The Universal Problem: No One Achieves Righteousness by Works

Paul’s argument that “faith is credited as righteousness” (Romans 4:3–5, quoting Genesis 15:6) is the theological cornerstone of justification by faith alone. It rests on a deliberate contrast between two systems of relating to God: works (human effort to earn merit) and faith (trusting God’s promise apart from merit). Below is the step-by-step logic as Paul develops it, primarily in Romans 3–4 and Galatians 3.

1. The Universal Problem: No One Achieves Righteousness by Works

1. Premise: “By works of the law no human being will be justified” (Rom 3:20; cf. Gal 2:16).
2. Reason: The law exposes sin, not righteousness; it demands perfect obedience, which all fail (Rom 3:23; Gal 3:10–11).
3. Conclusion: Righteousness cannot be earned; it must be received.

2. The Old Testament Witness: Abraham Believed, and It Was Credited

1. Key text: “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (Gen 15:6; Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6).
2. Timing is decisive: This crediting happened before circumcision (Gen 17) and centuries before the Mosaic law (Rom 4:9–13).
3. Therefore, righteousness by faith predates and transcends the law.
4. Nature of the act: Abraham’s “belief” was not a work that merited credit; it was empty-handed trust in God’s promise of a son despite sterility and old age (Rom 4:18–21).
5. Paul’s analogy: “To the one who does not work but believes… his faith is credited as righteousness” (Rom 4:5).

3. Accounting Logic: Imputation, Not Infusion

1. Metaphor: God treats faith like a ledger entry. The believer has no positive balance (all are debtors, Rom 3:23), yet God credits (λογίζομαι, logizomai, 11× in Rom 4) Christ’s righteousness to the account (Rom 4:6–8; cf. 2 Cor 5:21).
2. David confirms: Psalm 32:1–2 speaks of sins “not counted” (same verb); forgiveness is non-imputation of guilt + imputation of righteousness (Rom 4:6–8).

4. Christological Fulfillment: Faith’s Object Is the Risen Jesus

1. Romans 3:21–26: The righteousness God credits is “through faith in Jesus Christ” because Jesus is the propitiation (ἱλαστήριον) who absorbs wrath and the righteous one whose obedience is gifted.
2. Romans 4:23–25: Genesis 15:6 was written “for us” who believe in Him who raised Jesus, whose death was “for our trespasses” and resurrection “for our justification.”

5. Exclusion of Boasting

1. Corollary: If righteousness were by works, boasting would be valid (Rom 4:2).
2. But: “Where then is boasting? It is excluded” (Rom 3:27). Faith, by definition, looks away from self to Another; it is the anti-boast.

Summary in Paul’s Own Words

“Now to the one who works, his wages are not credited as a gift but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.” (Rom 4:4–5)

In short: Faith is counted as righteousness not because it is inherently meritorious, but because it is the instrument that receives the alien righteousness of Christ, promised in the gospel and foreshadowed in Abraham. It is God’s chosen mechanism to uphold both His justice (sin is punished in Christ) and His grace (righteousness is gifted, not earned).

Living Every Moment for God’s Glory: A Biblical Framework for Conscience, Faith, and Freedom

Living Every Moment for God’s Glory

A Biblical Framework for Conscience, Faith, and Freedom

“So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.”

— 1 Corinthians 10:31

“Everything that does not come from faith is sin.”

— Romans 14:23

These two verses are not suggestions—they are marching orders for the Christian life. They transform the mundane into the meaningful and elevate every decision, from what you watch to how you speak, into an act of worship. But how do we apply them without slipping into legalism? The answer lies in a simple, Scripture-shaped question:

“Can I do this—fully, freely, and faithfully—to the glory of God with a clear conscience?”

If the honest answer is no, the loving response is to abstain. This is not rule-keeping. This is relationship-keeping.

The Biblical Principle: Faith + Conscience = Obedience

The apostle Paul gives us a powerful diagnostic tool in Romans 14:23:

“But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith. And everything that does not come from faith is sin.”

Note the logic:

1. You doubt whether an action honors God.
2. You do it anyway.
3. It becomes sin—not because the act is inherently evil, but because it violates your faith-informed conscience.

This is personal, not universal. Eating meat offered to idols was not sin in itself (1 Cor 8), but if a believer couldn’t eat it in faith, it became sin for them.

Now pair this with 1 Corinthians 10:31:

“Do it all for the glory of God.”

Paul refuses to compartmentalize life. There is no “secular” zone. Your Netflix queue, your group chat, your lunch break—all fall under divine jurisdiction.

