Paul Okello

Saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.
_
Founder of Set-Apart, @HelloPOD and @visitafrica2, CCC at @eevangelism, Former Pro 🏀 Player

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

We are unworthy for whom God should do anything, and unworthy to do anything for God; but He is worthy for whom we should do all things. - Ralph Venning.

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

Anyone who claims that Christ's life, death, and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins to reconcile fallen humanity to God is a guarantee for physical health and/or material wealth is a mutilator of the Gospel and an enemy of the Cross of Christ. They are in opposition to Christ. Their interest is other than that of Christ. If your love is for Christ, you will do well to avoid such persons.

Be encouraged, Christian, that a time is coming when all your tears will be wiped away, when death, sickness, and pain are no more, living in a city whose architect, builder, and temple is the Lord, whose light is the glory of God. Desire such a city. Wait for such a Saviour.

Therefore, walk in a manner worthy of the Gospel of Christ. If you are to suffer, suffer for his sake, rejoicing in the blessedness of such a calling. If, by his
grace, you have much, rejoice, not that you have and another doesn't, but that you may use that gift to serve others.

Dear sinner, you need not a 'big fix' conference. You need to flee to Christ, repent of your rebellion, and place your faith in Him alone (no +) for your salvation. Join a church that treasures the Gospel. That believes and teaches the Bible. That is led by qualified male pastors.

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

@D_B_Harrison @podcast_just

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

@TodAshby 😍

[Darrell B Harrison @D_B_Harrison]

So perfect is the reconciliation, and so completely has sin been covered and blotted out, that he who believes in Christ is looked upon and treated by God as entirely righteous. - Andrew Murray, The Power of the Blood of Jesus

[Evangelism Explosion Africa @ee_africa]

Salvation is not earned. It is received entirely by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

Have you placed your trust in Jesus Christ alone for eternal life?

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

Puritan John Collins (1632–1687) on Jude 3:

I. What is here meant by faith?
It is not so much the grace of faith, but the doctrine of faith; not special faith, by which we apprehend special mercy upon a promise made to the elect, but the faith that is believed, the whole substance of the doctrine of Christ, as to things that are to be believed and duties that are to be practised.

But why is it said that the faith was once delivered? Because it has been given finally, irrevocably, once for all.

'Delivered to the saints, respects the privilege the saints of God had in the faith that God had left them. It is the faith of the gospel, committed as a treasure to them. The church is called a candlestick, not only to hold out the light, but to hold the light; whence the church is called the pillar and ground of the truth. Not that the church is to make doctrines, but to hold forth the doctrines of Christ, even as tablets and pillars, upon which proclamations are hung and held forth to be made public. The church of Christ is that place in which the truths of the Lord Jesus are kept and will be kept from one age to another.

II. But what is the import of the word 'earnestly contend'? It is a word used only once in the New Testament. The root of the word is frequently used and imports a struggling with might and main, as is seen in those who run at games. It is used for Jesus Christ in his sufferings. He was in agony: the same word from whence this word is compounded. The apostle would imply such a contention, such a struggling to keep the faith of the gos-pel, that one word in the English is not able to express it, and interpreters very much differ as to what is the import. The best centre in this, that we should contend for the faith, as men that would contend to keep their very lives.

The proposition is this, that it is the duty of the saints of God to maintain an earnest contention, to struggle for, and to keep the faith that was entrusted with them.

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

Not only is this not possible but it also brings into focus the question of our very existence. If we were to assess any community, past and present, we would conclude that human beings have an innate awareness of right and wrong. This in itself is evidence of an objective moral lawgiver; thus the Apostle Paul writes, "For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them."

The issue then, isn't the absence of a perfect, all-powerful, and omnipresent God, since we have already observed that no society exists apart from Him. Rather, the issue is the sinfulness of the human race, who, being aware of God's law on their hearts, 'suppress the truth' (Romans 1:18b).

Therefore, while a society can temporarily maintain what outwardly looks like stability, with time, due to sin, it collapses. "Accordingly, two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self. The former, in a word, glories in itself, the latter in the Lord." (Augustine, The City of God)

[Siyasa Jimmy @JimmySiyasa]

Can society be stable and moral without God?

[Evangelism Explosion Africa @ee_africa]

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Ephesians 2:8-9

[Mike Riccardi @MikeRiccardi_]

J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston, from their Introduction to Martin Luther’s Bondage of the Will:

“Here was the crucial issue: whether God is the author not merely of justification but also of faith; whether in the last analysis Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort.

“Justification by faith only is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood until it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia. What is the source and status of faith?

