chosen not to sin against God, but such is clearly not the case. Murder, rape, drugs, war, prisons, cemteries, genecide, slavery, child abuse, etc; the worldwide results of sin and evil are so obvious that everyone is forced to wrestle with these issues and come up with some type of answers as to the origins and prevalence of evil and suffering. 

This is where secular psychology falls flat on its face. Secularism has no coherent answers to the problems of evil and suffering. The negative fallout from this cannot be overstated. If humanity's greatest problem is misdiagnosed, then perceived cure will be wrong. J.C. Ryle wrote; 

“There are very few errors and false doctrines of which the beginning may not be traced up to unsound views about the corruption of human nature. Wrong views of the disease will always bring with them wrong views of the remedy. Wrong views of the corruption of human nature will always carry with them wrong views of the grand antidote and cure of that corruption.”

Imagine a scenario in which a man comes in for counseling. After the greetings and the formalities are over, the man admits that he is greatly depressed. Upon being further questioned by the counselor, the man admits that he is sexually attracted to children. He wants to act out his fantasies, but he is afraid that he will get caught and this has led to his depression. 

In this scenario, the modus operandi for the biblical counselor will be very simple. They will take the Word of God and show this man that his thoughts are evil and sinful in the eyes of a Holy God, that there will be serious consequences for acting out on his fantasies, and that God will judge him accordingly. The counselor could then take him to the cross, show him his need for the new birth in salvation, and explain to him that nothing short of Christ will satisfy him.  

On the other hand, the secular counselor has a big problem. For starters, they have no objective standard by which to call anything good or evil. If they try to claim that sexual activity with children is wrong, it begs the question, wrong by what standard. If the counselor attempts to claim that sex with children is wrong by the laws of that society, the simple reductio would be to bring up examples like the Holocaust or Slavery in America. As a society, Nazi Germany decided that it was an honorable thing for Jews, Gypsies and the mentally handicapped to be killed. The Nazis called them “useless eaters” and “life unworthy of living.” America as a society thought that the slavery of Africans was a good thing. Later on when slavery was outlawed, the South still practiced Jim Crow laws that dehumanized black people. Were these things morally right just because they were legalized and practiced by society? Honesty requires us to answer “no”. Consistency requires that we have an absolute, objective standard by which to do so. This isn’t a problem for the Biblical counselor. The same God that wrote a moral law within our hearts, also wrote it on papyri. 

Once someone comes to grips with the fact that their biggest problem is that their sin has separated them from God and that their idols can never satisfy, then the solution becomes much more beautiful. God is so Holy that He must punish sin. But God is so loving that He sent His Son, Jesus Christ (the Second Person of the Godhead) to shoulder our punishment for us. Christ was born of the virgin Mary. So He walked the earth as the God-man, fully divine and fully human. He lived the sinless life that God’s law requires, the life that we could never live. He died on the cross, bearing our sin, and taking the wrath for that sin so that we might be saved and reconciled to God. He rose from the dead on the third day, which proved that God the Father was completely satisfied with Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. The Substitutionary death of Christ is good news for sinners because they can “know with certainty that they will never be punished for their sins.”

On the part of the sinner, the only thing that they must do in order to be saved from their sin is repent and trust in Christ and His finished work for salvation (Mark 1:15, I Thessalonians 1:9). They must be willing to turn from their sin and dead works in order to follow Christ. Repentance and faith are two inseparable sides of the same coin; they occur  simultaneously at conversion. 

Abundant Life in Christ 

While man’s responsibility in salvation is rather simple, God’s part in salvation is a bit more complex. There are several things involved in salvation that must be examined. One important thing to remember is that while there is a heaven to gain and a hell to shun upon death, salvation in Christ is much more than a ticket to Heaven. The benefits of the cross are both eternal and immediate. If someone views salvation in Christ only as a means of gaining entrance into Heaven, then they won’t understand what the cross means for them right now. The only way to truly be happy and free in this life is to understand our position in Jesus Christ. We will now examine the different aspects of Christ’s work on the cross and what they mean for those who are in Christ. 

Imputation- Imputation means to “charge to one’s account, or to lay to one’s charge.” There are three types of imputation in scripture; Adam’s sin imputed to us, our sins imputed to Christ and Christ’s righteousness imputed to us. Adam’s sin was imputed to the human race when he fell in the Garden of Eden (Romans 5:12). Our sin was imputed to Christ on the cross (I Peter 2:24). Christ’s righteousness is imputed to a person when they are brought to believe the gospel, by grace, through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9). What this means for the sinner that he is clothed in the righteousness of Christ. This is why the sinner is guaranteed to go to Heaven. It’s also why we don’t have to bear the burden of our own sin, or the pressure of being “good enough” for God. Christ was good enough in our stead.  