So the test is twofold:

1. Can I participate in faith? (No lingering doubt before God)
2. Can I participate for His glory? (In a way that reflects His character)

If either answer is no, the activity is off-limits—not because a rulebook says so, but because love for God demands it.

This Is Not Legalism—Here’s Why

Legalism	Biblical Conscience
Adds man-made rules to earn favor	Applies God-given principles to honor Him
Focuses on external behavior	Focuses on internal conviction
Judges others by personal standards	Applies the standard only to self
Breeds pride or fear	Breeds humility and dependence on grace

Legalism says, “You must never watch R-rated movies.”

Biblical conscience says, “I cannot watch this movie in faith and to God’s glory—so I won’t.”

One binds. The other frees you to love God with your whole life.

How to Apply This in Everyday Life

Step 1: Ask the Two Questions

Before you click “play,” send the text, or open the book, pause and ask:

1. “Do I have any doubt that this honors God?”
2. “Can I engage in this in a way that reflects God’s glory?”

Example: A TV show with crude humor

1. You laugh at jokes that mock purity (Eph 5:3–4).
2. You feel a check in your spirit.
3. Verdict: You cannot watch in faith or for glory. Skip it.

Step 2: Test Your Conscience with Scripture

Your conscience is a compass, not a king. It must be trained:

1. Is this clearly forbidden? (e.g., pornography, gossip) → Abstain.
2. Is this a gray area? (e.g., secular music, fantasy novels) → Ask: “Does this stir up sin or draw me closer to Christ?” (Phil 4:8)

Step 3: Respect Others’ Freedom

Your conviction is yours. Don’t project it:

“As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.” (Romans 14:1)

If your friend can watch a war documentary in faith and for God’s glory, celebrate their freedom. You are not their Holy Spirit.

Guardrails to Stay in Grace

1. Don’t let conscience become hypersensitive
   
2. A “weak conscience” (1 Cor 8:7) can be overly fragile. Grow it with truth, not fear.
3. Check your heart
   
4. Are you abstaining to honor God or to signal virtue? Motive matters.
5. Remember grace
   
6. You’re not earning salvation by your choices. You’re responding to it.

A Final Word: This Is Mature Discipleship

The world says, “Do whatever feels good.”

Culture says, “Do whatever everyone else is doing.”

Christ says, “Do whatever glorifies Me—in faith, with joy, without compromise.”

When you live by this standard, you’re not being restrictive—you’re being devoted.

You’re not shrinking your life—you’re filling it with worship.

So go ahead.

Turn off the show.

Close the app.

Skip the conversation.

Not because you’re afraid.

But because you’re in love.

And that, believer, is the most liberating way to live.

The Final Countdown: everyone who believes gets us closer to zero.

The Finite Number of True Believers: God’s Predetermined Plan Unfolding

In the vast tapestry of Christian theology, few concepts stir as much contemplation and debate as the doctrine of predestination and election. At its core lies the profound idea that God, in His infinite wisdom and sovereignty, has predetermined a finite number of individuals to be saved through faith in Jesus Christ. This number—the elect—was established before the foundations of the world. As each person comes to genuine faith, placing their hope in Christ, they fulfill one spot in this divine roster, effectively reducing the remaining count. Day by day, we draw nearer to the completion of God’s eternal decree, when the last of the elect will be called home. This article explores the biblical foundations of this teaching, its theological implications, and what it means for believers today.

The Biblical Roots of Predestination and the Elect

The Scriptures provide a clear framework for understanding God’s sovereign choice in salvation. Central to this is the concept of election, where God selects specific individuals for redemption, not based on their merits, but according to His will. As outlined in Ephesians 1:4-5, God “chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will.” 3 This passage underscores that the decision was made in eternity past, implying a fixed and finite group known only to God.

Predestination, closely tied to election, refers to God’s eternal decree to bring the elect to salvation. Romans 8:29-30 elaborates: “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son… And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” 11 Here, the process is portrayed as a golden chain, unbreakable and predetermined, ensuring that every elected soul will ultimately be saved. The finite nature of this group is further hinted at in passages that speak of a “fullness” or completion.

One striking example is found in Romans 11:25, where Paul reveals a mystery: “Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” 10 The term “fullness” suggests a complete, predetermined number of Gentile believers that must be reached before certain eschatological events unfold. Similarly, Revelation 6:11 speaks of martyrs being told to wait “until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete.” 16 While this specifically addresses those killed for their faith, it illustrates the biblical principle of God operating with a precise, finite tally in His redemptive plan.