“Is it the God-given means whereby the God-given justification is received, or is it a condition of justification which is left to man to fulfill?

“Is it a part of God’s gift of salvation, or is it man’s own contribution to salvation? Is our salvation wholly of God, or does it ultimately depend on something we do for ourselves?

“Those who say the latter, as the Arminians later did, thereby deny man’s utter helplessness in sin and affirm that a form of Semi-Pelagianism is true after all.

“It is no wonder, then, that later Reformed theology condemned Arminianism as being in principle (a) a return to Rome, because in effect it turned faith into a meritorious work, and (b) a betrayal of the Reformation, because it denied the sovereignty of God in saving sinners, which was the deepest religious and theological principle of the Reformers’ thought.

“Arminianism was indeed in Reformed eyes a renunciation of New Testament Christianity in favor of New Testament Judaism, for to rely on oneself for faith is no different, in principle, from relying on oneself for works, and the one is as unchristian and anti-Christian as the other.”

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

In light of the sufficiency of Scripture and the blessed Gospel of Christ, if you have ever wondered about (1) Prayer watches and altars, (2) Spiritual mappping and territorial spirits or (3) dominion theology, I implore you to consider watching the @ugandangospel's Worlds at War.

https://t.co/pBJ2YysyQc

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

📌

[DrJackHughes @DrJackHughes]

There are many today bashing "Calvinists" who wrongly assert Calvin taught this or that, but never actually quote Calvin. Thus they misrepresent and slander Calvin's name. It is also true that many self-proclaimed Calvinists don't believe what Calvin taught and fall into the same error. For instance, many who claim to be "Calvinists" believe that "Christ died for the elect and the elect only" and that He in no way died for the non-elect. This is the "hyper-Calvinist" position, "hyper" which means "to go beyond." They agree with Calvin that Christ died to save the elect, but go beyond Calvin when they add the word "only" and deny that Christ in anyway died for the non-elect.

Calvin taught a dual purpose for the atonement, that Christ died for the elect and non-elect alike. This may be a shock to some self-proclaimed "Calvinists" who have never really studied John Calvin and who have learned their "Calvinism" from other "Calvinists" rather than from John Calvin himself.

John Calvin actually taught Christ died: 1) To save the elect. And that He died, 2) To make a sufficient sacrifice for the non-elect so that the gospel could be preached to them and they could be judged for not receiving the love of the truth so as to be saved (2 Thess. 2:10). Calvin knew there is no gospel to preach to "all creation" (Mk. 16:15; Col. 1:23) and "all nations" (Mt. 28:19; Lk. 24:47) if it doesn't include the death of Christ.

Let John Calvin himself teach you what true "Calvinism" is. It is okay if you disagree with Calvin, but it is clear that many on both sides of the "Calvinism" debate have not learn about "Calvinism" from John Calvin himself. Let's see what John Calvin actually taught.

Commenting on Isa. 53:12 Calvin wrote:

"I approve of the ordinary reading, that he alone bore the punishment of many, because on him was laid the guilt of the whole world. It is evident from other passages, and especially from the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, that 'many' sometimes denotes 'all.'"

Kevin D. Kennedy, in an article published in the "Scottish Journal of Theology," convincingly shows that Calvin often used the word “many” to describe the entirety of humanity, elect and non-elect alike. He quotes Calvin’s discussion of the great commission in Mt. 20:28:

‘Many’ is used, not for a definite number, but for a large number, in that he sets Himself over against all others. And this is the meaning also in Rom. 5:15, where Paul is not talking of a part of mankind but of the whole human race." (Latin removed)

Commenting on Mk. 14:24 Calvin wrote:

"Which is shed for many. By the word many he means not a part of the world only, but the whole human race; for he contrasts many with one; as if he had said, that he will not be the Redeemer of one man only, but will die in order to deliver many from the condemnation of the curse. It must at the same time be observed, however, that by the words for you—as related by Luke—Christ directly addresses the disciples, and exhorts every believer to apply to his own advantage the shedding of blood. Therefore, when we approach to the holy table, let us not only remember in general that the world has been redeemed by the blood of Christ, but let every one consider for himself that his own sins have been expiated."

Commenting on the phrase in Rom. 5:18 “even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men,” Calvin said:

"He makes this favor common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive him."

Commenting on Gal. 1:3-5 Calvin wrote:

"For the faithless have no profit at all by the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, but rather are so much the more damnable, because they reject the means that God had ordained: and their unthankfulness shall be so much the more grievously punished, because they have trodden under foot the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was the ransom for their souls.”