Atonement- To atone means to “cover over, usually with a blood sacrifice.” This has to do with the second kind of imputation. Christ atoned for our sin at the cross. This principle is seen even as early as Genesis chapter three. Immediately after Adam and Eve fell, the Lord in His grace sacrificed an animal (possibly a lamb?) and covered Adam and Eve’s nakedness and shame with the skins of that animal. This was a picture of the ultimate and final sacrifice that Christ would make on the cross as the Lamb of God. Historically, the atonement is known as the great exchange, Christ exchanged our sin for His righteousness. “He was made sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” (II Corinthians 5:21). This means that for those who are in Christ, their sins are covered and forgotten, never to be brought up again by God. 

Justification- is “the act of pronouncing righteous, an acquittal.” Justification deals with the third kind of imputation, Christ’s righteousness applied to those that believe. This means that the sinner will be presented righteous before God at the judgment. However, justification is also the bedrock on which people can find happiness and wholeness in this life. Justification defeats the false belief that “I must meet certain standards in order to feel good about myself.” Justification frees us from the performance trap and the fear of failure. “God has given us a secure self-worth totally apart from our ability to perform. We have been justified, placed in a right standing before God through Christ’s death on the cross, which paid for our sins. But God didn’t stop with our forgiveness; He also granted us the very righteousness of Christ.” From our justified position, we have the freedom to serve the Lord with a grateful, forgiven heart. In other words, we don’t work in order to save ourselves, we work because we are saved. 

Reconciliation- means “to change from enmity to friendship, to reconcile.” For those who don’t know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, they are at enmity with God (John 3:18, 36). To live a life alienated from the God of the universe is an empty, meaningless life. However, Christ has reconciled us to God by His death and resurrection (Romans 5:10). This takes us from being an enemy of God to being a friend of God. It also frees us from the false belief that “I must be approved by certain others to feel good about myself (self-worth = performance + other’s opinions).” If someone is convinced that they are fully approved of God through the work of Christ, then they won’t be devastated by the negative opinions of others. Through reconciliation to God, people can overcome the fear of rejection. 

Propitiation- is “an appeasing” of God’s wrath. Many people, even Christian’s think it’s a virtuous thing to beat themselves up about everything. However, the truth is that when someone continuously beats themselves up over things that Christ was already beaten for, it’s really a subtle way of saying that the cross isn’t enough. When a person understands that Christ expiated their sin and took God’s wrath in their place it releases them from the false belief that “those who fail are unworthy of love and deserve to be punished.” This attitude is a breeding ground for self-condemnation. It is true that our sin has made us unworthy of God’s love, and worthy of judgment. But because of the propitiation of Christ we have been made worthy. “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” (I John 4:10). Christ can set a person free of the fear of God’s punishment through His propitiation. 

Regeneration- is “the spiritual change wrought in man by the Holy Spirit, by which he becomes the possessor of a new life.” Regeneration is the supernatural work of God in which He causes us to be born again, giving us a new heart and calling us to faith in Christ. In regeneration, God doesn’t make bad people into better people, He makes the spiritually dead to live. Regeneration destroys the lie that “I am what I am, I cannot change, I am hopeless.” The Apostle Paul gives such great clarity as to what regeneration accomplishes in the heart and life of a believer; “For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” (Titus 3:3-7). Regeneration makes us a new creature in Christ (II Corinthians 5:17) and sets us free from the shame of our past.

Conclusion

For the Biblical counselor, both man’s greatest problem and man’s greatest need are clear. People are great sinners who need a great savior. This isn’t the end all, be all, but it must begin here. A person who is in Christ is a new creature. They have gone from death to life, sinners to saints, from enemies of God to friends of God, and even adopted into God’s family. This foundation provides an endless source of joy, comfort, forgiveness, acceptance, hope and confidence in death. Even in our shortcomings, God promises to sanctify us by making us more like Him (Philippians 1:6)

The secularist can offer no such hope. They have no objective standard for truth, good or evil. They can’t even offer hope or help beyond this life. The motto of an honest secularist is “eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” And while we can learn some valuable things from secular psychology, we cannot start with their humanistic foundation. 