These verses align with the broader doctrine of unconditional election, which asserts that God’s choice is not contingent on human actions but is rooted in His sovereign grace. As theologians note, this election is not arbitrary but purposeful, designed to display God’s glory. 2 The finite aspect challenges human notions of fairness, yet it affirms God’s omniscience—He knows the end from the beginning and has ordained every conversion as part of His unchangeable blueprint.

A Countdown in Motion: How Faith Reduces the Number

Imagine the elect as a sacred ledger inscribed in heaven before time began. Each entry represents a soul destined for eternal life through Christ. When a person repents and believes, they don’t add to the list; rather, they claim their preordained place, ticking off one entry and bringing the world one step closer to the fulfillment of God’s quota. This isn’t a random process but a divinely orchestrated unfolding.

Theological traditions, particularly within Reformed Christianity, emphasize this dynamic. Election is God’s initiative, where He first regenerates the heart, enabling faith. 1 As 2 Timothy 2:10 states, “Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” 12 Paul’s endurance implies active participation in God’s plan, hastening the day when all the elect are gathered.

Critics may argue this diminishes human responsibility or free will, but the Bible harmonizes both divine sovereignty and human choice. While the number is fixed, individuals are called to respond to the gospel, unaware of their status until faith awakens. 4 Every evangelism effort, every testimony shared, contributes to this cosmic countdown, as God uses means to draw His chosen ones.

In eschatological terms, this finite number ties into end-times prophecies. Matthew 24:22 warns of tribulation so severe that “if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.” 13 The implication is clear: God’s plan protects and preserves until the last elect soul is secured, signaling the approach of Christ’s return.

Implications for Believers Today

Understanding this doctrine isn’t merely academic; it carries practical weight. For the Christian, it fosters humility—salvation is God’s gift, not earned merit. It also ignites urgency in mission, knowing that each day brings us closer to the end of the countdown. As the world witnesses conversions, from quiet personal awakenings to mass revivals, the remaining number dwindles, edging humanity toward the consummation of God’s kingdom.

Yet, this truth also offers comfort amid uncertainty. In a chaotic world, believers can rest in the assurance that nothing thwarts God’s plan. The elect will not exceed or fall short; every slot will be filled precisely as decreed. 0 For those questioning their election, the advice is simple: Turn to Christ in faith, for “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13)—and if you do, it’s evidence you were among the chosen all along. 11

Conclusion: Approaching the Divine Fulfillment

As we navigate the complexities of faith in the modern era, the idea of a finite number of true believers serves as a reminder of God’s masterful design. Established before creation, this number decreases with every soul that embraces Jesus, propelling us toward the day when the last elect is called. Far from being fatalistic, this doctrine inspires awe at God’s sovereignty and motivates active participation in His redemptive story. In the end, when the count reaches zero, the fullness of the kingdom will dawn, and all glory will be to Him who planned it from eternity.

The Inconsistency of Applying Micah 5:2 Entirely to Christ’s First Coming

Micah 5:2, a well-known messianic prophecy, states:

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.”

This verse is often cited as a prophecy fulfilled in Jesus Christ, particularly with respect to His birthplace in Bethlehem. Many Christians accept the first part of the verse—that the Messiah was born in Bethlehem—as a literal fulfillment during Jesus’ first coming. However, some argue that the latter part, which describes the Messiah as “Ruler in Israel,” was fulfilled “spiritually” during His first coming, rather than literally. This interpretation introduces an inconsistency, as it applies a literal hermeneutic to one part of the verse (the birthplace) while spiritualizing another (the rulership). This article will demonstrate that Jesus did not rule in Israel during His first coming, that He rejected attempts to make Him a ruler by force, and that scriptural evidence points to a literal fulfillment of His role as “Ruler in Israel” during His second coming in the millennial reign.

The Literal Fulfillment of Bethlehem and the Problem of Spiritualizing the Rulership

Micah 5:2 explicitly identifies Bethlehem Ephrathah as the birthplace of the Messiah, a prophecy fulfilled literally in Jesus’ birth, as recorded in Matthew 2:1: “Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem.” This literal fulfillment is universally accepted among Christians, as the historical and geographical specificity of Bethlehem aligns precisely with the Gospel accounts. The verse’s clarity and the historical record leave no room for a spiritual or allegorical interpretation of the birthplace.

However, the latter part of Micah 5:2, which declares that the Messiah will be “Ruler in Israel,” is sometimes interpreted as a spiritual reign during Jesus’ first coming, such as His authority over the church or a metaphorical kingship. This creates an inconsistent hermeneutic: if the prophecy’s specification of Bethlehem is literal, why would the rulership be spiritualized? The text does not indicate a shift in interpretive method. Both elements—birthplace and rulership—are presented in the same prophetic context, suggesting that both should be understood literally unless the text explicitly suggests otherwise. To demonstrate the inconsistency, we must examine whether Jesus ruled in Israel during His first coming and whether Scripture supports a literal rulership in His second coming.