Calvin, in his lengthy discussion of the phrase in 1 Timothy 2:4 “who desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth,” has a very balanced understanding of the text and its implications. He affirms predestination, God’s sovereignty in salvation, God’s particular intention to save His elect, and denies universalism, but also asserts that God desires all, the world, everyone, to be saved universally:

"Paul states that God desires all men to be saved, in order to encourage us to do our best to ensure the salvation of those who seem to be banished from God's kingdom. . .

God appeared to have chosen Abraham's line on the condition that all others were excluded from the hope of salvation. We see indeed how holy Scripture exalts God's adoption of the Jews to be his people (Exod. 19:5-6). Yet here Paul exhorts us to pray for all men, and he is careful to supply the reason: God wants all men to be saved. . .

Thus, since God wants all to share in the salvation offered in his only Son, we should endeavor to draw in poor souls who are still in ignorance, and to attain together with them the heritage of the heavenly kingdom which has been promised to us.’ . . .

Although God had set the Jews apart from all other peoples, when Jesus Christ appeared for the salvation of the world he removed the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. . . Now that Jesus Christ is revealed as the common Savior of all, he offers the grace of God his Father so that all may receive it. And just as Paul in this verse has all peoples in mind, so too he has in view all conditions of men, as if to say: 'God wishes to save kings and magistrates as well as the humblest of men.' We ought never to restrict his fatherly goodness only to ourselves or to a given group of people. Why not? Because he makes it plain that he desires to show favor to all. . .

It follows, then, that when by God's will the gospel is proclaimed to everyone, witness is borne to a salvation which is common to all. That is why Paul says that God desires all men to be saved. He did not appoint his apostles so that they should confine themselves only to the Jews. Their commission, as we know, was to preach to every creature, to bear witness to Jesus Christ from Jerusalem to Samaria, and from there to the ends of the earth (Mark 16:15; Acts I:8). Were the apostles sent to make God's truth known to all peoples and to all conditions of men? It therefore follows that God offers himself to everyone, and that the promise belongs to both great and small, to the Gentiles just as it had earlier belonged to the Jews. . . He makes the point that things are no longer what they were before Christ's coming, when there was but one chosen people. God now reveals himself as the Savior of the whole world, just as it was written: Your inheritance will stretch to the uttermost parts of the earth' (Psa. 2:8). (Italics mine.)
Calvin, commenting on the phrase in Heb. 9:28, “Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sin of many,” wrote:

‘To bear the sins’ means to free those who have sinned from their guilt by his satisfaction. He says many meaning all, as in Rom. 5:15. It is of course certain that not all enjoy the fruit of Christ’s death, but this happens because their unbelief hinders them. The question is not dealt with here because the apostle is not discussing how few or how many benefit from the death of Christ, but meant simply that he died for others, not for himself. He therefore contrasts the many to the one."

Calvin, in his work "The Eternal Predestination of God," wrote:

"Georgius imagines himself to argue very cleverly when he says, "Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Therefore, those who would exclude the reprobate from a participation in the benefits of Christ, must, of necessity, place them somewhere out of the world." Now we will not permit the common solution of this question to avail on the present occasion, which would have it that Christ suffered sufficiently for all men, but effectually for His elect alone. This great absurdity, by which our monk has procured for himself so much applause amongst his own fraternity, has no weight whatever with me. John does indeed extend the benefits of the atonement of Christ, which was completed by His death, to all the elect of God throughout what climes of the world soever they may be scattered. But though the case be so, it by no means alters the fact that the reprobate are mingled with the elect in the world. It is also a fact, without controversy, that Christ came to atone for the sins "of the whole world."

Calvin goes on to state that the elect are the ones who enjoy the benefits of Christ’s atoning work, but affirms that there is a sense in which Christ died for all, so that the saving gospel might be preached to all.

Calvin in his last will and testament said:

"I testify also and declare, that I suppliantly beg of Him, that He may be pleased so to wash and purify me in the blood which my Sovereign Redeemer has shed for the sins of the human race, . . .”

Furthermore, many who are squarely in the reformed camp, who studied Calvin, some who even defined and claimed to be "calvinists," they also believe Christ died for the elect and non-elect alike. Men like Richard Baxter, John Newton, Charles Simeon, R. L. Dabney, J. C. Ryle, Charles Spurgeon, William Shed, Charles Hodge, and many others, both dead and alive.

Lesson to learn whether you are or are not a self-proclaimed "Calvinist," make sure you understand what John Calvin actually taught, not what others say he taught. If you died you wouldn't want people misrepresenting what you taught and slandering in the grave.