Perhaps no one encapsulates this healing and freedom in Christ anymore than Charles Spurgeon when he said; 

     “Oh, there is, in contemplating Christ, a balm for every wound! In musing on the Father, there is a quietus for every grief and in the influence of the Holy Spirit there is a balsam for every sore. Would you lose your sorrows? Would you drown your cares? Then go plunge yourself in the Godhead’s deepest sea; be lost in His immensity; and you shall come forth as from a couch of rest, refreshed and invigorated. I know nothing which can so comfort the soul, so calm the swelling billows of grief and sorrow; so speak peace to the winds of trial, as a devout musing upon the subject of the Godhead.”

Bibliography 

Beeke, Joel and Smalley, Paul M., Reformed Systematic Theology, Volume 2: Man and Christ (Wheaton, IL, Crossway, 2020)

Berenbaum, M. "T4 Program." Encyclopedia Britannica, September 10, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/event/T4-Program.

Crabb, Larry, Effective Biblical Counseling: A Model for Helping Caring Christians Become Capable Counselors (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1977 )

MacArthur, John , Mayhue, Richard, eds. Biblical Doctrine; A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (Wheaton, IL, Crossway, 2017)

McGee, Robert S., The Search For Significance (Houston, TX, Rapha Publishing, 1990)

Spencer,  Duane Edward, TULIP; The Five Points of Calvinism in the Light of Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Publishing, 1979)

Spurgeon, Charles, The Immutability of God; New Park Street Pulpit, Volume 1 (preached January 7, 1855)

Thayer's Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody, MA, Hendrickson, 1996)

Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN, Thomas Nelson, 1996)

 Wright, Norman, The Complete Guide to Crisis and Trauma Counseling (Bloomington, MN, Bethany House Publishers, 2011)

The New Unger's Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988)

The Weakness of Retribution Theology

 

    Retribution Theology is a term that few people know, but it's a principle that everyone recognizes and understands. In simple terms, RT is the belief that people ultimately get what they deserve. Good things come to good people and bad things come to bad people. I like to refer to RT as the "just desserts syndrome". If someone gets cancer or some other horrible disease, they must have done something to deserve it. If a person goes through a horrible tragedy such as losing a child or their house burning to the ground, they just got what was coming to them. Sadly, even many professing Christians believe such ideologies. 

    This subject is deeply personal for my wife and I, due to the fact that almost three years ago my wife developed a migrainous headache, accompanied with extreme back and body aches. She has suffered with this pain in varying degrees every second of every day since then. This condition has taken us all over the country seeking medical help, spending thousands, and moving 2,000 miles away to a drier climate that for a while helped her with her migraine triggers (although since August, even this relief has disappeared). 

    Over the past three years, we've had a lot of varying advice from well meaning people. We've been told that if we just had enough faith that my wife would be healed, or that anointing her with oil and having the elders of the church pray over her is a guaranteed fix. Someone even told us that the Lord's Supper is a "meal that heals". However, without a doubt, the most common thing that people have said to my wife actually comes in the form of a question, "Do you have any secret sin in your life that you haven't repented of?" There are actually a handful of people that bring up this subject almost every time they see or talk to my wife. Why? It's because their theology will not allow for suffering that isn't a direct result of a person's sin. Hence, RT. 

    Both the Old and New Testaments are full of examples of people who believed in RT. In fact, the Jews were (and are) notorious for believing in this error ridden theology. My mind goes immediately to John chapter nine when Jesus and the disciples came upon a man that had been blind from his birth. The ever inquisitive disciples asked Jesus, "who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" In other words, what did he do to deserve this? This is textbook Retribution Theology. 

    We find another example of this mindset in Mark chapter two, with the healing of the paralytic. Jesus was preaching inside a house that was packed with listeners. The paralytic man had four faithful friends (who obviously didn't believe in RT, praise God) that had hauled him up to the roof, tore open a hole and lowered him down to where Jesus was. When Jesus healed this man, He chose His words very purposefully. He said to the man, "Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee." Why did Jesus say this? Well, for one reason the Jews and Pharisees would have automatically associated this man's condition with his sin. He must have done something to deserve this, but Jesus can forgive sin. The Pharisees responded to this by giving their most intelligent quote in the NT (they didn't say it, but only thought it), "Only God can forgive sins". Jesus essentially smiled at them and said, right you are. This was the second reason for choosing His words so carefully, to prove that He is God in the flesh. 