Jesus Did Not Rule in Israel During His First Coming

The Gospel accounts provide clear evidence that Jesus did not assume a position of political or national rulership over Israel during His first coming. Instead, His mission focused on spiritual redemption, teaching, and fulfilling the role of the suffering servant (Isaiah 53). Several passages illustrate this:

1. Rejection of Earthly Kingship: In John 6:15, after feeding the five thousand, the crowd attempted to make Jesus a king by force: “Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone.” This incident demonstrates that Jesus explicitly rejected earthly rulership during His first coming. The people’s desire to make Him king aligns with the expectation of a political Messiah who would overthrow Roman rule and restore Israel’s national sovereignty, but Jesus’ mission at that time was not to fulfill this role.

2. Submission to Roman Authority: Jesus acknowledged the existing political order under Roman rule. In Matthew 22:21, when asked about paying taxes to Caesar, He responded, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” This statement shows that Jesus did not challenge or assume authority over the political structures governing Israel, further indicating that He was not acting as a “Ruler in Israel” in a governmental sense.

3. Focus on Spiritual Redemption: Jesus’ first coming centered on His role as the sacrificial Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). His teachings emphasized the kingdom of God as a spiritual reality accessible through faith (Luke 17:20–21: “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you”). While Jesus exercised spiritual authority, this does not equate to the national rulership over Israel described in Micah 5:2, which implies a visible, governing role.

These passages demonstrate that Jesus did not fulfill the role of “Ruler in Israel” during His first coming. To interpret this part of Micah 5:2 as spiritually fulfilled requires ignoring the plain meaning of the text and the historical context of Israel’s expectation of a reigning Messiah. Such an interpretation also undermines the consistency of applying a literal hermeneutic to the entire verse, as the birthplace was undeniably fulfilled in a literal, physical sense.

Scriptural Evidence for Christ’s Literal Rule in the Millennial Reign

Scripture consistently points to a future, literal reign of Christ as the “Ruler in Israel” during His second coming, which will occur during the millennial kingdom. This period, described in Revelation 20:1–6, involves a thousand-year reign of Christ on earth, where He will govern with authority and fulfill the messianic promises of national restoration for Israel. Several key passages support this:

1. Revelation 20:4–6: “And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them… And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.” This passage explicitly describes Christ’s reign on earth, during which His followers will share in His authority. The context is a physical, earthly kingdom, not a spiritual metaphor, as it follows the defeat of Satan and precedes the final judgment.

2. Zechariah 14:9–11: “And the Lord shall be King over all the earth. In that day it shall be—‘The Lord is one,’ And His name one… And men shall dwell in [Jerusalem], and there shall be no more utter destruction, but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.” This prophecy describes a future time when the Lord will rule as king from Jerusalem, with a focus on Israel’s restoration and safety. The geographical and political details indicate a literal reign.

3. Isaiah 9:6–7: “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder… Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever.” This messianic prophecy links the Messiah’s birth to His future government, specifically on the “throne of David,” which is associated with ruling over Israel. The eternal nature of His reign points to the millennial kingdom and beyond.

4. Luke 1:32–33: In the annunciation to Mary, the angel Gabriel declared, “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” The reference to the “throne of David” and reigning over the “house of Jacob” (Israel) indicates a literal, national rulership that was not fulfilled during Jesus’ first coming but awaits His return.

5. Daniel 7:13–14: “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.” This vision of the Son of Man receiving a kingdom aligns with Christ’s second coming, when He will establish His dominion over all nations, including Israel, in a literal, visible manner.

These passages collectively point to a future, literal reign of Christ as the “Ruler in Israel,” fulfilling Micah 5:2 in its entirety. The millennial reign will involve Christ’s physical presence on earth, governing from Jerusalem, restoring Israel, and fulfilling the covenant promises made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David (Genesis 12:1–3; 2 Samuel 7:12–16).

The Inconsistency of a Mixed Hermeneutic

To accept the Bethlehem prophecy as literal while spiritualizing the rulership creates an inconsistent interpretive framework. If Micah 5:2’s reference to Bethlehem is fulfilled literally in Jesus’ birth, the prophecy’s description of the Messiah as “Ruler in Israel” should also be understood literally, as the text provides no indication of a shift to metaphorical language. Spiritualizing the rulership to fit the first coming disregards the historical evidence that Jesus did not assume a governing role over Israel at that time and ignores the broader scriptural context pointing to a future, literal reign.