Bottom line you should be a biblicist. Your cry should be "sola scripture" and thus you should get your theology not from men and men who have studied other men, not from creeds, but from the diligent study and careful exegesis of Scripture and synthesizing what the bulk of biblical texts teach on a given doctrine. Then you can be a Berean and see if what other men have taught aligns with the Word of God. @anchorbiblelou

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

📌

[Mike Riccardi @MikeRiccardi_]

Some theologians point to passages that teach election to service, the election of Christ, or the election of corporate entities to temporal blessing, and they argue that when Scripture speaks of election, it’s not about the election of individuals unto salvation.

But the fact that Scripture uses the terminology of election in one sense doesn’t mean that it can’t use that same terminology in other senses. In addition to vocational and corporate election, Scripture also teaches that God chooses certain individuals to receive the salvation He accomplishes in Christ.

I. Scripture explicitly connects election with salvation, with both the term and the concept appearing in salvific contexts.

1. In Ephesians 1:4, Paul states that the Father chose His people in Christ before the foundation of the world. Note, it doesn’t say that the Father chose Christ (though that’s true, 1 Peter 1:20), nor merely that He chose to save whoever believes in Christ, but that He chose “us”—a group of particular individuals. In other words, the objects of sovereign election are chosen to be united to Christ, the Mediator of their salvation.

This is when the Father “gives” His people to the Son (John 17:6), who will come to Him (John 6:37), be raised up on the last day (John 6:39), who are given eternal life (John 17:2; cf. 10:28-29), who are distinct from the world (John 17:9), and who will be with Christ forever in glory (John 17:24).

In the next verse, Ephesians 1:5, Paul says God’s purpose for choosing us in Christ is that His chosen ones would be holy and blameless before Him as adopted sons. Holiness, blamelessness, and adoption are all blessings of salvation—as are redemption (Eph 1:7, 14), forgiveness of sins (Eph 1:7), an eternal inheritance (Eph 1:11, 14), and the sealing of the Spirit (Eph 1:13). These are the fruits of “the gospel of [our] salvation,” and they start with the Father’s election.

2. In Acts 13:48, Luke narrates the conversion of the Gentiles in Pisidian Antioch by saying that “as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” Individuals savingly believe the Gospel because they had been appointed to eternal life by God.

3. Paul uses similar language when he tells the Thessalonians that God has “destined [them] … for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 5:9). Destined for salvation.

4. Second Thessalonians 2:13 says what should end all controversy on the matter: “God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation.” God elects unto salvation.

5. And because Romans 9 is so clear, non-Calvinists aim to dismiss it by arguing that the election spoken of all throughout this chapter is a non-salvific election. But the context doesn’t allow for that.

a. For one, Romans 9 comes on the heels of Romans 8:28–39, where Paul links God’s foreknowledge and predestination—two words that speak of election—with several other aspects salvation. Those whom God foreknew and predestined, He also effectually called, justified and glorified. Those chosen are the ones who are regenerated, declared righteous, and finally brought to heaven to be with Christ.

b. For another, yes, there is no question that Romans 9 to 11 is about the place of Israel in God’s plans. But Paul begins this discussion about Israel by announcing his grief over their not being saved (9:1–5). Romans 9 (and 10 and 11) is about Israel’s salvation, or lack thereof: “My heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation” (10:1; cf. 9:30–33; 11:26).

c. God’s choice of Isaac over Ishmael (9:7–9) and Jacob over Esau (9:10–13) certainly had to do with nations and people groups and temporal blessings. But being “children of God” and “children of the promise” describes more than just earthly blessings or a special role for service. Every time Paul uses these phrases they are references to salvation (Rom 8:16, 21; Gal 4:28; Phil 2:15). Further, this election is “not because of works” (Rom 9:11), which picks up on Paul’s virtually ubiquitous polemic in favor of justification by faith alone (cf. Rom 3:28; 9:32; Gal 2:16). The language of Romans 9:6–13 is intensely salvific.

d. And 9:14–29 continues to show us that Paul has salvation in mind. There is mention of:

· vessels of wrath fitted for destruction (9:22; destruction being the opposite of salvation, cf. Phil 1:28);
· vessels of mercy prepared for glory (9:23; glory being the concomitant of salvation, cf. 8:18; 2 Tim 2:10);
· being God’s beloved people (9:25);
· being sons of the living God (9:26);
· a remnant who are saved (9:27); and
· the righteousness which is by faith rather than works (9:30–33).