    Who can forget the story of Job in the OT. Within a very short space of time, Job lost his children, his wealth and his health. His three friends traveled from afar to come and comfort him. To their credit they sat with Job and kept their mouth shut for seven days before they spoke to Job. But it all went South when the conversation started. All three of them told Job that his trials were a direct result of his sin. Eliphaz broke the ice on this subject by saying to Job, "Remember, I pray thee, who ever perished, being innocent? or where were the righteous cut off? Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same." In other words, I don't know exactly why, but I know that you deserve this Job. 

    Some might be reading this and think, well it doesn't seem like that big of a deal, especially since there seems to be at least some element of truth involved. Retribution Theology is a really big deal. For the rest of this blog I will attempt to prove that RT is unscriptural and damaging for the following reasons. RT confuses the categories of consequences for sin, and trials from God. Retribution Theology has absolutely no room for grace. People who believe in RT will find absolutely no peace or anchor in their own storms because they will constantly be heaping self blame and guilt upon themselves. Lastly, RT will greatly effect how we view others in their suffering and how we minister to them. 

Retribution Theology Confuses the Categories of Consequence vs. Trial 

    It is an undeniable fact that ultimately, all suffering goes back to Adam's sin in the garden. Because of his disobedience, sin and death entered the world, resulting in the fall of the entire human race (Romans 5:12). Every time that we drive down the road in our car, we are constantly reminded of this truth every time that we pass a hospital, prison, nursing home or cemetery. The consequences of sin are all around us. It's also true that our personal sins have consequences. It is clear that drinking alcohol can lead to liver damage (and a host of other problems). Adultery can lead to divorce and a broken home. A loose sexual lifestyle can lead to STD's and/or unwanted pregnancy. All sin equals death. In many cases we can find clear links between sin and corresponding consequences, and this truth should not be avoided. However, even in these cases, grace must be extended. We too are sinners, and Christ extended grace to us with the command and the invitation to repent and believe the gospel. 

    Think about how Christ dealt with Matthew the hated tax collector, the woman taken in adultery, the woman at the well, Zacchaeus, Mary Magdalene, the thief on the cross, etc. In fact, you won't find a single time in Scripture where Christ dealt harshly with sinners, not once. He was honest. He never made light of sin or offered up excuses for immoral behavior. He told them to repent, but He was always loving and gracious. The only time that Christ got harsh with anyone was when He went off on the religious Pharisees who thought that they were above any kind of reproach. As we have seen, the Pharisees reeked of Retribution Theology. 

    Clearly, we understand the correlation between sin and consequence. However, is everything that we suffer as Christians a direct result of our sin? The answer is a resounding "NO". In the case of the blind man in John chapter nine, Jesus gave a clear answer as to why he was born blind. He told His disciples, "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him." Christ wasn't advocating sinless perfection among this man or his parents. He was saying that they hadn't done anything specifically to deserve him being blind. This is an astounding statement from Christ. He essentially said that, I made Him that way so that when I passed by this way, he would bring me glory when I heal Him. 

    There may be some that cringe at the thought that God would create people less than "normal" for His glory, but the Scriptures are clear. When God told Moses to command Pharaoh to let His people go, Moses made the excuse that he wasn't a good speaker. The Lord responded with a rhetorical question "Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? Have not I the Lord?" (Exodus 4:11). Ask the blind man if he got a raw deal. The Lord healed him and used him greatly. His story was forever etched in Holy Writ, and now He is seeing Christ and the splendors of Heaven for all eternity! His blindness had nothing to do with his personal sin and everything to do with the sovereign plan of God. This is the difference between a consequence for sin, and a trial from God. Retribution Theology fails horribly in recognizing this distinction. 

There is Absolutely No Place For Grace in Retribution Theology

    Let's be honest, if we start talking about life in terms of what we deserve, we all deserve eternity in hell due to our sin against a Holy God. Anything North of hell is sheer grace and mercy. As Christians, it is the epitome of hypocrisy to judge our life in light of God's grace, and judge others based on what they deserve. The word "grace" literally means the undeserved favor of God. There term "deserved grace" is a misnomer, for there is no such thing. 

    For starters, we can't possibly even know all of the facts about a person's life to even be able to make the proper judgment about what exactly they deserve. Only God can do that. In the case of Job, the book opens by clearly defending Job's character, God Himself said that He was "perfect and upright, that he feared God and eschewed evil." Also, several times throughout the book it is stated that "in all this, Job sinned not." We also get a glimpse into the inner workings of Heaven. It was God that brought Job up to Satan, not the other way around. However, Job's friends simply could not imagine that God would allow these things to happen in Job's life unless there was some kind of secret sin involved. They were incapable of extending any grace to Job because they didn't think that he deserved any grace. This is why there is absolutely no room for grace in RT, because the moment that grace is deserved, it ceases to be grace.