Moreover, the phrase “Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting” in Micah 5:2 emphasizes the eternal nature of the Messiah, supporting His divine authority to rule. This eternal quality aligns with the promises of an everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7:14; Luke 1:33), which are not fully realized in a spiritual sense during the church age but require a literal, earthly fulfillment in the millennial kingdom.

Conclusion

Micah 5:2 is a unified prophecy that points to both the Messiah’s birthplace and His role as “Ruler in Israel.” The literal fulfillment of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem sets a precedent for interpreting the entire verse literally. However, Jesus did not rule in Israel during His first coming, as evidenced by His rejection of earthly kingship (John 6:15) and His focus on spiritual redemption. Instead, Scripture consistently points to a future, literal reign during the millennial kingdom, where Christ will govern Israel and the nations from Jerusalem (Revelation 20:4–6; Zechariah 14:9; Isaiah 9:6–7). To apply the rulership portion of Micah 5:2 spiritually to the first coming while accepting the Bethlehem prophecy as literal is an inconsistent hermeneutic that fails to account for the full scope of biblical prophecy. The “Ruler in Israel” prophecy awaits its complete fulfillment at Christ’s second coming, when He will establish His millennial reign.

Three and Five and Eschatology

The Eschatological Lens: How Theological Perspectives Shape Interpretation

Eschatology, the study of end times and ultimate destiny in theological frameworks, profoundly influences how adherents interpret questions, texts, and even seemingly straightforward inquiries. To illustrate this, consider a hypothetical question posed to three individuals representing distinct eschatological positions: a postmillennialist, an amillennialist, and a premillennialist. The question is simple: “What is five and three?” Yet, their responses reveal not only their theological leanings but also how these perspectives shape their approach to interpretation itself.

The Postmillennialist: Seeing the Greater Outcome

The postmillennialist, grounded in an optimistic view of history where Christ’s reign is progressively realized through the church before His return, might answer, “Fifteen.” This response reflects a tendency to interpret “and” as a call for multiplication, suggesting a belief in the compounding effect of God’s work in the world. To the postmillennialist, the question is not merely about numbers but about discerning a deeper operation—multiplication symbolizing the growth and triumph of the Kingdom over time. They see the “sign” (in this case, multiplication) as the key to unlocking the question’s intent, aligning with their view of a world gradually transformed by divine influence.

The Amillennialist: A Balanced Calculation

The amillennialist, who views the millennium as a symbolic period where Christ reigns spiritually through the church amidst ongoing worldly struggles, might respond, “Eight.” Here, “and” is interpreted as addition, a straightforward operation that yields a sum. The amillennialist’s answer reflects a tempered realism—acknowledging the components (five and three) and combining them without assuming an expansive outcome like multiplication. This mirrors their eschatological stance: the Kingdom is present but not fully consummated, requiring a careful, balanced approach to interpretation that avoids overreaching.

The Premillennialist: Taking the Question at Face Value

The premillennialist, who anticipates a literal future reign of Christ following His return, takes a strikingly different approach. When asked, “What is five and three?” they might respond, “Numbers—five and three are numbers.” This answer reflects a commitment to the plain, literal meaning of the question. For the premillennialist, there is no hidden operation or deeper intent to uncover. The question is what it appears to be, and the answer addresses its surface-level content. This aligns with their eschatological emphasis on taking prophetic texts literally, expecting a clear, future fulfillment without symbolic reinterpretation.

Mutual Recognition, Divergent Methods

Interestingly, the postmillennialist and amillennialist might concede that the other’s numerical answer (15 or 8) is “correct” in a technical sense, given the chosen operation. However, each would likely argue that the other misread the “sign” or operation implied by the question. The postmillennialist might claim the amillennialist underestimates the transformative potential of the question’s intent, while the amillennialist might counter that the postmillennialist overcomplicates a simple sum. Both assume the question carries a deeper meaning requiring interpretation, reflecting their respective eschatological tendencies to see spiritual or symbolic layers in texts and events.

The premillennialist, however, stands apart. By refusing to assume a hidden operation, they avoid what they see as the error of over-interpretation. Their response—declaring five and three as numbers—demonstrates a methodological commitment to clarity and directness, eschewing speculation about implied meanings. This mirrors their eschatological approach, which prioritizes straightforward readings of prophetic texts over allegorical or symbolic interpretations.

Broader Implications

This simple analogy of “five and three” highlights how eschatological frameworks shape not only theological conclusions but also the interpretive process itself. Postmillennialists lean toward expansive, transformative readings, seeing questions and texts as pointing to a grand, progressive outcome. Amillennialists favor a balanced, restrained approach, acknowledging present realities while awaiting future fulfillment. Premillennialists, by contrast, emphasize the plain meaning, resisting the temptation to read beyond what is explicitly stated.