II. And not only does Scripture use the terms and concepts of election in salvific contexts, it also identifies the objects of that election as particular individuals. I’ll stick to just Romans 9, because that text is probably the most disputed and because this post is already obscenely long.

1. In 9:15, Paul quotes Exodus 33:19, where God says, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Both relative pronouns (Gk. ὃν, “whom”) are singular, which indicates that Paul has in view particular individuals upon whom God exercises saving mercy.

2. In 9:16, Paul retains the use of the grammatical singular when he says, “So then it does not depend on the man who wills [τοῦ θέλοντος, genitive singular] or the man who runs [τοῦ τρέχοντος, genitive singular], but on God who has mercy.”

3. In 9:18, Paul sums up the argument of verses 14 to 17 and once again uses the singular relative pronoun whom: “So then He has mercy on whom [ὃν] He desires, and He hardens whom [ὃν] He desires.”

4. In 9:19, Paul represents the objection to his teaching in individual terms. He says, “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who [the interrogative pronoun τίς, nominative singular masculine] resists His will?’”

5. And even through to 9:21, Paul speaks of “one [Gk. ὃ, accusative singular neuter] vessel for honorable use and another [same] for dishonorable use.”

New Testament scholar Tom Schreiner is right to conclude, “Those who say that Paul is referring only to corporate groups do not have an adequate explanation as to why Paul uses the singular again and again in Romans 9” (99).

Schreiner’s chapter, “Does Romans 9 Teach Individual Election Unto Salvation?”, is worth reading in its entirety (link in comments). If you read it, you’ll recognize two things: one, my indebtedness to Schreiner for the case made in this post; but also, that it is illegitimate to read Romans 9 as if it did not speak of election of particular individuals unto salvation.

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

@ntvuganda Are we under Trump's administration or the Government of Uganda?

What has been done to address this in light of the "decision to halt health funding"? @MinofHealthUG

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

"... human love is by its very nature desire-desire for human community. So long as it can satisfy this desire in some way, it will not give it up, even for the sake of truth, even for the sake of genuine love for others. But where it can no longer expect its desire to be fulfilled, there it stops short-namely, in the face of an enemy. There it turns into hatred, contempt, and calumny."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together; The Classic Exploration of Christian Community.

[Siyasa Jimmy @JimmySiyasa]

It's possible for an act of charity to be an extension of one's selfishness. This happens more often than we like to admit.

[Wes Huff @WesleyLHuff]

Mediating on Ephesians 5 today. Christ “gave himself up for” the church (Eph 5:25), and he is “himself its Savior” (Eph 5:23), language suggesting a defined body for whom the sacrifice was specifically made. In a same way, Jesus tells us that the good shepherd “lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11, 15), and these sheep “hear my voice,” are known by Christ, and “will never perish” (John 10:26–28). The shepherd metaphor distinguishes between those who are Christ’s sheep and those who are not, those who “do not believe” are “not among my sheep” (John 10:26–28).

The language of substitution reinforces this particularity. Jesus “will save his people from their sins” (Matt 1:21), he won’t try to save, make people saveable, or attempt to save, but will accomplish the act for his people specifically. Jesus does not desire to save people and fail. He accomplishes the act of salvation and restoration. The church was “obtained with his own blood” (Acts 20:28), suggesting an actual acquisition of a defined people. Christ “gave himself” to “redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession” (Titus 2:14); language indicating the accomplishment of redemption for those redeemed, not a mere offer extended to all.

Christ’s intercessory work further illuminates this pattern. In prayer, Christ states: “I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me” (John 17:9), and he “consecrate[s]” himself “for their sake” so “they also may be sanctified” (John 17:19). His self-consecration corresponds to those for whom he prays, a specific group, not humanity universally.

The sacrificial terminology employed throughout Scripture, redemption, propitiation, and reconciliation, implies actual accomplishment rather than mere potential.

The servant “bore the sin of many” (Isa 53:11–12), and the Son of Man gave “his life as a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28). When Scripture speaks of Christ’s death achieving these effects, it describes completed realities for those included, not conditional possibilities for all.

[5 Solas @5Solas]

Every calvinist believes this.

[Darrell B Harrison @D_B_Harrison]

I may be called Antinomian or Calvinist for preaching a limited atonement; but I had rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than a universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of man be joined with it. - Charles H. Spurgeon, from his sermon "The Death of Christ," delivered January 24, 1858

[Paul Okello @opaul42]

O love divine, O matchless grace
That God should die for men!
With joyful grief I lift my praise
Abhorring all my sin
Adoring only Him

— Chris Anderson