In one of the threads on this board, I stated that “somebody once said that He became sin for all the elect”, not verbatim, but you all get the idea. One poster jumped at that and called it “heresy” and questioned while others have allowed it to pass, why I have not been beaten down and black and blue, and still another called it “hogwash”. The secular dictionaries define heresy thus: 1.opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, esp. of a church or religious system. 2. the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine. 3. Roman Catholic Church. the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church. 4. any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs, customs, etc. Hogwash, on the other hand, is defined by the secular dictionaries as: 1. refuse given to hogs; swill. 2. any worthless stuff. 3. meaningless or insincere talk, writing, etc.; nonsense; bunk. Let me see, either way you cut it, the terms used were not very kind words to say to a brother-in-Christ. Here we have one saying that his doctrines and systems of belief is the orthodox or accepted system of belief in the entire Christendom virtually shutting off those groups in church history who have always adhered to the belief that the atonement of Christ was for the benefit of the elect, or what is more popularly called Limited Atonement, the “L” of TULIP, that much hated acronym for the Doctrine of Grace, which the enemies of this doctrine would rather call “Calvinism”. Groups like the Reformed Presbyterian churches, those who are of the Southern Baptist Churches, other orders of Baptists who quietly just go on about their businesses but adhere to the Doctrine of Grace, the Primitive Baptists some among the Missionary Baptists, and I do know of some Methodist and United Church of Christ congregations (at least in the Philippines) and Lutherans who at the time I was in my old country adhered to the Doctrine of Grace. The entire TULIP, the whole nine yards of it. This preacher, who this Sunday will be most likely preaching, just swept under the rug those Christians I mentioned, who like me, believed that Christ died for His people, and only for His people, under the rug of heretics. And I’m willing to wager (unchristian word as it is, forgive this heretic), that he has at the door of his church the words “Welcome”. Hopefully he won’t add “except if you’re a Calvinist”. Are these his enemies ? Am I an enemy ? Do we preach a different Christ ? Do we preach a different God ? Do we call on a different Name ? And the other poster just called what those Bible –believing Christians who produced preachers that are more likely than not quoted by his own pastor, he just called their theology “swill”, “refuse to be given to hogs, worthless stuff”, and in the same train of thought that he was having at the time pronounced himself a faithful and true follower of Christ. Yeah, right. Whatever. Going back to “heresy”. I think those who are on the opposite side of Calvinism (let me just call it that, although I am very definitely not a Calvinist) will find it hard to prove that their belief system is THE orthodox view, the popular one, the most widely held set of doctrines, for the simple reason that it is not so. Never was so. There has always been an opposing view, the view that Christ died for His people and only for His people. The Angel of the Lord told Joseph: “You shall call His Name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sin”. (Matthew 1:20-21). Oh, I’ll bet (ooopppsss! There’s another unchristian, hogwash, heresy word) one Scripture doesn’t prove anything, they’ll say. One scripture, though, is a ton more in weight than a conclusion not hinted at by Scripture, especially if it comes from the lips of the Angel of the Lord. Wonder who this angel of the Lord is ? Maybe the angel of the Lord got his message mixed up somewhere. You know how it is. Musta flown a gazillion miles from heaven to earth and seen some wonderful sights to behold and forgotten exactly what the message was, and how it was worded. Maybe God sent this angel to tell Joseph to name the baby Jesus because He shall save mankind from their sins. Grave mistake, that one, tsk, tsk, tsk. Maybe the angel of the Lord should have used the word mankind, and not “his people”. Now look what the results are. Here we have a bunch of people calling themselves by His Name and preaching what he told his disciples, you know, love one another for by this the world (hey, there it is again, the “they” and “us”, “we” and “them” thing) shall know that ye are my disciples, calling one and the other heretic and hogwash and jealously guarding one another’s doctrine all the while thumping their chests and boasting that they would rather believe Christ ! Yeah, right. Whatever. Well, okay, I’m a heretic. What I believe is hogwash. After all, they called my Lord worse names. Okay, there it is, a hogwash introduction by a heretic. Now, I wonder if the name callers can go ahead and start to justify why I am a heretic and why my beliefs are hogwash. Then maybe they can convert me and teach me to eat food fit for human beings.