In theological discourse, these differences manifest in how each group approaches scripture, history, and even practical questions. The postmillennialist might see cultural and social progress as evidence of the Kingdom’s advance, the amillennialist might focus on the spiritual reign of Christ amidst earthly tensions, and the premillennialist might await a dramatic, literal intervention by Christ in the future. Each perspective brings unique insights but also risks—whether of over-optimism, undue caution, or rigid literalism.

Conclusion

The question “What is five and three?” serves as a microcosm of eschatological interpretation. The postmillennialist’s “fifteen,” the amillennialist’s “eight,” and the premillennialist’s “numbers” reveal not just different answers but different ways of seeing the world. While the postmillennialist and amillennialist debate the correct operation, the premillennialist challenges the assumption that an operation is even required. In this way, eschatology shapes not only beliefs about the end times but also the lens through which all questions—numerical, theological, or otherwise—are answered. Understanding these perspectives fosters greater appreciation for the diversity of thought within Christian theology and the interpretive richness it brings to even the simplest of questions.

The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins: Shining Light Through the Holy Spirit

The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins, found in Matthew 25:1-13, is a powerful teaching from Jesus about spiritual readiness for the Kingdom of Heaven. In this story, ten virgins await a bridegroom, each carrying a lamp to light his path. Five are wise, bringing extra oil to sustain their lamps, while five are foolish, carrying only the oil in their lamps. When the bridegroom arrives unexpectedly at midnight, the wise virgins’ lamps shine brightly, welcoming him into the wedding feast, while the foolish virgins’ lamps flicker out, leaving them in darkness and excluded. This parable underscores the importance of preparation, but it also reveals a profound truth: the foolish virgins were willing to shine their light during the “day,” relying on their own resolve, but their limited resources and understanding prevented them from shining in the “night,” when light was most needed. The wise virgins, however, carried extra oil—possibly their reliance on the Holy Spirit, which fueled their love for Christ and others, enabling them to shine even in the darkest hour.

The Shared Calling: Lamps Lit in the Day

At the parable’s start, the wise and foolish virgins share a common purpose. All ten are invited to the wedding feast, symbolizing the Kingdom of Heaven, and all carry lamps, representing an outward profession of faith or commitment to the bridegroom (often interpreted as Christ). In first-century Jewish weddings, the virgins’ role was to light the bridegroom’s procession, a task requiring readiness and vigilance. Both groups begin with lit lamps, suggesting an initial willingness to shine their light in the “day”—times of spiritual ease, when faith feels natural, and the cost of devotion is low.

The foolish virgins, like the wise, are eager to participate. Their lit lamps reflect a willingness to shine, perhaps through acts of worship, public faith, or a personal resolve to love Jesus. This “daytime” effort might represent a sincere but superficial commitment—sufficient when conditions are favorable but vulnerable to challenges. Their lamps burn brightly at first, but their preparation is incomplete, relying solely on their own strength rather than a deeper source.

The Fatal Flaw: Limited Resources and Understanding

The critical distinction between the wise and foolish virgins lies in their preparation. The wise virgins bring extra oil (Matthew 25:4), a symbol of sustained spiritual resources. This oil may represent their reliance on the Holy Spirit, which provides the love and strength needed to love Christ and others consistently. Unlike the foolish virgins, who depend on their personal resolve, the wise draw upon the Holy Spirit, allowing divine love to fuel their faith beyond human effort. Their foresight reflects an understanding that the bridegroom’s arrival may be delayed and that enduring faith requires more than initial enthusiasm.

The foolish virgins, however, take no extra oil (Matthew 25:3). Their lamps rely on limited resources—perhaps their own determination to follow Christ or a shallow commitment that burns out under pressure. They lack the understanding that true readiness involves drawing on the Holy Spirit’s power to sustain their love for Jesus and others, especially in challenging times. Their willingness to shine in the “day” is genuine but insufficient, as they fail to anticipate the demands of the “night”—the moments when faith is tested, and human resolve alone cannot endure.

The Midnight Crisis: When Light Matters Most

The parable’s climax occurs at midnight, when the cry announces the bridegroom’s arrival (Matthew 25:6). This is the “darkest hour,” when the virgins’ lamps must shine to fulfill their purpose. The wise virgins, with their extra oil, trim their lamps and join the procession (Matthew 25:7, 10). Their reliance on the Holy Spirit ensures their lamps burn brightly, reflecting a love for Christ and others that endures through delay and darkness. This divine empowerment enables them to shine when it matters most, securing their place at the wedding feast.