    Think about the horrible implications of RT when carried to its logical conclusion. If grace is something that must be earned, what does this do to our relationships? What a strain for children having to earn grace from their parents, or wives having to earn grace from their husbands, or fathers having to earn grace from their children. But the ultimate tragedy is that RT teaches us that we must earn grace from God. Sadly, Retribution Theology has much more in common with the Hindu concept of Karma than it does the gospel of grace.  

    Unfortunately, there are pulpits all over the country who preach this kind of thing. Someone sent me a recent clip of a Baptist pastor making the statement that Job "made many mistakes" and that "God didn't want Job to worship in that moment, He wanted him to repent..... Job didn't repent until the end of the book, and God didn't restore him until he repented..... Job was always just one step away from the favor and blessings of God." Not only does this butcher the context, as well as the meaning of grace (earning God's favor), but it implies that Job got what he deserved, and only when he changed his behavior, did his situation change. Certainly, if one is truly living in sin, they need to repent. But if your go to theology when it comes to suffering is "if you would just do better, things would get better", it adds an incredible weight to someone who is already suffering greatly. This leads us into out third point. 

Retribution Theology Offers No Peace or Anchor During Times of Great Suffering

    Retribution Theology sounds great until you are the one in need of grace, a comforting word or a helping hand. Imagine the problem that Job's friends would have created for themselves if later on they had found themselves in a horrible trial. There is absolutely nothing that serves up a freshly baked humble pie like deep personal suffering. First of all, everyone who knew what they had said, and how they had acted towards Job would have immediately suspected sin in their lives. And after they inserted their foot into their mouth, there would have been no way to defend themselves. This is what Job nailed them with when he said, "He destroyeth the perfect and the wicked." In other words, any fool can see that no one is exempt from trials and tribulations. Years ago I had a very wise preacher give me advice on preaching with grace from the pulpit. He said, "If you spend years filling your church people with gun powder, don't be surprised if they blow up on you down the road." Suffice it to say, don't be like Job's friends. 

    The second thing that needs to be considered here is, what are the natural implications for someone who really buys into RT, and find themselves in a trial. By their theology, they must have done something wrong. If they would just do better, than things would get better, right? Instead of taking comfort in the fact that God is working all things for the good, they can't help but feel as if they are being punished for doing something wrong. For those who are suffering, RT yields a never ending supply of self guilt and condemnation. This again shows how badly RT butchers grace. The flip side of being able gain God's favor by doing well, means that it is possible to lose God's favor when doing badly (even if the bad is only perceived). 

    The truth is that many times our suffering is a gift from God (Phil. 1:29), it is the will of God (I Pet. 3:17), and is working for our good and His glory (Rom. 8:28). God doesn't despise those with a broken heart (Psalm 51:17). In fact, He is drawn to them (Psalm 34:18). However, for the adherents of RT, there is no room for such graces, neither for themselves or others. They have absolutely no comfort or solutions to offer. 

Why is Retribution Theology So Popular? 

    I believe that RT is popular for one simple reason, the illusion of control. People want to feel like they are in control of their own destiny, their own suffering. If people think that as long as they try to do their best, that nothing bad will ever happen to them, it makes them feel good. It's all an illusion that will come back to hit them in the mouth, but it feels good in the moment. This is exactly what Job said to Eliphaz, "For now ye are nothing; ye see my casting down and are afraid." It's intimidating to watch good Christian people suffer. It wakes us up to the reality that if it can happen to them, it can happen to us. People don't want God to be in control of their suffering. As Charles Spurgeon once said, "Men are comfortable with God being everywhere but on His throne." 

    Another reason that RT is so popular is that it's just easier to write someone off than it is to get in the fire with them. But we are commanded to "bear on another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ." (Gal. 6:2) To those guilty of RT (probably all of us at some time and to some extent) we need to repent. To those who are concerned about whether their suffering is due to their sin or if they are in a trial, I would simply say, if you aren't directly violating Scripture, and God hasn't revealed the sin through prayer, I would take a deep breath and thank God for the trial. God doesn't play games with things like that. Our Heavenly Father knows how to chasten His children. He is a God who is full of grace and truth. 

    In closing, we have seen that Retribution Theology finds no place in scripture. The weakness of RT is that it falls completely short of grace. We must be aware of it and cast it aside, both for our sake and the sake of others. While you're at it, could you please pray for my wife Leah in her suffering?