The foolish virgins, however, face a crisis. Their lamps are “going out” (Matthew 25:8), exposing their lack of reserves. Having relied on their own resolve, they find it insufficient in the night. They beg the wise virgins for oil, but are refused (Matthew 25:9), highlighting a key truth: spiritual readiness, particularly the love fueled by the Holy Spirit, cannot be borrowed at the last moment. The foolish virgins’ attempt to buy oil reflects their scramble for external solutions, but they return too late, finding the door shut and the bridegroom declaring, “I do not know you” (Matthew 25:11-12). Their willingness to shine in the day, rooted in personal effort, fails when the night demands a deeper, Spirit-sustained love.

The Holy Spirit: The Oil of Enduring Love

The extra oil carried by the wise virgins offers a profound spiritual insight. While their initial lamp oil might represent their personal commitment to love Jesus, the extra oil likely symbolizes their reliance on the Holy Spirit. Human resolve, though sincere, is finite; it cannot sustain the love required to remain faithful through life’s trials or the uncertainty of Christ’s return. The Holy Spirit, however, provides a renewable source of divine love, empowering believers to love Christ wholeheartedly and extend that love to others, even in the darkest moments.

The foolish virgins’ lack of extra oil reflects their failure to draw on this divine resource. Their faith, though initially bright, is rooted in their own strength, which falters when tested. They lack the understanding that true readiness involves surrendering to the Holy Spirit, allowing God’s love to flow through them. This limitation prevents them from shining their light when it is most needed—when darkness falls, and the bridegroom’s arrival demands enduring devotion.

The Spiritual Lesson: Preparing for the Night

The foolish virgins’ story warns against relying solely on human effort in our faith journey. They were willing to shine their light in the “day,” when love for Christ felt easy and natural, but their lack of spiritual resources and understanding left them unprepared for the “night.” The night represents times of spiritual testing—doubt, hardship, or the delay of Christ’s return—when human resolve alone cannot sustain us. The wise virgins teach us that readiness requires drawing on the Holy Spirit, who fuels our love for Christ and others, enabling us to shine even in the darkest hour.

Jesus’ concluding call, “Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour” (Matthew 25:13), urges vigilance and preparation. The wise virgins’ extra oil—their reliance on the Holy Spirit—ensures their lamps burn through the night, reflecting a faith sustained by divine love. This reliance empowers them to remain faithful, not just in moments of ease, but when light is most needed to honor the bridegroom.

Application for Today

The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins challenges us to reflect on the source of our faith. Are we like the foolish virgins, shining brightly in the “day” with a faith rooted in personal resolve—attending church, professing belief, or doing good when it’s easy? Or are we like the wise virgins, drawing on the Holy Spirit to fuel a love for Christ and others that endures through trials and delays? To shine in the night, we must cultivate a deep reliance on the Holy Spirit through prayer, scripture, and obedience, allowing His love to sustain us when human effort falls short.

The foolish virgins’ exclusion reminds us that readiness is a personal responsibility, and the love required to follow Christ cannot be borrowed or conjured at the last moment. By seeking the Holy Spirit’s guidance now, we can build spiritual reserves that empower us to love faithfully, ensuring our lamps shine brightly when Christ returns.

Conclusion

The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins is a call to enduring, Spirit-fueled faith. The foolish virgins were willing to shine their light in the “day,” but their reliance on personal resolve left them unprepared for the “night,” when their light was most needed. The wise virgins, drawing on the Holy Spirit as their extra oil, sustained a love for Christ and others that shone through the darkness, welcoming the bridegroom into the feast. As we await Christ’s return, may we rely on the Holy Spirit to fuel our love, ensuring our light burns brightly, no matter when or how He comes.

In Memory of Charlie Kirk: A Beacon of Faith, Patriotism, and Unyielding Truth

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, and fellow patriots who cherish the freedoms bestowed upon us by our Creator,

In this hour of profound sorrow and national mourning, as the echoes of tragedy still reverberate across our land on this somber September 11, 2025, we gather our hearts and minds to reflect upon the life and legacy of Charlie Kirk—a man whose voice has been cruelly silenced, yet whose message endures eternally. What was it, I ask you, that truly set Charlie Kirk apart from the multitude of political pundits who clamor for attention in our divided age? Was it not his unwavering commitment to being a Christian first and foremost, a devoted patriot second, who viewed his activism not as mere political maneuvering, but as a divine calling to uphold the principles of righteousness in a nation founded on godly foundations?

Indeed, Charlie was no ordinary commentator. In a sea of voices driven by ambition, ideology, or fleeting trends, he stood as a pillar of conviction, seeking first the kingdom of God as commanded in the sacred words of Matthew 6:33: “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” He was profoundly convinced that by aligning his life and work with this eternal priority, he could rightly discern and address the ills plaguing our society—the moral decay, the erosion of family values, the assault on religious liberty, and the rise of godless ideologies that threaten to unravel the fabric of our republic. Charlie did not merely critique the symptoms of our cultural ailments; he diagnosed them through the lens of Scripture, believing that true healing could only come from returning to the unchanging truth of God’s Word.

Consider how he embodied the wisdom of Proverbs 14:34, which declares, “Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” Charlie was thoroughly persuaded that holding forth the Word of God as the sole reliable source of life, true morality, and godliness was the righteous and proper pathway to correcting the evils and societal ills of our day. From the sanctity of life in the womb to the defense of traditional marriage, from combating the indoctrination in our schools to championing free speech and Second Amendment rights, he never wavered. He pointed unapologetically to Christ as the ultimate solution, echoing the apostle Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 3:16-17: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” In every speech, every debate, every broadcast, Charlie urged his listeners to turn to Jesus Christ, the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6), as the only means of reconciliation with God and restoration for our broken nation.

Oh, how he never ceased to direct anyone and everyone back to Christ! Whether addressing college students on campuses hostile to conservative thought or rallying supporters at Turning Point USA events, Charlie’s message was laced with gospel hope. He proclaimed that without Christ, our efforts at patriotism and policy reform were futile, for as Jesus Himself taught in Matthew 7:24-27, the wise man builds his house upon the rock of obedience to God’s commands, not the shifting sands of human wisdom. Charlie lived this out, modeling a life where faith informed his patriotism, and patriotism served as an extension of his faith. He was a modern-day Jeremiah, weeping over the sins of the people yet boldly calling them to repentance, convinced that America’s greatness stemmed not from political power alone, but from covenant faithfulness to the God who blessed our founding.

Yet, as we grieve, we must confront the painful reality that the enemies of God, His Christ, and righteousness could not endure his love for the Savior or his steadfast stand for biblical truth. Just as in ages past, when the religious leaders and mobs could not bear the light of truth shining in their darkness, they sought to extinguish it through violence. Recall how they murdered Jesus, the innocent Lamb of God, as foretold in Isaiah 53:7: “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter.” Or Stephen, the first Christian martyr, stoned to death in Acts 7:59-60 for proclaiming Christ, crying out, “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.” And the apostles themselves, most of whom met violent ends—James beheaded by Herod (Acts 12:2), Peter crucified upside down, Paul beheaded—because their words cut to the heart, exposing sin and calling for repentance. These persecutors, as the Scriptures warn in John 3:20, “hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.”

So it was with Charlie Kirk. His enemies—those steeped in the shadows of secularism, moral relativism, and outright hostility to Christian values—could not refute the truth of what he said. They could not dismantle his arguments rooted in the immutable authority of Scripture, nor could they withstand the power of his testimony that transformed lives and ignited a movement among young conservatives. Therefore, in their malice, they deemed it necessary to assassinate him, to shut him up forever in this earthly realm, much like the pharisees who plotted against the prophets. As Psalm 37:32-33 reminds us, “The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him. The Lord will not leave him in his hand, nor condemn him when he is judged.” Though the weapon of the enemy has prevailed for a moment, we know that vengeance belongs to the Lord (Romans 12:19), and Charlie’s blood cries out from the ground, just as Abel’s did in Genesis 4:10.

But let us not succumb to despair, beloved. In the face of this atrocity, we are called to rise, as the early church did after the martyrdoms of old, spreading the gospel with even greater fervor. Let us continue the message he proclaimed, in the teeth of the enemy! As 2 Timothy 4:2 exhorts, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.” We must take up the mantle of faith-filled patriotism that Charlie bore so courageously. Teach our children the Scriptures, as Deuteronomy 6:6-7 commands: “And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children.” Defend the unborn, protect our borders, restore prayer to our schools, and vote with biblical conviction—all while pointing souls to the cross of Calvary.

Charlie’s death is not the end; it is a clarion call. As Revelation 12:11 declares, the saints overcome “by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.” His testimony lives on in the hearts he touched, the lives he changed, and the kingdom work he advanced. Let us honor him by living likewise—Christians first, patriots always—seeking God’s kingdom above all, and trusting that in doing so, we too shall see righteousness exalted in our land.

In the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who conquered death itself, may God comfort Charlie’s family, bring justice to the wicked, and revive America through His Spirit. Amen.

With fervent prayer and unshakeable resolve,

A Bereaved Patriot and Follower of Christ